This whole episode doesn't give me a whole lot of faith in the competence of their police and the way they've decided to interpret the law, but I think its clear from this the law is idiotic
http://www.komonews.com/news/nation...make-you-think-others-are-too--143562996.html
this furthers my argument that gun ownership makes you paranoid.
The GOP shitheads who co-sponsored the law thinks Zimmerman should be arrested/immunity revoked and their law doesn't cover cases like these:
http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nake...tml?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
I just listened to the 911 call again - sure does sound like he said "fucking coons"
Of course, even a guy like him is not as stupid as some flaming idiots we have here in our forum defending the indefensible.
This is why conviening a grand jury in Fla won't go anywhere. This case needs to be moved quickly to a federal jurisdiction so civil rights violations can be filed. Once that happens all the "stand your ground" bullshit no longer applies and Z is toast.
I still view him as a fuckup who is telling the truth as he sees it but misinterprets a lot of shit.
Besides, the picture I paint of T is innocuous and is one that I myself have often been in when in a new place.
For your theory to work, he would have to be an evil mastermind who planned to commit legalized stand your ground murder that night.
Solid defense.If he misinterprets a lot of shit, it might be safe to think he misinterpreted his "reasonable threat of bodily harm/imminent danger" now isn't it???
we have the authors of the law stating that the problem is not the law but the PD. They are trying to deflect blame, basically.
The stand your ground defense goes away even if he is convicted of something that isn't serious. Any unlawful activity negates the stand your ground defense. i.e. Even if aggravated stalking (a 3rd degree felony which can trigger felony murder) can't be proved but they can get stalking to stick (which in and of itself wouldn't be sufficient to trigger felony murder), there is no stand your ground defense available. All they have to do is find something unlawful about Zimmerman's conduct leading up to the shooting. Anything.Not exactly. The federal civil rights law - which of course is not nearly as serious as murder I assume - has the highest standard for intent in the law required beyone a reasonable doubt. That's apparently not at all easy to prove. There's a real question here to me whether he'll be convicted of anything serious.
2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(a), (b),... or
(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity;
Yep. Getting tired of all of the folks thinking they know the law. Only Martin had a right to Stand his Ground.
Z also said on the 911 tape he thought the kid had "something" tucked into his waistband. Yet he chose to follow and confront him anyway. Sounded like he was primed to think it was a gun.
Again, unarmed guy? =>GTFO
Superman w/ a CC? => time to be a hero
He chases the thug down, now he's in a fight and somehow losing hmm and he's thinking he better shoot first, bc he's got a gun too.
How many bad decisions can one man make and get away with it?
If he misinterprets a lot of shit, it might be safe to think he misinterpreted his "reasonable threat of bodily harm/imminent danger" now isn't it???
Not exactly. The federal civil rights law - which of course is not nearly as serious as murder I assume
article said:Two men meet at a park one Sunday afternoon in September. One is playing basketball with his daughter. The other has a gun tucked in his pants.
The two men argue about a kid who's skateboarding. The man with the gun tries to enforce the rules. The other man lunges.
The unarmed man takes his last breath in front of his 8-year-old daughter. Two days later, authorities charge the gun owner with manslaughter.
......... break........
Miami's police chief made a prediction shortly before the law took effect:
"Whether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house,'' Chief John Timoney told the New York Times, "you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used.''
Four years later, Billy Kuch got drunk, so drunk that at 5 a.m. one day he stumbled to the door of the wrong house in a look-alike neighborhood and tried to open it, twice.
Before the "stand your ground" law, homeowner Gregory Stewart would have been expected to hunker down in his Land O'Lakes residence, dead-bolt secure, and call police.
With the law in place, he could use deadly force anywhere he had a right to be, provided he felt threatened with death or great bodily harm. He had no duty to retreat from danger.
Stewart left his wife inside with their baby and stepped outside, gun in hand.
Kuch put his hands up and asked for a light.
"Please don't make me shoot you," Stewart said.
Kuch, then 23, says he might have stumbled. Stewart, then 32, told police the unarmed man took three steps forward.
The bullet ripped into Kuch's chest, nicked his heart, shot through his liver, in and out of his stomach, through his spleen, then out his back. He felt like his body was on fire.
Stewart, when questioned by deputies, began to cry. "I could have given him a light," he said.
Billy Kuch spent more than a month in the hospital.
"The guy is 6-1, 250. I'm 5-9, 165, and I have a 0.3 blood-alcohol level," he said. "Did he really think I was going to be able to take his gun away?"
......... break........
One of those numbers: Michael Frazzini, 35, Cape Coral, father of two, decorated Army helicopter pilot who served five tours of duty. Now dead.
Frazzini's elderly mother thought a 22-year-old neighbor was disturbing her property. One night in 2006, Frazzini stopped by to check things out.
The neighbor later told authorities that he encountered Frazzini wearing a camouflage mask and wielding what looked like a pipe. The neighbor pulled a knife.
The neighbor's father came out next and, thinking the masked man might attack his son, fired one shot from his .357 revolver into Frazzini's chest.
Frazzini died in his mother's back yard. The pipe turned out to be a 14-inch baseball bat.
The shooter walked away uncharged. A prosecutor said nobody involved in the decision felt good about it. Neither did one of the law's co-sponsors.
"The intent is that you can only use the same amount of force as you believe will be used against you," Lt. Gov. Jeff Kottkamp, then a state representative, said at the time. "It certainly wasn't that you can shoot and kill somebody wielding a souvenir baseball bat."
Maybe so. But there is no provision specifically barring someone with a permit from bringing a gun to a knife fight, let alone to a brawl that starts with fists.
......... break ..........
The Times' analysis indicates that the law has provided legal cover not just to those fending off attacks by strangers, but also to those who pull a gun in a storm of machismo and adrenaline.
Fights at house parties and a pool hall. Neighbor disputes. Disagreements at a park.
One of the law's biggest critics is Willie Meggs, the state attorney for six counties in the Panhandle. He says he's a strong believer in gun rights but thinks the law is just another valuable tool for killers. The old law was working just fine, he says. He petitioned the Legislature to address the law last year. Nothing.
"Gangsters are using this law to have gunfights," he said. "That's exactly what this law breeds."
In 2008, two gangs in Tallahassee got into a shoot-out. A 15-year-old boy was killed. A judge dismissed charges against the shooters, citing "stand your ground."
This whole episode doesn't give me a whole lot of faith in the competence of their police and the way they've decided to interpret the law, but I think its clear from this the law is idiotic
Q: How did law enforcement respond to the law?
A: Prosecutors across the state opposed the law before it was enacted Oct. 1, 2005. In the following five months, there were at least 13 shootings in Central Florida where self-defense was claimed. Out of six men killed and four more wounded in the cases, only one was armed. Some Orlando-area police agencies simply stopped investigating shootings involving self-defense claims and referred them directly to state prosecutors to decide.
That was when Martin started viciously attacking zimmerman. Then zimmerman on his back, unable to escape the viciously beating, Martin over him beating, zimmerman calling/begging/screaming for help.
bang.
I think this article in a Fl paper shows how idiotic the law is
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com..._law-enforcement-castle-doctrine-deadly-force
Some of the police felt that the law so tied their hands on claims of self-defense that they threw up their hands and said "why bother?"
Not exactly. The federal civil rights law - which of course is not nearly as serious as murder I assume - has the highest standard for intent in the law required beyone a reasonable doubt. That's apparently not at all easy to prove. There's a real question here to me whether he'll be convicted of anything serious.
LOLZ is hilarious we have more bloodthirsty members in here than Sean hannity's forums.