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.
|
When you word it like that, it sounds bad, but it's really the only way that is fair.
The prosecutors are charging him with second degree murder, so the burden of proof is on them to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was murder. If you are going to charge someone with something, you better have enough evidence to prove it.
If Zimmerman's team is able to lawyer out of the charges with dumbshit trickery, contrived self-defense scenarios, and other fringe evidence, that just means the prosecution had shit for evidence.
What would you do instead?