Quote:
Originally Posted by Barkingturtle
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Even as someone who has paid the attention little attention, I can see a case made that the older, supposedly trained Zimmerman should have known how to handle the situation without killing Martin. That's all it takes for 2nd degree murder. This is not CSI. You do not an eye-witness to contradict Zimmerman. You do not need evidence to contradict Zimmerman's account, even. You need to establish that Zimmerman knew he was doing something reckless which could lead to this ultimately tragic outcome, and did not take the steps he knew could prevent that outcome. If that's not how it's being prosecuted then they bad.
Or does the law say it's okay to murder if you first incite violence in your victim? I'm not from Florida I dunno.
|
you're ascribing a level of responsibility to zimmerman that has no foundation in law. even if he knew that being an obnoxious busybody could lead to violence, he isn't liable for that violence simply for being obnoxious. and even if he could have potentially escaped without killing trayvon, he's not required to try. as soon as he felt his life was in danger, he was justified to use deadly force.