Re the bolded: If we don't know these things, how can it be said that it was defintely SYG or self defense? How can it be said that GZ was only arrested due to public pressure, or political aspirations, as opposed to, there is and was always probable cause for an arrest?
Not directed at you specifically but, does Trayon have the right to due process as well, does he get get to have his day in court? Seems to me that Trayvon has already been convicted by some out there, without him having his right to due process, or without the need to present evidence in a court of law.
Nancy Grace interview with Angela Corey's regarding "Stand your Ground...
GRACE: “In a case like this when you are confronted with force — let’s just say for argument’s sake Zimmerman’s story is true, a 17-year-old hits him. Standing your ground, is he allowed under the law to shoot him dead?”
COREY: “Nancy, our laws are very clear that it has to be a forcible felony and that a reasonable person would have to believe that deadly force is necessary as opposed to just physical force, fighting back and that sort of thing. I’ve prosecuted a woman who shot her husband and killed him because he slapped her, and we argued that was not deadly force and she was convicted and sent to state prison.”
Corey made two very clear points here. The first is that, in order for "stand your ground" to work, the dead person must have been in the process of committing a "forcible felony" when the struggle happened. In other words, Trayvon needed to be engaged in a crime such as an assult on Zimmerman.We now know from the probable cause affadavit that Corey is using a statement from the friend Trayvon was speaking with on the phone at the time his confrontation with Zimmerman started.According to that witness, Zimmerman approached Trayvon, which means Trayvon would not have been engaged in a felony at the time the struggle started.Secondly, it appears from the charge that Corey simply isn't convinced that whatever happened between Zimmerman and Trayvon justified the use of deadly force. Maybe she will argue that Zimmerman could have protected himself with some lesser level of self-defense.She mentioned the example of the woman who was slapped by her husband and retaliated with a gunshot. That women was convicted because Corey convinced a jury that she wasn't justified in using deadly force.Of course, that is a very subjective call. I would expect Zimmerman's attorney to argue that Trayvon was so aggressive that Zimmerman feared for his life and, in the heat of the moment, didn't see any other way out other than to pull out his gun and fire.It will all play out in court. But for all the armchair detectives out there, these are two points worth considering.
COREY: “Nancy, our laws are very clear that it has to be a forcible felony and that a reasonable person would have to believe that deadly force is necessary as opposed to just physical force, fighting back and that sort of thing.
Based on what Corey is saying, Zimmerman is going to have a hard time proving that Trayvon was committing a forcible felony that justified his actions. I suspect Zimmerman better have plenty of medical documentation to back up his claim.
Just my opinion
“Mars had been an exhibitor at ALEC’s 2011 annual meeting in New Orleans. Mars is the maker of Skittles, the snack Trayvon Martin had purchased before he was shot by George Zimmerman, whose arrest was delayed due to an NRA-backed gun law that became an ALEC ‘model’ bill,” the Center for Media and Democracy adds.
Martin’s death brought attention to Florida’s GOP-sponsored “Stand Your Ground” law, which states that “a person is justified in the use of deadly force” if “he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.”
GZ: These a-holes, they always get away. -----------------------S**t he's running.--------------------------Dispatcher: He's running, which way is he running?------------------------------GZ: The back entrance.
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7715220&postcount=41"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - FL - 17-yo Teen Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #4[/ame]
Anyone anywhere can just simply say they "feared for their life" after killing someone? If that is really what the law says... it needs to be changed, ASAP!
I understand if someone has entered a private home or business illegally because the fear would be there. That person is obviously there to commit a crime that could result in death of great bodily harm. I have no problem with people protecting themselves against intruders.
However... Trayvon was not an intruder. He had just as much right to be there as George Zimmerman.
When George was in the safety of his own car and on the phone with LE, why didn't he, when Trayvon was "walking towards him", introduce himself as neighborhood watch and ask Trayvon if he had just moved in? It would have been that simple! I believe Trayvon would have nicely answered back that he was visiting his soon-to-be step mom? Or maybe he would have been offended and told him that it was none of his business? At least George would be in his car and LE would have gotten it on tape and when they got there... LE could deal with Trayvon?
