TalkLeft Discussion Forums

State v. George Zimmerman (Pre-Trial) => Self-Defense and Stand Your Ground => Topic started by: RickyJim on July 03, 2012, 03:28:26 PM

Title: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: RickyJim on July 03, 2012, 03:28:26 PM
Suppose Zimmerman had claimed the following had happened as far as when his gun was drawn; the rest of his story remains the same.  Which would disqualify him from claiming self defense?

1. Zimmerman left his Honda with his gun drawn.  He sees Martin and tells him get his hands up.  Martin refuses and struggles with Zimmerman over the control of the gun.

2.  Same as 1, but this time Martin surprises Zimmerman from behind and starts to wrestle with him for control of the gun.

3.  Zimmerman leaves vehicle with gun in holster.  He claims that Martin comes up to him at the T in a menacing manner and he draws his gun instead of cellphone and then the struggle commences.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 03, 2012, 05:46:04 PM
Actually depending on what follows. None of the the three scenarios inherently disqualifies stand your ground. It depends what happens prior to the shooting.

If Martin had control of the situation and the gun and was pummeling Zimmerman so that Zimmerman feared great bodily harm, Zimmerman would be justified in pulling his second weapon.

Why be silly? There is absolutely no evidence that Zimmerman drew his gun until necessary. He almost waited too long.

Do we discuss the legalities of extra terrestrial intervention next?
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: TalkLeft on July 03, 2012, 07:46:50 PM
Suppose Zimmerman had claimed the following had happened as far as when his gun was drawn; the rest of his story remains the same.  Which would disqualify him from claiming self defense?

This is meaningless.  Please don't make stuff up and post it here. There's enough that is real to discuss  and debate, we don't need imaginary theories. 
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Jozz on July 03, 2012, 09:04:12 PM
It is not a meaningless question.   >:(  There are many who believe that Zimmerman wouldn't have left his vehicle without his gun drawn because he has made two statements that indicate he thought Martin might be armed.  Others think it improbable that Zimmerman reached for his cellphone instead of his gun when menacing Martin came right up to him at the T.  And still many more including Chris Sereno find Zimmerman's description of the fight for the gun incomprehensible.  So when does the prosecution think the gun came out?   It is interesting to understand how Zimmerman's self defense claims would hold up even if the prosecution convinces the jury that the gun came out earlier.

IF he would have pulled his gun, the main focus of the injuries to George would have been his hands and arms as it would be the focus of the altercation. There is absolutely no evidence that suggests that the firearm was drawn or that George drew on Trayvon at any point before the altercation became physical.

Do you have any evidence that supports such a theory? ANY?

Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: TalkLeft on July 03, 2012, 09:12:00 PM
There are many who believe that Zimmerman wouldn't have left his vehicle....Others think it improbable...

The state has not alleged it. Serino didn't allege it. No witness saw anything in George's hand. You cite no facts to support it, just "some people believe." That's just gossip.

Also from the interview (part 1) on Feb 29 with Singleton and Serino:

Quote
DS: When he comes up to your car you’re telling them, right? That he’s…
GZ: Yes
DS: He’s reaching in his waistband?
GZ: Yes, ma’am.
DS: So what do you think there’s a possibility that he has?
GZ: Well, the guy 3 weeks, 2 weeks prior, did the same thing when he saw me, like put his hand in his jacket and watched me walk by and then he lit a cigarette. So I thought that he was just trying to, um, look tough or intimidate….
DS: You didn’t think he had a weapon?
GZ: No, no. I didn’t….
DS: You thought he was just trying to bluff you.
GZ: Yes, ma’am.
CS: Hey, did that scare you? The bluff?
GZ: No.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: unitron on July 03, 2012, 09:47:37 PM
An amusing quirk of freshstarting these threads is that even the owner/administrator is labeled a "newbie".

On to the scenarios.

"1. Zimmerman left his Honda with his gun drawn.  He sees Martin and tells him get his hands up.  Martin refuses and struggles with Zimmerman over the control of the gun."

Let's see, wouldn't that be brandishing followed by kidnapping?  I'd think only Martin would have a self-defense claim there.

"2.  Same as 1, but this time Martin surprises Zimmerman from behind and starts to wrestle with him for control of the gun."

I presume this means " Zimmerman left his Honda with his gun drawn." but not the rest.

I think that's still brandishing, but one could argue that if Martin could sneak up on him from behind he could sneak away from him, so I think that theoretical discussion gets very messy very quickly.


"3.  Zimmerman leaves vehicle with gun in holster.  He claims that Martin comes up to him at the T in a menacing manner and he draws his gun instead of cellphone and then the struggle commences."

Here I think SYG, rather than just self-defense, gets dragged into the picture.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Jozz on July 03, 2012, 09:53:14 PM
An amusing quirk of freshstarting these threads is that even the owner/administrator is labeled a "newbie".

On to the scenarios.

"1. Zimmerman left his Honda with his gun drawn.  He sees Martin and tells him get his hands up.  Martin refuses and struggles with Zimmerman over the control of the gun."

Let's see, wouldn't that be brandishing followed by kidnapping?  I'd think only Martin would have a self-defense claim there.

"2.  Same as 1, but this time Martin surprises Zimmerman from behind and starts to wrestle with him for control of the gun."

I presume this means " Zimmerman left his Honda with his gun drawn." but not the rest.

I think that's still brandishing, but one could argue that if Martin could sneak up on him from behind he could sneak away from him, so I think that theoretical discussion gets very messy very quickly.


"3.  Zimmerman leaves vehicle with gun in holster.  He claims that Martin comes up to him at the T in a menacing manner and he draws his gun instead of cellphone and then the struggle commences."

Here I think SYG, rather than just self-defense, gets dragged into the picture.

You must be humoring him, but because you must here goes. None of these scenarios disqualifies George from a SYG defense if in fact the tables turned, he withdrew from the altercation and was in fear of great bodily harm or death. Under 766.041 even an aggressor has the right to defense.

2011 Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE[22]

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

    (1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
    (2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

    (a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
    (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.



The only other difference between these statutes is that with one you're protected against civil action and the other you're not.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: unitron on July 03, 2012, 10:59:43 PM
I find myself confused as to whether the aggressor and the assailant are the same person or two different persons in the Florida statue cited.

Further, I suspect there would not have been enough aspirin in the known universe to have gotten me through law school.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Mr. Filexican on July 03, 2012, 11:08:02 PM
An amusing quirk of freshstarting these threads is that even the owner/administrator is labeled a "newbie".

On to the scenarios.

"1. Zimmerman left his Honda with his gun drawn.  He sees Martin and tells him get his hands up.  Martin refuses and struggles with Zimmerman over the control of the gun."

Let's see, wouldn't that be brandishing followed by kidnapping?  I'd think only Martin would have a self-defense claim there.

"2.  Same as 1, but this time Martin surprises Zimmerman from behind and starts to wrestle with him for control of the gun."

I presume this means " Zimmerman left his Honda with his gun drawn." but not the rest.

I think that's still brandishing, but one could argue that if Martin could sneak up on him from behind he could sneak away from him, so I think that theoretical discussion gets very messy very quickly.


"3.  Zimmerman leaves vehicle with gun in holster.  He claims that Martin comes up to him at the T in a menacing manner and he draws his gun instead of cellphone and then the struggle commences."

Here I think SYG, rather than just self-defense, gets dragged into the picture.

Thanks for answering the question. I think the poster, like me, is just trying to gain a better understanding of SYG.

Another hypothetical. Say Jorge, without drawing his firearm, commits a felony. Let's call it kidnapping. Everything plays out like it did. Jorge gets mounted, Trayvon is pummeling him, Jorge is yelling for help for about a minute before he decides that he's in fear for his life and fires.

Does the commission of the felony prevent him from claiming a stand your ground defense? 776.041 reads as if a person who has committed a felony IS entitled to SYG so long as he exhausted every reasonable means to withdraw.

On the other hand, if somebody commits a felony and is attempting to withdraw in order to simply flee the scene, he's not entitled to SYG.

I haven't read or heard any explanation of this.


Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: cboldt on July 04, 2012, 03:45:47 AM
I find myself confused as to whether the aggressor and the assailant are the same person or two different persons in the Florida statue cited.

I don't think the term "aggressor" is recited, but if it is, that would be the person who provoked the use of force.  In 776.041, this person who initially provoked the use of force is conditionally entitled to defend his life if his opponent, the assailant, acts in a way that results in reasonable fear of death or serious injury (like attempting to disarm you while uttering "I'm going to kill you," after never letting up).

The person who provoked the use of force in the first place can also remove that taint by making a good faith effort to withdraw.  The initial provocation is still a crime of assault or battery (at least), but it becomes "in the past" upon a good faith effort to withdraw.  If the assailant continues use of force, the person who provoked the use of force in the first place can defend himself.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: cboldt on July 04, 2012, 04:07:18 AM
I haven't read or heard any explanation of this.

The "commission of a felony" angle is an act outside of the altercation.  Robbing a store or a bank, for example.  The give and take between the two combatants is evaluated without asking if the acts are, of themselves, felonious.  For example, Martin was more likely than not committing battery, and if you believe Zimmerman, Martin also committed the felony of aggravated assault.  That determination lies outside of the question of whether or not Zimmerman is entitled to use force in self defense.

Same way looking at the very beginning.  If Zimmerman is brandishing, the law will look at the reaction that causes to Martin, and whether or not it gives him the right to use force in self defense.  And going back further, sometimes brandishing is justified under the law.  The right to use, show, or threaten force in self defense is a fact intensive inquiry.  For fun, you might google "restatement of torts self defense"

Restatement 2d, Sec 65 - Use of deadly force (http://www.saltshaker.us/Roeder/restatement-torts-self-defense-sec65.htm)

Restatement 2d, Sec 63 - Use of less than deadly force (http://www.onlinelawtutoring.com/Case_Reference/Restatement_2d_Torts__63_SelfDefense_By_Force_Not_Threatening_Death_Or_Serious_Bodily_Harm.htm)

I know there are cases where brandishing a firearm was justified (Court found so) to a person who was threatened.  There are good policy argument on both sides of allowing a person to show deadly force without using it.  I happen to think that Martin would have acted differently if he had known Zimmerman was armed.

One off topic point - this will be my only post in response to a question of yours.  I find your use of "Jorge" that offensive.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: RickyJim on July 04, 2012, 07:32:39 AM
I am astounded  :o  that the powers here respond to my question by denouncing the question.  I find it unreasonable to ask that I document all the other blogs where I have seen theories of the case different than the one the moderator favors.  We have only Zimmerman's word for when the gun came out.  I find the other two suggested times equally as probable.  Zimmerman himself explicitly admitted that he thought Martin might be armed during his apology given at the first bail hearing.  Zimmerman's attorney has himself stated that Zimmerman's credibility is very important in this case, so it is quite important to discuss how a juror might vote even if the prosecution convinces the jury that Zimmerman is lying through his teeth about many of the details, in particular when the gun came out.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: unitron on July 04, 2012, 08:05:53 AM
Mr. Filexican, what is the cause for your insistence, one might almost say obsession, with referring to George Zimmerman as Jorge?

Did his parents originally put it down that way on the birth certificate and later change it or something?

Do you feel there's some reason he doesn't deserve to use the name George?

Is this some meme about which I missed the memo?

What is it?
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Lousy1 on July 04, 2012, 08:06:10 AM
Quote
NOTE! Person X and person Y in no way shape or form represent Jorge Zimmerman or Trayvon Martin.

So find another Forum.  XYZ in Wonderland perhaps
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Cylinder on July 04, 2012, 08:12:52 AM
I am astounded  :o  that the powers here respond to my question by denouncing the question. I find it unreasonable to ask that I document all the other blogs where I have seen theories of the case different than the one the moderator favors.

I'm not an any way affiliated with this board, but some peer advice would be that the administrator ussually frowns on purely speculative posts - though this forum is less than 24 hours old and the specific rules haven't been published.

For instance, if I were to advance a theory that Martin was responsible for previous burglaries, that would violate the TOS because no party has introduced evidence that could support that claim.

I think there's an expectation of quality of product here that's unusual for other boards that may throw some users off. It's understandable, since though our opinion do not represent hers, her name and professional reputation are somewhat attached to this site.

Many posters here are very careful to support any but the most basic facts with a source or link.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Jozz on July 04, 2012, 09:17:22 AM
I think the discussion evolved from the original question into SYG and how it does apply to this case.

I sure would like to see everyone come out of fantasy land and start showing facts as to what laws were violated before the altercation became physical and how they make George the aggressor. What are the laws that he broke and WHY is he only being charged with second degree murder, when every other defendant out there would be charged with multiple crimes leading up to the end of the altercation?

