Saturday, July 13, 2013

The Trial

You know the trial that I'm talking about… Zimmerman.

I think they got it all wrong. He was with the “Block Watch” what do those words mean? It means that you watch and call the police. Once he got out of the car he was no longing watching, he was on the offensive.

How do we know that Martin wasn’t defending himself and standing his ground? We don’t know and we will never know because he is dead and cannot give his side of what happened.

Here in Connecticut the law says that if you can escape without using deadly force you had to retreat.
Duty to retreat:  the defendant had a duty to retreat from the physical encounter because (he/she) knew (he/she) could do so with complete safety.

Surrender property:  the defendant knew that (he/she) would not need to use physical force against if (he/she) surrendered property to .
The only time when that isn’t true is in your home.

The “Stand Your Ground” law allows you to comment murder and get away with it, all you have to do is say you were in fear for your life. You want to get rid of your ex-girlfriend new boyfriend, just meet him and a dark street and shoot him and say you were in fear for your life. Bingo, you get a free get out of jail card.

You don’t think that is true? Read this…
Florida 'stand your ground' law yields some shocking outcomes depending on how law is applied
Tampa Bay Times
By Kris Hundley, Susan Taylor Martin and Connie Humburg, Times Staff Writers
June 1, 2012 10:25am

Florida's "stand your ground'' law has allowed drug dealers to avoid murder charges and gang members to walk free. It has stymied prosecutors and confused judges. • It has also served its intended purpose, exonerating dozens of people who were deemed to be legitimately acting in self-defense. Among them: a woman who was choked and beaten by an irate tenant and a man who was threatened in his driveway by a felon.

Seven years since it was passed, Florida's "stand your ground" law is being invoked with unexpected frequency, in ways no one imagined, to free killers and violent attackers whose self-defense claims seem questionable at best.
[…]
Among the findings:
[…]
• People often go free under "stand your ground" in cases that seem to make a mockery of what lawmakers intended. One man killed two unarmed people and walked out of jail. Another shot a man as he lay on the ground. Others went free after shooting their victims in the back. In nearly a third of the cases the Times analyzed, defendants initiated the fight, shot an unarmed person or pursued their victim — and still went free.

• Similar cases can have opposite outcomes. Depending on who decided their cases, some drug dealers claiming self-defense have gone to prison while others have been set free. The same holds true for killers who left a fight, only to arm themselves and return. Shoot someone from your doorway? Fire on a fleeing burglar? Your case can swing on different interpretations of the law by prosecutors, judge or jury.
Remember what I said about the boyfriend of an ex-girlfriend…
Derrick Hansberry thought John Webster was having an affair with his estranged wife, so he confronted Webster on a basketball court in Dade City in 2005. A fight broke out and Hansberry shot his unarmed rival at least five times, putting him in the hospital for three weeks.

Ultimately, a jury acquitted Hansberry, but not before police and prosecutors weighed in. Neither thought Hansberry could reasonably argue self-defense because he took the gun with him and initiated the confrontation.
The Republicans pushed through the law in Florida and in 23 other states there are similar laws.

Yoshihiro Hattori was on his way to a Halloween party and went to the wrong house by accident in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and the homeowner shot and killed him. So if your car breaks down in the middle of the night, don’t go and ring any doorbells because you could be shot through the door.

1 comment:

  1. I have always been grateful that IL was the last station w/o a concealed carry law and now we do. Oh, goody. As if Chicagoland doesn't have enough gun trouble! And everything you outline is true.

    The thing of it is, if I just watched the case and saw only what the jury saw,I don't know if I could have convicted him. I am disturbed by how lackluster the prosecution was. I think much of your post was more convincing than what I heard argued in court.

    Perhaps if the state had concentrated on manslaughter, the Martin family would have gotten justice. As if it, it's just sad, sad, sad.

    ReplyDelete