Imagine if the Zimmerman case happened in Mass....

[wheelgun]

Watching the court proceedings today was a refresher course on some basic concepts that you'll hear from any decent instructor in the use of firearms for self defense. But it's still shocking and real a wake-up call to actually see these concepts applied in a real case, live on TV.

- The prosecution raised the issue of whether Zimmerman was actually at risk of grave bodily injury or death, i.e. whether his use of a firearm was excessive force.
- The prosecution stated that regardless of whether Zimmerman is acquitted of murder (or whatever the proper legal term is here), they will still go after him for manslaughter.

Keep in mind this is in Florida, which is a VERY gun friendly state compared to Mass. They have shall issue, castle doctrine, stand your ground, etc. If this case happened in Mass. Zimmerman wouldn't stand a chance. There is no justifiable reason for the use of a firearm in this state... you use one, you lose. Heck, if you even show a gun in this state you'll be charged.

For those in Mass. following the case, does it cause any of you to reconsider carrying outside the home?

 

[Hush]

For those in Mass. following the case, does it cause any of you to reconsider carrying outside the home?

Because being killed at the hands of a stranger is preferable to having to defend yourself in court, even if you're railroaded? What does not having the gun do for you in a lethal encounter??

 

[Garys]

This is politics, not law. If both Zimmerman and Martin were of the same race, there would be no prosecution in Florida.

The prosecution can't "go after" Zimmerman for manslaughter if he's acquitted of murder. The jury can find him guilty of the lesser, included, crime of manslaughter if they don't think the facts merit a Second Degree conviction.

To try to retry him on the same facts with a different charge would violate the Fifth Amendment,

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The exception to this would be if the federal government decided to try to indict him on a civil rights charge, which while possible, is unlikely.

This case also doesn't involve stand your ground. This is a straight self defense case and what is at issue is whether or not Zimmerman was reasonably in fear for his life when he shot. Not that anyone would know that if they didn't pay close attention because the media spin has certainly been all about stand your ground. The prosecution has tried to muddy the waters by bringing the severity (or lack thereof) of Zimmerman's injuries into play. Justifiable self defense doesn't require you to sustain an injury, just be in reasonable fear that the attacker was trying to cause serious injury or death.

The big difference between MA and FL in this case is that just about any person who shot in self defense in MA would be charged, while in Florida most people would not have. This case is about politics, specifically ginning up voters in advance of last year's election.

 

[wheelgun]

The prosecution can't "go after" Zimmerman for manslaughter if he's acquitted of murder. The jury can find him guilty of the lesser, included, crime of manslaughter if they don't think the facts merit a Second Degree conviction.

To try to retry him on the same facts with a different charge would violate the Fifth Amendment,

One of the prosecutors stated explicitly today that they would pursue a manslaughter charge if he was not convicted in this round.

 

[Garys]

One of the prosecutors stated explicitly today that they would pursue a manslaughter charge if he was not convicted in this round.

Good luck with that. Based on what I've seen, these prosecutors don't have a good grasp on the law.

ETA: I have only your word on what was said. I'll have to see if I can find video or a direct quote.

 

[wheelgun]

Because being killed at the hands of a stranger is preferable to having to defend yourself in court, even if you're railroaded? What does not having the gun do for you in a lethal encounter??

You pick the simplistic case, where it's clear you'll be killed if you don't defend yourself. But in many (if not most) situations that's not the case. It's the gray zone of "grave bodily injury". Zimmerman is a good example of that. It's a question of escalation of force. When an unarmed man attacks a woman and she uses a firearm most juries will side in her favor. But when an unarmed 200 pound guy attacks a 150 pound guy the victim's chances in court are slim if he uses a firearm in Mass.

 

[wheelgun]

This case also doesn't involve stand your ground. This is a straight self defense case and what is at issue is whether or not Zimmerman was reasonably in fear for his life when he shot.