So, What laws did George break?
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: RickyJim on July 04, 2012, 10:49:03 AM
The accusation of law breaking against Zimmerman, that has been best supported so far, is lying to police investigators.  This thread was intended to explore what happens to the self defense case if the judge/jury buys into the liar hypothesis.  I find it weird that there are other posters who think that somehow exploring this hypothetical brings down the quality of the discussions on this site.  I doubt that Mark O'Mara would agree and might well be thinking about the same thing. 

The assertion that Zimmerman's story of when the gun came out is better supported by the evidence can be argued but it is not so self evident that one has to insult a person who disagrees.  The evidence against it includes Zimmerman's strange account of what happened when they were on the ground as well as judging what his most likely choice would be when leaving the car or meeting up with Martin.  But maybe this is better discussed in detail on an evidence thread.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Jozz on July 04, 2012, 10:55:42 AM
The accusation of law breaking against Zimmerman, that has been best supported so far, is lying to police investigators.  This thread was intended to explore what happens to the self defense case if the judge/jury buys into the liar hypothesis.  I find it weird that there are other posters who think that somehow exploring this hypothetical brings down the quality of the discussions on this site.  I doubt that Mark O'Mara would agree and might well be thinking about the same thing. 

The assertion that Zimmerman's story of when the gun came out is better supported by the evidence can be argued but it is not so self evident that one has to insult a person who disagrees.  The evidence against it includes Zimmerman's strange account of what happened when they were on the ground as well as judging what his most likely choice would be when leaving the car or meeting up with Martin.  But maybe this is better discussed in detail on an evidence thread.

Could you please explain to us what "strange account of what happened when they were on the ground" means? I'd like to know what was strange about what he described.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: RickyJim on July 04, 2012, 12:23:59 PM
Jozz, instead of me rehashing the oodles of stuff out there on Zimmerman's several accounts of the fight, let me send you to two of Susan Simpson's posts on her blog.

http://viewfromll2.com/2012/06/21/zimmermans-police-statements-are-not-consistent-with-established-facts/#comment-3939

http://viewfromll2.com/2012/06/21/zimmermans-police-statements-are-not-consistent-with-established-facts/#comment-3937

However, nothing beats listening oneself to the various accounts with Singleton, Serino, CVSA expert and the walkthrough while trying to write down where his and Martin's hands were at various times and trying to reconcile everything.  Where were Martin's hands when Zimmerman got that shot off, perfectly aimed at Martin's chest? 
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Jozz on July 04, 2012, 12:59:28 PM
Jozz, instead of me rehashing the oodles of stuff out there on Zimmerman's several accounts of the fight, let me send you to two of Susan Simpson's posts on her blog.

http://viewfromll2.com/2012/06/21/zimmermans-police-statements-are-not-consistent-with-established-facts/#comment-3939

http://viewfromll2.com/2012/06/21/zimmermans-police-statements-are-not-consistent-with-established-facts/#comment-3937

However, nothing beats listening oneself to the various accounts with Singleton, Serino, CVSA expert and the walkthrough while trying to write down where his and Martin's hands were at various times and trying to reconcile everything.  Where were Martin's hands when Zimmerman got that shot off, perfectly aimed at Martin's chest?

I was asking for your opinion because you're the one making the comments. I'm not interested in other sources at the moment.

I guess next we'll be discussing how Trayvon perfectly aimed at George's nose? You're creating some sort of weird scenario in your mind where George was walking around the entire night twisting his mustache with the intentions to kill someone. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that this is the outcome he intended.

And for some reason, You all still ignore the fact that Trayvon had 2 minutes and 30 seconds to get home before Zimmerman ended his call with dispatch, starting from the time he said Trayvon ran. How did he not make it home and end waaaaaay back up at the other end of the townhouses 2 minutes and 30 seconds later to confront George?

Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: RickyJim on July 04, 2012, 01:42:14 PM
Jozz you have confirmed my suspicion that you stereotype somebody who doesn't have the same viewpoint as you as being completely on the other side.  As a matter of fact, I think Martin was lurking around looking for a confrontation with Zimmerman.  And if I was on a jury today, I would vote not guilty by reason of self defense, because while I think it is 50-50 that Zimmerman committed manslaughter, I know that is not enough for a guilty verdict.  On every forum on this case I have posted, I get attacked by both sides for not being an extremist.   :(
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Jozz on July 04, 2012, 02:40:50 PM
Jozz you have confirmed my suspicion that you stereotype somebody who doesn't have the same viewpoint as you as being completely on the other side.  As a matter of fact, I think Martin was lurking around looking for a confrontation with Zimmerman.  And if I was on a jury today, I would vote not guilty by reason of self defense, because while I think it is 50-50 that Zimmerman committed manslaughter, I know that is not enough for a guilty verdict.  On every forum on this case I have posted, I get attacked by both sides for not being an extremist.   :(

