Zimmerman to be charged

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Yes it is a media circus and a political prosecution. The government has a huge hurdle to prove 2nd degree murder based on the FL. statute.

The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

Link

If you read the jury instruction here: http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/chapters/chapter7/p2c7s7.4.rtf

or as I posted it here: http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/362267-zimmerman-to-be-charged/page__view__findpost__p__5292098

you might have an idea how the archaic language is to be applied by a jury to render a verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree for the State of Florida. BTW. the charge of murder in the second degree also includes the lesser charges of manslaughter, third degree murder, and negligent homicide, as well as several non-homicide charges.

[Sayha or bust. 71]

i'm betting on voluntary manslaughter. i don't think you can be charged w/ murder w/o a grand jury.

Not correct! Cannot be charged with 1st degree, 2nd degree yes.

[Sayha or bust. 71]

So railroad a man for defending himself. Guess they decided that having someone bash your skull against the cement is not harmful. Maybe she thought it was just wrestling. Soon they will try to make it where white men can't defend themselves. Open season it looks like. Buy lots of ammo.

He wouldn't be defending himself if he wouldn't have got out of the car.

[B_J 2,752]

He wouldn't be defending himself if he wouldn't have got out of the car.

Very true. However, I think in the US, you have the right to get out of your car.

[Sayha or bust. 71]

Very true. However, I think in the US, you have the right to get out of your car.

Of course there funny guy but Mr.Zimmerman used some very poor judgement and young mans life was cut short.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Of course there funny guy but Mr.Zimmerman used some very poor judgement and young mans life was cut short.

It's against the law to attack another human being. It's not against the law to defend against an attacker/aggressor.

[Sayha or bust. 71]

It's against the law to attack another human being. It's not against the law to defend against an attacker/aggressor.

Your another smart guy too. When the evidence comes out and they say trevon came at zimmerman then sure but we know one thing already zimmermam got out of that car and was armed with a gun and a young man was killed.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Your another smart guy too. When the evidence comes out and they say trevon came at zimmerman then sure but we know one thing already zimmermam got out of that car and was armed with a gun and a young man was killed.

Getting out of your vehicle armed with a gun is not against the law. Physically attacking another human being is against the law. Protecting yourself from said attacker is not against the law.

[Sayha or bust. 71]

Wow, tell me something I don't know. You think Zimmerman would of got out that car if he didn't have a gun? I doubt it, anyway my point being if Zimmerman stayed in car and used his better judgement, the young man would still be alive. What don't you comprehand?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Wow, tell me something I don't know. You think Zimmerman would of got out that car if he didn't have a gun? I doubt it, anyway my point being if Zimmerman stayed in car and used his better judgement, the young man would still be alive. What don't you comprehand?

I agree. But that didn't happen, and he was attacked and he defended himself.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Actually it will boil down to who threw the first punch, and if Martin was in fact on top of Zimmerman pummeling him. Following a person in Florida is not illegal, (following the same person multiple times is stalking). Asking a person what you are doing in the neighborhood is not a crime. Doesn't matter if Zimmerman was following Martin, or if he asked him what he was up to. If Martin attacked Zimmerman, and Zimmerman felt he was in danger of great bodily harm, he was justified in shooting Martin. Here is a link to a case where a person chased a suspected robber and stabbed him to death.The prosecutor charged him with 2nd degreee murder also,and the judge threw the case out based on the stand your ground law. http://www.miamihera...n-the-back.html

Under Florida law, "[a] person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony." § 776.013(3), Fla. Stat. (2007

So you don't believe there is any possibility that Martin felt his life threatened and could have acted out in self defense? Why not? If you were walking home at night in the rain and unarmed, and you notice some guy in an SUV watching and following you then approach you after you had started to walk/run in the opposite direction, you wouldn't feel threatened by that in any way? There's an obvious bias for believing Zimmerman as opposed to looking at all possible scenarios. While it could be possible that Zimmerman felt he was defending his life, Martin had no incentive to attack Zimmerman that night other than feeling threatened by Zimmerman's odd behavior, and if Zimmerman had his gun visible, that would have freaked Martin out even more. Put yourself in similar circumstances and try to imagine how you would have reacted. Zimmerman had no badge, no identity, no marking on his car that showed he was in an position of security or lawman. He was not recognized in the neighborhood as watchman, nor did he have any authority to carry a gun as a watchman for the neighborhood. He was told by the police not to follow Martin, once Martin started to run away from him, yet he did.

It's funny to see how so many of you make excuses for Zimmerman's behavior. He should not have been going after Martin. If Martin felt his life was in danger, he had every legal right to defend himself, even if that meant neutralizing Zimmerman (according to those of you who support 'Stand Your Ground' laws). Martin doesn't need a gun to make him taking decisive action out of self preservation a legitimate act of self defense. Any one of us would probably have pounced on Zimmerman if we believed he was going to kill us. To dismiss that very real possibility is being selective about self defense.

Edited April 15, 2012 by Mister Fancypants

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

So you don't believe there is any possibility that Martin felt his life threatened and could have acted out in self defense? Why not? If you were walking home at night in the rain and unarmed, and you notice some guy in an SUV watching and following you then approach you after you had started to walk/run in the opposite direction, you wouldn't feel threatened by that in any way?

Did Traaayvon have a cell phone on him at the time, and if so did he call 911?

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

So you don't believe there is any possibility that Martin felt his life threatened and could have acted out in self defense? Why not? If you were walking home at night in the rain and unarmed, and you notice some guy in an SUV watching and following you then approach you after you had started to walk/run in the opposite direction, you wouldn't feel threatened by that in any way? There's an obvious bias for believing Zimmerman as opposed to looking at all possible scenarios. While it could be possible that Zimmerman felt he was defending his life, Martin had no incentive to attack Zimmerman that night other than feeling threatened by Zimmerman's odd behavior, and if Zimmerman had his gun visible, that would have freaked Martin out even more. Put yourself in similar circumstances and try to imagine how you would have reacted. Zimmerman had no badge, no identity, no marking on his car that showed he was in an position of security or lawman. He was not recognized in the neighborhood as watchman, nor did he have any authority to carry a gun as a watchman for the neighborhood. He was told by the police not to follow Martin, once Martin started to run away from him, yet he did.

It's funny to see how so many of you make excuses for Zimmerman's behavior. He should not have been going after Martin. If Martin felt his life was in danger, he had every legal right to defend himself, even if that meant neutralizing Zimmerman (according to those of you who support 'Stand Your Ground' laws). Martin doesn't need a gun to make him taking decisive action out of self preservation a legitimate act of self defense. Any one of us would probably have pounced on Zimmerman if we believed he was going to kill us. To dismiss that very real possibility is being selective about self defense.

Zimmerman sounded drunk or under the influence of some intoxicant. His curious use of language suggests that he was hunting Martin. Perhaps not lying in wait but pushing it. Zimmerman was/is a psycho vigilante wanna be supercop.

[B_J 2,752]

Wow, tell me something I don't know. You think Zimmerman would of got out that car if he didn't have a gun? I doubt it, anyway my point being if Zimmerman stayed in car and used his better judgement, the young man would still be alive. What don't you comprehand?

You keep bringing up things that don't matter. That's like saying if the kid hadn't gone to get skittles then he would still be alive. The kid had the right to go get skittles. The man had the right to get out of his car. The man has the right to carry a gun. They have the right to talk to each other also.

The real issue is how did the fight start.

[Sayha or bust. 71]

You keep bringing up things that don't matter. That's like saying if the kid hadn't gone to get skittles then he would still be alive. The kid had the right to go get skittles. The man had the right to get out of his car. The man has the right to carry a gun. They have the right to talk to each other also.

The real issue is how did the fight start.

The only way I'm going to believe this murder was justified if the kid literally dragged Zimmerman out of his car and went for his gun, until then Zimmerman a cold blooded killer in my mind. Stop with the law rhetoric!