Florida stand Your ground law?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 3141 - 3160 of total 3216 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
jghedge

climber
Aug 8, 2013 - 09:45am PT


"Yes, good point. And none of us should advocate for the guvment spending money on education unless we're a teacher, or spending on health care unless we're a doctor or nurse, etc."


"Spending money" has nothing to do with the point being made. You're trying to equate sending teachers into a classroom with sending soldiers onto a battlefield. Hahahaha

blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Aug 8, 2013 - 10:13am PT
Yes, you got it, you should not advocate sending teachers into a classroom unless you yourself have been a teacher.
That simple enough for you? Sound incredibly stupid?
If the answer to both of the foregoing questions is "yes," congratulations, you're capable of elementary reasoning.
jghedge

climber
Aug 8, 2013 - 10:17am PT

"Yes, you got it, you should not advocate sending teachers into a classroom unless you yourself have been a teacher."

Except no one trying to make any kind of reasoned argument would be dumb enough to equate sending a teacher into a classroom with sending soldiers into battle - obviously.

bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
Aug 8, 2013 - 04:53pm PT
*edit* Sweet! Patdollard.com links! I only like my news copy/pasted from actual news organizations and placed under the byline "The War Starts Here" so this site fits all my needs.


The Dollard posts are sourced from common MSM sources, idiot. It says the source at the beginning of the post.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Aug 8, 2013 - 04:59pm PT
Bluey do you think if we got a collection going we could get jhedgeworm sent to the UK!?>? Wouldnt have to be by plane -- as long as the shipping container had one or two air holes. Provided no one forgets to drill those.



and now,, a musical interlude by Mr tom Petty~~




.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
Aug 8, 2013 - 05:49pm PT
Too bad this little 13 yr-old wasn't packing. 3-on-1 beatdown because the whitey didn't like their drug-dealing;

http://www.examiner.com/article/school-bus-fight-three-black-teens-attack-white-bus-driver-doesn-t-intervene

Where're the civil rights as#@&%es?
Tarzan

Trad climber
Vegas
Aug 8, 2013 - 08:54pm PT
No kidding Blu, 3 little Trevonns from when he was 15. Everybody asked for comments from Sharpton and Jackson but nothing. Chief of police says 'no racial component'. Right! Here comes another pig flying out my ass.

The big news is that no charges filed aginst the bus driver for doing more. What color was the busdriver? Too late..he has since retired.

Know why there won't be a giant march on Tuesday when these thugs go to court? No signs or Tee Shirts or TV camaras or J leno interviews or Ben Crump pulling down 6 figures invoking Martin Luther King?

Cause this kids parents have to go to work! They don't have the day off. Or 4 f*#king months off. Neither do any of their friends and family.

Think those punks called that kid a 'Rat Ass Cracker'? But we need to understand that 'Cracker' is not a racial slur.

Those punks can thank God that kid wasn't my kid.

Think I'm raceist, watch this video about 4 times and imiagin this is your kid who told a teacher some kids were trying to sell him pot in the bathroom. How the f*#k did the 15year olds find out who ratted them out anyway? Who was the teacher? What color were they?

We can't trust teachers anymore? That's what I drilled into my kids, teachers are just lazy pig tools too!

Confide in a teacher and the next thing you know you are getting your ass kicked or drugged and nekked in the back of their car.

WTF?


Tarzan

Trad climber
Vegas
Aug 8, 2013 - 11:10pm PT
Look at this guy's fingers, small short and thin..must be his half whi...
Look at this guy's fingers, small short and thin..must be his half white curse
Credit: Tarzan
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Aug 9, 2013 - 06:23am PT
bluering scoffed
The Dollard posts are sourced from common MSM sources, idiot. It says the source at the beginning of the post.

It's true! They find the most hysterical, sensationalist broadcasts/articles they can find that reinforce the worldview of their audience and then re-headline them in a manner that redoubles the hysteria! I went and watched the actual broadcast about the Fort Hood shooter being given "special treatment by Obama" and it boils down to the shocking, SHOCKING revelation that:

The military flies him to court in a helicopter due to security concerns.

Which clearly was Obama's decision because he's a megalomaniacal Muslim capable of micromanaging the military but incapable of managing the military.

Some other choice PatDollardDotCom articles "sourced" from maintstream media:

http://patdollard.com/2013/08/watch-florida-school-bus-driver-stands-by-while-kids-beat-sixth-grader-may-face-charges/

Black School Bus Driver Stands By While Pack of Black Kids Beat Younger White Kid, Break His Arm, Rob Him

Turns out when you read the article or watch the video that the "Black School Bus Driver" called for help and tried to get the kids to stop but that's not important what's important is that a Black School Bus Driver Stood By While A PACK OF BLACK KIDS Beat And Robbed A White Kid. A whole PACK of them. And the black school bus driver just STOOD there. Being black. I don't understand why you people keep bringing up race as still being an issue all I see is some innocent dog whistling here ok?


http://patdollard.com/2013/08/ww2-hero-refuses-medical-care-so-cops-kill-him-in-his-nursing-home/

WW2 Hero Refuses Medical Care, So Cops Kill Him in His Nursing Home

Nursing home resident swings a cane and a large kitchen knife at staff, paramedics and police so they shoot him with a beanbag gun which then causes internal bleeding and he later dies but I think that headline accurately paraphrases that, don't you? Plus it was "excerpted" (decontextualized and rewritten) from the Chicago Tribune so you know it's accurate! Also they stretch the article out to like 5 times the original length by including excerpts from an interview with the family lawyer, nursing home executive and lots of editorializing which they fail to mention was not part of the original article. A pretty clever way to make it seem like all your "facts" are sourced by actual journalists!

PatDollard knows very well that bluering would never actual click the link to the original articles so I'm pretty sure they know who the idiot here is.
Dave Kos

Social climber
Temecula
Aug 9, 2013 - 12:21pm PT
Dude was just standing his ground:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/09/us/florida-facebook-confession/index.html
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Aug 9, 2013 - 12:39pm PT
He and his wife argued. He pulled a gun on her. She threatened to leave him. He put the gun away and followed her. She unloaded a volley of punches on him. He fetched the gun again. She pulled a knife. He wrestled it out of her hands. She punched him again.

Well, she DID pull a knife on him.

Seriously, though this is unbelievably terrible. Their 10 y/o daughter was in the house too.
Dave Kos

Social climber
Temecula
Aug 9, 2013 - 12:44pm PT
Seriously though, I don't see why he couldn't use the "stand your ground" defense.
blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Aug 9, 2013 - 01:28pm PT
Seriously though, I don't see why he couldn't use the "stand your ground" defense.

Do you think the outcome of the case would have been different based on the law of self defense in FL before SYG?
If so, why?
If you're a little confused (and I don't know if you are or you aren't), no biggie, it was clear in this thread that many posters had no idea of what changes to the law of self defense SYG made, what relevance SYG may have had to the Zimm case (nothing really, although some guy went ape sh#t based on the fact that an aspect of SYG was a part of the jury instructions), etc.
Lots of people seem to be mad that people have a right to defend themselves (and that right includes hurting or killing an attacker, depending on the circumstances), but that's true in every US jurisdiction. The details vary.
Dave Kos

Social climber
Temecula
Aug 9, 2013 - 01:36pm PT
It's true that I don't know the nuances of the law before/after SYG.

My take is that the basic characteristic is that there is no requirement to attempt escape or retreat before shooting (per Wikipedia.)

But I do know that other states have similar self defense law, so it's a matter of degree...

The fundamentals in the "facebook killer" case are almost identical to the Martin case. (Except for the creepy facebook photo part of the story.)

But I doubt that the gun enthusiast clubs will be defending this guy.

blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Aug 9, 2013 - 01:56pm PT
Yeah, elimination of the "duty to retreat" was an important aspect of SYG, but there are other important parts too (such as the "immunity" aspect of it, and a fee shifting provision in civil cases). I don't want to act like an expert on it; just looked at the law when following the Zimm case.
As I understand it, no one claimed that Zimm had a "duty to retreat," because once Trayvon was beating the crap out of Zimm, Zimm really couldn't retreat. (If you don't believe Trayvon was beating the crap out of Zimm and Zimm just assassinated Trayvon, that's fine, but under those circumstances, SYG isn't a defense. That was pretty much the prosecution theory.)

It isn't clear to me if the "duty to retreat" is relevant under the Facebook killer facts; it seems to me that you cannot safely retreat from someone attacking you with a knife, and so there may not be any difference in the Facebook killer case under SYG or under the pre-existing law.
Dr. F.

Boulder climber
SoCal
Aug 12, 2013 - 08:27pm PT
Lawyers Say Florida's Law Enforcement Threw Away George Zimmerman's Case

A growing chorus of attorneys and analysts say Zimmerman didn't face anything like a serious trial.


August 6, 2013
http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/10-reasons-lawyers-say-floridas-law-enforcement-threw-ryan-zimmermans-case-away?paging=off

Florida law enforcement, from the local police to the special prosecutor overseeing the Trayvon Martin case, did not want to see George Zimmerman convicted of murder and deliberately threw away the case, allowing their prosecution to crumble. A growing chorus of attorneys and analysts who know jury trials and courtroom procedure say this is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from the parade of otherwise incoherent missteps by George Zimmerman’s prosecutors.

“I find it personally difficult to believe it was not thrown,” said Warren Ingber, a New York-based attorney who has practiced law for decades. “I am far from alone in this assessment, and it reveals even harder truth why this case was a miscarriage of justice.”

Ingber detailed his reasons in a letter sent to a NPR’s "Left, Right and Center" program after its liberal analysts would not touch that possibility. But there’s been a growing chorus saying the Zimmerman prosecution was not merely incompetent, but going through the motions and intentionally losing. This includes Florida talk radio host Randi Rhodes, who covered the trial daily, to New Orleans Times-Picayune editorial writer Jarvis DeBerry whose source canvassed 20 local prosecutors, to celebrity lawyers like Alan Dershowitz and other legal analysts, and longtime lawyers like Ingber who was indignant at NPR’s commentators ceding too much ground to right-wingers.

Here are 10 key points the lawyers in these reports cite behind this conclusion.

1. There was enough evidence to convict, despite biased police work.That assessment “is itself a miracle,” Ingber wrote, citing how the Sanford, Florida police handled the killing. “Martin’s body lay in the morgue as a John Doe for three days while his mother was asking for his whereabouts. His cell phone records indicated he was on the phone as he was being killed. The person he was on with had no idea where he was. Meanwhile his admitted killer was on the loose and allowed to produce exculpatory evidence while crime scene evidence was deteriorating. It appears from videos of Zimmerman ‘strolling’ into custody that he was not that badly hurt. But in Florida the right of self-defense includes, for whites, the freedom to exculpate oneself. And when that wasn’t enough, the police stepped in, as when the lead detective Chris Serino told Zimmerman the screams for help were his, not Martin’s, over his objection.”

2. The governor’s handpicked prosecutor enters with an agenda.“No account of this trial is complete if it does not start with how the deck was stacked before the trial took place,” Ingber said. “But it continues in the identity of the person that Florida’s [Republican] Gov. Rick Scott selected to prosecute the case: Angela Corey, the prosecutor who sentenced Marissa Alexander [a black woman] to 20 years for firing a gun into the air in her own garage in defense against a convicted abuser of women. I’ll leave it to Alan Dershowitz, who knows the law of defamation, to describe her professional lapses that ‘bordered on criminal conduct.’”

3. No change of venue was demanded.There were a series of decisions made by the prosecutors that incrementally lowered their chances of obtaining a conviction. The first concerned not seeking a jury trial in another county. The Seminole County district attorney and multiple judges recused themselves, “proof that the case was a political hot potato and that there was a fear that there would be negative political ramifications following a Zimmerman verdict,” Times-Picayune editorial writer Jarvis DeBerry wrote. But the state did not want to move the trial.

4. The early mishandling of the jury.Prosecutors meekly tried to remove two jurors with very strong pro-Zimmerman biases, but did not use more forceful “preemptory challenges,” DeBerry noted. “Juror B-37… should never have been let onto the jury after she said there were ‘riots’ in Sanford over this case,” Ingber added. “How was that allowed to occur? B-37’s interview is worth a listen.” She called Martin a “boy of color” (at 10.41) and mentioned “rioting” twice (12.12 and 14.32), calling it “organized” by Martin supporters and adding that she didn’t trust mainstream media.

5. There were no men on the jury.DeBerry, citing a former prosecutor who “handled hundreds of homicide cases over his career,” said opposing an all-female jury was “prosecuting 101. In a fatal fight between men, you fight to get men on the jury. Men are more likely to convict.”

6. The jury was improperly sequestered.While talking about the jury—before turning to what the prosecution did and didn’t do with witnesses—it’s also important to note that the jury wasn’t properly kept away from interacting with the public. “Why wasn't the jury properly sequestered?” Ingber said. “Why was it given time with family members, time enough for, oh, I don’t know, arranging a book deal?” (Juror B-37 signed a contract with a literary agent immediately after the trial ended.)

7. Missteps with the state’s witnesses.The prosecution failed to adequately prepare its witnesses, such as Rachel Jeantel, who was on the phone with Martin during the confrontation “and was the closest thing the state had to a star witness,” DeBerry wrote.

“Why was the jury’s prejudices given free rein to suppose, as the entire nation did, that Rachel Jeantel was stupid because of her speech when she has an underbite that will require surgery that she is putting off?” Ingber explained. “Why did even close observers of the trial learn this only afterward, from this supposedly stupid witness? Could the prosecution have been even stupider? Or is prosecution of a white man for killing a black man in the South just stupefying?”

Jeantel was hardly the state’s only bad witness. “What of the ill-prepared "I know nothing" state medical examiner, who changed his testimony in the course of his examination, including waffling on the absurd notion that marijuana might have made Martin aggressive?” he wrote. “Why did he ignore testimony that Zimmerman was the aggressor? One wonders who got to this man. Surely not those Sanford rioters!”

8. More missteps with Zimmerman’s witnesses.If your side’s witnesses are falling down, lawyers usually work even harder to undermine their opponent’s case. But exactly the opposite unfolded.“The defense witness that impressed B-37 the most was that friend of Zimmerman’s (whom she mistook for a doctor) who testified he knew it was Zimmerman’s voice based on a knack acquired in military service,” Ingber said. “He had been sitting in the courtroom throughout the trial before his testimony—undisguised and adjacent to the defense team—in flagrant violation of the witness sequestration rule. He should never have been permitted to testify. Where was the prosecution?”

He cited other examples: “How could the prosecutors have been so stupid as to allow Zimmerman to testify in his own defenseby admitting into evidence his Sean Hannity interview on Fox News for the ostensible reason of admitting a minor detail?” Inger said. “Could it have missed the predictable effect on the jury’s sympathies of the defendant appearing before a fake journalist on Fox? Could it not see this for a one-sided waiver of Zimmerman’s Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination? Without risking cross-examination?”

DeBerry’s ex-prosecutor source noted more examples. “A Sanford police officer who was asked if he believed Zimmerman’s story of self-defense was allowed to answer yes without the prosecution objecting,” he said. “Witnesses should not be permitted to offer an opinion on the credibility of other witnesses or other evidence. The next day prosecutors asked the judge to strike that portion of the investigator’s testimony, and she complied. But why did the prosecutors sit quietly as the question was asked and answered?”

9. Florida’s abysmal laws compounded the botched prosecution.Many media outlets analyzed Zimmerman’s acquittal by saying that the state overcharged him—because second-degree murder has a higher standard of proof than the lesser charge of manslaughter. The lawyer-critics don’t buy that analysis, however.

“All of the evidence is that Zimmerman was the aggressor,” Ingber said. “Jeantel testified that Martin was being stalked and that Martin’s cell phone was knocked out of his hand in real time and fell to wet grass just as the struggle—obviously self-defensive on Martin’s part—commenced. The tape of the 911 call is to the same effect. Zimmerman’s self-serving testimony, the coached evidence from the detective about whose voice it was—it’s all fluff. The two telephone calls set it all out. Who was on top for a moment means nothing. They rolled around. The injuries were not consistent with a ground-and-pound attack.

“But say they were. Is the explanation of the not-guilty verdict as to manslaughter that the jury thought it is legal for a man with a gun to initiate an altercation with an unarmed boy and shoot him dead if he starts to lose the fight and fears for his own?”

The Florida law deciding this case is abysmal, Ingber said, noting that this added to the jury’s confusion during deliberations, and in getting the charge from the judge. “Try reading the instructions. Really try. I did,” he wrote. “I am an attorney and thought I knew what the elements of manslaughter were until I read this. Anyone who can parse this—in written form, never mind by ear—qualifies for a Supreme Court nomination.”

“But it’s even worse,” he continued, saying these were yet more prosecutorial blunders. “During deliberations the jury, having only the legal smarts of a mere circuit court judge, asked for clarification as to manslaughter but never received them. Why was that?”

10. Florida wanted to get rid of the case, not win it.The Times-Picayune’s DeBerry said his ex-prosecutor source “said he’s polled about 20 prosecutors in New Orleans, and though all aren’t sure that they would have been able to get Zimmerman convicted as charged, each of them is convinced that he or she could have gotten more than an acquittal. It was a clear case of tanking, he argued: ‘They didn’t want to win this case.’”

There are political benefits to that outcome, Ingber said, explaining what would be the state’s motive for proceeding so sloppily and working not to get a conviction.

“Bear in mind how cost-free all of this shoddy prosecution is,” he said. “Once jeopardy attaches and a defendant is exonerated the prosecutor will suffer no judicial embarrassment because any further proceedings would be double jeopardy. Translation: Zimmerman can’t be retried and the prosecution also gets off the hook. So this could all be swept under the rug and Angela Corey and Rick Scott… can go their merry way.”

Who wins when the state deliberately loses?

It is clear that the details of the Trayvon Martin case will not be forgotten by people who watched the trial or heard it described in detail by radio hosts such as Randi Rhodes, who understand how Florida’s legal system can be stacked in favor of white defendants. The striking conclusion after listening to these lawyers is that even with all the state’s policing and courtroom errors, there was enough to obtain a conviction.

“It takes no partisan slant to see the procedural injustice in this case,” Ingber said. “It is not hard to make the case that the evidence supported a manslaughter verdict beyond a reasonable doubt. This was another O.J. [Simpson] case, except this was not a case of jury nullification. It is to the Emmett Till case what modern-day voter suppression is to the poll tax. You need to drill down to see it for what it is.”
couchmaster

climber
pdx
Aug 22, 2013 - 01:17pm PT
Wrap up in case anyone missed it. Jury heard all of the evidence and decided. Zimmerman is a free man and judged "not guilty".

"I'm letting the judge jury and prosecutors make the call. They will be looking at better evidence than any of us will get third hand or from typically sloppy biased reporting."

"If the head split, you must acquit"
. The head was split.

blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Aug 27, 2013 - 09:14am PT
George Zimmerman to ask for $200,000 from Florida for court costs
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/26/justice/george-zimmerman-court-costs/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Don't know if this request probably will or won't be granted; you never really hear about criminal defendants recouping costs, but perhaps this is an aspect of Stand Your Ground.
If so, this seems like a good idea--about time the government gets held at least a little bit accountable when is decides to f*#k with peoples' lives to score political points.
After all, Florida's case was so weak that the the libs are now claiming that it threw the case (regardless of whether that's true, it shows the entire thing was a farce and a fraud).
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 27, 2013 - 09:16am PT
Maybe Zimmerman will learn not to f*#k with peoples lives by carrying a gun while on neighborhood watch.

The homeowners association had to settle with the Martin family over this issue.
blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Aug 27, 2013 - 09:41am PT
Maybe Zimmerman has learned why it's not advisable to carry a gun while on neighborhood watch.

The homeowners association had to settle with the Martin family over this issue.

Maybe, although it's interesting that the Martin family apparently hasn't sued Zimmerman and that the HOA didn't try a subrogation claim against him.
Could be a reflection that insurance companies (I assume the HOA had an insurance policy--I believe that virtually all of them do, and I know that purchasing insurance is required bylaws of my HOA) settle claims for economic reasons that don't perfectly track likely legal liability.
Messages 3141 - 3160 of total 3216 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews