Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

zipplewrath

(16,669 posts)
22. Tend to agree
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 03:54 PM
Jul 2013

When this first happened, because of the lack of any real eye witnesses, I was pretty sure that ultimately George was gonna walk. The problem with Florida law is it is a real possibility that both Treyvon AND George could have killed the other and BOTH would have been "justified" under Florida law. Martin could have claimed an threat by an armed man, and George could have claimed an attack by Martin. In either case, Florida law makes it difficult for the prosecution to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that they were doing anything other than "defending themselves against a reasonable belief they were under a deadly threat". It is why in so many states you DON'T have "stand your ground" laws. To avoid this situation, the law insists that your primary behavior should be to avoid physical confrontation, especially that which could result in death. Therefore George is guilty of something akin to "reckless endangerment" at the very least for engaging Martin in an armed conflict. Your first duty is to AVOID armed conflict, not rely upon it.

Pass Cirque du So-What Jul 2013 #1
Does the jury have the discretion to find zimmerman brush Jul 2013 #2
Yes, premium Jul 2013 #3
The interesting thing about the lesser charge Jenoch Jul 2013 #7
Yeah, that's interesting, premium Jul 2013 #10
Except self-defense is an affirmative defense to manslaughter as well kudzu22 Jul 2013 #11
Does FL require unanimity with a 6-person jury? (nt) Recursion Jul 2013 #4
I believe so. I think that in criminal cases, MineralMan Jul 2013 #9
You're correct, premium Jul 2013 #13
Not guilty, but he will lose a civil suit. denverbill Jul 2013 #5
Is that an option? michreject Jul 2013 #18
I don't think Florida allows a civil suit if Z is found not guilty. nt Llewlladdwr Jul 2013 #30
I waver betwen hung jury and innocent. avebury Jul 2013 #6
"Acquitted" does not equal "innocent" in the eyes of the law. WinkyDink Jul 2013 #12
Correct, premium Jul 2013 #14
What judicial decision customerserviceguy Jul 2013 #28
This is Florida. moondust Jul 2013 #8
No idea- who knows what is in the jury's mind Marrah_G Jul 2013 #15
It's looking like a not guilty michreject Jul 2013 #16
I'm wavering between an acquittal and manslaughter and hoping for the latter. DemocratSinceBirth Jul 2013 #17
probably a not guilty verdict rollin74 Jul 2013 #19
he'll walk--young black lives are considered cheap in the US, especially the old confederacy. nt geek tragedy Jul 2013 #20
He walks. Scot-free. Period. Bake Jul 2013 #21
Tend to agree zipplewrath Jul 2013 #22
Scot free except for one thing customerserviceguy Jul 2013 #29
kick rollin74 Jul 2013 #23
no way to tell TorchTheWitch Jul 2013 #24
It's a pipi_k Jul 2013 #25
The judge will bang a gavel jberryhill Jul 2013 #26
deadlock nt Incitatus Jul 2013 #27
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»How do you think the Zimm...»Reply #22