• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Enough already... Zimmerman, Martin and Florida's self defense laws.

Grim17 said:
There is no such law in the state of Florida called "Reckless Homicide".
Click to expand...

The legal theory of Reckless Homicide is universal in American law.. It is the theory under which state laws are written with small variations depending on jurisdictiion.

In FLA the same legal theory applies.

If you create a threat or a set of circumstances that cause the death of an innocent person, you can be convicted of murder 2 or some variation of manslaughter.

In FLA the law is written that it goes to a reasonable man standard of what would a reasonable precatutions would a reasonable man exercise considering ALL the circumstances.
 
sharon said:
The legal theory of Reckless Homicide is universal in American law.. It is the theory under which state laws are written with small variations depending on jurisdictiion.

In FLA the same legal theory applies.

If you create a threat or a set of circumstances that cause the death of an innocent person, you can be convicted of murder 2 or some variation of manslaughter.

In FLA the law is written that it goes to a reasonable man standard of what would a reasonable precatutions would a reasonable man exercise considering ALL the circumstances.
Click to expand...

So you choose to embrace a legal theory over established laws that are on the books in the state of Florida... Laws that clearly state what does and does not qualify as legal self defense.

Again, it seems that you willing to embrace anything that props up your beliefs in this case, and won't let anything, like say, the law, stand in your way.
 
sharon said:
If you create a threat or a set of circumstances that cause the death of an innocent person, you can be convicted of murder 2 or some variation of manslaughter.
Click to expand...

When Trayvon Martin decided to committ the crime of assault, he was no longer an innocent person.

However, if Trayvon Martin had killed George Zimmerman in their fight he would have been a murderer hands down since there was a witness that is affirming that Geroge Zimmerman did not want to be in that fight.

None of this is about what was going on in George Zimmerman's mind. He may very well be a racist, but that doesn't change the circumstances or the actions of these two individuals. The facts are what they are. George Zimmerman did not break any laws.
 
sharon said:
The legal theory of Reckless Homicide is universal in American law.. It is the theory under which state laws are written with small variations depending on jurisdictiion.

In FLA the same legal theory applies.

If you create a threat or a set of circumstances that cause the death of an innocent person, you can be convicted of murder 2 or some variation of manslaughter.

In FLA the law is written that it goes to a reasonable man standard of what would a reasonable precatutions would a reasonable man exercise considering ALL the circumstances.
Click to expand...

Fl manslaughter statute doesn't mention reckless at all.
 
Some people have evaluated all the facts and evidence, and used that information to form an opinion... While others like Sharon formed an opinion, then evaluated only the facts or evidence that would support that opinion.
 
Ya know it's kinda funny. The way some people act about this, it's as if George Zimmerman just decided to take Trayvon Martin out with a sniper rifle from his kitchen window or something.
 
sharon said:
GZ was NEVER the object of any action or agenda by Trayvon.
Click to expand...
That is simply speculation that you are stating as fact. Trayvon could have been high and at some point decided to beat up and kill Z and steal his gun and truck and go on a killing spree for all you or I know.
 
Muhammed said:
That is simply speculation. Trayvon could have been high and at some point decided to beat up and kill Z and steal his gun and truck and go on a killing spree for all you know.
Click to expand...

No its not.. Don't listen to the words.. Look at the actions.
 
Ryanm said:
This fits here too, and I don't feel like re-typing it all so here goes...
Click to expand...

Again, a couple things.

First, the girlfriend called HIM, for accuracys sake.

Second, in two of the three accounts of Zs account the physical altercation begins as Z reaches for his phone. In the one from someone at SPD "familar with the case" the gun comes into play right then.

Can't say for sure, but trying to keep someone from drawing their weapon triggers a legitimate fear for his life on Ms part and would justify lethal force on his part.

Until we have Zs ACTUAL statement this is still conjecture, but its part of the available evidence like everythong else.
 
Thank god for fox news...



Now what do you Martin supporters have to say?
 
What if...? said:
Again, a couple things.

First, the girlfriend called HIM, for accuracys sake.

Second, in two of the three accounts of Zs account the physical altercation begins as Z reaches for his phone. In the one from someone at SPD "familar with the case" the gun comes into play right then.

Can't say for sure, but trying to keep someone from drawing their weapon triggers a legitimate fear for his life on Ms part and would justify lethal force on his part.

Until we have Zs ACTUAL statement this is still conjecture, but its part of the available evidence like everythong else.
Click to expand...

Okay, I will take your word for the fact that his girlfriend called him. Regardless, that does not change anything about what I said; if you're ever being followed by someone, call the police.

George Zimmerman reaching for his phone is not a crime. If Trayvon assumed he was reaching for his gun... well, you know what they say when you assume.
 
Ryanm said:
"he initially provokes the use of force against him by throwing the first punch
(which he did)"

What's your source on that? I have found nothing claiming Zimmerman or Martin threw the first punch.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter who threw the first punch..

GZ will be asked on the stand what Trayvon was doing that appeared criminal or illegal.

He will be asked if he knows every resident of the Retreat and their guests and visitors. H

He will be asked how long he followed Trayvon in his car before he called 911 at &:09 PM.
 