Actually, it was stated by one of the legal consultants today that since Zimmerman was (allegedly) pinned on his back when he fired, this does qualify as a "stand your ground" case.

 

[inerlogic]

judged by 12/carried by 6

 

[montemuscle1970]

I haven't been watching the trial, but I believe he had a confirmed broken nose. Maybe that injury in and of itself isn't life threatening, but if I was getting my ass kicked to the point the person broke my nose, I'd be inclined to shoot. Who knows how much further the injuries would have gone.

But yeah in Mass, this guy would already have served 6 months of his life sentence.

 

[Bill Katt]

What I've learned from this case besides MYOFB (especially in Ma)....is....SSS.

YMMV

 

[soloman02]

Actually, it was stated by one of the legal consultants today that since Zimmerman was (allegedly) pinned on his back when he fired, this does qualify as a "stand your ground" case.

Stand your ground means you have no duty to retreat if you were in a place you legally have a right to be (which GZ was). In almost all states where there is no SYG (MA), you have to no longer have the ability to retreat before you can use lethal force. NH was this way up until 2011.

You can't retreat (run away) while your head is being bashed into concrete with a guy on top of you doing it.

Realistically in this case, SYG isn't really in play, it is a standard self defense. All the requirements were met: Cannot retreat, unlawful force, grave bodily harm about to be inflicted (that a reasonable person would believe).

Getting you head bashed into the sidewalk is grave bodily harm. It doesn't take many hits to the head before you are dead.

If this happened in Mass, it would still meet the requirements for self defense.

It can be argued that GZ put himself into this situation by looking to see where Martin went after he lost sight of him. It could be argued that GZ was dumb for getting out of his vehicle.

But being dumb is not a crime. Being shortsighted is not a crime. And neither negate your right to defend yourself from unlawful deadly force.

 

[Fixxah]

You pick the simplistic case, where it's clear you'll be killed if you don't defend yourself. But in many (if not most) situations that's not the case. It's the gray zone of "grave bodily injury". Zimmerman is a good example of that. It's a question of escalation of force. When an unarmed man attacks a woman and she uses a firearm most juries will side in her favor. But when an unarmed 200 pound guy attacks a 150 pound guy the victim's chances in court are slim if he uses a firearm in Mass.

You shouldn't carry, just to be on the safe side.

-Stalking via S3.-

 

[MagGus1820]

I think this is what the trial would go like in MA. The gov just wanting a conviction, putting BS medals on their idiot witnesses to make them more credible. It shouldn't be like this in FL, this is all crappy politics.

 

[Garys]

Actually, it was stated by one of the legal consultants today that since Zimmerman was (allegedly) pinned on his back when he fired, this does qualify as a "stand your ground" case.

Then the legal expert is wrong. Since he was PINNED ON HIS BACK, he didn't have the option to flee, which is what stand your ground refers to. Once again, I only have your word for what was said, not a direct quote.

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

I agree, this is a case of politics. If both were of the same race, this trial would not even have been a consideration and would not be happening.

Hasn't changed my mind about carrying though. You'll never need a gun until you need a gun. The object is to have it when you need it, politics be damned. As posted above tried by 12 or carried by 6.

What it has really has done is expose to the public that they might be far better off taking their chances and leaving a scene after a shoot, especially if its not right in your own backyard/neighborhood/city or town.

This trial is proof that there is no shortage of people who will seek to punish anyone for abiding by the law, being self sufficient, protecting themselves and doing the right thing. This fact brings up a point......if you're going to kill someone, you might as well go down the list and kill everyone that you ever thought needed killing because you can only be put away for one lifetime and can only die once. The saying is, after the first one all the rest are free.

Personally, I think Zimmerman showed extreme restraint in only firing once.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Florida is an "all or nothing" state when it comes to use of a gun in a crime. FL has a 10/20/life law - 10 years for producing a gun in a forcible felony; 20 for firing it in such a crime; 25 if someone dies.

