Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » Zimmerman did not invoke a "Stand your ground defense" for all you arguing about it

Zimmerman did not invoke a "Stand your ground defense" for all you arguing about it

+7
Markle
no stress
Joanimaroni
Floridatexan
Hospital Bob
Ghost Rider
Nekochan
11 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Go down  Message [Page 4 of 6]

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote:
Sal wrote:

 Perry who?

Sorry,  Sal,  I forgot you're just a whippersnapper.  I bet you've never heard of Dobie Gillis or Maynard G Krebs either.  lol

 I've actually heard of Perry Mason (although I've never seen an episode, and it was mostly in the context of law doesn't really work that way), but what you just said right there is just gibberish, amarite?

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Sal wrote: what you just said right there is just gibberish, amarite?

This is one of those times you had to be there,  Sal.  It's impossible to have any understanding of what Perry Mason or Dobie/Maynard was without seeing it.

It's like me and hiphop used to be.  BUT,  I've been listening to an FM station somewhere around 92 something on the dial and now I'm starting to groove on it.



Last edited by Bob on 7/18/2013, 11:35 pm; edited 2 times in total

2seaoat



See I told you, neko. You could have Clarence Darrow and Perry Mason themselves saying the same thing, and seaoat aint buyin it because they don't know any more about the law than jukebox mechanics. lol


It is still amusing that people cut and paste opinions of people who by their status bring certitude to the discussion. However, it is a leap of faith to suggest that the legislative actions in 13 states have been undertaken because they absolutely have no impact on criminal trials. Either the people who have worked these legislative efforts are idiots and believe like Omara that an instruction of law which changes the presumption in fear from traditional self defense does not make any difference. To support that argument people give the opinion that the Zimmerman was not a stand your ground case, yet those legislative efforts made sure it was, and again.........please show me where there intended purpose has not been accomplished in the state of Florida.......it should be easy.....there should be out of 200 cases about 50 convictions under traditional self defense........again I have only read and posted sources which say there are none.....that may be wrong and I await for correction, but if 20 really smart people say that the pool is full of water, and the facts reveal that 200 checks......the pool is still empty......one might conclude that those people who say the pool is full are mistaken, or there would be a pool full of water......it cannot be both.

Nekochan

Nekochan

Of course Stand Your Ground has an impact in cases where the defendant might have had a chance to retreat.

2seaoat



Some of the discussions of the law on this forum are very similar to Perry Mason......remarkably similar. Ironsides, however was fact based and more realistic than Perry, but a generation of watching Perry and Judge Judy leads to the crisp and accurate discussions we have here.

2seaoat



Of course Stand Your Ground has an impact in cases where the defendant might have had a chance to retreat.


The presumption shifts with the fear........it is not by accident that Florida defendants who claim self defense are walking.......and defense lawyers are smiling all the way to the bank. Do you understand it matters not if the Defendant may have had a chance to retreat with the instruction and shifted presumption?

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote:
It's like me and hiphop used to be.  BUT,  I've been listening to an FM station somewhere around 92 something on the dial and now I'm starting to groove on it.

I know, right?

I've been riding around with my 14-year-old and his buds, and I can't get this shit outta my head ...



And, I'm diggin' it, and gawd dammit that ain't right.

I'm a metal head!

Nekochan

Nekochan

2seaoat wrote:OK. Then explain why the prosecution also said that it was not about stand your ground?


Here is a little secret Neko.......SA are elected officials.   They do not get reelected telling the electorate the truth that it is next to impossible to convict any person who raises self defense in the state of Florida, and that stand your ground automatic instructions have problems.   That part is simple to understand, but additionally the state does not want to discuss stand your ground, and wants to hope the presumption in the instructions will not be comprehended, because the pre stand your ground instructions where no presumption exists, have resulted in convictions in the State of Florida.

Until the lobby stops passing legislative presumptions on self defense, it is utterly nonsensical to discuss the jury instructions and the lobby which is pressing so hard to expand states is being done in a bottle with no impact on jury decisions.    I have asked for a week.  In the state of Florida show me cases where the instruction has allowed a Guilty finding.   There may be cases, I have only seen representations that there have been 200 some cases and no successful prosecution of someone raising self defense.  I am sure there will be law review articles looking at the statistics in the next three years, but it just is hilarious to have Omara making this argument......he is very good......but really?

This is big in the news now and I am not sure why you haven't heard about it. I think it was Boards who started a threat about it a day or so ago. Jesse Jackson was in Jacksonville today, protesting about it. This is a case where a defendant was found guilty in a stand your ground case.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57434757-504083/fla-woman-marissa-alexander-gets-20-years-for-warning-shot-did-she-stand-her-ground/

2seaoat



For 2000 years the basic self defense law rarely changed, and the castle doctrine which was once limited has been expanded beyond the home, and the presumption attaches anywhere.......2000 years of getting it wrong, or was there a real concern that innocent people would be killed and guilty people would simply say......I was afraid..........It is a pretty easy answer.

However, in fairness maybe people will just start being convicted under these instructions which mean nothing..........then the question will be........why all the effort to change the instructions if the intended effect was not realized......guess what....the intended impact was achieved....wimps with guns can now shoot, at least in Florida to date, without any threat of a successful prosecution. That is a reality, and I look forward to reviewing those cases since stand your ground took effect proving the talking heads correct......I am told there are none.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

What I'm finally starting to discover (and it took too long), Sal, is that it is a natural evolutionary offshoot of blues,  funk and soul,  music I've loved all my life.  I'm beginning to appreciate how it gets rid of all the superfluous stuff in that music and focuses on the heart of it.  I liken it to camping out without all the extra stuff bought at Academy Sports and just concentrating on the wood fire at the center of the camp because that's the heart of the whole thing.
And the message of it is as significant as the music.  As crude as it is,  the message is capturing the culture regardless of the pros and cons of the culture.  Just like the music of my generation did.

Nekochan

Nekochan

Denied Stand Your Ground Immunity:

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-05-20/story/man-who-claimed-stand-your-ground-defense-gets-10-years-2009-shooting

2seaoat



This is big in the news now and I am not sure why you haven't heard about it.

I have heard about it. It is not a killing. The stat I gave is 200 killed and no successful conviction. In that case there was no killing. Her husband had the opportunity to give testimony and shift the presumption. We are talking about killings, and the actual results of cases similar to the Zimmerman case were a person claiming self defense kills a person.

If you understand what I have been talking about with the presumption shifting, how exactly does a dead person shift the presumption back to traditional self defense instructions where the burden is on the shooter.......to date it has not been done.......but I welcome a case which shows the same, and please do not hesitate to give the same if you find it.....I do not think you will find it, but I do not know how reliable the sources I have read are.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

If you ever listen to the great blues music that originated the genre,  Sal,  and I'm talking about the Delta acoustic bluesmen/vocalists AND the early electric bluesmen both,  it's crude just like modern day hiphop.  And like hiphop,  it's an acquired taste which is really enhanced with intoxicants.
But once your brain starts to sync with that music,  it will put you in the middle of the Mississippi delta in the 20's and 30's or in the black parts of Chicago in the 40's and early 50's.
Hiphop can have the same effect and put you in South Central or in modern day South Chicago or north Guillemard and Tarragona Streets once you've acquired the taste for it too.

2seaoat



http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-05-20/story/man-who-claimed-stand-your-ground-defense-gets-10-years-2009-shooting

This is exactly what I am looking for.......well except the jury instruction was not given to the jury......why.....because there never was a trial getting the jury instruction. This case was pled. However, it does show that somebody was concerned that they did not have a very good case of self defense........but again, that individual decision is different than a jury after being instructed on stand your ground law, convicts this person.

Much better case, but it still does not address the jury instructions where a defendant has been convicted, they are saying there are none, and your two examples so far have confirmed what I have heard reported........

Nekochan

Nekochan

There are a number of cases where the defendant killed someone but was denied immunity in stand your ground hearings. So stand your ground doesn't get everyone off who tries to claim it as a defense.

Guest


Guest

Another hedge by Seaoat. You were talking about stand your ground cases. Neko produced that now you're quivering it was not a killing.

Nekochan

Nekochan

2seaoat wrote:http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-05-20/story/man-who-claimed-stand-your-ground-defense-gets-10-years-2009-shooting

This is exactly what I am looking for.......well except the jury instruction was not given to the jury......why.....because there never was a trial getting the jury instruction.   This case was pled.  However, it does show that somebody was concerned that they did not have a very good case of self defense........but again, that individual decision is different than a jury after being instructed on stand your ground law, convicts this person.

Much better case, but it still does not address the jury instructions where a defendant has been convicted, they are saying there are none, and your two examples so far have confirmed what I have heard reported........  

I cannot go and get every case and look up jury instructions...well, I guess I could but I don't care to spend the many, many hours doing that. It seems that a number of people have tried to claim stand your ground as self defense but they have been denied immunity. I would think that most who claim stand your ground as a defense do ask for immunity hearings and that this helps weed out the cases that clearly are not stand your ground.

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote:If you ever listen to the great blues music that originated the genre,  Sal,  and I'm talking about the Delta acoustic bluesmen/vocalists AND the early electric bluesmen both,  it's crude just like modern day hiphop.  And like hiphop,  it's an acquired taste which is really enhanced with intoxicants.
But once your brain starts to sync with that music,  it will put you in the middle of the Mississippi delta in the 20's and 30's or in the black parts of Chicago in the 40's and early 50's.
Hiphop can have the same effect and put you in South Central or in modern day South Chicago or north Guillemard and Tarragona Streets once you've acquired the taste for it too.

Listen to this, Bob ...

2seaoat



Another hedge by Seaoat. You were talking about stand your ground cases. Neko produced that now you're quivering it was not a killing.


No equivication at all. There are thousands of cases in Florida where an assault or battery uses the self defense argument and the stand your ground instruction. The article I posted from Tampa said where a person has been killed and claimed self defense there has been about 200 cases.......no convictions. I assume that they are talking about trials, I assume they are talking about killings, and I assume they are not talking about every case where the affirmative defense of self defense can be raised, or the stand your ground instruction given. I look forward to cases which are contrary to what they said.....these are not my conclusions, but what is being reported. It is powerful if it is true, but please post the cases which contradict those conclusions.

Sal

Sal

Another good one ..

2seaoat



cannot go and get every case and look up jury instructions...well, I guess I could but I don't care to spend the many, many hours doing that. It seems that a number of people have tried to claim stand your ground as self defense but they have been denied immunity. I would think that most who claim stand your ground as a defense do ask for immunity hearings and that this helps weed out the cases that clearly are not stand your ground.

The stand your ground jury instructions are automatic in a self defense case. I am only asking for one case. One simple case since 2005 where the jury was given the stand your ground instruction, and they convicted the defendant in a killing. I could care less, because the very effort the lobby groups are exerting prove the efficiency of denial of convictions which allow people to use firearms with impunity. It is a very definable goal, and one statistically which is being reported as being successful. Nothing complex about the bottom line. People who shoot someone under the new laws where the stand your ground instruction is given.... do not get convicted.......or (I am sure somebody can find a case after 8 years in the entire state where a defendant was convicted after being instructed by the judge on stand your ground). Nothing hard to understand here. The lobby group has accomplished there goal.

Guest


Guest

Both the defense and prosecution say it's not a stand your ground case yet you continue to argue they're wrong? What wrong w/ this picture?Someone please tell me why Seaoat's opinion should override these credentialed experienced people?

2seaoat



Both the defense and prosecution say it's not a stand your ground case yet you continue to argue they're wrong? What wrong w/ this picture?Someone please tell me why Seaoat's opinion should override these credentialed experienced people?


Everybody is entitled to their opinion. No argument from me on the right of experts or laymen to have an opinion. A fact is not in dispute. A jury who is instructed under stand your ground instruction, and commanded to follow the law is a legal standard which is part of the case.

Some have argued the instructions had no impact on the jury. They may be right. However, I am unaware that the jury has been polled and a reliable rendition of what influenced their decision had been published, so if you think X opinion on the same is better than Y opinion, I have not wasted a second of effort on the same because, the only facts which still remain a fact which I have invited rebuttal because I do not know the newspaper and other sources are reliable.......but there have been no convictions where there has been a killing and this instruction has been given. If you think for a minute, I will attempt to get a talking head and cut and paste and argue that the person who I have quoted has status to prove what cannot be proved........that the jury did not consider the instruction given.....sorry...........and to make the final point.......well I await the factual case which would at least begin to show stats which would suggest the instruction has not purpose or impact and the lobby group has been wasting their time insisting on the instruction. Pretty simple stuff.

Guest


Guest

From the little I understood from your post and I mean little ..the defense and prosecution are not talking heads. Sorry...you've failed to make any sense to me.

2seaoat



From the little I understood from your post and I mean little ..the defense and prosecution are not talking heads. Sorry...you've failed to make any sense to me.

Nothing new there........the State is trying to sell a depraved act, and is not going to talk about the stand your ground instruction because Zimmerman was depraved and had targeted Martin......and the defense.......its not about stand your ground.....this was just about Martin walking up to Zimmerman and hitting him.........and being attacked by concrete........I do not suspect you could make a lick of sense out of those positions.....not a lick, so no argument from me in that regard.  The stand your ground instructions do not my translation......they speak for themselves, but I am glad you think they need a translation from a talking head........

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 4 of 6]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » Zimmerman did not invoke a "Stand your ground defense" for all you arguing about it

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum