Whats your opinion on the florida shooting?

[SGB]

I think the probability of wide spread violence breaking out in response to Zimmerman not being charged is highly unlikely. However being prepared never hurts.

 

[Fyrewerx]

The Special Prosecutor announced, this morning, that she will NOT present this case to Grand Jury tomorow (Tues., April 10). Most TV stations are stating they take this to mean Zimmerman will be arrested this week (not sure what they're basing that on).

 

[therikoxide]

I think the probability of wide spread violence breaking out in response to Zimmerman not being charged is highly unlikely. However being prepared never hurts.

I agree with you about widespread violence, however I would be very surprised if nothing happened in Sanford or the surrounding area. Especially if its true that two completely opposite fringe groups are gathering in the same place. Nationally, I think we will continue to see isolated events thanks to the libtards stocking the fire, but nothing more than isolated events.

 

[Doc Mustang]

"They should arrest George Zimmerman immediately, and make him prove it was self-defense."

I fell off my chair in disbelief of what I had just heard.

You shouldn't have. If Zimmerman is arrested and charged with a homicide, (murder or manslaughter) he will have to prove that it was self defense. Self defense is what is known as an affirmative defense. You acknowledge that you took action that you knew would result in the death of the victim, and that those actions did indeed cause their death. You essentially make the bulk of the prosecutor's case for them. You must then proove that your actions were justified and that a reasonable person would, in that circumstance, have been in fear of their life and acted similarly. In a self defense case the burden of proof does shift to the defense.

 

[Fyrewerx]

You shouldn't have. If Zimmerman is arrested and charged with a homicide, (murder or manslaughter) he will have to prove that it was self defense. Self defense is what is known as an affirmative defense. You acknowledge that you took action that you knew would result in the death of the victim, and that those actions did indeed cause their death. You essentially make the bulk of the prosecutor's case for them. You must then proove that your actions were justified and that a reasonable person would, in that circumstance, have been in fear of their life and acted similarly. In a self defense case the burden of proof does shift to the defense.

That's good to know. Then in Zimmerman's case, he'll have to use the preliminary police report, and SFD's report if it exists, indicating the bloody nose and blood on the back of his head, as his only evidence of being harmed. The following of Martin in the first place, will damage his case, but may not be relevant at the moment of self-defense. Interesting to see how defense attorneys present this one.

 

[SGB]

I agree with you about widespread violence, however I would be very surprised if nothing happened in Sanford or the surrounding area. Especially if its true that two completely opposite fringe groups are gathering in the same place. Nationally, I think we will continue to see isolated events thanks to the libtards stocking the fire, but nothing more than isolated events.

I agree, though I suspect such events will be minor. The NBPP & KKK are thugs who lack the will to act on their rhetoric in the light of day.

You shouldn't have. If Zimmerman is arrested and charged with a homicide, (murder or manslaughter) he will have to prove that it was self defense. Self defense is what is known as an affirmative defense. You acknowledge that you took action that you knew would result in the death of the victim, and that those actions did indeed cause their death. You essentially make the bulk of the prosecutor's case for them. You must then proove that your actions were justified and that a reasonable person would, in that circumstance, have been in fear of their life and acted similarly. In a self defense case the burden of proof does shift to the defense.

Nope, sorry but you're 100% wrong. Burden of proof beyond a REASONABLE doubt is upon the State, and that will be a near impossible row to hoe given what we currently know.

 

[Bttbbob]

^^^^^^What SGB said.......My money says he doesn't get arrested.

 

[MilShooter]

The Special Prosecutor announced, this morning, that she will NOT present this case to Grand Jury tomorow (Tues., April 10). Most TV stations are stating they take this to mean Zimmerman will be arrested this week (not sure what they're basing that on).

You should understand the press by now, Fyrewerx! The press thrive on SPECULATION, RUMOR, and FABRICATION. The acted no differently here.

 

[walknotinfear]

No one wins in this case. A teen is dead and Zimmerman's life has come to a halt. No one will know what happened that night with the exception of Zimmerman. Even if Zimmerman is not charged you better believe he will be sued.
I have no side on this story. I believe that both the teen and Zimmerman were equally a fault. I feel that there is a chance now that the laws will change in Florida because of this (I hope not).

 

[SGB]

No one wins in this case. A teen is dead and Zimmerman's life has come to a halt. No one will know what happened that night with the exception of Zimmerman. Even if Zimmerman is not charged you better believe he will be sued.
I have no side on this story. I believe that both the teen and Zimmerman were equally a fault. I feel that there is a chance now that the laws will change in Florida because of this (I hope not).

Really now ..........

 

[walknotinfear]

I hope the Stand you ground law is untouched, just my 2 cents, but I am sure they will try to change it.

 

[six-gun-saint]

This all been blown way out of proportion. He was in a gated community where he did not live after dark and confrounted the watch captain. The media has turned rhis in to a racial debate. But zimmerman feared for his life. That is the entire basis behind the stand your ground law, lethal force if personal injury is imminent.

 

[Fyrewerx]

....Even if Zimmerman is not charged you better believe he will be sued.
...

If he is not charged because he acted under the "Stand Your Ground" law, then he cannot be sued in a civil case, according to the wording of SYG.

 

[Doc Mustang]

Nope, sorry but you're 100% wrong. Burden of proof beyond a REASONABLE doubt is upon the State, and that will be a near impossible row to hoe given what we currently know.

Technically you are correct the Burden of Proof is still on the state. However, an affirmative defense complicates things. A justifiable homicide defense necessitates admitting:
1. A person died (actus reus)
2. the defendant through direct intentional action utilized deadly force against the decedent. (actus reus)
3. The defendant knew (or should have known) that their actions would or could have resulted in the death of the decedent. (mens rea)

This means that several points that the prosecutor would ordinarily been required to make beyond a reasonable doubt to prove a homicide are no longer in question. The defense has, in effect, relieved the prosecution of the burden of proof for those elements. This partial admission of guilt is the difficulty of an affirmative defense. It is also why you should consult with an attorney prior to making ANY statements to police in a self defense shooting. What remains in question is the following:

4. Malice and/or premeditation (for murder), Negligence (for manslaughter). (mens rea)
5. The act was without legal justification. (varies by jurisdiction)

The numbered elements make up a generalized corpus delecti for homicide. These are the elements that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt for conviction.

In any criminal defense the defense must introduce(prove) reasonable doubt by attacking the elements of the prosecutors case. An affirmative defense limits the areas in which the defense may introduce reasonable doubt. A justifiable homicide defense requires that the defense paint a picture that a reasonable person could believe that the defendant was not the aggressor, or had ceased aggression and made an effort withdraw or disengage, and that a reasonable person in the defendant’s place would have been in fear of their life. In effect this means that the defense must prove reasonable doubt beyond a reasonable doubt. A subtle distinction but in an affirmative defense, such as what I just described there is a substantial burden on the defense because much of the corpus delicti is not in contention.

 

[SGB]

Technically you are correct the Burden of Proof is still on the state.

The rest is hyperbole ...............

As for the NBPP Maybe it's time for some new cammies :laugh:

Link Removed

 

[S&W645]

If he is not charged because he acted under the "Stand Your Ground" law, then he cannot be sued in a civil case, according to the wording of SYG.

Hate to say it but you still can be tried in Civil Court. The prosecutor could decide not to try Zimmerman in Criminal Court. Reason being not enough evidence to bring charges. Does not mean the same as not guilty. Failure to prosecute does not mean innocent. Failure to charge does not mean you get off scottfree. Weasel wording of laws is where lawyers earn their money. 776.032 still leaves open a Civil Trial and you could lose big time.

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
History.—s. 4, ch. 2005-27.

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.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.

 

[BluesStringer]

Hate to say it but you still can be tried in Civil Court. The prosecutor could decide not to try Zimmerman in Criminal Court. Reason being not enough evidence to bring charges. Does not mean the same as not guilty. Failure to prosecute does not mean innocent. Failure to charge does not mean you get off scottfree. Weasel wording of laws is where lawyers earn their money. 776.032 still leaves open a Civil Trial and you could lose big time.

Absolute bunk. In the eyes of the law, every suspect or charged defendant is presumed innocent until proven otherwise in a fair trial, and adjudicated by a jury of his peers that he is, indeed, guilty. Not charged is absolutely the same as saying "innocent" because the law views everyone innocent from the beginning of a case right up to the moment that a Jury Foreman or Court Clerk says in open court, "We find the defendant guilty, Your Honor." No charges = no guilty verdict = innocent.

As to the improbable potential for a civil case being brought against Zimmerman and allowed to proceed by a civil court judge in blatant contravention of the intent of FL's SYG law, even if that happened, civil court doesn't deal with guilt or innocence, only responsible or not responsible in a wrongful death suit. Zimmerman would still be 100% innocent in the eyes of the law no matter the verdict in such a kangaroo court as that would necessarily be in the absence of any criminal charges for the shooting.

Blues

 

[Flanmedic51]

No one wins in this case. A teen is dead and Zimmerman's life has come to a halt. No one will know what happened that night with the exception of Zimmerman. Even if Zimmerman is not charged you better believe he will be sued.
I have no side on this story. I believe that both the teen and Zimmerman were equally a fault. I feel that there is a chance now that the laws will change in Florida because of this (I hope not).

Yea, 'who instigated who' type of scenario. Wonder if he could be convicted of a wrongful death civil suit or something after this plays out and he is found innocent of criminal wrongdoing.

 

[jhodge83]

Yea, 'who instigated who' type of scenario. Wonder if he could be convicted of a wrongful death civil suit or something after this plays out and he is found innocent of criminal wrongdoing.

waiting for another OJ trial all over again.

 

[Flanmedic51]

Yea, 'who instigated who' type of scenario. Wonder if he could be convicted of a wrongful death civil suit or something after this plays out and he is found innocent of criminal wrongdoing.

waiting for another OJ trial all over again.

Yup...with potentially strong repercussions on self defense laws.