There was a high profile case, also prosecuted by Angela Corey, in which someone admitted to firing a warning shot. He turned down a plea deal, was convicted and given a few years. Prosecutor Corey appealed then sentencing on the basis of the 10/20/life law not being properly applied and got his sentence upped to 20.

 

[Dadstoys]

I would think it would play out in MA. just the same.
Remember we had a guy in Swampscott that got charged for defending himself against a guy with a knife, using his fist!
If the local PD declined to press charges , Marsha would step in.
Still though, I don't believe i'm giving up my life to suit any ones political agenda, thank you very much.

 

[Hoover]

Stand your ground means you have no duty to retreat if you were in a place you legally have a right to be (which GZ was). In almost all states where there is no SYG (MA), you have to no longer have the ability to retreat before you can use lethal force. NH was this way up until 2011.

You can't retreat (run away) while your head is being bashed into concrete with a guy on top of you doing it.

Realistically in this case, SYG isn't really in play, it is a standard self defense. All the requirements were met: Cannot retreat, unlawful force, grave bodily harm about to be inflicted (that a reasonable person would believe).

Getting you head bashed into the sidewalk is grave bodily harm. It doesn't take many hits to the head before you are dead.

If this happened in Mass, it would still meet the requirements for self defense.

It can be argued that GZ put himself into this situation by looking to see where Martin went after he lost sight of him. It could be argued that GZ was dumb for getting out of his vehicle.

But being dumb is not a crime. Being shortsighted is not a crime. And neither negate your right to defend yourself from unlawful deadly force.

Exactly the case. The mentioning of SYG was by the libs last yr, not by the defense.

 

[Hoover]

Florida is an "all or nothing" state when it comes to use of a gun in a crime. FL has a 10/20/life law - 10 years for producing a gun in a forcible felony; 20 for firing it in such a crime; 25 if someone dies.

There was a high profile case, also prosecuted by Angela Corey, in which someone admitted to firing a warning shot. He turned down a plea deal, was convicted and given a few years. Prosecutor Corey appealed then sentencing on the basis of the 10/20/life law not being properly applied and got his sentence upped to 20.

Angela Corey is a F'ing NUT. She is a problem bigtime. Remember she called up Harvard and threatened to sue them because Alan Dershowitz was hammering her on tv for her ignorance of the law. She is power hungry, arrogant and use the law a a weapon. She is the worst of the worst.

 

[Hoover]

One of the prosecutors stated explicitly today that they would pursue a manslaughter charge if he was not convicted in this round.

They meant in this trial. If the judge threw out 2nd degree yesterday, the manslaughter charge should stand. You cannot be charged twice for the same crime once jeopardy has attached. After Z is acquitted, the state can not file any charges against him for that night. No manslaughter, no unlawful discharge of a firearm, no jaywalking, nothing. In a week or so this will be over forever exceptthe civil case and race riots.

 

[Jason Flare]

They meant in this trial. If the judge threw out 2nd degree yesterday, the manslaughter charge should stand. You cannot be charged twice for the same crime once jeopardy has attached. After Z is acquitted, the state can not file any charges against him for that night. No manslaughter, no unlawful discharge of a firearm, no jaywalking, nothing. In a week or so this will be over forever exceptthe civil case and race riots.

Boy, I hope he's found not guilty.

 

[gunslinger2a]

In a week or so this will be over forever exceptthe civil case and race riots.

Aka: opportune excuse to loot and pillage their own community




Sent from my iPhone using Yakalot

 

[Scott D.]

For those in Mass. following the case, does it cause any of you to reconsider carrying outside the home?

Nope, how's that ole saying go...

I'd rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.

 

[nightpoison]

I'm of the understanding that SYG is not part of this trial because he waived his right to a pre-trial SYG hearing which is required before proceedings to a jury trial if they choose to use SYG as a defense. It was waived so self defense is what the defense is going by. unlike what the lame stream media is pandering.

