Another test for Florida

BigPapa

New Member
Florida will have another test of it's Stand Your Ground law in the next few months when the case of killer Michael Dunn goes to trial. He killed a 17 year old boy who was sitting in a car at the gas station when he fired 8 or 9 times at the vehicle. Anyone have any thoughts on this one? Do you think he will be convicted?
 

Andersson

New Member
I never even knew about this one, when did it happen? I see all types of people up in arms but the problem is we never totally know the full story. I hate how the media wraps things up, it does no good to anyone except their ratings.
 

polamalu43

New Member
I remember that case Jason. I live about 40 miles south of Rochester. It was sad. I do think that people get those two messed up. What other states besides Florida have the Stand Your Own Ground act?
 

BigPapa

New Member
Zimmerman was self defense not Stand your ground. Just like this case from 2009. Jury Finds Roderick Scott Not Guilty - Rochester

I think a lot of people get confused with SYG and SD. But the media would not sell as many stories if they did not help to muck up the two.
Actually, if you watched the trial, even though the defense did not use SYG in it's defense, the judge gave it in the jury instructions. So technically, it was used.

Andersson, it happened a few months after the Martin shooting. Polamalu, 33 states have SYG laws on the books.
 

On The Mark

New Member
Why would someone have to shoot someone else 8 times when they're sitting in a car? Why can't people just walk away from things anymore? Why do they have to shoot other people all the time?
 

jason

Administrator
Staff member
Actually, if you watched the trial, even though the defense did not use SYG in it's defense, the judge gave it in the jury instructions. So technically, it was used.

Andersson, it happened a few months after the Martin shooting. Polamalu, 33 states have SYG laws on the books.
Here is a link to the Jury instructions. George Zimmerman Trial: Final Jury Instructions

Here is a quote from someone who can explain it much better then I can.

Some people have insisted that SYG was applied in the case as a defense through Judge Nelson’s jury instructions. This is understandable given the fact that the jury instructions state that there is no duty to retreat. The jury was told that if 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 [as above].”

However, the common law does not impose a duty to retreat. It preexisted the SYG law in most states. If it didn’t, hundreds of thousands of cases of self-defense would have had different results after people defended themselves rather than flee. Indeed, this is a point that I often made in opposing these laws: you already have the right to defend yourself and not to retreat. There are slight difference in the jury instruction among the states, including Florida, but the Zimmerman instructions reflected the general common law standard for self-defense and the justified use of force.
You have no duty of retreat in many states that do not have a formal SYG law.
Again, the media has done its best to confuse people on what is already a confusing statute.
 

polamalu43

New Member
I agree Jason! The media pretty much tells one side of the story - the side they want everyone to take. It's sick! I do think that Zimmerman was wrong and he should be in jail. I don't know what he was guilty of - I wasn't there at the trial.
 

BigPapa

New Member
I agree about the media, but in this instance, I think it is the judge that confused people. She did use the words "stand his (your) ground". Whether she meant it in reference to the actual SYG law or the general self defense law. I watched the trial in full, I didn't watch the news coverage of it.
 

jason

Administrator
Staff member
I agree about the media, but in this instance, I think it is the judge that confused people. She did use the words "stand his (your) ground". Whether she meant it in reference to the actual SYG law or the general self defense law. I watched the trial in full, I didn't watch the news coverage of it.
I can see where the confusion comes in. But it is part of the law.

I honestly do not see why that law was needed as we already have strong self defense laws. The only part I like is you cannot be sued in civil court. Too many families or injured criminals like to sue when they break into your house and you defend it. But my child/parent/sibling/etc. was a saint, they would never break into a house, he must have been just confused so now I'm going to sue you.

Our local news station had the trial live. Not to mention many local radio stations.
 

Bear

New Member
I just Googled the Michael Dunn case and that doesn't sound like Stand Your Ground or self-defense to me. Has his attorney said what defense he will be trying to use? I know I don't know all of the facts of the case, but that one just sounds like murder.
 

On The Mark

New Member
That's a good point Jason. That law does seem to be proactive against further legal actions. But it also seems to be bogging down an already overburdened system.
 
Top