Quote:
Originally Posted by Alawen
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I'm not really following this case, but I'm confused. I can carry a gun, follow you, shoot you, and then the burden of proof is on a prosecutor to establish that I wasn't defending myself? Is all of the self defense evidence coming from the killer's testimony? This seems like really bad precedent.
|
pretty much. zimmerman is required to provide evidence that he acted in self defense. he doesn't need to convince anyone of his self defense though -- he just needs to create a reasonable doubt as to whether he acted in self defense, based in evidence.
and that shifts the burden of proof to the prosecutor, to prove that there is no reasonable doubt.
in this case, there's no evidence to disprove self defense