Moderators: Mick, TheGingerMan

Winston Smith wrote:If the facts show Zimmerman was defending himself from death or serious bodily injury rather than making false claims to cover up the fact that he was retaliating with deadly force after losing a fist fight then he was within his rights.

Tigerman wrote:Winston Smith wrote:If the facts show Zimmerman was defending himself from death or serious bodily injury rather than making false claims to cover up the fact that he was retaliating with deadly force after losing a fist fight then he was within his rights.
The law is simple, yet you and others continue to misunderstand it.
1. GZ does not need to show that he was defending himself from death or serious bodily injury. He needs only show that he had a reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily injury. That's all.
2. The prosecution, not GZ, must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that GZ was retaliating with deadly force after losing a fist fight in order to get GZ convicted of 2nd degree murder.
Tigerman wrote:Obviously I am remarking on the fact that the concept of the right of self defense has existed since Roman times and that as far as I know, all common law nations have long adopted the same.

Winston Smith wrote:The context of my statement about rights and the fact that no one was contesting the legitimate right to self-defense was:Tigerman wrote:Obviously I am remarking on the fact that the concept of the right of self defense has existed since Roman times and that as far as I know, all common law nations have long adopted the same.
:not the narrower context of Florida's Stand Your Ground statute.













Return to International Politics
Forumosans browsing this forum: No Forumosans and 1 visitor