General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Zimmerman's injuries were insignificant - he LIED [View all]Vattel
(9,289 posts)is even lower than a preponderance of the evidence standard. Notice what a Florida appeals court says in Montijo (2011):
No, he (the defendant claiming self-defense) did not have to prove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. He did not have to prove even that his additional facts were more likely true than not. The real nature of his burden concerning his defense of justification is that his evidence of additional facts need merely leave the jury with a reasonable doubt about whether he was justified in using deadly force. Hence, if he wanted his self-defense to be considered, it was necessary to present evidence that his justification might be true. It would then be up to the jury to decide whether his evidence produced a reasonable doubt about his claim of self-defense.