Florida's Stand Your Ground Law

[Karmady]

So that DID happen?

The SYG law says the LE agency is the one to determine whether there is probable cause to arrest if the force used was illegal. To bring in the prosecutor (and judge father) of GZ that night was improper and unnecessary. The LE agency is the one that is supposed to make that decision on their own, according to that law, not the prosecutor.

Bringing in the prosecutor at the point they did makes me believe they found something questionable about what George said that did not match the evidence they found so were reluctant to make a decision not to arrest on their own. They wanted back up and assurance that the prosecutor would not overrule them and file charges.

There is also the story of the detective wanting to file charges which nobody supporting GZ wants to accept, and maybe the chief wanted him to be overruled.

This law to me has turned the legal system upside down...making the LE agency act legally as prosecutors and judges.

IMO

I don't know for sure that it happened, but I have no reason to doubt that it did and there's absolutely nothing improper about it. Under SYG, the State will be liable for damages if George is immune, so it makes perfect sense that they would ask the prosecutor's advice before deciding whether to arrest him or not. The prosecutor ALWAYS makes the decision whether to charge someone in any criminal case, except in most cases there isn't any urgency for the prosecutor to decide b/c the State won't be liable if there is an arrest that the prosecutor later decides not to charge or prosecute. There is absolutely nothing nefarious about what happened in this case and the urgency is totally logical under the circumstances.

jmo.

 

[Just K]

If this were not Florida, with the concealed weapons law and the SYG:
Would those saying he is not guilty/SYG agree that he is guilty of voluntary manslaughter. After all, he chose to kill Trayvon...

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Florida Senator Chris Smith and his task force on the SYG law have completed their report and forwarded it to the govenor. In his letter to the gov, Sen. Smith said:




Link to the report and comments:

http://floridastandyourground.org/

Thank you, Reader..it's very enlightening..I skimmed through it but below caught my eye...

One of he recommendations is to bring this to a Grand Jury to decide if there is a SYG defense..take it away from the prosecutors/LE and allow a jury to decide if there was reasonable fear to SYG...or if one should have retreated..much more that I'll read later...

In my post 114...it appears that TM had a right to be there and since he was the one frightened, he too had the right to SYG...but poor kid can't tell but his remains will tell with evidence found...or not found...

 

[marlame]

Mind giving the statute number for that? My google searches for someone being locked up for chasing someone else is proving to be fruitless in the US. In Europe there are plenty of cases though.

This is clearly covered in FL "case law"...Statutes are created by the legislature. Case law is the law that is created by judges who try to interpret the statutory law and make it fit within the constitution.

As I said in an earlier post..."chasing" someone would fall under harassment/stalking. It is a "course of conduct". Just because the word "chasing" may not be in the actual statute does NOT mean it is legal.

If this isn't helpful maybe you could google "unlawful pursuit"?

Thanks for engaging in a healthy debate...we just see things differently. Time to move on... eace:

 

[Concerned Papa]

You can not chase someone who is not already running. Why would they be running? That is a separate issue all together. The act of CHASING does not deprive someone of any right.

Edit: Also, just because you THINK something doesn't mean any rights are being violated either. I can sit here in my house all day long and think that YOU are going to come attack me and be fearful that tomorrow I will not wake up from my sleep. See?

Let me ask you a hypothetical question in this context. Suppose for a moment, that there was an encounter between GZ and TM "where the sidewalks meet" along the lines as stated by RZ Sr. after talking to his son AND watching the reenactment w/LE the following day, in which TM gained the upper hand. Suppose TM then DID see GZ draw his gun and took off running, for half a football field's distance, to the area Attorney O'Mara said the body was found in.

Do you think GZ would have been legally justified in chasing him down with his gun drawn and killing him?

 

[AJ Noiter]

This is clearly covered in FL "case law"...Statutes are created by the legislature. Case law is the law that is created by judges who try to interpret the statutory law and make it fit within the constitution.

As I said in an earlier post..."chasing" someone would fall under harassment/stalking. It is a "course of conduct". Just because the word "chasing" may not be in the actual statute does NOT mean it is legal.

If this isn't helpful maybe you could google "unlawful pursuit"?

Thanks for engaging in a healthy debate...we just see things differently. Time to move on... eace:

Did you happen to review the results of "unlawful pursuit" before suggesting it? The results I get:
"Chasing the Devil: The Corrupt and Unlawful Pursuit ..."
"Court of Appeals of Virginia" (it has to do with a police officer chasing someone, making it a separate issue because they're a government entity)
"Man Pays Price for Unlawful Pursuit of Liquor" ... interesting..
"Dentists rapped with tax evasion for unlawful pursuit of business" ...

Maybe you could find a source to site to me, since I'm not the one making the claim? It would be very helpful.

 

[AJ Noiter]

Let me ask you a hypothetical question in this context. Suppose for a moment, that there was an encounter between GZ and TM "where the sidewalks meet" along the lines as stated by RZ Sr. after talking to his son AND watching the reenactment w/LE the following day, in which TM gained the upper hand. Suppose TM then DID see GZ draw his gun and took off running, for half a football field's distance, to the area Attorney O'Mara said the body was found in.

Do you think GZ would have been legally justified in chasing him down with his gun drawn and killing him?

Based on the story sited numerous times, I don't feel that Self Defense/SYG automatically dissolve just because someone decides to change their course of action. The case cited happened in march of this year in Orlando, why would it be any different now?

 

[Concerned Papa]

Based on the story sited numerous times, I don't feel that Self Defense/SYG automatically dissolve just because someone decides to change their course of action. The case cited happened in march of this year in Orlando, why would it be any different now?

As you've possibly noticed, I don't get too deep in this area of the case and this type conversation as a general rule. You'll have to forgive me for not recognizing the case you're referring to.

 

[AJ Noiter]

As you've possibly noticed, I don't get too deep in this area of the case and this type conversation as a general rule. You'll have to forgive me for not recognizing the case you're referring to.

I'll find the story if you need, the facts of that case relevant to your scenario are: A man found a burglar breaking into his car, he grabbed a knife and chased the man for approximately 1 block before stabbing the burglar to death.

 

[MaryAnn]

Based on the story sited numerous times, I don't feel that Self Defense/SYG automatically dissolve just because someone decides to change their course of action. The case cited happened in march of this year in Orlando, why would it be any different now?

BBM
Based on Papa's hypothethical story

SYG wouldn't apply because Trayvon retreated and ran the other way. SYG only applies if you are fearful for your life and being threatened at the time of the shooting.

 

[Concerned Papa]

I'll find the story if you need, the facts of that case relevant to your scenario are: A man found a burglar breaking into his car, he grabbed a knife and chased the man for approximately 1 block before stabbing the burglar to death.

Then there's no need as I have read that story, but if I remember correctly, the physical altercation and subsequent stabbing happened AFTER a crime had been committed hadn't it? Is this the one involving a bicycle?

 

[AJ Noiter]

Based on Papa's hypothethical story

SYG wouldn't apply because Trayvon retreated and ran the other way. SYG only applies if you are fearful for your life and being threatened at the time of the shooting.

Stand Your Ground applied in the case noted to him, there was never a threat to the individual's life who did the stabbing.

 

[Concerned Papa]

Stand Your Ground applied in the case noted to him, there was never a threat to the individual's life who did the stabbing.

Whoa! I might better get out of this conversation and do some reading. Are you saying he just walked up cold turkey and stabbed the guy with NO altercation or threat and got away with it?

 

[cityslick]

Then there's no need as I have read that story, but if I remember correctly, the physical altercation and subsequent stabbing happened AFTER a crime had been committed hadn't it? Is this the one involving a bicycle?

I guess my question would be was the guy who was getting his car broken into still justified in chasing the guy and then stabbing him? His life wasn't in danger when he was chasing him. But yet he was still protected by SYG?

 

[AJ Noiter]

Whoa! I might better get out of this conversation and do some reading. Are you saying he just walked up and cold turkey and stabbed the guy with NO altercation or threat and got away with it?

That is my understanding of the events. The individual had no weapons and took off running as soon as he was found, from my recollection.

Garcia, alerted by a roommate, grabbed a large knife and ran downstairs. He chased Roteta, then stabbed him in a confrontation that lasted less than a minute, according to court documents.

The stabbing was caught on video. Roteta was carrying a bag filled with three stolen radios, but no weapon other than a pocketknife, which was unopened in his pocket and which police said he never brandished.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/21/2706789/miami-judge-stabbing-in-the-back.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Sherbie]

Florida Law:
"Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083."
http://www.esia.net/State_Stalking_Laws.htm

marlame, thank you for the link in your signature. I don't think that statute would apply to the evening in question since, IMO, "repeatedly" would mean multiple (or at least two) separate instances of the behavior, rather than behavior where there is not a break in time between offenses.

I'm not saying it might not fall under some other statute, but I don't think this one fits the circumstances. If it did, the state would likely have charged Zimmerman with violating it if they had evidence he'd broken that law. JMO

 

[cityslick]

That is my understanding of the events. The individual had no weapons and took off running as soon as he was found, from my recollection.

I wonder what was the jury's explanation for that? Did they say that the guy committing the crime made the other guy fear for his life so at that point, the guy can do anything to the other, up to and including running after him and stabbing him?

Does SYG not define what constitutes 'fear of one's life' and when that fear is no longer valid?

 

[AJ Noiter]

I wonder what was the jury's explanation for that? Did they say that the guy committing the crime made the other guy fear for his life so at that point, the guy can do anything to the other, up to and including running after him and stabbing him?

Does SYG not define what constitutes 'fear of one's life' and when that fear is no longer valid?

There wasn't a jury. The judge threw it out at the Stand Your Ground hearing.

 

[LynnM]

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/27/2717572/miami-dade-issues-ruling-in-stand.html

The judge said that he had a right to chase the thief to retrieve his property and once the thief swung the bag of stolen radios at him, he was justified in fearing for his life and stabbing him. Ironically, the man then took all of the radios not just his own and sold two of the stolen radios so he too was a thief.

oops, sorry, didn't see Beach's post while I was posting and I forgot we weren't in the Stand Your Ground thread!

 

[Concerned Papa]

That is my understanding of the events. The individual had no weapons and took off running as soon as he was found, from my recollection.

Thanks for the article. I hope you understand that ruling makes me want to puke.

I won't bother with the semantics of burgular vs unarmed, non law breaking teenager. That horse is beat ad naseum every day around here.

Damn, he really did chase this dude down and cold turkey kill him, didn't he?

ETA, Sorry Beach. I'm through talking about it anyway, but if you want to zap my posts feel free to do so.