George Zimmerman is a piece of crap

[Kat Kid]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

The same laws are in place in Kansas and most other states. It was just a standard self-defense claim, and there's nothing really special about it.

Don't you have to attempt to retreat in KS?  I mix up which ones are which.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/03/23-other-states-have-stand-your-ground-laws-too/50226/

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

The same laws are in place in Kansas and most other states. It was just a standard self-defense claim, and there's nothing really special about it.

You said that a lot, then someone pointed out that Stand Your Ground was mentioned in the jury instructions and you seemed surprised and now you seem to be claiming that it had no effect again.

That "someone" was me. The SYG portion was just a carryover from the standard jury instruction. I was surprised that the defense didn't try (maybe they did) to take that part out, since they never claimed SYG and it didn't fit with theri theory of the case.

Again, stand your ground had no application to this case. GZ claimed he couldn't retreat, and it is therefore irrelevant that he didn't have to retreat.

[michigancat]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

What insane law are you referring to? I think it was a complete lack of evidence that got him off, honestly.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

The same laws are in place in Kansas and most other states. It was just a standard self-defense claim, and there's nothing really special about it.

Don't you have to attempt to retreat in KS?  I mix up which ones are which.

No, you don't have a duty to retreat in KS before invoking self-defense. It all comes down to whether you have a reasonable fear. Regardless, SYG was not an issue in the Zimmerman trial because according to the defendant's story that TM was on top of him, he couldn't retreat anyway.

SYG was in the jury instructions, therefore it was an issue in the Zimmerman trial.

You should stop pretending to be an attorney. You really don't know what you're talking about.

[eastcat]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

What insane law are you referring to? I think it was a complete lack of evidence that got him off, honestly.

If you are a bleeding-heart liberal, all laws that you disagree with are insane.

[puniraptor]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

The same laws are in place in Kansas and most other states. It was just a standard self-defense claim, and there's nothing really special about it.

Don't you have to attempt to retreat in KS?  I mix up which ones are which.

No, you don't have a duty to retreat in KS before invoking self-defense. It all comes down to whether you have a reasonable fear. Regardless, SYG was not an issue in the Zimmerman trial because according to the defendant's story that TM was on top of him, he couldn't retreat anyway.

this doesn't make any eff damn sense.  TRAY HAD A REASONABLE FEAR THAT HIS LIFE WAS IN DANGER SO HE USED SELF DEFENSE AGAINST THE WEIRDO CONFRONTING HIM AT NIGHT WITH A GUN.

[Kat Kid]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

The same laws are in place in Kansas and most other states. It was just a standard self-defense claim, and there's nothing really special about it.

Don't you have to attempt to retreat in KS?  I mix up which ones are which.

No, you don't have a duty to retreat in KS before invoking self-defense. It all comes down to whether you have a reasonable fear. Regardless, SYG was not an issue in the Zimmerman trial because according to the defendant's story that TM was on top of him, he couldn't retreat anyway.

SYG was in the jury instructions, therefore it was an issue in the Zimmerman trial.

You should stop pretending to be an attorney. You really don't know what you're talking about.

I'm not "pretending to be an attorney."  Maybe you are.  I'd love your theory of how the jury instructions were irrelevant to the outcome when according to the juror granting an interview on CNN the jurors started split 3-3 and then "they read the jury instructions over and over" and then ended up acquitting.

[Cire]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

What insane law are you referring to? I think it was a complete lack of evidence that got him off, honestly.

the law is insane AND they had no evidence.

[michigancat]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

What insane law are you referring to? I think it was a complete lack of evidence that got him off, honestly.

the law is insane AND they had no evidence.

Yeah, I agree that SYG is crazy, but there wasn't enough evidence to convict with or without it.

[puniraptor]

Just seems like if the WHY isn't relevant, then last man standing goes free. Florida is Thunderdome.

[kim carnes]

TM tried to stand his ground and got killed. 

[Kat Kid]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

What insane law are you referring to? I think it was a complete lack of evidence that got him off, honestly.

If you are a bleeding-heart liberal, all laws that you disagree with are insane.

I think it is crazy that you can pick fights, then after getting a few minor abrasions, shoot and kill someone and successfully claim that you were afraid of imminent harm/death, thus not guilty due to self-defense.

micat- juries can and should nullify unjust laws.

[Tobias]

Because of the only, the two options you had, second degree murder or manslaughter, you felt neither applied?

Right. Well, because of the heat of the moment and the stand your ground. He had a right to defend himself. If he felt threatened that his life was going to be taken away from him or he was going to have bodily harm, he had a right.

[kim carnes]

If you get into an altercation and no witnesses saw who intsigated the fight, as long as you kill the other party, you're free to go.  That's the law. 

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

The same laws are in place in Kansas and most other states. It was just a standard self-defense claim, and there's nothing really special about it.

Don't you have to attempt to retreat in KS?  I mix up which ones are which.

No, you don't have a duty to retreat in KS before invoking self-defense. It all comes down to whether you have a reasonable fear. Regardless, SYG was not an issue in the Zimmerman trial because according to the defendant's story that TM was on top of him, he couldn't retreat anyway.

SYG was in the jury instructions, therefore it was an issue in the Zimmerman trial.

You should stop pretending to be an attorney. You really don't know what you're talking about.

I'm not "pretending to be an attorney."  Maybe you are.  I'd love your theory of how the jury instructions were irrelevant to the outcome when according to the juror granting an interview on CNN the jurors started split 3-3 and then "they read the jury instructions over and over" and then ended up acquitting.

I'll be very interested to see the interview. And I'm not pretending to be an attorney. I am an attorney.

The jury was instructed on self defense, and one aspect of self defense in Florida, and in many other states, is that you have no duty to retreat before acting in self defense. The jury was instructed accordingly. The SYG aspect of the instruction was irrelevant, however, because GZ claimed he was pinned under TM at the time of the shooting - hence no ability to retreat. If the two had been standing up at the time, then SYG would have been relevant. I'm not sure what part of this is difficult to understand.

[Kat Kid]

The thing that bothers me more than anything is that relatively little attention has been paid to the absolutely insane laws in place that protected George Zimmerman.

The same laws are in place in Kansas and most other states. It was just a standard self-defense claim, and there's nothing really special about it.

Don't you have to attempt to retreat in KS?  I mix up which ones are which.

No, you don't have a duty to retreat in KS before invoking self-defense. It all comes down to whether you have a reasonable fear. Regardless, SYG was not an issue in the Zimmerman trial because according to the defendant's story that TM was on top of him, he couldn't retreat anyway.

SYG was in the jury instructions, therefore it was an issue in the Zimmerman trial.

You should stop pretending to be an attorney. You really don't know what you're talking about.

I'm not "pretending to be an attorney."  Maybe you are.  I'd love your theory of how the jury instructions were irrelevant to the outcome when according to the juror granting an interview on CNN the jurors started split 3-3 and then "they read the jury instructions over and over" and then ended up acquitting.

I'll be very interested to see the interview. And I'm not pretending to be an attorney. I am an attorney.  Congrats on the attorney thing.  I actually meant "maybe you were an attorney."

The jury was instructed on self defense, and one aspect of self defense in Florida, and in many other states, is that you have no duty to retreat before acting in self defense. The jury was instructed accordingly. The SYG aspect of the instruction was irrelevant, however, because GZ claimed he was pinned under TM at the time of the shooting - hence no ability to retreat. If the two had been standing up at the time, then SYG would have been relevant. I'm not sure what part of this is difficult to understand.

Apparently it was super rough ridin' hard for the jury to understand.

Because of the only, the two options you had, second degree murder or manslaughter, you felt neither applied?

Right. Well, because of the heat of the moment and the stand your ground. He had a right to defend himself. If he felt threatened that his life was going to be taken away from him or he was going to have bodily harm, he had a right.

[yoga-like_abana]

If you get into an altercation and no witnesses saw who intsigated the fight, as long as you kill the other party, you're free to go.  That's the law.

why don't you stick your head up my butt and fight for air

[michigancat]

If you get into an altercation and no witnesses saw who intsigated the fight, as long as you kill the other party, you're free to go.  That's the law.

pretty much this

[Kat Kid]

If you get into an altercation and no witnesses saw who intsigated the fight, as long as you kill the other party, you're free to go.  That's the law.

pretty much this

It does not even matter who instigates.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Apparently it was super rough ridin' hard for the jury to understand.

Because of the only, the two options you had, second degree murder or manslaughter, you felt neither applied?

Right. Well, because of the heat of the moment and the stand your ground. He had a right to defend himself. If he felt threatened that his life was going to be taken away from him or he was going to have bodily harm, he had a right.

Well, I'll forgive the juror for mixing up her terminology. She's just talking about self defense. This was not an instance where the ability to retreat would even come into play. And if I were the judge, I would have nixed that portion of the instruction to avoid any confusion.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

If you get into an altercation and no witnesses saw who intsigated the fight, as long as you kill the other party, you're free to go.  That's the law.

pretty much this

It does not even matter who instigates.

It does matter, to a degree. It is possible, however, that you could instigate the fight, and the tables then turn to such an unexpected degree that you regain your right to self defense.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

If you get into an altercation and no witnesses saw who intsigated the fight, as long as you kill the other party, you're free to go.  That's the law.

pretty much this

Not necessarily. There's all kinds of evidence that could come into play to support or undercut the reasonable fear of death or grave bodily injury. For example, if somebody runs at you with a knife, you could shoot him right there without suffering a scratch. If he just shouted at you, or maybe pushed you, you'll probably have a harder time justifying it. The investigators have to look for any evidence that might support or negate your story. In GZ's case, he had his injuries, plus the eye witness testimony of Good, who said that TM was on top, beating him.

[michigancat]

If you get into an altercation and no witnesses saw who intsigated the fight, as long as you kill the other party, you're free to go.  That's the law.

pretty much this

It does not even matter who instigates.

You can't prove who instigated it in this case. I personally think Zimmerman lied at worst or left out a lot of key details at best, but the evidence to contradict his story just wasn't there.

[MakeItRain]

I think gun rights are the issue here, possibly more than race. Zimmerman was not properly trained to handle a firearm, and for that reason, I don't think he should have been allowed to have a concealed carry permit.

Zimmerman being a racist didn't kill Trayvon, his gun did.

I lean this way. I'm pretty sure Zimmerman would have shot a kid of any color.

I'm in this camp too, though sadly I think he was trained just as well as anyone who gets a concealed carry permit...which is to say very minimally.  I have friends who have taken the concealed carry class and even they say the amount of "training" is equally laughable and frightening.

imo, the nra got really lucky that this case was hijacked by the civil rights community early on because, on it's face, it undeniably disproves the asinine argument that more guns equal safer law-abiding citizens.

Get the eff outta here, what does this even mean? It's not even true, it was a local grassroots effort & facebook campaign that made this story national & forced the SPD to do something, anything.

[Cire]

If you get into an altercation and no witnesses saw who intsigated the fight, as long as you kill the other party, you're free to go.  That's the law. 

there were witnesses and audio dumbass