Posted: Jul 16, 2013 3:22 pm
by purplerat
CdesignProponentsist wrote:
Teague wrote:
Shrunk wrote:
purplerat wrote:Given that narrative of events any person in Martin's situation - first being stalked by a stranger in a car then after running away being chased/followed - would be well reasoned to be in fear of their safety. Keeping in mind that Florida self defense law only requires that a person reasonably believe they are in danger (even if they are in fact mistaken) and there is no duty for Martin to retreat. Even had Martin actually been committing a crime I believe those standards would still have applied. Zimmerman should have been aware of that and known that he was setting up a situation that could very well end in bloodshed. The fact that he decided to go about as he did anyways while carrying a lethal weapon further adds to his culpability.

If we take all that as a given, then I don't see how Zimmerman could have been convicted. Even if he provoked a fight, he still has the right to defend himself once the fight has started. He may be "culpable", but that would only be relevant in a civil case, which may still happen. It's not enough to secure a criminal conviction.

And Martin had the right to defend himself from some nutter stalker, right. Zimmerman initiate the whole event and then killed the kid and got away scott free- that's fucking nuts.

Zimmerman didn't "initiate" it with physical assault. Martin did.

Did you actually watch any of the trial?

But the law does not require that Zimmerman initiate with a physical assault before Martin would have been justified in defending himself. This would be particularly true in a case where the person one is defending themselves against is carrying a lethal weapon.
That being said, with Martin dead and no other witnesses, it would be virtually impossible to prove such a justification on Martin's behalf.