I could be wrong but that's my understanding of the case.

I do not believe GZ is guility of 2nd degree murder and should be found innocent. I haven't heard all the evidence but I do know GZ should never have attempted to follow the guy. This was an error in his judgement that led to a confrontation. He is partially responsible in my opinion, but not to the degree of murder.

Probably an unpopular opinion here and I'm now waiting to get ripped in to. lol

Sent from the Batcave, I AM BATMAN!

 

[crazymikie]

If you followed the trial, there was testimony that Zimmerman was attacked while retreating to his vehicle. He wasn't following Martin- he was attacked [cowardly] from behind.

I'm of the understanding that SYG is not part of this trial because he waived his right to a pre-trial SYG hearing which is required before proceedings to a jury trial if they choose to use SYG as a defense. It was waived so self defense is what the defense is going by. unlike what the lame stream media is pandering.

I could be wrong but that's my understanding of the case.

I do not believe GZ is guility of 2nd degree murder and should be found innocent. I haven't heard all the evidence but I do know GZ should never have attempted to follow the guy. This was an error in his judgement that led to a confrontation. He is partially responsible in my opinion, but not to the degree of murder.

Probably an unpopular opinion here and I'm now waiting to get ripped in to. lol

Sent from the Batcave, I AM BATMAN!

 

[mikem317]

Actually, it was stated by one of the legal consultants today that since Zimmerman was (allegedly) pinned on his back when he fired, this does qualify as a "stand your ground" case.

SYG means you have the possibility of retreat but you are not obligated to do so. If you're pinned on your back on the ground, I don't think retreat is an option.

 

[mikem317]

I'm of the understanding that SYG is not part of this trial because he waived his right to a pre-trial SYG hearing which is required before proceedings to a jury trial if they choose to use SYG as a defense. It was waived so self defense is what the defense is going by. unlike what the lame stream media is pandering.

I could be wrong but that's my understanding of the case.

I do not believe GZ is guility of 2nd degree murder and should be found innocent. I haven't heard all the evidence but I do know GZ should never have attempted to follow the guy. This was an error in his judgement that led to a confrontation. He is partially responsible in my opinion, but not to the degree of murder.

Probably an unpopular opinion here and I'm now waiting to get ripped in to. lol

Sent from the Batcave, I AM BATMAN!

INAL, but I think the proper term would be found not guilty. There's no finding of innocence, nor is it required. The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that GZ is guilty of the Murder 2 charge. IMHO, I don't think the state has shown anything to reach this threshold. There's way too much doubt and this honestly looks like a legitimate case of SD.

 

[MrAl]

The media would go nuts in MA.

- The police department issuing the LTC would be under fire, having to defend the issuance of an LTC to a cowboy who only wanted to kill. Getting an LTC in the town will then become a focus of the media, and the fact that we are "allowed" to have them in some towns will be under fire.

- Creepy reporter from Channel 7 with the white mustache does a piece on guns in MA, Channel 5 does a piece on "People carrying guns in MA", and Fox25 holds a poll asking whether gun owners should be allowed to carry guns outside of their home.

-Any gun range this guy shot at would have live reporters outside, bothering members going in and out, trying to capture something that fits their mold - maybe even a scary black gun. Z's posts on Northeastshooters will be examined, one by one, media outraged that free speech still exists on the internet and that we are allowed to have a website discussing shooting. More Fox25 polls.

-We will see daily interviews from Coakley, Deval, Menino, Ed Davis, and whomever else can be found that can provide us "expert" analysis on how to fix the issue.

-Then the legislature will act with something so incredibly stupid claiming that it is doing so to "prevent the tragedy", and "listening to its constituents."

 

[Twigg]

What if Zimmerman stayed in his car ?

 

[center442]

IIRC, it took about 40 days before the guardians of political correctness were able to get an indictment against Zimmerman. In MA, I would have expected it to take about 4 days.