03-23-2012, 05:44 PM
I have not read the Florida law, but if Zimmerman was chasing Martin, this is obviously different from standing his ground. The intent of the law presumably was that a law abiding person does not have to attempt to escape from a violent offender first, and only then use force to protect himself. In some way this makes sense -- why should the rest of us have to give up our own rights (like being in a public place without bothering anyone else) to accomodate violent criminals? But the law should not be written as carte blanche to shoot anybody you don't like, particularly if that dislike stems from a generalized racial fear.
As I said, I have not read the florida statute, so if it is written in a way that allows for murder, it ought to be scrapped immediately. But if there is any sense to it at all, and if the prosecution can show that Zimmerman chased down Martin, precipitated a physical fight (there is evidence that the two made contact) and then shot him, it comes pretty close to premeditated murder.
The recusal by the local DA is proper because the entire local law enforcement mechanism has come under public scrutiny. The DA is the highest law enforcement official in the county, so he or she is also tainted as of now. The replacement by the state's attorney for the district is the next step and seems proper to me.
In other words, if the "stand your ground" issue is made moot in this specific case by a court ruling, then the jury's choice would seem to be between first and second degree murder. Alternatively, a criminal prosecution could be brought in which the jury is asked to determine whether the facts are consistent with the "stand your ground" principle, in which case they would have a choice between acquittal and the murder charges.
As I said, I have not read the florida statute, so if it is written in a way that allows for murder, it ought to be scrapped immediately. But if there is any sense to it at all, and if the prosecution can show that Zimmerman chased down Martin, precipitated a physical fight (there is evidence that the two made contact) and then shot him, it comes pretty close to premeditated murder.
The recusal by the local DA is proper because the entire local law enforcement mechanism has come under public scrutiny. The DA is the highest law enforcement official in the county, so he or she is also tainted as of now. The replacement by the state's attorney for the district is the next step and seems proper to me.
In other words, if the "stand your ground" issue is made moot in this specific case by a court ruling, then the jury's choice would seem to be between first and second degree murder. Alternatively, a criminal prosecution could be brought in which the jury is asked to determine whether the facts are consistent with the "stand your ground" principle, in which case they would have a choice between acquittal and the murder charges.