Joe Shlabotnik wrote:I'd like to see a couple of guys in Liberty City confront white teenagers walking in their neighborhood. Film the whole thing. Put "Community Watch" on the side of their car. When they see a kid follow him. Get out of the car and follow them. Piss them off and get them scared. The first one to fight back, stand their ground and blow them away.
Let's see how color-blind justice is in Florida.
No need to perform the experiment you are describing:
A Florida woman who fired warning shots against her allegedly abusive husband has been sentenced to 20 years in prison.
Marissa Alexander of Jacksonville had said the state's "Stand Your Ground" law should apply to her because she was defending herself against her allegedly abusive husband when she fired warning shots inside her home in August 2010. She told police it was to escape a brutal beating by her husband, against whom she had already taken out a protective order.
Read the whole thing if you really want your blood to boil. Keep in mind she didn't even harm the guy, much less kill him. She probably scared the crap out of him, but in this case, probably rightfully so!
Joe Shlabotnik wrote:I'd like to see a couple of guys in Liberty City confront white teenagers walking in their neighborhood. Film the whole thing. Put "Community Watch" on the side of their car. When they see a kid follow him. Get out of the car and follow them. Piss them off and get them scared. The first one to fight back, stand their ground and blow them away.
Let's see how color-blind justice is in Florida.
No need to perform the experiment you are describing:
A Florida woman who fired warning shots against her allegedly abusive husband has been sentenced to 20 years in prison.
Marissa Alexander of Jacksonville had said the state's "Stand Your Ground" law should apply to her because she was defending herself against her allegedly abusive husband when she fired warning shots inside her home in August 2010. She told police it was to escape a brutal beating by her husband, against whom she had already taken out a protective order.
Read the whole thing if you really want your blood to boil. Keep in mind she didn't even harm the guy, much less kill him. She probably scared the crap out of him, but in this case, probably rightfully so!
So, there is a difference, undoubtedly.
What % of that difference do you chalk up to racism? What % is due to a law that apparently doesn't have a clear scope? What % do you think is the difference in the best defense lawyer money can buy vs a public defender?
If I had to give an answer, it would go something like 0-5%, 25%, 70-75%, respectively. But, that could be way off.
Zimmerman killed Martin, and should have to pay for that. Unfortunately the stupid law in Florida allowed Zimmerman to get away with it. Instead of Civil suits against Zimmerman, maybe they NAACP and other groups should pressure the state to change the laws.
wart57 wrote:Zimmerman killed Martin, and should have to pay for that. Unfortunately the stupid law in Florida allowed Zimmerman to get away with it. Instead of Civil suits against Zimmerman, maybe they NAACP and other groups should pressure the state to change the laws.
If Zimmerman had been found guilty I don't feel he would have had a fair trial. The issue with prosecution mishandling evidence is damning, and there is plenty enough evidence to find Martin guilty in the court of public opinion, but I don't know if there is enough evidence to overcome innocent until proven guilty.
And that's a shame, because this situation should obviously have consequences for Zimmerman. People shouldn't just be outraged that Zimmerman is a free man, they should be outraged at these poorly-worded open-ended self-defense laws that allow people like Zimmerman to go free.
Again, this is not a question of innocent until proven guilty. He already admitted guilt. It's a question of whether his actions were justified or not. It's not fundamentally any different than what has been played out in the court of public opinion.
If you think what he did was justified or you aren't sure, he is free. If you don't think what he did was justified, he is convicted of either manslaughter or murder. Apparently the entire jury was able to agree to be at least unsure about whether it was justified. But yes, the giant gray area created by these stupid stand your ground laws are a big problem and partially to blame. In other states he would have already pleaded guilty to manslaughter and it would never have made it to trial.
Freed Roger wrote:Any talk of a wrongful death civil case? Or has Zimmerman and his lawyers hid the millions donated to him.
There seems to be some disagreement over whether that's possible. Lots of news outlets have mentioned the possibility of one and then draw parallels to what happened to OJ, but I distinctly remember reading something in the Florida law that once the criminal court concludes a homicide was justifiable you are automatically immune to a civil suit for the same thing. Something about the reasonable fear of harm that led to the justifiable conclusion making a civil suit impossible. I could be wrong. The federal civil rights thing is probably a better bet.
Ok I think I have cleared this up with some more googling.
If you officially invoke the stand your ground law and the court agrees, you are immune from a civil suit. However to officially invoke stand your ground, the case is heard and decided by a judge not a jury. Zimmerman wanted a jury trial for obvious reasons, so he sacrificed the immunity thing. He still gets to use the same law to establish his defense, but doesn't get immunity from civil suits. It sounds like the Martin family intends to file a suit but from what I've read it doesn't have a lot of chance of success, specifically since it has already been deemed he acted in self defense. I guess that's different than a case where it's simply guilty vs not guilty and there isn't enough evidence to establish guilt. FWIW, the Martin family already settled a suit against the HOA and everything seems to indicate the amount was seven figures.
I presume the law would only be "invoked" in obvious cases where you are confident the judge will side with you like shooting a pedophile in the middle of raping a child or something, so the immunity actually makes sense in that case.
Maybe not the correct thread, but here's a live stream of a gathering in Little Rock where people have gathered to show their displeasure of a cop shooting and killing a guy this morning.
