If Zimmerman prevails in the SYG hearing the Martin family can't sue.

[dkf]

One area that sets Florida apart is the next step Zimmerman faces: With the police and prosecutor having weighed in, a judge will decide whether to dismiss the second-degree murder charge based on "stand your ground." If Zimmerman wins that stage, prosecutors can appeal.

But in another aspect peculiar to Florida, if the appeals court sides with Zimmerman, not only will he be forever immune from facing criminal charges for shooting the 17-year-old Martin — even if new evidence or witnesses surface — he could not even be sued for civil damages by Martin's family for wrongfully causing his death.

http://www.pressherald.com/news/Stand-Your-Ground-gives-Zimmerman-extra-chances-in-legal-fight.html

[jp11]

1. So screwed up.

It really seems to raise any person who kills another 'out of fear' to the same protections offered police. Where I have concerns with the use of deadly force with police they are at least 'regulated', trained, and tasked to deal with such situations ordinary citizens are not.

Protecting yourself should always be allowed to be tested to see if you 'went overboard' in your own 'defense' otherwise it is essentially a license to kill.

[dkf]

2. Or it's imperative to be completely non confrontational.

When I visited my brother in Florida and did my stint driving he warned me that people have guns there so I needed to be careful to not upset anyone. Yikes.

[hlthe2b]

4. You think that Trayvon was being confrontational?

[dkf]

5. I have no idea.

There are an entire gamut of scenarios that are possible.

I would like more forensic evidence to try to ascertain what happened.

[aikoaiko]

3. It can be tested in every claim of SYG in a hearing before a judge.

It depends on the will of the prosecutor.

And there is no mention of feelings or fear in FL's SYG law. The person must demonstrate a "reasonable belief" of grave threat or the facts must be so obvious.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

7. What makes you think it is not tested?

Last edited Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:18 AM - Edit history (1)

The basis is the reasonable man concept...SYG did not change the basic test in FL law.

[jp11]

53. It seems to take that idea and put it in the hands of one person the

prosecutor/da not a jury. In addition that person doesn't want to lose cases, then there is the aspect of does that 'special' law apply ie it is now legal, if there is a 'case' that the killer can 'reasonably' believe (right or wrong) they were threatened they 'get off'. All the killer needs to do is have some slight 'edge' like no conflicting witnesses or a lawyer paint the victim as a criminal to skew the potential jury and SYG seems to apply and maybe that ONE person doesn't pursue the case.

I've also seen it reported, I've not researched this myself, that justifiable homicides have increased since these kinds of laws have been enacted. That says to me, anecdotally of course, that it increases people killing others and 'getting away with it' when overall crime is reported to be lower than ever. If all these situations were being tested properly wouldn't the number of justifiable homicides be lower with our 'lower' crime rate or roughly the same pre-syg laws?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

6. It is more an anti tort lawyer part of FL law

There have been a few notorious cases where people were hurt while committing criminal acts later sued people.

If a homicide is declared justifiable in FL, the same section of the law that specifically does not require retreat in public also declares that the dead perp's surviors cannot sue. No matter what happens to SYG, expect that portion to survive.

[alcibiades_mystery]

9. "dead perp"

Yeesh.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

10. That is the classic requirement for a justifiable homicide

That the criminal perpetuating a crime caused reasonable fear of freat bodily injury or death and that they were killed in the process.

If you find the nomenclature distasteful, I would point out that umbrage is free and you should take all you want.

[alcibiades_mystery]

17. Blah blah blah

"Dead perp"

[ProgressiveProfessor]

18. More examples of your intellectual excellence

[alcibiades_mystery]

24. Whatevs, "Professor"

We all know that you're the real "intellectual" here, or at least the only one who chooses to announce that through self-naming and laughably inflated diction.

By the way, "perp" stands for perpetrator, and perpetrators perpetrate. They don't "perpetuate," there, "Professor." Although the idea of a "criminal perpetuating" something is certainly amusing, your Excellency. Nomenclature, indeed.

[Ikonoklast]

30. You should have just kicked Herr Professor in the balls.

It would have been less painful than that beat-down you just laid on him.

That will perpetually sting a bit, as nothing ever goes away on teh intrawebs.

[bongbong]

33. Professor

Professor of NRA Talking Points.

[customerserviceguy]

35. He seemed to just be explaining what the law says

I don't see where he took a position on how he felt about it.

[anti-alec]

38. He misread the law.

SYG law does not apply to Zimmerman and the prosecutor has more than enough evidence to charge him for second degree murder, and no deals will be laid in. The only deal I would accept that he gets the maximum in prison, in a gen pop full of African Americans.

[customerserviceguy]

40. It remains to be seen

whether Zimmerman's defense will have occasion to raise SYG, and it also remains to be seen if it will be persuasive. I agree that there will be no deals, unless some new evidence arises. I would hope that the prosecutor has had full access to the autopsy report, and that it does not contain any ambiguities that a skilled defense can use to raise reasonable doubt.

We're still fairly early in this whole process. It's good for the President that the trial will not take place until after the election, if I'm guessing correctly about that.

[anti-alec]

37. You called Martin a dead perp.

I think you're in the wrong side of the aisle there, pal.

Zimmerman is the perp, and justifiably deserves first degree murder. He deservedly earned a date with a needle, but the State Attorney screwed it up.

Second degree murder, and he serves the maximum - life without parole.

Finally, there was more than enough evidence to suggest that Zimmerman was the aggressor, not Martin. Therefore, your argument is not valid, Professor.

[alcibiades_mystery]

39. I believe you should be addressing this post to somebody else

...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

47. I did not address Martin in the least

I was explaining how the parts of the law block civil suits

[morningfog]

50. ...as it pertains and relates to this case.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

52. A generic comment on how the law works

[ProgressiveProfessor]

49. Spell checker and the bright Socal sun strike again

But if the best you have is a spelling flame...

[alcibiades_mystery]

51. Uh huh

Your diss committee must have had a patience requirement to deal with your slovenly intellectual excellence. Sun and all, see?

[NutmegYankee]

28. The term Mr. Scumbag was used when I took CC classes

And we were told that even if Mr. Scumbag was trying to rape and murder our children and we shot him in our home in self defense (Conn. just has castle doctrine), that we were to expect that Mrs. Scumbag would sue for wrongful death.

In that sense, perp is actually pretty polite.

[zorahopkins]

46. "Dead Perp"?? WTF??!!

Honestly, I am so angry right now.

I just read the post where you refer to Trayvon Martin as a "Dead Perp"!!!

I cannot believe how disrespectful that post was!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

48. I did not, but don't let that stop your poutrage

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. Judges Look To Legislative Intent, Especially Appellate Justices

The writers of the law have said it was never intended to be applied in instances like this one.

[ewagner]

14. True.

If there is no legislative intent written into the law they will look at the transcripts of the debate..the legislative record...to determine what, if anything, was on their mind about passing the law.

If I'm not mistaken, Wisconsin' "Castle Doctrine" law precludes civil remedies (or pursuit of civil remedies) if the doctrine is found to apply....the "presumption of self-defense" is to be included in the jury instructions so the prosecution has to present evidence that it was NOT self-defense...(I'm not sure what standard has to be achieved: "clear and convincing" or "reasonable doubt".) At any rate, if the defendant prevails the injured party is prohibited from seeking civil damages.

[former9thward]

11. From what I can tell Zimmerman has no real assets anyway.

What lawyer would sue someone who has no assets? A fool's errand.

[HooptieWagon]

12. They can still sue the HOA.

[rainbow4321]

13. Or can they if he sticks to the latest story of his that

he "was on his way to Target" when this all happened.
At first, he and his camp were saying he was patrolling the area for the neighborhood watch program, but within a matter of days/week with the scrutiny on that neighborhood patrol coverage, they changed it to say that he was on the way to the Target...does that give the HOA an out by saying that he was not patrolling on their behalf? He needs witnesses...witnesses that he needs not to be pissed off at him from a lawsuit/increased HOA feees, etc. What better way to keep his needed witnesses cooperative towards HIM.

Does his change in bullshit story allow the HOA to say "he was not acting on OUR behalf at the time, he was out doing his own thing".

[HooptieWagon]

15. I dont think it matters.

He was.t "off the clock". He was recognized by the HOA as captain of their neighborhood watch. As soon as he dialed 911 to report a suspicious person, he was acting on their behalf in that capacity. The HOA was negligant in failing to vet him, and in failing to supervise him.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. I would expect the HOA insurance company to settle for a token amount

I don't see this being a goldmine in the FL courts.

[HooptieWagon]

21. Maybe. May not be covered though.

Its possible only BoD and paid employees like groundskeeper or custodian are covered. I suspect the neighborhood watch was thrown together without much thought about potential liabilities. They dont seem to have done a background check on GZ.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

42. Yeah well your declarative predictions on legal matters don't have much of a track record, IMO.

Last time I saw you making predictions you laughably stated nothing would come of the cop who posted shot up pictures of Obama on his Facebook page - he was fired.

This HOA is on the hook and no "token" amount is going to get them off. I don't know what you base your opinion on but it ain't legal reality.

This is a text-book case. There are board votes and meeting minutes. A paper trail.

[MoonRiver]

16. This is so wrong.

FL seems to totally weigh on the side of gun toting maniacs who don't give a hoot about human life. UGH!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

19. I am not sure FL is on the side of maniacs

SYG still requires the burden of the defensive use of deadly force to be met. I cannot see that it has. FL is not alone in protecting people from being sued by criminals who get hurt while doing criminal acts.

Suing the HOA is about the only way to get any money out of this since Zimmerman has none. Not sure if there are legitimate grounds or not. The HOA insurance company will probably settle for a token amount will be about it.

[HooptieWagon]

22. As I read SYG, it requires prosecution to prove GZ wasnt in imminant danger of bodily harm or death.

The burden of proof is on prosecution, not on defense. That is the problem.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

25. So, providing proof that someone is guilty of a crime is a problem? Guilty until proven innocent.

Does that about sum up your position. Pretty progressive ideals you got there!

[The Magistrate]

31. Generally, Sir, A Claim Of Self-Defense At Trial is An Affirmative Defense

It is something the defendant who proffers it against a charge must prove. In certain circumstances, the Florida law reverses this traditional burden, and requires the court to treat a person's claim of having acted in self-defense as true.

[alcibiades_mystery]

26. Burden of proof is always on the prosecution in a criminal trial

Another reason SYG was unnecessary.

[magical thyme]

34. not necessarily

the legal expert pundits are saying in the pretrial hearing, Zimmerman will likely have to testify to explain why he was afraid enough to use deadly force.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

23. Many states have civil immunity self-defense laws in effect.

Nothing wrong with that, IMO. No law can cover every situatoin perfectly - we are a diverse complex society. If Zimmerman walks it doesn't negate all the proper situations the law covers and victims it's helps to protect. There's always an exception and we shouldn't base rational lawmaking on outlier sensationalist events.

Honestly, people complaing about the SYG self defense laws (laws designed to protect victimized individuals) in response to the Martin shooting sound no different than the neocons clammoring for removng our welfare system because a few dishonest people cheat the system (ie: lottery winners receiving foodstamps).

[dkf]

27. Good point.

The media has been pretty one sided on the cases that look more egregious, not much on people who saved their lives or the lives of others.

[Cali_Democrat]

29. Fingers crossed?

[dkf]

32. Just surprised is all.

I'm still at the point of wondering what is just regardless of the law. I can pin it down to a pure tragic mistake but even that should have a financial consequence you would think. That is why we get umbrella policies after all.

But Zimmerman is financially cooked regardless. He will probably need to be supported by his parents any way this turns out.

[customerserviceguy]

36. Even if the Martin family got a judgment against Zimmerman

He would be able to void it with a bankruptcy. The only judgments you can't wiggle out of in bankruptcy are for actions done with malice, and if SYG is Zimmerman's way out, then it's really tough for the Martin family to make it stick for life.

[anti-alec]

41. SYG law doesn't apply to Zimmerman

and he will have the burden to prove it.

Not the prosecutor's. That is an affirmative defense.

[customerserviceguy]

43. Again

We don't know if it will be invoked, and we don't know how successful that technique will be. It seems that he has found a really smart mouthpiece who knows the monetary value of being able to get a George Zimmerman set free. The case is guaranteed to get massive publicity, the value of the free advertising for the attorney will be priceless, even if he fails.

[anti-alec]

44. Zimmerman already doomed himself

with his stupid remarks and not turning himself in early enough.

The murder is known everywhere - SYG will be then shot down and removed from the books.

He committed murder. Not a justifiable murder. Murder as in extinguish life from a human person unnecessarily.

Manslaughter will be not applied there. The jury will find Zimmerman damn guilty of murder and sentenced to life in prison WITHOUT parole. His life is already over.

[customerserviceguy]

45. I don't think there was a cause for arrest

even two days before the arrest. Clearly, Zimmerman was working with an attorney who was working with the prosecutor to figure out if there would BE charges, and what they would be. There was no reason to "turn himself in" if there was no arrest warrant or such legal paperwork being drawn up.

The only way SYG gets "shot down" is if the various legislatures decide to rewrite it or eliminate it. It's possible that the courts could try to invalidate it, but if that went all the way to the SCOTUS, we'd have to hope that one of the five conservative Justices is replaced by a progressive one at that point. Still, legislatures could use the words of such a decision to rewrite another SYG that passes judicial muster.

If this doesn't go 100% your way (and that seems to include having Zimmerman shanked in prison by a black inmate, from what you say in post #38) then I expect you will be very sorely disappointed? I have a feeling that a significant number of people feel the way you do, and it's one of the reasons that I'm glad this trial will take place after the election. I saw how Richard Nixon was able to play white fear of the 1965-68 race riots into a winning issue, even with George Wallace bleeding off the very worst of the racist vote.