Listen, I'm not attacking you. I'm asking for your opinion. I'm interested in the opinions from both sides, what facts they have and how they came to the conclusions they do. This was an honest question. Do you have an opinion on the information that I asked about? Does that opinion mean that you're pigeon held to one side or the other?

Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: JW on July 04, 2012, 02:44:27 PM
I really could care less if George lied or not. The 911 call by him tells me he lost sight of Trayvon long enough to render actions he had taken up to that point as no longer threatening to Trayvon. The crime scene also shows the location of the beginning of the struggle, confirmed by witnesses 11 and 20, proves Trayvon returned from where he had ran. Hardly the action of someone who is scared. That makes Trayvon the aggressor at that point. The crime scene doesn't lie.

Those factors makes the self defense case for George. If not then look at what happened next. George ends up with head injuries and is pinned to the ground by Trayvon.This is supported by the injuries themself, George's clothes being wet and witness #6. Again, self defense even if George was the aggressor in the beginning...which he wasn't.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Jozz on July 04, 2012, 03:01:21 PM
I really could care less if George lied or not. The 911 call by him tells me he lost sight of Trayvon long enough to render actions he had taken up to that point as no longer threatening to Trayvon. The crime scene also shows the location of the beginning of the struggle, confirmed by witnesses 11 and 20, proves Trayvon returned from where he had ran. Hardly the action of someone who is scared. That makes Trayvon the aggressor at that point. The crime scene doesn't lie.

Those factors makes the self defense case for George. If not then look at what happened next. George ends up with head injuries and is pinned to the ground by Trayvon.This is supported by the injuries themself, George's clothes being wet and witness #6. Again, self defense even if George was the aggressor in the beginning...which he wasn't.

Very nicely stated.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: TalkLeft on July 04, 2012, 03:04:15 PM
And if I was on a jury today, I would vote not guilty by reason of self defense, because while I think it is 50-50 that Zimmerman committed manslaughter, I know that is not enough for a guilty verdict.  On every forum on this case I have posted, I get attacked by both sides for not being an extremist.   :(

Which is precisely why you shouldn't be on a jury. Jurors are not allowed to make up their mind until all the evidence is in.

Your comments are criticized because they are filled with hypotheticals that are not in the facts released by the state or by the defense. You make stuff up and pose it as a hypothetical, and then people start discussing it as if it's real.

I did not ask you to post links to sites hosting these unsupported theories and ask that you do not.

What you might argue to a jury as your theory is not relevant, any more than mine is or anyone else's.  In order to have a worthwhile discussion, especially on the legal aspects, the possible scenarios have to come from the facts and information released by the parties -- the state and the defense . If they haven't raised a theory or provided documents to support one, it's not at issue and leads to a confusing and irrelevant exercise in my view.

Maybe the prosecution will come out with a theory that George Z. got out of his car with his gun in his hand. So far they have not, the police have not said that happened and no witnesses have suggested it. It is at this time a baseless distraction from the real issues.

Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: TalkLeft on July 04, 2012, 03:14:21 PM
Does the commission of the felony prevent him from claiming a stand your ground defense? 776.041 reads as if a person who has committed a felony IS entitled to SYG so long as he exhausted every reasonable means to withdraw.  On the other hand, if somebody commits a felony and is attempting to withdraw in order to simply flee the scene, he's not entitled to SYG. I haven't read or heard any explanation of this.

Mr. Filexican, I did  answer your question on whether someone who is committing another felony is precluded from using deadly force in self-defense.  But I will make one more attempt ( I also put this on the other thread you asked it on):  In order for that bar to apply, the Defendant has to be charged with a forcible felony that is independent from the felony for which he claims self-defense.

George Zimmerman is not charged with an independent forcible felony. He is only charged with one felonius act -- killing Trayvon Martin.

To make it clearer, I have highlighted the 2011 case of State v. Johnson (http://www.talkleft.com/zimm/johnsonhighlighted.pdf) which clearly says so.

