Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[Checkmite]

Burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense. The defendant is under no obligation to tell anyone anything.

That's where evidence comes into play, got any? Once you get that, then the prosecutor can file charges. Then you get to have a trial.

A bullet in the kid, admittedly fired by the suspect. Murder is against the law.

Why is it that someone who pleads not guilty by reason of insanity has to provide evidence and professional testimony supporting that, rather than merely sit back and wait for the prosecution to prove he wasn't insane? You're right that a defendant never has to say anything; but if he chooses to say something - a claim of self-defense is a claim.

 

[crimresearch]

A bullet in the kid, admittedly fired by the suspect. Murder is against the law.

Why is it that someone who pleads not guilty by reason of insanity has to provide evidence and professional testimony supporting that, rather than merely sit back and wait for the prosecution to prove he wasn't insane? You're right that a defendant never has to say anything; but if he chooses to say something - a claim of self-defense is a claim.

That's why it is called an affirmative defense... like claiming entrapment, it requires that the defendant affirm, or admit to performing the action, and then arguing against other elements.

A defense in which the defendant introduces evidence, which, if found to be credible, will negate criminal or civil liability, even if it is proven that the defendant committed the alleged acts. Self-defense, entrapment, insanity, and necessity are some examples of affirmative defenses

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/affirmative_defense

 

[triforcharity]

Small question regarding self defense in US law: I think here(Germany) you need to prove self defense beyond doubt to get the charges for the violence needed to repell the unlawful attack dropped. Unless you do get the sentence accorded to violent action used. (E. g. manslaughter)
Do I understand it correctly that in the U. S. law enforcement has to gather evidence to build a case that it was not self defense before the person using violence can be charged?

Correct.

 

[triforcharity]

They can prove it was homicide. That should be enough for a trial. Let a jury decide whether it was "justifiable".

Not really.

Homicide, according to Florida law, is the unlawful killing of a human being.

If a killing occurs during self defense, it's usually ruled as "Justifiable Homicide" which is the LAWFUL killing of another.

And no, we don't just arrest people for very serious charges, and say "Let the jury decide" because sometimes, juries come to the wrong conclusion.

See : Wilton Dedge ( http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Wilton_Dedge.php )

See also " William Dillion
http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/William_Dillon.php

BTW, both occurred in Brevard county, which is about an hour away. So, this hits home for many of us. I believe SgtBaker will know these two names.

 

[WildCat]

Some guy chases me down, in my neighborhood, and grabs me, I can assure you I will defend myself.

And your evidence Martin was chased down and grabbed is...?

 

[WildCat]

Absolutely not. He must have witnessed an actual crime. Since walking while black and wearing a hooded sweatshirt is not a crime, he could not have detained the kid under any circumstances. This is called false imprisonment.

Again, do you have evidence Martin was detained by Zimmerman? Where are you getting this information?

 

[triforcharity]

In Florida statute, you do not actually have to be in fear for your life, you can be in fear of great bodily harm to use deadly force, in the no retreat law. The key phrase is "if he didn't throw the first punch". As far as the information that is available to us, no one was there to see who threw the first punch.

I fixed that for you. Getting punched in the face is not reason to use deadly force. However, getting hit in the face with a crow bar certainly is.

Cheers!

 

[WildCat]

A bullet in the kid, admittedly fired by the suspect. Murder is against the law.

A bullet in a body is evidence of a homicide, it is not evidence of a murder.

Why is it that someone who pleads not guilty by reason of insanity has to provide evidence and professional testimony supporting that, rather than merely sit back and wait for the prosecution to prove he wasn't insane? You're right that a defendant never has to say anything; but if he chooses to say something - a claim of self-defense is a claim.

Self-defense is legal, killing someone because you're insane is not legal.

 

[Checkmite]

Again, do you have evidence Martin was detained by Zimmerman? Where are you getting this information?

Obviously if he hadn't attempted to detain the boy, Martin would have made it home alive.

We know he was going to attempt to detain Martin because he told the dispatcher that was his intention.

 

[sgtbaker]

I fixed that for you. Getting punched in the face is not reason to use deadly force. However, getting hit in the face with a crow bar certainly is.

Cheers!

He wasn't just punched in the face, though, the back of his head was also bleeding. When you are getting the snot kicked out of you, do you often sit an contemplate; hmm is this just bodily harm or is this great bodily harm?

 

[TheGoldcountry]

Burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense. The defendant is under no obligation to tell anyone anything.

That's where evidence comes into play, got any? Once you get that, then the prosecutor can file charges. Then you get to have a trial.

They have a dead kid, they have premeditation, they have a murder weapon, and they have motive and opportunity. The defendant is under no obligation to say anything, but if the defense wants to establish self-defense as a mitigating factor, his attorney would probably want him to say something.

Unless you're saying that self-defense should be the default assumption, which seems quite unfair considering that one participant in this situation will never have the opportunity to speak for himself.

 

[crimresearch]

He wasn't just punched in the face, though, the back of his head was also bleeding. When you are getting the snot kicked out of you, do you often sit an contemplate; hmm is this just bodily harm or is this great bodily harm?

The standard that a jury would be instructed on would be the reasonableness of the belief. 'Reasonable' in court doesn't necessarily mean the same thing it does in mundane conversation. So, the jury would be given guidelines based in the law on how to determine if a claim like 'I was standing my ground' is reasonable or not.

If a case got as far as a trial, there is at least a chance that some prosecutor has already rejected such a claim.

 

[WildCat]

Obviously if he hadn't attempted to detain the boy, Martin would have made it home alive.

You are asserting facts not in evidence. It's very easy to imagine scenarios in which no attempt to detain was made, for example Martin could have turned and confronted Zimmerman for following him.

We know he was going to attempt to detain Martin because he told the dispatcher that was his intention.

Evidence?

 

[WildCat]

They have a dead kid,

Yes.

they have premeditation,

No.

they have a murder weapon,

You haven't shown there was a murder.

and they have motive

What's the motive?

and opportunity.

I suppose.

The defendant is under no obligation to say anything, but if the defense wants to establish self-defense as a mitigating factor, his attorney would probably want him to say something.

Yes, now the DA has to show it wasn't.

Unless you're saying that self-defense should be the default assumption,

It wasn't an assumption, it was the claim by Zimmerman.

which seems quite unfair considering that one participant in this situation will never have the opportunity to speak for himself.

Such is life.

 

[triforcharity]

And your evidence Martin was chased down and grabbed is...?

Sorry, that is speculation.

I should have specified that it was.

Mia Culpa.

 

[triforcharity]

Again, do you have evidence Martin was detained by Zimmerman? Where are you getting this information?

I am not the one who made the claim. RobRoy made a claim that as a citizen, he could have detained the kid.

 

[triforcharity]

He wasn't just punched in the face, though, the back of his head was also bleeding. When you are getting the snot kicked out of you, do you often sit an contemplate; hmm is this just bodily harm or is this great bodily harm?

I won't argue that, as I don't know the extent of Zimmerman's injuries, but there are other reasons why someone would have a bloody head.

Just pointing out Florida state law.

No animosity at all, I assure you.

 

[triforcharity]

You are asserting facts not in evidence. It's very easy to imagine scenarios in which no attempt to detain was made, for example Martin could have turned and confronted Zimmerman for following him.

Very true.

Evidence?

"I'm not going to let this one get away" or something to that effect.

But again, Martin could have approached Zimmerman.


I doubt it though. Just my personal feelings.

 

[sgtbaker]

I won't argue that, as I don't know the extent of Zimmerman's injuries, but there are other reasons why someone would have a bloody head.

Just pointing out Florida state law.

No animosity at all, I assure you.

I didn't take it as such. You seem to be pretty neutral on the whole topic. I just think it's important to remember the perspective of a person who is taking the beating. I don't think it's fair to assume that one, in the heat of the moment, can reasonably distinguish the difference between bodily harm and great bodily harm.

Either way, the 911 tapes were released tonight to the family and supposedly will be released to the public tomorrow. According to what I have been reading, the family heard the tapes and are now convinced that their son was murdered. If we get to hear the tapes and hear what the family heard, I am all for prosecution. I am confused because all the witnesses have said a single shot was fired but they heard two separate shots on the tape.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/treyvon-martin-neighborhood-watch-shooting-911-tapes-send/story?id=15937881

 

[WildCat]

"I'm not going to let this one get away" or something to that effect.

And can't you keep someone from getting away just by following them so you can point them out to the police when they finally show up? If you let them get out of your sight they have a good chance of getting away.