I mostly agree with you except for a couple of your conclusions. Either way, I appreciate the work you put into creating this thread and development of your argument.

What I agree with is that it really comes down to who confronted who, and who started the fight. However, I do think Zimmerman was reckless by pursuing Martin and trying to play the hero, and for that, I believe he should be at least held partly accountable.
 
Last edited:
Muhammed said:
That is simply speculation that you are stating as fact. Trayvon could have been high and at some point decided to beat up and kill Z and steal his gun and truck and go on a killing spree for all you or I know.
Click to expand...

We know Trayvon wasn't high according the the ME and the autopsy he did.

George will get on the stand and describe exactly what Trayvon was doing to be considered a threat.

George will also be asked if he knows every resident of the Retreat and all their guests and visitors..

Was he peeking in windows, looking for unlocked cars, checking for unlocked front doors???
 
sharon said:
George will get on the stand and describe exactly what Trayvon was doing to be considered a threat.
Click to expand...

No....you have no idea WTF you are talking about. Thats NOT the point

Zim ONLY has to present with clarity and effectiveness a reasonable belief/fear of serious bodily injury or death, and no other means would suffice to prevent such harm.
 
Ryanm said:
Okay, I will take your word for the fact that his girlfriend called him. Regardless, that does not change anything about what I said; if you're ever being followed by someone, call the police.

George Zimmerman reaching for his phone is not a crime. If Trayvon assumed he was reaching for his gun... well, you know what they say when you assume.
Click to expand...

Cops kill unarmed people all the time for "reaching" for things at their waists.

Gun on the right hip, phone in right front pocket or also on hip.

Picture it in your mind, honstly picture someone reaching under their jacket, for a pocket or phone case, RIGHT NEXT to a GUN!!1!, and ask yourself if a "reasonable person" would consider this an actionably threatening action from an individual who got out of their vehicle to "follow" them.

Self defense does not require a person to let a weapon be brought to bear, any more than it requires one to allow themselves to be shot.
 
Grim17 said:
Thank god for fox news...



Now what do you Martin supporters have to say?
Click to expand...



The investigator admitted he lied in his affidavit. Of course, its ok for LE to lie when doing so on the instruction of the prosecutor.
 
What if...? said:
Cops kill unarmed people all the time for "reaching" for things at their waists.
Click to expand...

When they investigate afterwords and find that the vitim was unarmed or was just reaching for a phone, do the cops not get into some pretty serious trouble and the city typically gets sued? So, it sounds as if you agree that Trayvon was in the wrong or at least contributed to his own death.
 
Last edited:
What if...? said:
Picture it in your mind, honstly picture someone reaching under their jacket, for a pocket or phone case, RIGHT NEXT to a GUN!!1!, and ask yourself if a "reasonable person" would consider this an actionably threatening action from an individual who got out of their vehicle to "follow" them.
Click to expand...
Only an idiot would.
 
You accuse members of DP of baseless speculation. While that may be a possibility, don't forget that it is the prosecutor in the case who believes that she can get a conviction in a court of law, based on the evidence. So I would not call any speculation, one way or the other, baseless. In the end, Zimmerman is getting his day in court, and he will either be found innocent, or he will be found guilty. That's the way things work in America, and that's all the family of Martin wanted. Their UNARMED son is dead, and all they asked for was a little justice. Whether Zimmerman is found innocent or guilty, justice is what the Martin family finally got.
 
danarhea said:
it is the prosecutor in the case who believes that she can get a conviction in a court of law, based on the evidence.
Click to expand...
Have you looked into that whining persecutor?
As for based on the evidence... yeah, sure we already know that they fudged a PC Affidavit. Her reading of the evidence is a joke.


danarhea said:
In the end, Zimmerman is getting his day in court, and he will either be found innocent, or he will be found guilty. That's the way things work in America,
Click to expand...
The law states that he has immunity. That is how it works.


danarhea said:
and that's all the family of Martin wanted. Their UNARMED son is dead, and all they asked for was a little justice. Whether Zimmerman is found innocent or guilty, justice is what the Martin family finally got.
Click to expand...
Bs. They wanted to be able to sue, and they wanted what they perceive justice to be. Not what justice truly is. That is what all the uproar is about. They couldn't accept that justice was initially done. They wanted a different result than actual justice.
 
haymarket said:
anybody simply want to wait to see how this plays out at trial?
Click to expand...

The trial will basically be between the prosecutor and defense attorney.

Zimmerman has been coached so much that he will be like Palin in her interview with Katie Couric. They will have months to train him what to say. His contribution will be minor.

It will come down to lawyer vs lawyer.
 
Crosscheck said:
The trial will basically be between the prosecutor and defense attorney.

Zimmerman has been coached so much that he will be like Palin in her interview with Katie Couric. They will have months to train him what to say. His contribution will be minor.

It will come down to lawyer vs lawyer.
Click to expand...
Sorry, they don't really coach.

As for the rest of what you said. That may be a good read on what will happen.
 
Excon said:
As for the rest of what you said. That may be a good read on what will happen.
Click to expand...
After thinking about it. Nah, it is mostly going to depend upon what Zimmerman says.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom