• 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.

Florida Statutes "JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE"... Prove this doesn't apply to Z

Grim17

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
34,478
Reaction score
17,282
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
This is a condensed version of the Florida self defense laws. I merely removed all wording that didn't apply so that it reads as complete sentences and you don't have to skip to sub sections.

In order for George Zimmerman to be found guilty of murder, it must be proved that the following laws do not apply to him. So for those of you who believe that Zimmerman is guilty, here's you chance to prove it by posting evidence that directly contradicts the following laws... Good luck, because based on the evidence I've seen, you're going to need it.



The 2011 Florida Statutes​
Title XLVI
CRIMES
Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE​


776.012 Use of force in defense of person.

A person is justified in using force against another when the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.


776.041 Use of force by aggressor.
The justification described in 776.012 "Use of force in defense of person" is not available to a person who initially provokes the use of force against himself, unless such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and he 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 in good faith, he withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
Click to expand...


As you see, whether you believe Zimmerman was the aggressor or not, the law is quite clear on what qualifies as legal self defense. If you have concrete evidence proving Zimmerman was the aggressor, then 776.041 applies, otherwise 776.012 is the law that must be overcome to prove Zimmerman is guilty of murder.


Text of Statute for Florida's Stand Your Ground Law
 
Grim17 said:
This is a condensed version of the Florida self defense laws. I merely removed all wording that didn't apply so that it reads as complete sentences and you don't have to skip to sub sections.

In order for George Zimmerman to be found guilty of murder, it must be proved that the following laws do not apply to him. So for those of you who believe that Zimmerman is guilty, here's you chance to prove it by posting evidence that directly contradicts the following laws... Good luck, because based on the evidence I've seen, you're going to need it.




As you see, whether you believe Zimmerman was the aggressor or not, the law is quite clear on what qualifies as legal self defense. If you have concrete evidence proving Zimmerman was the aggressor, then 776.041 applies, otherwise 776.012 is the law that must be overcome to prove Zimmerman is guilty of murder.


Text of Statute for Florida's Stand Your Ground Law
Click to expand...

You're probably right, but if the jury doesnt believe Z is being entirely truthful, then what?

Anybody could make up a self defense story if no one was there to see.

Florida law does allow armed bullies to start **** and kill if they start to lose, so Z is probably still safe.

Absurdly easy to get away with murder in Florida. Just do it where no one can see and claim self defense.
 
What if...? said:
You're probably right, but if the jury doesnt believe Z is being entirely truthful, then what?

Anybody could make up a self defense story if no one was there to see.

Florida law does allow armed bullies to start **** and kill if they start to lose, so Z is probably still safe.

Absurdly easy to get away with murder in Florida. Just do it where no one can see and claim self defense.
Click to expand...


Don't get ahead of yourself

Wait for, the SYG hearing verdict before jumping towards the trial by jury
 
What if...? said:
You're probably right, but if the jury doesnt believe Z is being entirely truthful, then what?

Anybody could make up a self defense story if no one was there to see.
Click to expand...

The thing is, any cop will tell you that when a person makes up a story and lies to them, there is always glaring inconsistencies that stand out to them. After talking to witnesses, interviewing Zimmerman, going over the 911 recordings, listening to Zimmerman's call to police, and evaluating the physical evidence at the crime scene, police had nothing at all indicating that Zimmerman's story was not true and released him. How often have you ever heard of police releasing a person who shot and killed someone in a public place? That speaks volumes.

Back to the self defense laws... The evidence supports that Zimmerman was in a position where self defense was warranted. We know Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating him up according to witnesses. Zimmerman's injuries and Martin's lack of injuries show that Zimmerman was definitely the one who was physically assaulted, not Martin. The audio evidence recorded Zimmerman screaming for help 14 times, which indicates both that he wanted the attack to stop, and that Martin did not stop the attack.

To my knowledge, there is no credible evidence that contradicts these things, therefore it would seem as though Zimmerman was justified when he shot Travon Martin... What I'm looking for here, is for someone to post evidence that directly contradicts what the evidence shows, and proves that Zimmerman's actions were not legally justified under Florida's self defense laws.

That's your cue hawke, sharon...
 
*snip*A person is justified in using force against another when the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force.*snip*

1. "These assholes, they always get away."
2. "****ing Punks"
3. "He's running!"
4. "Are you following him?"
5. "Yeah."
George Zimmerman 911 call about Trayvon Martin UnRedacted - YouTube

She heard Trayvon say “Why you following me for?” An old man said, “What are you doing around here?” Trayvon was saying “Get off, get off.”
Witness #8 Files: Trayvon Martin / George Zimmerman Case | AxiomAmnesia.com Presents They Always Get Away: Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman Documents, Photos, Videos, Audio, and Articles

Trayvon was defending himself, invalidating George Zimmerman's UNLAWFUL use of force.
 
hawke812 said:
*snip*A person is justified in using force against another when the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force.*snip*

1. "These assholes, they always get away."
2. "****ing Punks"
3. "He's running!"
4. "Are you following him?"
5. "Yeah."
George Zimmerman 911 call about Trayvon Martin UnRedacted - YouTube

She heard Trayvon say “Why you following me for?” An old man said, “What are you doing around here?” Trayvon was saying “Get off, get off.”
Witness #8 Files: Trayvon Martin / George Zimmerman Case | AxiomAmnesia.com Presents They Always Get Away: Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman Documents, Photos, Videos, Audio, and Articles

Trayvon was defending himself, invalidating George Zimmerman's UNLAWFUL use of force.
Click to expand...
You have already been told the above means nothing.

So what else do you have?

What was that? Nothing? See, told ya!
 
hawke812 said:
It means George Zimmerman will spend many a year behind bars.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. That is your imagination that you are speaking about. Nothing more than that.
 
hawke812 said:
*snip*A person is justified in using force against another when the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force.*snip*

1. "These assholes, they always get away."
2. "****ing Punks"
3. "He's running!"
4. "Are you following him?"
5. "Yeah."
George Zimmerman 911 call about Trayvon Martin UnRedacted - YouTube

She heard Trayvon say “Why you following me for?” An old man said, “What are you doing around here?” Trayvon was saying “Get off, get off.”
Witness #8 Files: Trayvon Martin / George Zimmerman Case | AxiomAmnesia.com Presents They Always Get Away: Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman Documents, Photos, Videos, Audio, and Articles

Trayvon was defending himself, invalidating George Zimmerman's UNLAWFUL use of force.
Click to expand...

Just where is your evidence that Z was about to attack/use unlawful force on M?

For that to happen M had to reasonably believe he was about to be attacked by Z.

You have NO evidence to support this

Do you understand?
 
hawke812 said:
*snip*A person is justified in using force against another when the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force.*snip*

1. "These assholes, they always get away."
2. "****ing Punks"
3. "He's running!"
4. "Are you following him?"
5. "Yeah."
George Zimmerman 911 call about Trayvon Martin UnRedacted - YouTube

She heard Trayvon say “Why you following me for?” An old man said, “What are you doing around here?” Trayvon was saying “Get off, get off.”
Witness #8 Files: Trayvon Martin / George Zimmerman Case | AxiomAmnesia.com Presents They Always Get Away: Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman Documents, Photos, Videos, Audio, and Articles

Trayvon was defending himself, invalidating George Zimmerman's UNLAWFUL use of force.
Click to expand...

Why is it you skipped the other half of the paragraph hawke?

It not only says "A person is justified in using force against another when the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force" but goes on to say "a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself."

So you need to prove that Zimmerman wasn't in a position where he believed he was in danger of imminent death or great bodily harm to himself. What Zimmerman said on the phone and what his girlfriend said, does nothing to prove that.

So lets see the evidence that shows this hawke.
 
hawke812 said:
Because the part I highlighted PROVES GZ is not protected by Justifiable Use of Force Florida Chapter 776 as you requested.

But no, you go ahead and ignore it as usual. You are doing a fine job of it. Just look at Zimmerman for proof:lamo

Tell me what human being would believe this is GZ:lamo
Expert Voice Analysists Say 911 Screams are NOT From Zimmerman - YouTube
Click to expand...

and what is your comment on the FBI analysis as inconclusive for the voice analysis?
Trayvon evidence fails to answer who screamed for help | Reuters

"An FBI expert found crucial evidence in the Trayvon Martin case was inconclusive, saying it was impossible to tell if the voice screaming for help belonged to the black Florida teenager or his shooter George Zimmerman just before the neighborhood watch captain pulled the trigger."

Now want to bet the prosecution will present "experts" like you linked and the defense will provide "experts" to counter?
Since the FBI analysis came up inconclusive. Seems at best its a draw on what the scream tape is telling us.

So please explain why the FBI is wrong?
 
mike2810 said:
and what is your comment on the FBI analysis as inconclusive for the voice analysis?
Trayvon evidence fails to answer who screamed for help | Reuters

"An FBI expert found crucial evidence in the Trayvon Martin case was inconclusive, saying it was impossible to tell if the voice screaming for help belonged to the black Florida teenager or his shooter George Zimmerman just before the neighborhood watch captain pulled the trigger."

Now want to bet the prosecution will present "experts" like you linked and the defense will provide "experts" to counter?
Since the FBI analysis came up inconclusive. Seems at best its a draw on what the scream tape is telling us.

So please explain why the FBI is wrong?
Click to expand...

The jury will determine who the screams belonged to, Not the FBI.

Who will they believe the death scream belonged to? The guy with the gun who said "these assholes always get away", "****ing punks", etc? Or the teenager who ran from him, and said "get off, get off"?

Yeah sure buddy, Zimmerman will walk:lol:
 
hawke812 said:
Because the part I highlighted PROVES GZ is not protected by Justifiable Use of Force Florida Chapter 776 as you requested.

But no, you go ahead and ignore it as usual. You are doing a fine job of it. Just look at Zimmerman for proof:lamo
Click to expand...

Leave it to you to twist the law so it suites your beliefs... The actual text of the law states immediately following that part:

However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(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
Click to expand...


So as you see hawke, I am right and you need to prove that Zimmerman wasn't in a position where he believed he was in danger of imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.
 
Grim17 said:
Leave it to you to twist the law so it suites your beliefs... The actual text of the law states immediately following that part:




So as you see hawke, I am right and you need to prove that Zimmerman wasn't in a position where he believed he was in danger of imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.
Click to expand...

The paper cuts are your trump card...:lamo:lamo:lamo:lamo:lamo
 
hawke812 said:
The jury will determine who the screams belonged to, Not the FBI.

Who will they believe the death scream belonged to? The guy with the gun who said "these assholes always get away", "****ing punks", etc? Or the teenager who ran from him, and said "get off, get off"?

Yeah sure buddy, Zimmerman will walk:lol:
Click to expand...

Didn't say Z would.
Your responses are predictable.
Yes, but we are discussing (and not in a court of law) the case.
You posted the link for a reason, did you not? What was that reason?

My link simply put doubts in what your link had to say.

Where did I say anything that post that Z will walk?

As far as your other quotes of Z, what does that have to do with the scream analysis?

Your style of posting is much like CT folks. make statements, misdirect, try to be agressive, don't answer any direct question asked of you.

I will agree with you, the jury will decide.
 
Grim17 said:
WTF are you talking about?
Click to expand...

There is no physical evidence in existence that proves GZ was in fear for his life, only in his mind.

In Florida, I can't walk down the street, bump someone, shoot him, then claim I was in fear for my life.

The physical evidence does not support Zimmerman's fantasy version of events.
 
Last edited:
mike2810 said:
Didn't say Z would.
Your responses are predictable.
Yes, but we are discussing (and not in a court of law) the case.
You posted the link for a reason, did you not? What was that reason?

My link simply put doubts in what your link had to say.

Where did I say anything that post that Z will walk?

As far as your other quotes of Z, what does that have to do with the scream analysis?

Your style of posting is much like CT folks. make statements, misdirect, try to be agressive, don't answer any direct question asked of you.

I will agree with you, the jury will decide.
Click to expand...

I have seen this before...what is the CT?
 
mike2810 said:
Didn't say Z would.
Your responses are predictable.
Yes, but we are discussing (and not in a court of law) the case.
You posted the link for a reason, did you not? What was that reason?

My link simply put doubts in what your link had to say.

Where did I say anything that post that Z will walk?

As far as your other quotes of Z, what does that have to do with the scream analysis?

Your style of posting is much like CT folks. make statements, misdirect, try to be agressive, don't answer any direct question asked of you.

I will agree with you, the jury will decide.
Click to expand...

Actually they do not.

1-study in favor of Trayvon Martin

1-Study a wash

0-Studies in favor of Zimmerman

Trayvon Martin still a point up:lol:
 
hawke812 said:
There is no physical evidence in existence in reality that proves GZ was in fear for his life, only in his mind.
Click to expand...

WHAT? Fear is in the mind... LMMFAO

The law state that if the person reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself...
 
Grim17 said:
WHAT? Fear is in the mind... LMMFAO

The law state that if the person reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself...
In Florida, I can't walk down the street, bump someone, shoot him, then claim I was in fear for my life.

The physical evidence does not support Zimmerman's fantasy version of events.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

Yes, reason is on my side. Put a fork in Zimmerman he done...oh wait he 300 pounds obviously not done yet:lamo
 
hawke812 said:
Yes, reason is on my side. Put a fork in Zimmerman he done...oh wait he 300 pounds obviously not done yet:lamo
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have that proves Zimmerman was not in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm?

That's what you need to provide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom