Absolutely zero credibility. This so called witness 9 has nothing to do with this case. However, due to my experience in the legal field, the prosecution will look at this as a person who can describe Zimmerman's mental state and his basic MO. They will absolutely want to use this witness, no doubt. It'll be up to the judge whether or not they will be allowed.
My opinion on this case as whole:
If his testimony matches up with the way he described it in the beginning, that he feared for his life, that he feared great bodily harm, etc, then he will get off...
The way the stand your ground law is defined in florida is such as this:
2011 Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE[22]
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.
If he believed this, and stated such in the beginning. Case closed. Jury will have no choice but to follow the wording of state law.
Absolutely zero credibility. This so called witness 9 has nothing to do with this case. However, due to my experience in the legal field, the prosecution will look at this as a person who can describe Zimmerman's mental state and his basic MO. They will absolutely want to use this witness, no doubt. It'll be up to the judge whether or not they will be allowed.
My opinion on this case as whole:
If his testimony matches up with the way he described it in the beginning, that he feared for his life, that he feared great bodily harm, etc, then he will get off...
The way the stand your ground law is defined in florida is such as this:
2011 Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE[22]
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.
If he believed this, and stated such in the beginning. Case closed. Jury will have no choice but to follow the wording of state law.
I'm just not sure how you go from actively pursuing for no cause to arguing the lack of a duty to retreat...
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois
I'm just not sure how you go from actively pursuing for no cause to arguing the lack of a duty to retreat...
He was wrong to follow the kid. However is that grounds for the kid to physically attack...if that is what happened? No
that is the problem with the prosecutions case, since the only witness is GZ, he should be found innocent of the current charge
I believe the prosecutor should have charged a lessor crime but due to emotions went for the whole shebang. I believe the prosecution expects the jury to judge on emotions not facts
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
2. If this happened while they were BOTH children, I'm not sure how the law would even apply. Lots of kids "play doctor" or explore sexually.
3. Even if it were proven that Zimmerman molested her, could he be prosecuted for something he did as a minor child and wouldn't a statute of limitations kick in somewhere?
IMO, this is a smear campaign and not worthy of anyone's serious attention.
__________________
"God, send me anywhere, only go with me. Lay any burden on me, only sustain me. And sever any tie in my heart except the tie that binds my heart to Yours."
--David Livingstone
"To see no being, not God’s or any, but you also go thither,
To see no possession but you may possess it—enjoying all without labor or purchase—
abstracting the feast, yet not abstracting one particle of it;…."
--Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass, Song of the Open Road
This testimony is far less relevant to me than what I read from his former co-worker as to why he was fired as a security guard...
I completely agree.
__________________
"God, send me anywhere, only go with me. Lay any burden on me, only sustain me. And sever any tie in my heart except the tie that binds my heart to Yours."
--David Livingstone
"To see no being, not God’s or any, but you also go thither,
To see no possession but you may possess it—enjoying all without labor or purchase—
abstracting the feast, yet not abstracting one particle of it;…."
--Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass, Song of the Open Road
He was wrong to follow the kid. However is that grounds for the kid to physically attack...if that is what happened? No
that is the problem with the prosecutions case, since the only witness is GZ, he should be found innocent of the current charge
I believe the prosecutor should have charged a lessor crime but due to emotions went for the whole shebang. I believe the prosecution expects the jury to judge on emotions not facts
Prax, as I've said before, following is fundamentally different from pursuing. At the point when he was in his car, on the phone with 911, I think you could argue he was following. At the point when the kid runs and he gets out armed and gives chase, he is pursuing. If an armed man is pursuing you for no reason, at what point can the one being pursued invoke the stand your ground law as justification to physically engage? You say that chasing a kid with a weapon is not reason for him to physically attack, but you easily accept that the one doing the chasing had reason to use deadly force? Something there does not compute with me...and it has nothing to do with race.
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois
Linear Mode
