Trayvon Martin (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Kasaki
- Start date
Anywho:
In Florida, a person who commits 2nd Degree Murder is one who is either an Accomplice to Felony Murder; or commits Murder with a Depraved Mind.
Obviously the first definition has no bearing on this case.
Murder with a Depraved Mind occurs when a person is killed, without any premeditated design, by an act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind showing no regard for human life.
Common Defenses include:
Excusable Homicide
The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:
1) When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or
2) When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or
3) When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner.
Justifiable Homicide
The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if done while resisting an attempt by someone to kill you or to commit a felony against you.
Self Defense
Also known as the justified use of deadly force, self defense is a defense to the crime of Second Degree Murder.
The assumption is that the defense will use one of the last 2 and lean on the Stand Your Ground law.
---------- Post added 12.04.2012 at 21:05 ----------
Which isn't much.
In Florida, a person who commits 2nd Degree Murder is one who is either an Accomplice to Felony Murder; or commits Murder with a Depraved Mind.
Obviously the first definition has no bearing on this case.
Murder with a Depraved Mind occurs when a person is killed, without any premeditated design, by an act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind showing no regard for human life.
Common Defenses include:
Excusable Homicide
The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:
1) When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or
2) When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or
3) When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner.
Justifiable Homicide
The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if done while resisting an attempt by someone to kill you or to commit a felony against you.
Self Defense
Also known as the justified use of deadly force, self defense is a defense to the crime of Second Degree Murder.
The assumption is that the defense will use one of the last 2 and lean on the Stand Your Ground law.
---------- Post added 12.04.2012 at 21:05 ----------
Which isn't much.
![Juventino[RUS]](https://www.juventuz.com/data/avatars/m/5/5409.jpg?1650619365){kind=avatar}
![Juventino[RUS]](https://www.juventuz.com/data/avatars/s/5/5409.jpg?1650619365){kind=avatar}
Snowden first, now Zimmerman 
The verdict is a non-shock. The whole experience is a bit of a sad waste, really. You have a case where there wasn't probable cause to begin with. But then days after the fact people freaked and mobilized and "demanded justice" online, so the guy got arrested. And people reverted to a "guilty before proven innocent" mindset.
A year and a half and millions of dollars later, despite the guy being a bit creepy and dubious and taking idiotic actions, there was insufficient evidence to prove that it wasn't self-defense. And for everybody who thinks that's a poor legal outcome, just imagine the number of innocent people who would be additionally locked up if the U.S. relaxed its "burden of proof", "innocent before proven guilty", and "beyond a reasonable doubt" legal tenets. It would not be pretty, and it would be a horrible precedent for many of those who sided with the prosecution in this case: a lot of people would suffer horribly. Most of whom look a lot like Treyvon Martin.
IMO, all that money and attention could have been applied to much more suitable legal cases than this one. Meanwhile, people are dying in the streets of Chicago and other cities left and right with zero attention that this case got.
A year and a half and millions of dollars later, despite the guy being a bit creepy and dubious and taking idiotic actions, there was insufficient evidence to prove that it wasn't self-defense. And for everybody who thinks that's a poor legal outcome, just imagine the number of innocent people who would be additionally locked up if the U.S. relaxed its "burden of proof", "innocent before proven guilty", and "beyond a reasonable doubt" legal tenets. It would not be pretty, and it would be a horrible precedent for many of those who sided with the prosecution in this case: a lot of people would suffer horribly. Most of whom look a lot like Treyvon Martin.
IMO, all that money and attention could have been applied to much more suitable legal cases than this one. Meanwhile, people are dying in the streets of Chicago and other cities left and right with zero attention that this case got.
Black " ghetto rappers" are killing each other because of the comments on twitter and youtube 
It's a perfectly sensible legal outcome considering the laws in place. The real issue is that you have a nation full of retards either legally armed or illegally so, escalating a gazillion conflicts into lethal outcomes.
Meanwhile, last year some niglet chick got done for 20 years in the same state for firing into a wall to scare her husband/boyfriend as he was assaulting her while under a restraining order.
Niglets gon' nig (in prison).
Meanwhile, last year some niglet chick got done for 20 years in the same state for firing into a wall to scare her husband/boyfriend as he was assaulting her while under a restraining order.
Niglets gon' nig (in prison).
Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the
people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
There are were battles against indians in that period, people were hunting alot on animals for the food, there were a lot of bandits in that era so you had to have gun to defence ur house, but now?! why americans don't want to stick with short firearms only for example?!
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the
people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
There are were battles against indians in that period, people were hunting alot on animals for the food, there were a lot of bandits in that era so you had to have gun to defence ur house, but now?! why americans don't want to stick with short firearms only for example?!
The problem really with the case, I think, was the police not taking the guy into custody initially. That sent out a bad message and got people's attention because it gave the impression that the authorities (for whatever reason) weren't taking the incident particularly seriously.
If the police had arrested him initially - even if they had then released him without charge - I doubt the case would have got half the attention it did.
And the difference US law (or is it just Florida?) compared to here, I think, is that here the burden would be on the defence to prove that the killing was in self-defence, rather than it being for the prosecution to prove it wasn't.
If the police had arrested him initially - even if they had then released him without charge - I doubt the case would have got half the attention it did.
And the difference US law (or is it just Florida?) compared to here, I think, is that here the burden would be on the defence to prove that the killing was in self-defence, rather than it being for the prosecution to prove it wasn't.