|
ruveyn
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 22, 2008
Age: 76
Posts: 29317
Location: New Jersey
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 3:28 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Kraichgauer wrote: | | John_Browning wrote: | I think the point I was trying to get to was missed.
This matter really needs to be left to a real court and real jury without race baiting! |
That would have been the case, had that idiotic law not caused the police to release Zimmerman free and clear immediately after the shooting.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer |
Even though the police released him charges may yet be brought against him. It all depends on the district attorney and a grand jury.
ruveyn |
|
| Back to top |
|
Kraichgauer
Phoenix
Joined: Apr 13, 2010
Age: 47
Posts: 12770
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ruveyn wrote: | | Kraichgauer wrote: | | John_Browning wrote: | I think the point I was trying to get to was missed.
This matter really needs to be left to a real court and real jury without race baiting! |
That would have been the case, had that idiotic law not caused the police to release Zimmerman free and clear immediately after the shooting.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer |
Even though the police released him charges may yet be brought against him. It all depends on the district attorney and a grand jury.
ruveyn |
Thankfully.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dox47
Consigliere
Joined: Jan 29, 2008
Posts: 5190
Location: Seattle Area
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Read your own link:
| ABC News wrote: | | But Sanford, Fla., Investigator Chris Serino was instructed to not press charges against Zimmerman because the state attorney's office headed by Norman Wolfinger determined there wasn't enough evidence to lead to a conviction, the sources told ABC News. |
Bold is mine.
That's not "we can't charge him under SYG", that's "we can't charge him because we don't have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt", AKA standard procedure in the legal system, or at least what it ought to be.
_________________
Unconditional allegiance is the surest way to render one’s beliefs and agenda irrelevant
Any power that government has to do something you like will invariably be used for something you abhor
Murum aries attigit |
|
| Back to top |
|
simon_says
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 21, 2011
Posts: 2443
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dox47 wrote: |
Read your own link:
| ABC News wrote: | | But Sanford, Fla., Investigator Chris Serino was instructed to not press charges against Zimmerman because the state attorney's office headed by Norman Wolfinger determined there wasn't enough evidence to lead to a conviction, the sources told ABC News. |
Bold is mine.
That's not "we can't charge him under SYG", that's "we can't charge him because we don't have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt", AKA standard procedure in the legal system, or at least what it ought to be. |
In the context of what we know about the law, you are wrong. There is an additional burden of proof with this law. Prosecutors bring charges all the time without absolute certainty, then they let the jury decide. Ive read that police in Florida now routinely kick self-defense shootings up to the prosecutor before arresting. They just don't want to deal with this law and leave it to the higher ups. You not only have a presumption of innocence in court, you have a presumption that what you did was right and that you shouldnt be charged at all.
Werent you on here weeks ago saying that unarmed people can't be killed and that you can't kill over a fist fight or "feeling threatened"? That's not true in Florida because it's harder to even get the prosecutor to charge you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dox47
Consigliere
Joined: Jan 29, 2008
Posts: 5190
Location: Seattle Area
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| simon_says wrote: | | In the context of what we know about the law, you are wrong. There is an additional burden of proof with this law. Prosecutors bring charges all the time without absolute certainty, then they let the jury decide. |
Most prosecutors *anywhere* won't bring a case they don't think they can win simply because they're concerned about their conviction rate, which is often how they're promoted and can come into play if they later run for higher office, which is a fairly common path from a DA's chair. Though I don't like the idea of cases being prosecuted or not based more on someone's career outlook than in the interests of justice, I also prefer that people not be put through the wringer that is the legal system "just to be sure" when the evidence is thin on the ground.
| simon_says wrote: | | Ive read that police in Florida now routinely kick self-defense shootings up to the prosecutor before arresting. They just don't want to deal with this law and leave it to the higher ups. |
And this is a bad thing why? It's not like Zimmerman wasn't brought in and questioned, he was; so what's the problem here? YOU think the evidence looks pretty clear so they should have just slapped charges on him first and investigated later? Believe it or not, police officers are not experts on the law, so kicking a case where they have questions up the DA's office before proceeding is the SMART thing to do, that way they don't step on their own dicks and ruin any potential case before it starts with procedural errors. Again, you seem to be saying they should just "go with their guts" legal system be damned when an emotional case comes up, and that's just not responsible.
| simon_says wrote: | | You not only have a presumption of innocence in court, you have a presumption that what you did was right and that you shouldnt be charged at all. |
That should be the case with all investigations, the police shouldn't start out with the presumption that you're guilty and then you have to prove you're not or get arrested. These laws are a response to numerous incidents where clear cut self defense cases were charged by prosecutors, often for political reasons, and innocent people who did nothing wrong in protecting themselves were subjected to the legal system and all of it's expense and disruption and threat to their freedom for no good reason. It's much the same story with castle doctrine, it came out of voter outrage when homeowners were charged with crimes for defending their residences or sued for damages by injured burglars.
My own state has a law that if the state charges you in a self defense shooting and you win in court, they have to pay all your legal bills. This also discourages the police and prosecutors from getting overly aggressive with self defense shootings; so do you think it's a terrible idea as well?
| simon_says wrote: | | Werent you on here weeks ago saying that unarmed people can't be killed and that you can't kill over a fist fight or "feeling threatened"? That's not true in Florida because it's harder to even get the prosecutor to charge you. |
What I was saying is that you're not allowed to start a fight and then start shooting when you start losing; that does not look to be what happened in this case. Like I've said and will continue to say, the primary bar to *any* legal action in this case is the murky circumstances and lack of evidence; SYG or not a cautious prosecutor would not file those charges. If you have a problem with that, take it up with the prosecutor culture that worships conviction rates and not the red herring self defense laws that may not even apply in this case.
_________________
Unconditional allegiance is the surest way to render one’s beliefs and agenda irrelevant
Any power that government has to do something you like will invariably be used for something you abhor
Murum aries attigit |
|
| Back to top |
|
simon_says
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 21, 2011
Posts: 2443
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | What I was saying is that you're not allowed to start a fight and then start shooting when you start losing; that does not look to be what happened in this case. Like I've said and will continue to say, the primary bar to *any* legal action in this case is the murky circumstances and lack of evidence; SYG or not a cautious prosecutor would not file those charges. If you have a problem with that, take it up with the prosecutor culture that worships conviction rates and not the red herring self defense laws that may not even apply in this case. |
We don't know what happened to start the fight. Only ZImmerman's account. There are no witnesses to what started the fight. Just the shooters version of events and the language he described is not the language described by the witness on the telephone. The investigator thought it was manslaughter. But 40 pages of back and forth playing Socrates on the internet won't change my or your opinions. We have different views of justice.
| Quote: | | And this is a bad thing why? It's not like Zimmerman wasn't brought in and questioned, he was; so what's the problem here? YOU think the evidence looks pretty clear so they should have just slapped charges on him first and investigated later? Believe it or not, police officers are not experts on the law, so kicking a case where they have questions up the DA's office before proceeding is the SMART thing to do, that way they don't step on their own dicks and ruin any potential case before it starts with procedural errors. Again, you seem to be saying they should just "go with their guts" legal system be damned when an emotional case comes up, and that's just not responsible. |
What they are doing here is an addtitional step beyond the normal consultation with a DA. It's going up to the state office to review. Because the NRA has effectively created an additional burden on the state.
| Quote: | That should be the case with all investigations, the police shouldn't start out with the presumption that you're guilty and then you have to prove you're not or get arrested. These laws are a response to numerous incidents where clear cut self defense cases were charged by prosecutors, often for political reasons, and innocent people who did nothing wrong in protecting themselves were subjected to the legal system and all of it's expense and disruption and threat to their freedom for no good reason. It's much the same story with castle doctrine, it came out of voter outrage when homeowners were charged with crimes for defending their residences or sued for damages by injured burglars.
? |
No, it should not be. The NRA and ALEC have devised special laws to let shooters avoid a charge. That's just nuts. If you want to play with guns, fine, but constant lobbying to make it easier to use them on others will only generate more backlash against weapons. It's inevitable.
| Quote: | | My own state has a law that if the state charges you in a self defense shooting and you win in court, they have to pay all your legal bills. This also discourages the police and prosecutors from getting overly aggressive with self defense shootings; so do you think it's a terrible idea as well? |
It's pandering to the gun lobby, likely via the NRA. It is what it is.
| Quote: | | Most prosecutors *anywhere* won't bring a case they don't think they can win simply because they're concerned about their conviction rate, which is often how they're promoted and can come into play if they later run for higher office, which is a fairly common path from a DA's chair. Though I don't like the idea of cases being prosecuted or not based more on someone's career outlook than in the interests of justice, I also prefer that people not be put through the wringer that is the legal system "just to be sure" when the evidence is thin on the ground. |
There are special circumstances here via SYG. If you choose to ignore the nature of those circumstances then what am I supposed to do about it? Believe whatever you like. |
|
| Back to top |
|
TM
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 04, 2012
Posts: 2122
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| This is the kind of law that makes America looks idiotic in comparison with any other civilized country. Unless the kid had a gun or otherwise was a clear threat that could be an equal threat to Zimmerman holding a gun, its 2nd degree murder in just about every other country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dox47
Consigliere
Joined: Jan 29, 2008
Posts: 5190
Location: Seattle Area
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| simon_says wrote: | | We don't know what happened to start the fight. Only ZImmerman's account. There are no witnesses to what started the fight. Just the shooters version of events and the language he described is not the language described by the witness on the telephone. The investigator thought it was manslaughter. |
Yep, and the prosecutor though it wasn't a case. One's a lawyer and one's a cop, different levels and areas of expertise. Absent more information, I'd take the conservative view as well.
| simon_says wrote: | | But 40 pages of back and forth playing Socrates on the internet won't change my or your opinions. We have different views of justice. |
And yet here you are. My view of justice includes due process and a thorough investigation before charges are filed; what does your idea entail?
| simon_says wrote: | | What they are doing here is an addtitional step beyond the normal consultation with a DA. It's going up to the state office to review. Because the NRA has effectively created an additional burden on the state. |
So? Self defense is often complicated and should be thoroughly investigated. Why invoke the NRA at all, what bearing do they have here (unless you're trying to provoke a certain response in people conditioned to hate the NRA).
| simon_says wrote: | | No, it should not be. The NRA and ALEC have devised special laws to let shooters avoid a charge. That's just nuts. If you want to play with guns, fine, but constant lobbying to make it easier to use them on others will only generate more backlash against weapons. It's inevitable. |
"Play with guns"? Well I see what caliber of a debater I'm dealing with now, childish insults rarely being a mark of quality and all.
And again with the NRA (and ALEC!). The NRA (and ALEC!) said it rained yesterday; does that mean it didn't?
Concern trolling too, huh? Must be going for the trifecta... No need to watch out for us, us gun folks are pretty good at watching out for our own interests, if recent trends and court cases are any indication.
| simon_says wrote: | | It's pandering to the gun lobby, likely via the NRA. It is what it is. |
So if you're charged with a crime you didn't commit and successfully defend yourself in court, you think you should still be stuck with your likely large legal fees? Or in other words, you want to see innocent people punished?
Pandering to the NRA...  Watch, I can do that too: Soros! Soros! Soros! Pretty convincing, huh? I didn't even need to provide any context or ties to the issue being discussed, just evoking a loaded name 3 times in a row is perfectly sufficient to tell people all the really need to know about everything. On a related note, did you know that Hitler was a big fan of gun control? 
| simon_says wrote: | | There are special circumstances here via SYG. If you choose to ignore the nature of those circumstances then what am I supposed to do about it? Believe whatever you like. |
It's still up in the air whether SYG is even applicable, do some actual research, and come back with something better than NRA! NRA! NRA! (and ALEC!).
