Your isolated incident of the day


I think that if there’s one thing we can take away from the Zimmerman trial, it’s that this guy’s primary mistake was in leaving witnesses alive to testify against him and mess up his stand your ground defense.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Your isolated incident of the day

  1. lwk2431

    ” I think that if there’s one thing we can take away from the Zimmerman trial, it’s that this guy’s primary mistake was in leaving witnesses alive to testify against him and mess up his stand your ground defense.”

    I find it hard to believe that the above statement makes any kind of sense in a rational universe. Legal commentators more than once remarked that the prosecution witnesses time and again turned out to be more beneficial to the defense than the prosecution.

    Here is a tip I learned from the instructor when taking the course to get a concealed carry license in Texas. He said that if someone is approaching you in a very threatening manner and you have to draw your gun, then you should shout at the top of your lungs “STOP! DON”T COME ANY CLOSER!”

    There are two purposes. The first is obvious I suppose, but the second perhaps not as much. The second reason is you want to attract as many witnesses as possible if you are forced to fire. One eyewitness testified it was Zimmerman screaming for help.

    lwk
    free2beinamerica2.wordpress.com

    Like

    Reply
    1. comradedread Post author

      In cases where self-defense is claimed, the prosecution bears the responsibility for disproving the claim beyond a reasonable doubt. (As it should. People accused by the State of a crime should have the presumption of innocence.)

      In the Zimmerman case, they failed to do so. They failed to do so possibly because the police failed to do a thorough job investigating the scene of the shooting or Zimmerman because they took his word for it and only did an investigation later when they were forced to. So the available physical evidence was compromised.

      If it weren’t, the prosecution would still have likely failed to disprove the claim because of the absence of other witnesses. The only other person there who saw everything up to the point of the shooting was dead, and I am not certain that physical evidence alone would have disproved the self-defense claim.

      Hence my statement that the valid takeaway from the trial is that if you really want to get away with shooting someone without consequence, don’t leave any witnesses and keep saying “He was coming right at us!”

      That said, I think the thing we should take away from the trial is to remove the liability shield from people whose actions lead to a shooting. You shouldn’t be able to instigate or provoke a fight with someone and then kill them because you felt ‘threatened’. You shouldn’t get murder charges unless the State can prove that, but manslaughter or reckless endangerment should apply in those cases.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s