Quote:
Originally Posted by Barkingturtle
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I guess this is where we differ. I agree that's an adequate defense against a first degree charge, but the crime he's accused of is more nuanced. That he recklessly and willfully created an environment wherein he caused the death of someone else is the crux of the case. It overwhelms the self-defense argument. That's why the state filed that way, I'd guess.
|
i think you're overstating the nuance. in order for murder of any degree to stick, the prosecution still needs to prove that zimmerman was not acting in self defense when he pulled that trigger. whether or not he was generally liable for the encounter may be supporting circumstantial to the charge of murder, but not nearly enough to convict. and it doesn't overwhelm the self defense argument.
at the end of the day, there's no way to prove what they need to prove. which is why zimmerman originally wasn't even going to be charged. when you see the prosecutor asking one of his star witnesses whether it's illegal to wear a hoodie, then asking the judge to strike his own witness's statement from the record when he says he believes zimmerman's account... that's generally not a great sign. they're grasping at straws because of the outrage from not trying the case at all