The fact that George got out of his car to follow Trayvon and the fact that he hung up with LE while following Trayvon tells me that George Zimmerman had no fear of Trayvon! You know the kid that had "something in his pocket" and was "checking out George" and looked to be "on drugs?"
On the other hand, we know from Trayvon's girlfriend, that Trayvon was "worried" about this guy following him. He also tells her on the phone "he's right behind me again." (not verbatim) and that is when he says "Why are you following me?" and George replies "What are you doing here?" *** NOTE: I believe this is when George put his hands on Trayvon or at least made it known that he had a gun... which would make sense with the "pushing" sounds and the phone going dead.
Trayvon, IMO, feared for his life and rightfully so. He was the only one protecting himself from death of great bodily harm as we have all come to know he really did have a reason to fear those things.
Justice for Trayvon
What is there to interpret? Anyone that can read should be able to figure out what it says. One doesn't need a law degree for that. Jury will not have law degrees. I am reasonably certain I am not any more stupid than members of this jury that will have understand what the law says.
Just my opinion
It doesn't say or - it says and.....
“Nancy, our laws are very clear that it has to be a forcible felony and that a reasonable person would have to believe that deadly force is necessary as opposed to just physical force, fighting back and that sort of thing. I’ve prosecuted a woman who shot her husband and killed him because he slapped her, and we argued that was not deadly force and she was convicted and sent to state prison.”
The actual law says OR. Separate thing one can prevent. Yes, one can use this law to prevent imminent commission of forcible felony but that is a separate issue from death/great bodily harm.
"(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony..."
Just my opinion
this::On Friday, the Daily News obtained EMS documents suggesting Zimmerman, who an ex-colleague said was fired from a security job for being too aggressive, did not sustain serious injuries in the fatal encounter.
Paperwork detailing the EMS response to the shooting scene shows that a call for a second ambulance was canceled.
The following comment regarding the word in the narrative from nursebeeme, one of our own moderators and a licensed RN:
and what I saw with my own eyes in the jail video, I don't think he had any injuries that are going to help his claims for SYG.I am thinking all of his field tests were negative.
He was cleared to leave the scene in the back of the car with the officer which means he did not need emergent treatment. It does not say that he refused treatment or transport but that he was cleared.
But there is nothing covered up that will not be revealed, and hidden that will not be known. Accordingly, whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in the inner rooms will be proclaimed upon the housetops. Luke 12, 2-3
Just my opinion
776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
Legal experts have brought up the First Aggressor Exception. Just finding yourself on the losing end of a fight isn't automatically SYG or self defense, if you were the First Aggressor. That's why GZ's 911 calls, his medical records, his police statement, will all be a factor in a court of law. There are defense attorneys who have been interviewed who disagree. But given that they're criminal defense attorneys, it's pretty much what I would expect them to say, so we will see if and when this goes to trial.
Considering I was discussing part of AC's statement where she appeared to say that the only way to use SYG is to prevent forcible felony I included the relevant part and the link to the rest. Nothing I see in this law indicates to me that the only thing SYG is good for is to prevent forcible felony. And by the way the aggressor exception might work in GZ's favor because one can still use SYG even if one is an initial aggressor. Of course the initial aggressor has to try and escape first, but if GZ claims he was the one on the ground it might not be so easy to escape. With this law, it appears one can actually start a fight (not saying GZ did) and then still use SYG claim.
Just my opinion
When the dispatcher asks GZ's home address towards the end of the call, GZ starts giving his address and then says I don't wanna give it all out on here.(paraphrased) Then, under his breath, states, 'I don't know where this KID went'.
That tells me right there that come he77 or high water 'this one wasn't going to get away'.
Why do I think of the 'policeman' in Terminator (who morphs into liquid metal when he is in a pickle) when I envision GZ's pursuit of Trayvon?
IMO, he didn't look like he was 'gone' at the hearing the other day. His posture was quite erect and confident.
...and be sure your sin will find you out.