Court of public opinion looms large in George Zimmerman murder trial

My state does not have SYG but they do not have a duty to retreat.
 
Reba said:
Then again, none of us are lawyers either….
Click to expand...

but we know the laws and foxrac is not explaining it right. you don't need to be a lawyer to know if Stand Your Ground exists in your state or not. it's your responsibility to know it.
 
Jiro said:
but we know the laws and foxrac is not explaining it right. you don't need to be a lawyer to know if Stand Your Ground exists in your state or not. it's your responsibility to know it.
Click to expand...

Right but in my sate there is no statutory SYG or duty to retreat. But case law shows precedent that there is no duty to retreat.
 
Jiro said:
nope we don't.


what? lack of duty to retreat? that's not correct.

I think it's best if you leave it to us gun owners to explain the laws.... not you.
Click to expand...

For example, California doesn't have SYG law but they do have case law.

(Stand-your-ground exists in case law, but the State's Supreme Court provided civil remedies for damages resulting from the use of self-help.[12] Criminal jury instructions affirm no duty to retreat both in the home (CALCRIM 506) and elsewhere (CALCRIM 3470 and 505).[13] Castle Doctrine appears in California Penal Code § 198.5, which creates a presumption of reasonable fear of imminent peril when force is used against an unlawful intruder in one's residence.[14])
Click to expand...

Castle doctrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I means you don't have duty to retreat if your life is in danger.
 
Foxrac said:
For example, California doesn't have SYG law but they do have case law.

Castle doctrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I means you don't have duty to retreat if your life is in danger.
Click to expand...

it's called self-defense. it pretty much where and what weapon. in CA, NJ, and NY, you can be criminally charged if you used a gun to defend yourself from a rapist with a knife in a public area.

that's why it's called a draconian law.
 
Jiro said:
it's called self-defense. it pretty much where and what weapon. in CA, NJ, and NY, you can be criminally charged if you used a gun to defend yourself from a rapist with a knife in a public area.

that's why it's called a draconian law.
Click to expand...

Right, maybe in CA but for instance West Virginia had a long history of SYG with case law long before it became statutory. In other word there was no law on the books that allowed you to SYG but there was a long president among cases you could use in your defense.
 
Jiro said:
wow you surely did forget a lot of thing, eh?

no concrete proof that it was Zimmerman's voice.
no concrete proof that Trayvon was an aggressor.
no concrete proof in whatever Zimmerman said.

but it's a fact that Zimmerman would be found GUILTY if the charge was appropriate. GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY.
Click to expand...

No concrete proof Zimmerman would be found guilty if the charge was "appropriate".

There is, however, concrete proof that the State of Florida thought they had charged him appropriately, and there is concrete proof he was found not guilty.
 
Do you think Roderick Scott should be criminally charged and found guilty?

Do you agree with jury verdict in Roderick Scott case?
 
Steinhauer said:
No concrete proof Zimmerman would be found guilty if the charge was "appropriate".

There is, however, concrete proof that the State of Florida thought they had charged him appropriately, and there is concrete proof he was found not guilty.
Click to expand...

Snapple Fact #20 - "Broccoli is the only vegetable that is also a flower."

huh... imagine that!
 
Tousi said:
That oughtta be enough concrete to last a while.....:lol:
Click to expand...
If not, they can grab that chunk of concrete that the defense brought into the courtroom. :D
 

Attachments

  • omara-concrete.jpg
    omara-concrete.jpg
    30.4 KB · Views: 5
Jiro said:
wow you surely did forget a lot of thing, eh?

no concrete proof that it was Zimmerman's voice.
no concrete proof that Trayvon was an aggressor.
no concrete proof in whatever Zimmerman said.
Click to expand...
You made that bad mistake. The neighbor, Mr. Good (?) witnessed with his own eyes and ears that TM was on top and GZ was screaming for help before going back to his place to make a 911 call. That's a concrete proof. The jury found him to be credible so that's why GZ is not guilty. Are you losing your mind? Do you want me to call 911?
 
CrazyPaul said:
You made that bad mistake. The neighbor, Mr. Good witnessed with his own eyes and ears that TM was on top and GZ was screaming for help before going back to his place to make a 911 call. That's a concrete proof. The jury found him to be credible so that's why GZ is not guilty. Are you losing your mind? Do you want me to call 911?
Click to expand...

again - no concrete proof. just a snapshot.

re-read Post #1674. It's a riddle.
 
Jiro said:
again - no concrete proof. just a snapshot.

re-read Post #1674. It's a riddle.
Click to expand...
I'm curious; if eyewitness testimony is not "concrete proof," what do you consider to be "concrete proof?"
 
Reba said:
I'm curious; if eyewitness testimony is not "concrete proof," what do you consider to be "concrete proof?"
Click to expand...

you should already know that witness testimony is the most unreliable source. in this case - all witness testimonies were unreliable.

concrete proof.... isn't it obvious? video tape. photograph. fingerprints. enough evidences to prove beyond reasonable doubt.
 
Jiro said:
you should already know that witness testimony is the most unreliable source. in this case - all witness testimonies were unreliable.
Click to expand...
They aren't "concrete" but I wouldn't dismiss them entirely. If they didn't have some value the lawyers wouldn't put them on the stand.

concrete proof.... isn't it obvious? video tape. photograph. fingerprints. enough evidences to prove beyond reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...
I think rather than concrete you mean forensic proof. Even with that, those bits and pieces of evidence must be from credible sources and put together in a logical way. This is where collection methods, chain of custody, forensic techniques, and expert testimony come into play.
 
Back
Top