Quote
The Florida Supreme Court amended Florida Standard Criminal Jury Instruction 3.6(f) to clarify that the trial court should only include the aggressor instruction when the defendant has been charged with a contemporaneous independent forcible felony other than the one for which the defendant claims self-defense pursuant to Giles v. State, 831 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases (2007-3), 976 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 2008).

I have also highlighted the Florida jury instruction 3.6 (http://3.6hightlight.pdf) on this point (2010 edition) which states the same thing.

Because George Zimmerman is not charged with an independent forcible felony, the first section of the aggressor statute does not apply to him, even if he was the aggressor. If he was the aggressor, the second section would apply, but that allows him to assert self-defense so long as he was reasonably in fear of serious bodily injury or death, and he had no alternative lesser means available to avoid the danger he feared.

I hope this is clear. Also, you will have to find another forum to post on because I perceive your continued use of Jorge as George Zimmerman's first name is intended as an insult. You have not provided an alternative explanation. Insults are not allowed here.  Thank you for stopping by , and for your interest in the legal aspect of the case.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: RickyJim on July 04, 2012, 03:46:45 PM
Jeralyn, the posts I linked to were not to unsupported theories.  They were to postings of a critique, by a lawyer, of Zimmerman's statements in police interviews, something central to this case.  You seem to imply by your jury comment that I am more closed minded than the other posters here.  ::)  I doubt that anybody for whom it can be shown posted anything on this case will be allowed on its jury. 
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: friendofinnocence on July 04, 2012, 03:58:01 PM
"Jorge", pronounced "hor-hay", is the Spanish spelling for George.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Redbrow on July 04, 2012, 05:08:25 PM

1. That used extra large bandaids to cover up the 2cm and .5cm "wounds" on the back of his head, and the little tiny scratch on his "most likely" broken nose. A "broken nose" that didn't require being set. 


Fail. The "extra large bandaids to cover up the 2cm and .5cm "wounds" on the back of his head" were not applied by GZ. They were applied by SPD personnel as evident in the interrogation video from the night of the incident. I won't even bother with the rest of your drivel since you are an obvious troll as I proved in the Stand Your Ground I thread.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: AJ on July 04, 2012, 05:15:08 PM
Fail. The "extra large bandaids to cover up the 2cm and .5cm "wounds" on the back of his head" were not applied by GZ. They were applied by SPD personnel as evident in the interrogation video from the night of the incident. I won't even bother with the rest of your drivel since you are an obvious troll as I proved in the Stand Your Ground I thread.

I think the bandages he's referring to are the ones in the walk-through video, which were put on by his wife :)
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: Redbrow on July 04, 2012, 08:58:40 PM
I think the bandages he's referring to are the ones in the walk-through video, which were put on by his wife :)

No, you are mistaken. The bandages on his head in the walk through video are the same ones, in the same positions, as the interrogation video. One is a distinctive knuckle bandage the other is butterfly shaped.

see for yourself.

George Zimmerman police interrogation video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4t93Xadi-Y

reenactment video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX1sxARNq_c&feature=related

Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: AJ on July 04, 2012, 09:10:11 PM
No, you are mistaken. The bandages on his head in the walk through video are the same ones, in the same positions, as the interrogation video. One is a distinctive knuckle bandage the other is butterfly shaped.

see for yourself.

George Zimmerman police interrogation video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4t93Xadi-Y

reenactment video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX1sxARNq_c&feature=related

The re-enactment video you're pointing to doesn't show all of the video. There's another few minutes after all of that where they're talking about his injuries and he says his wife was the one that put the bandages on. I don't have a link to that video as everything is saved to my hard drive, but I will find it if you like.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: unitron on July 06, 2012, 10:16:56 AM
"Jorge", pronounced "hor-hay", is the Spanish spelling for George.

And "George", pronounced George, is the English version of Jorge, but only one of them is George Zimmerman's name and the other is not, and the continued use of the wrong one with no decent explanation offered was finally determined, it would seem, to be a continuing display of jerkitude.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: friendofinnocence on July 07, 2012, 10:40:28 AM
My comment was clearly for informative purposes, not justification.
Title: Re: Which of These Scenarios Disqualifies Self Defense?
Post by: unitron on July 07, 2012, 11:09:14 AM
My comment was clearly for informative purposes, not justification.

I was speaking of the actions of the person who insisted on using the wrong name, not you.