Trayvon Martin Case

[JoeRedskin]

Been thinking over the Florida immunity law (the one saying, if you assert self-defense, you can't be arrested without proof that the "self-defense" defense is inapplicable) and why I find it morally bothersome. It appears to change the claim of "self-defense" from an affirmative defense to a presumptive defense and, in doing so, lessens the value of life.

As an affirmative defense, "self-defense" is something I have to prove in order to be innocent of murder. If I fail to prove my actions satisfied the elements of self-defense, my defense fails and I may be liable for first or second degree murder. As such, I better be damn sure of myself before resorting to deadly force in self-defense. Simply put, as an affirmative defense, the philosophical underpinning of the "self-defense" claim is that, if you kill someone, the presumption is you are wrong to do so.

The presumption that it is wrong to kill someone is eliminated, however, when the claim of "self-defense" is converted into a presumptive defense as it appears to be in Florida. As a presumptive defense, I don't need to prove I acted in self-defense, I just need to assert that I was doing so. Once asserted, it becomes the State's burden to find enough evidence to prove I that I was not acting in self-defense. As such, when (like here) the evidence is just too conflicting to say one way or another with any reasonable degree of certainty, the State will almost always fail to overcome the presumption. As a result, the possibility that a person wrongly lost their life will never even make it to a jury.

Essentially, as a presumptive defense, the philosophical underpinning of the "self-defense" claim is that killing someone is not assumed to be wrong. Rather, Floridians have said that the right to defend your person is primary even if sometimes innocent people get killed. I am pretty sure I have a problem with that.

[JoeRedskin]

Quick primer on the degrees of murder - First degree murder is traditional murder - felony murder & pre-meditated murder. Second degree murder is simply Murder 1 with an imperfect defense (such as asserting self defense with deadly force when you had no right to use it) or, alternatively, death caused by gross negligence and reckless disregard for others (think firing a gun into a crowded room - you may not have intended to kill anyone, but you damn well should have known you were likely to do so). Manslaughter is simply the negligent/accidental killing of another.

Generally, the distingushing feature between second degree murder and manslaughter is that, in Murder 2, you admit to the intentional killing of another but wrongly assert you had the right to do so. In manslaughter, however, you deny that you intended to kill the person and assert it was an accident. In this case, Zimmerman has said "I killed him in self-defense." Meaning that he intended to kill Martin and that the death was not accidental. As a result, it would appear to me that the State is stuck with 2nd degree murder or nothing.

[JoeRedskin]

As I understand it, the fight was on his front yard and he was very clear that guy A was on top of and beating guy B. He looked away/went for phone, heard a gunshot and then saw "the guy who had been on top" lying on the ground.

A man who witnessed part of the altercation contacted authorities.

"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John.

John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot.

"And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point."

Trayvon Martin shot and killed in neighborhood altercation

The witness only wanted to be identified as "John," and didn't not want to be shown on camera.

His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up Zimmerman's claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of Zimmerman.

Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman

Sounds like he was pretty sure of what he saw and was close enough to speak to the two while they were fighting.

[firstdown]

I'll have to say I keep going back and forth on this as new stuff comes out. The past few days it seemed Zim acted in self defense and now after seeing the video I question that. I do wonder about the witness and what they said they saw. I know in my business the out side witness hold more ground then the the people involved.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I'll have to say I keep going back and forth on this as new stuff comes out. The past few days it seemed Zim acted in self defense and now after seeing the video I question that. I do wonder about the witness and what they said they saw. I know in my business the out side witness hold more ground then the the people involved.

Yeah I agree. I was against Zimmerman at first, then I thought Zimmerman had a good case, and now there's video that could possibly prove Zimmerman was lying. I haven't seen the video but if it's true and he didn't suffer any injuries than I don't know what to believe. I'm just going to wait until all the facts come out.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by mooby

Yeah I agree. I was against Zimmerman at first, then I thought Zimmerman had a good case, and now there's video that could possibly prove Zimmerman was lying. I haven't seen the video but if it's true and he didn't suffer any injuries than I don't know what to believe. I'm just going to wait until all the facts come out.

I looked at the video and you have a pretty good shot of his head with short, short crew cut (really like a 5:00 shadow on his head) and I couldn't see any lacerations or bandages. Zimmerman's lawyer says there was a broken nose. If so, let's some hospital records, same for the lacerations. I think he was admitted to the hospital at some point (I don't remember). If so, their records would reflect any treatment.

The more I think about it, the less I like the Florida law. We can sit here and parse the evidence and second guess it's meaning & weight. Many, like Chico, will reach conclusions as to guilt or innocence based on conjecture and/or speculation. Under the Florida law, however, it is likely that no jury will ever have all the evidence laid before them, see the various doucments, hear the recordings, see videos, and hear the various witnesses testify under oath subject to cross-examination so that they can weigh the credibility of them.

A person was killed and the law is not holding anyone - not the Zimmerman or Martin - accountable for the events of that evening. To me, just as is Martin's death, that's a real tragedy.

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I looked at the video and you have a pretty good shot of his head with short, short crew cut (really like a 5:00 shadow on his head) and I couldn't see any lacerations or bandages. Zimmerman's lawyer says there was a broken nose. If so, let's some hospital records, same for the lacerations. I think he was admitted to the hospital at some point (I don't remember). If so, their records would reflect any treatment.

The more I think about it, the less I like the Florida law. We can sit here and parse the evidence and second guess it's meaning & weight. Many, like Chico, will reach conclusions as to guilt or innocence based on conjecture and/or speculation. Under the Florida law, however, it is likely that no jury will ever have all the evidence laid before them, see the various doucments, hear the recordings, see videos, and hear the various witnesses testify under oath subject to cross-examination so that they can weigh the credibility of them.

A person was killed and the law is not holding anyone - not the Zimmerman or Martin - accountable for the events of that evening. To me, just as is Martin's death, that's a real tragedy.

In my opinion the only positive that can come from this tragedy would be severe modifications to the stand your ground law. As I have said before my opinion based on a confrontation between a unarmed teen and an armed adult resulting in the unarmed teen dying should be murder. And when I say that, that is coming from someone with a lot of training with firearms and a respect for the lethal potential of a loaded gun. But based on the "facts" so far it seems like Zimmerman broke no law in the state of Florida. Hopefully that law will change, and I wish the media would focus on that rather than sensationalizing each of the persons involved. Right now it seems like everyone would rather quiver over who is right or wrong in this case rather than trying to prevent something like this from ever happening again.

Just out of curiosity what kind of law do you practice?

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by mlmdub130

In my opinion the only positive that can come from this tragedy would be severe modifications to the stand your ground law. As I have said before my opinion based on a confrontation between a unarmed teen and an armed adult resulting in the unarmed teen dying should be murder. And when I say that, that is coming from someone with a lot of training with firearms and a respect for the lethal potential of a loaded gun. But based on the "facts" so far it seems like Zimmerman broke no law in the state of Florida. Hopefully that law will change, and I wish the media would focus on that rather than sensationalizing each of the persons involved. Right now it seems like everyone would rather quiver over who is right or wrong in this case rather than trying to prevent something like this from ever happening again.

I am fine with the law as it is in every other state (unless, they have a law like Florida's). If you are in reasonable fear of your life (or the life of wife/child, etc.), and can prove that your fear was reasonable, it doesn't matter who the attacker was - you have the right to defend with whatever force is necessary including deadly force. You just damn well better be able to prove that a real life threatening situation existed.

IMHO, the neighborhood watch should have some rules about carrying weapons - as in, don't! Again, it was a situation that could most likely been easily avoided with common sense at any number of levels.

[JoeRedskin]

Condemnation, tort and administrative (both regulatory and quasi-prosecutorial).

[skinsfaninok]

It is somewhat true black on black crime never gets reported and imo if Martin was white Zimmerman would have not followed him and started shit.. it's a sad world sometimes and racism is never going to go away .

[budw38]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

It is somewhat true black on black crime never gets reported and imo if Martin was white Zimmerman would have not followed him and started shit.. it's a sad world sometimes and racism is never going to go away .

I agree with you , and it is VERY SAD in 2012 ( or as early as 1970 ) , that soo many people are ,mean, stupid , ect . I don't think Zimmerman should have gone near the kid , he should have just called the local police , two lives are possibly over and the poor parents will suffer for ever .

[SolidSnake84]

Originally Posted by budw38

I agree with you , and it is VERY SAD in 2012 ( or as early as 1970 ) , that soo many people are ,mean, stupid , ect . I don't think Zimmerman should have gone near the kid , he should have just called the local police , two lives are possibly over and the poor parents will suffer for ever .

They'll be sad I'm sure but they are in line to make lots of money. They didn't copyright all that stuff and annouce they were going to sell DVD's and CD's, hats and shirts, etc... just for fun.

Consider that people are probably going to pay millions for the chance to interview the parents on talk shows, there could be a movie or book deal. The parents most certainly would stand to profit immensley from the whole ordeal. They must be thinking as much or else they wouldn't have the wheels already rolling on merchandise, etc...

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

They'll be sad I'm sure but they are in line to make lots of money. They didn't copyright all that stuff and annouce they were going to sell DVD's and CD's, hats and shirts, etc... just for fun.

Consider that people are probably going to pay millions for the chance to interview the parents on talk shows, there could be a movie or book deal. The parents most certainly would stand to profit immensley from the whole ordeal. They must be thinking as much or else they wouldn't have the wheels already rolling on merchandise, etc...

this is what this whole thing is about assumptions. could they be using this to make a profit off their sons death, sure. could they be trying to make money to pay for lawyer fees, sure. the thing is none of use know what they are thinking we are all just making assumptions. at the end of the day it's human nature to do so, but until we can remove all hearsay and look at the case from a non biased point of view, all we are doing is making assumptions.

as it was said in a cinematic masterpiece, "assumption is the mother of all f ups"

and btw i doubt they will be paid millions for their interviews but they will probably be paid a decent amount. would you be as upset if zimmerman decides to write a book in the future?

[NC_Skins]

Former co-worker: Zimmerman lost security guard job after he ‘snapped’ | The Raw Story


Trayvon Martin George Zimmerman 911 call analysis: Two forensic experts say it's not George Zimmerman crying out for help - Orlando Sentinel

[skinsfaninok]

Originally Posted by saden1

I don't have hard time believing Zimmerman, I have a hard time believing a murderous assailant that perpetuated the confrontation can reasonably claim self-defense in this country. Such claim is beyond preposterous and indefensible from any angle. It's murder and if anyone has grounds to justify their actions based on Florida's Stand Your Ground law it's Trayvon.

I mean, this Zimmerman character once called police to report "a suspicious black male, 7-9 years old, skinny build." That's not normal and here we are assuming that he's normal, justified, and acted in self-defense when in fact the only person that can reasonably claim self-defense is Trayvon.

He's racist sorry but imo he doesn't like black people and he Martin fitted the profile. And yes hispanics can be racist towards anyone just like whites and blacks and native Americans can be