_________________
Unconditional allegiance is the surest way to render one’s beliefs and agenda irrelevant
Any power that government has to do something you like will invariably be used for something you abhor
Murum aries attigit |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dox47
Consigliere
Joined: Jan 29, 2008
Posts: 5190
Location: Seattle Area
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TM wrote: | | This is the kind of law that makes America looks idiotic in comparison with any other civilized country. Unless the kid had a gun or otherwise was a clear threat that could be an equal threat to Zimmerman holding a gun, its 2nd degree murder in just about every other country. |
Do your country's lawmakers use "what would the Americans think?" as a criteria when setting domestic policy?
_________________
Unconditional allegiance is the surest way to render one’s beliefs and agenda irrelevant
Any power that government has to do something you like will invariably be used for something you abhor
Murum aries attigit |
|
| Back to top |
|
Tadzio
Phoenix
Joined: Sep 03, 2009
Age: 60
Posts: 877
Location: Banned-4-Epilepsy, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:52 pm Post subject: Stand Your Ground With Dibs On Retreat 4 Killers |
|
|
| TM wrote: | | This is the kind of law that makes America looks idiotic in comparison with any other civilized country. Unless the kid had a gun or otherwise was a clear threat that could be an equal threat to Zimmerman holding a gun, its 2nd degree murder in just about every other country. |
It certainly makes Florida look idiotic, with 20 or so other states with similarly flawed "self-defense" laws.
Some of the higher courts have noted that the law is circular when everybody involved is in a "covered incident" and reasonably feels threatened by others in the incident.
In instances where a person reasonably feels threatened, the notion of "retreat to the wall" being superseded by removal of any "duty to retreat" from wherever a person has a right to be (or from doing with rights), leads to circle of events that ends only when an individual finally succumbs to the threats & forces from another individual.
When no other illegalities from "forceful felonies" are directly involved, the succumbing individual has the better justification for attempting to use deadly force, while the non-succumbing individual necessarily has less justification, and hence, no protection or excuse under the law for the final act of deadly force.
Then, paradoxically, the "duty to retreat to the wall" (that has been in all practicality neutralized as a duty by the new "right to stand your ground"), pops back up as if it is still available as a defense for committing the final act of deadly force, and as if the dead victim never equally had the same "right to stand your ground" that initiated the circle of events. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Raptor
Phoenix
Joined: Mar 09, 2007
Posts: 4501
Location: Southeast U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
simon_says wrote:
| Quote: | | Because the NRA has effectively created an additional burden on the state. |
| Quote: | | The NRA and ALEC have devised special laws to let shooters avoid a charge. |
In case you didn’t know, neither the NRA nor ALEC are legislative bodies.
| Quote: | | It's pandering to the gun lobby, likely via the NRA. It is what it is. |
Hey, you have the Brady Campaign and we have the NRA……
I think I can honestly say that the NRA has done more to positively curb gun violence and accidents than those Brady idiots could ever hope to.....
TM wrote:
| Quote: | | This is the kind of law that makes America looks idiotic in comparison with any other civilized country. |
Gee, we sure have a lot of immigration into this idiotic country. How could that be????
|
|
| Back to top |
|
simon_says
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 21, 2011
Posts: 2443
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | So if you're charged with a crime you didn't commit and successfully defend yourself in court, you think you should still be stuck with your likely large legal fees? Or in other words, you want to see innocent people punished?
Pandering to the NRA... Watch, I can do that too: Soros! Soros! Soros! Pretty convincing, huh? I didn't even need to provide any context or ties to the issue being discussed, just evoking a loaded name 3 times in a row is perfectly sufficient to tell people all the really need to know about everything. On a related note, did you know that Hitler was a big fan of gun control? |
The NRA is behind a lot these pushes. They arent shy about it. Maybe you feel that if you line up enough words you can change reality. Good luck with that.
| Quote: | | Yep, and the prosecutor though it wasn't a case. One's a lawyer and one's a cop, different levels and areas of expertise. Absent more information, I'd take the conservative view as well |
For reasons that have been discussed ad nauseum on this forum. You choose to ignore it. Again, good luck.
| Quote: | | And yet here you are. My view of justice includes due process and a thorough investigation before charges are filed; what does your idea entail? |
Gun users and self-defense invokers should not get special rights.
| Quote: | | So? Self defense is often complicated and should be thoroughly investigated. Why invoke the NRA at all, what bearing do they have here (unless you're trying to provoke a certain response in people conditioned to hate the NRA). |
Again we come back to the different views of justice. And the NRA was behind this law. That's just a fact. I'm sorry if you find it upsetting in some way.
| Quote: | "Play with guns"? Well I see what caliber of a debater I'm dealing with now, childish insults rarely being a mark of quality and all.
And again with the NRA (and ALEC!). The NRA (and ALEC!) said it rained yesterday; does that mean it didn't?
Concern trolling too, huh? Must be going for the trifecta... No need to watch out for us, us gun folks are pretty good at watching out for our own interests, if recent trends and court cases are any indication. |
What are you doing with your guns if not playing with them? You are a hobbyist mate, not Paul Revere . Have fun. I just don't see why you need special rights to use them on others and get away with it.
| Quote: | | It's still up in the air whether SYG is even applicable, do some actual research, and come back with something better than NRA! NRA! NRA! (and ALEC!). |
What possible research could I do that would convince you of anything? Zimmermans' lawyer is planning on using SYG. Said so in an interview. The state attorney has said that SYG is a problem and may be a bar to prosecution. Maybe they are both crazy. Maybe youve successfully typed enough words on your keyboard and a genie came out and changed all that. Alakazam! |
|
| Back to top |
|
Raptor
Phoenix
Joined: Mar 09, 2007
Posts: 4501
Location: Southeast U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tadzio wrote:
| Quote: | | It certainly makes Florida look idiotic, |
You live in California but call anything about Florida idiotic.
Says a lot but whatev…..
| Quote: | | Then, paradoxically, the "duty to retreat to the wall" (that has been in all practicality neutralized as a duty by the new "right to stand your ground"), pops back up as if it is still available as a defense for committing the final act of deadly force, and as if the dead victim never equally had the same "right to stand your ground" that initiated the circle of events. |
When the type of event occurs where you would invoke SYG you rarely have time to dig into the law books for case history, assemble a panel of experts, or use an iPhone app to chart a course of action that is both legally and tactically sound.
It can be about the same as deciding whether to swerve or brake to avoid a car accident; split second decisions that have to be lived with.
The law was written to favor the law abiding citizen in surviving a potentially lethal encounter both physically and legally intact instead of giving his assailant a hand up.
It will not always work out for the best, this case being an example if Zimmerman is proven in court to be at fault, and laws cannot be written for each and every possible eventuality.
The more I think about this version of the SYG law the more I approve of it and reading some of the personal and political agenda driven arguments against it is helping me arrive at that conclusion.
I’m sure (read that KNOW) that since this incident last month that lots and lots of other people were murdered in much more certain terms but I don’t see those cases being examined to death in this forum. |
|
| Back to top |
|
marshall
Under the whirlwind
Joined: Apr 15, 2007
Posts: 9218
Location: Western Michigan
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The issue that isn't being addressed is the ability for almost anyone to get away with murder. If you have a death grudge against someone all you have to do is confront them somewhere where there are no witnesses and make up a "self-defense" story claiming they were going to beat you unconscious if you hadn't shot them first. |
|
| Back to top |
|
abacacus
Rock 'N Roll Outlaw
Joined: Apr 16, 2007
Age: 21
Posts: 3320
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Best way to restrain gun violence=educate about guns. Basic gun safety is something every person should know.
Put it as a required class in high school, in five years gun incidents will be down.
_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
