Just so you all are clear, SYG and profiling played no part in the trial.

[ecofarm]

Do you know why a majority of people don't end up in these situations? Because they don't put themselves in a place where it could happen.

There's nothing wrong with following a 6' male stranger at 7pm, in ones own neighborhood, to see what he's up to. Residents in my neighborhood do it regularly, as a matter of community security. We are not bad people, we are just looking out for our neighborhood. We do not stalk anyone. But if you're a 6' male stranger and wandering around here, someone IS gonna check you out. Being concerned neighbors does not remove our right to self defense.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Well, the thread title says SYG played no part in the trial and that's not exactly true. The jurors had these instructions as part of their deliberations..

"If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

And Juror B-37, said Stand Your Ground was key to reaching their verdict. She told CNN's Anderson Cooper in an interview that neither second-degree murder nor manslaughter applied in Zimmerman's case "because of the heat of the moment and the 'stand your ground.' He had a right to defend himself. If he felt threatened that his life was going to be taken away from him or he was going to have bodily harm, he had a right."

Stand Your Ground was not the defense. I dont care what B-37 says, or needed more info on.

 

[Gaius46]

I will concede that the "no duty to retreat" may be in regard to a home and not other places (I haven't compiled a full list with variables).

I will further concede that "no retreat" is the natural foil to "SYG".

Nonetheless, generally, it's the "forcible felony" clause (permitting lethal force without fear) that makes a state SYG. While the vast majority of states (39) have no duty to retreat, fewer have SYG.



Stand-your-ground law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I suppose we should say that "no duty to retreat" and "forcible felony" are both aspects of SYG; however, some states have "no duty to retreat" without the "forcible felony" and without SYG.

I was wondering if you were including Castle Doctrine states in your comments.

Thanks for link. The forcible felony clause puzzles me. At first I thought it was essentially a "good samaritan" clause that shielded one from prosection when going to someone's aid. But that's covered in the statute already. And given the general definition of what constitutes a forcible felony - murder, kidnapping, assault, robbery, arson etc, fear is almost always a factor. Seems to me there's really no reason for it to be there unless Florida defines forcible felony significantly different from everyone else.

 

[ecofarm]

I want to note that I probably underplayed the importance of "duty to retreat" law, as it is apparently the foil to SYG.

I wanted to highlight that some states have "no duty to retreat" while not having the "forcible felony" and not being SYG states. I may have gone too far in that, to the point of ignoring an obviously relevant aspect of SYG.

 

[ecofarm]

The forcible felony clause puzzles me. At first I thought it was essentially a "good samaritan" clause that shielded one from prosection when going to someone's aid. But that's covered in the statute already. And given the general definition of what constitutes a forcible felony - murder, kidnapping, assault, robbery, arson etc, fear is almost always a factor. Seems to me there's really no reason for it to be there unless Florida defines forcible felony significantly different from everyone else.

The forcible felony clause allows lethal force without "fear of grave bodily harm etc". In most states, that fear is required for using lethal force. In FL one does not need to be in any fear at all, if one is preventing the commission of a forcible felony.

That "forcible felony" and, I should admit, the "no retreat" are the things about FL SYG that are not found in every state. Additionally, the 'no-arrest' protocol in FL SYG is generally unique to SYG (FL even?) though it probably also exists outside of SYG states.

Thanks for link.

Unfortunately, it's one of the least informative and most muddy wiki pages. What we really need is a comparison of each state's self defense law, including specifics, to really ascertain the differences and numbers.

 

[ecofarm]

The bold red italicized underlined portion IS SYG.

Just to note, I agree and I excessively underplayed that aspect. I was wanting to highlight that some states have "no duty to retreat" but not SYG.

 

[grip]

There was no opportunity for such, as witnessed by Mr. Good from merely 5 meters away.

And the juror said that she was specifically referring to the "fear" aspect of the law, which exists in every state.

The only reason the juror said anything about SYG is because SYG covers all self defense in Florida. The juror DID NOT MEAN that she was coming to a verdict based on SYG specific laws. The juror might as well have said "according to the self defense law in every single state - fear - he was not guilty". That she used the umbrella term for Florida self defense law does not mean that FL SYG specifics had anything to do with her decision. In fact, her words make it clear that her verdict would have been reached under ANY state's self defense law (because her decision was based on "fear").

There's nothing wrong with following a 6' male stranger at 7pm, in ones own neighborhood, to see what he's up to. Residents in my neighborhood do it regularly, as a matter of community security. We are not bad people, we are just looking out for our neighborhood. We do not stalk anyone. But if you're a 6' male stranger and wandering around here, someone IS gonna check you out. Being concerned neighbors does not remove our right to self defense.

Unless you're pinned in a corner you can always stop arguing, turn and leave. I doubt Trayvon just jumped on him instantly without some exchange of heated words.

The title said SYG played no part in the trial. Not true and you still haven't refuted it.

I don't go around confronting people who walk around our apartment complex at dusk because it's a stupid thing to do. If I suspect someone is up to no good I call the police and let them get attacked.

Stand Your Ground was not the defense. I dont care what B-37 says, or needed more info on.

It.... was.... still.... part.... of.... the.... trial.

 

[ecofarm]

The title said SYG played no part in the trial. Not true and you still haven't refuted it.

The title, taken literally, is obviously impossible - because SYG is the only self defense law in Florida (except CD).

SYG is the name for all of Florida's self defense statutes (except CD). SYG contains basic self defense law found in every state and other statutes/clauses/protocols that do not exist everywhere else.

What the title meant is that no aspect of law specific (endemic) to SYG was part of the case. Only the parts of SYG that exist in the self defense law of every single state played a part in the trial - none of Florida's specific statutes played any role.

 

[CRUE CAB]

It.... was.... still.... part.... of.... the.... trial.

Where? Point to where SYG was part of the trial. Was it entered as evidence, was it part of the plea, was it part of the verdict?
No no and no.

 

[grip]

The title, taken literally, is obviously impossible - because SYG is the only self defense law in Florida (except CD).

SYG is the name for all of Florida's self defense statutes (except CD). SYG contains basic self defense law found in every state and other statutes/clauses/protocols that do not exist everywhere else.

What the title meant is that no aspect of law specific (endemic) to SYG was part of the case. Only the parts of SYG that exist in the self defense law of every single state played a part in the trial - none of the SYG in general or SYG Florida statues played any role.

Yeah, I get it SYG is part of self defense in Florida . So it's part of the trial.

How do you know the title meant all that, unless you were the author?

Where? Point to where SYG was part of the trial. Was it entered as evidence, was it part of the plea, was it part of the verdict?
No no and no.

I've already done that go back and read my posts. Yes, yes and double yes.

 

[ecofarm]

Yeah, I get it SYG is part of self defense in Florida . So it's part of the trial.

No, SYG is the name for ALL self defense law in Florida (excepting, of course, CD) - including stuff found in every state and stuff specific to Florida.

How do you know the title meant all that, unless you were the author?

Because declaring that a self defense case has nothing to do with self defense law (in Florida, that's called SYG) is ridiculous.

I've already done that go back and read my posts. Yes, yes and double yes.

SYG is the name (or title) for all self defense law in Florida. There is no other self defense law in Florida. There is not a "common" self defense law and then an SYG law. SYG contains all the self defense laws in Florida - the stuff found in every state AND the stuff specific to Florida.


Only the stuff common to every single state was used in the trial. None of the Florida specific parts of Florida defense law (called SYG) were relevant to the case. When the juror quoted "SYG law" she was actually quoting self defense law that exists in every single state and not anything specific to Florida law.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Yeah, I get it SYG is part of self defense in Florida . So it's part of the trial.

How do you know the title meant all that, unless you were the author?



I've already done that go back and read my posts. Yes, yes and double yes.

I went back to your posts and all you have done is regurgatate the same Al Sharpton non sense.
He was charged.
He plead not guilty.
He waived stand your ground.
He was found not guilty of murder 2.
Pretty simple.

 

[grip]

No, SYG is the name for ALL self defense law in Florida (excepting, of course, CD) - including stuff found in every state and stuff specific to Florida.



Because declaring that a self defense case has nothing to do with self defense law (in Florida, that's called SYG) is ridiculous.



SYG is the name (or title) for all self defense law in Florida. There is no other self defense law in Florida. There is not a "common" self defense law and then an SYG law. SYG contains all the self defense laws in Florida - the stuff found in every state AND the stuff specific to Florida.


Only the stuff common to every single state was used in the trial. None of the Florida specific parts of Florida defense law (called SYG) were relevant to the case. When the juror quoted "SYG law" she was actually quoting self defense law that exists in every single state and not anything specific to Florida law.

No it's not it's called.. Florida Statutes, CHAPTER 776: JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; 776.012

Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

That was definitely part of the case.

I didn't call the title ridiculous but I'll agree with you.

 

[grip]

I went back to your posts and all you have done is regurgatate the same Al Sharpton non sense.
He was charged.
He plead not guilty.
He waived stand your ground.
He was found not guilty of murder 2.
Pretty simple.

You're talking about completely irrelevant material to what I stated. SYG was considered by the jury, which makes the title of this thread off.

Other words I'm right and you're wrong. :mrgreen:

 

[ecofarm]

No it's not it's called.. Florida Statutes, CHAPTER 776: JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; 776.012

SYG is shorter and thus most people prefer that.

That was definitely part of the case.

The law permitting the use of lethal force when in fear of grave harm or death is found in every single state and is not something special to Florida (or to SYG).

I didn't call the title ridiculous but I'll agree with you.

The title means that only the parts of the Florida self defense statutes (called SYG) common to all states were invoked. Laws specific to Florida (or to SYG) were not part of the case.

 

[grip]

SYG is shorter and thus most people prefer that.



A law permitting the use of lethal force when in fear of grace harm or death is found in every single state and is not something special to Florida or SYG.



The title means that only parts of the Florida self defense statutes (called SYG) common to all states were used. Laws specific to Florida were not part of the case.

That's not what the juror said. It was part of it and the sooner we all accept this the happier we'll be.

 

[ecofarm]

That's not what the juror said. It was part of it and the sooner we all accept this the happier we'll be.

When the juror said "SYG", she meant "Florida self defense law". Here in Florida, we call our self defense law "SYG". SYG is not a separate entity in law, aside from other self defense laws - it IS the only self defense law and encompasses all laws regarding self defense.

The juror made this CLEAR when she quoted self defense law found in every state as her reasoning ("fear").

Think of it like this:

There is a book for Florida self defense law entitled "SYG". It has many chapters. The first chapter is stuff that is found in every single state, even those without "SYG". In this case, none of the other chapters were used. The only chapter used in this case was Chapter 1, which is found in every single state.

Thus, while "SYG" (the book) was used (there is no other self defense law in Florida, SYG encompasses everything) nothing specific to Florida (or to SYG) was part of the case.

You're indicting the book when only Chapter 1 (found in every state) was used.

 

[Jon Slice]

SYG took no part in the GZ/TM confrontation. Just like Aircraft Piracy took no part. The judge read forcible felony and Aircraft Piracy is a forcible felony but that doesn't mean it had any part in this case.

 

[CRUE CAB]

You're talking about completely irrelevant material to what I stated. SYG was considered by the jury, which makes the title of this thread off.

Other words I'm right and you're wrong. :mrgreen:

If that makes you feel better about yourself.
But the man waived his SYG rights and went to trial.
If he had claimed SYG he could have asked the judge for a verdict right then and there.

 

[grip]

When the juror said "SYG", she meant "Florida self defense law". Here in Florida, we call our self defense law "SYG". SYG is not a separate entity in law, aside from other self defense laws - it IS the only self defense law and encompasses all laws regarding self defense.

The juror made this CLEAR when she quoted self defense law found in every state as her reasoning ("fear").

Think of it like this:

There is a book for Florida self defense law entitled "SYG". It has many chapters. The first chapter is stuff that is found in every single state, even those without "SYG". In this case, none of the other chapters were used. The only chapter used in this case was Chapter 1, which is found in every single state.

Thus, while "SYG" (the book) was used (there is no other self defense law in Florida, SYG encompasses everything) nothing specific to Florida (or to SYG) was part of the case.

You're indicting the book when only Chapter 1 (found in every state) was used.

No, I'm simply stating the title of the thread is incorrect and it is. Whether SYG is only a part of the self defense statute it was still mentioned by the judge and considered by the jury.

This is how many people see the case.

"A 29 yr old man followed and approached a 17 yr old teen and asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood in a nasty manner. The kid saw his gun bulging thru the internal holster or was flashed and thought 'OMG this crazy, angry man is going to shoot me. I better knock him out before I get killed.' The kid punched him a few times and got shot in the chest and murdered."

And there's no way of knowing how close that was or wasn't to the truth. It wasn't provable in court.

If that makes you feel better about yourself.
But the man waived his SYG rights and went to trial.
If he had claimed SYG he could have asked the judge for a verdict right then and there.

I'm sorry but this makes no sense.

 

[ecofarm]

No, I'm simply stating the title of the thread is incorrect and it is. Whether SYG is only a part of the self defense statute it was still mentioned by the judge and considered by the jury.

That misses the point entirely. No SYG (or Florida specific clause) was used in the case. The case was based on self defense law common to all states.

Basically, the case was about Chapter 1 (common to all states) and you're indicting the rest of the Chapters (which were not relevant).

"A 29 yr old man followed and approached a 17 yr old teen and asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood in a nasty manner. The kid saw his gun bulging thru the internal holster or was flashed and thought 'OMG this crazy, angry man is going to shoot me. I better knock him out before I get killed.'

That's clearly an unjustified use of force.

There's nothing wrong with following a 6' male stranger in ones own neighborhood at 7pm to ascertain what he's up to. It in no way removes ones right to self defense.

Let's stop pretending that Martin was a female, downtown, in the middle of the night, in a parking lot. Let's stop dropping context.

 

[CRUE CAB]

I'm sorry but this makes no sense.

Because you refuse, absolutly refuse to see the facts.

 

[grip]

That misses the point entirely. No SYG (or Florida specific clause) was used in the case. The case was based on self defense law common to all states.

Basically, the case was about Chapter 1 (common to all states) and you're indicting the rest of the Chapters (which were not relevant).




That's clearly an unjustified use of force.

There's nothing wrong with following a 6' male stranger in ones own neighborhood at 7pm to ascertain what he's up to. It in no way removes ones right to self defense.

Let's stop pretending that Martin was a female, downtown, in the middle of the night, in a parking lot. Let's stop dropping context.

That is the point entirely that SYG was in the title and part of the case. It you repeat yourself enough it doesn't magically make you correct.

I didn't say Zimmerman did anything unlawful just not particularly smart.

Because you refuse, absolutly refuse to see the facts.

I refuse to see your opinion as fact.

 

[CRUE CAB]

I refuse to see your opinion as fact.

Even though the fact is SYG was not part of the defense.

 

[grip]

Even though the fact is SYG was not part of the defense.

SYG was part of the deliberations therefore part of the trial. Fact. Title of thread, not true.