It's a more extreme situation than with the officer involved with Floyd. They charge a crime higher than they can legally expect to convict on so it appeases the mob while the ba is in their court and will result in a lack of conviction where they can blame the corrupt justice system as if they aren't players in the same system.
When I took my CCW class in NC, the teacher, a local sheriff, explained to us that George Zimmerman could have been easily convicted jf they wanted him to be because he technically committed negligent homicide by confronting the kid. However, because of politics and the media, he was charged with a higher crime (I dont remember which degree of murder it was) and they couldn't convince a jury. This is extremely nasty and devastating for our country politically even though it is a good example of a justice system that often works in spite of political misbehavior.
APD walked out tonight. Only 2 precincts active in the whole city. Trending on twitter. Surrounding counties and suburbs asked to come help and said no way. Mayor Kesia is fucked
I'm not 100% sure on Florida but we went over the NC statutes in class and I was shocked to see that you actually cannot confront someone and then proceed to kill them in self defense unless the confrontation was clearly in self defense, such as someone attacking another person or threatening, physically or verbally, to cause harm. In that case, you're not the aggressor even if you take the first "action". Witnesses and other evidence have to back up you were defending and not being the aggressor to make a good self defense case if its murky enough to result in you being charged.
This is why there is insurance for gunowners in the event of a self defense shooting.
I think easily is the bullshit but supposedly the way the Stand Your Ground law is written, you have to show that you did not aggravate the situation by engaging unnecessarily. The "unnecessarily" part would be debated but the prosecution would have put the responsibility of proving engagement was truly necessary. The shooting was necessary but as the product of unnecessary engagement, the prosecution could use the letter of the law to prove negligent homicide in violation of the Stand Your Ground law. That law didn't get Zimmerman off as the media claims, rather it was the fact they couldn't prove intent.
You might be right. My understanding was that he "engaged" by drawing his weapon. In most states, thats considered assault in the wrong context and is considered an act of aggression if not assault. I may be wrong though that he drew his weapon befofe he was on the ground, but that was my understanding of why he would be considered the aggressor.
It's a more extreme situation than with the officer involved with Floyd. They charge a crime higher than they can legally expect to convict on so it appeases the mob while the ba is in their court and will result in a lack of conviction where they can blame the corrupt justice system as if they aren't players in the same system.
When I took my CCW class in NC, the teacher, a local sheriff, explained to us that George Zimmerman could have been easily convicted jf they wanted him to be because he technically committed negligent homicide by confronting the kid. However, because of politics and the media, he was charged with a higher crime (I dont remember which degree of murder it was) and they couldn't convince a jury. This is extremely nasty and devastating for our country politically even though it is a good example of a justice system that often works in spite of political misbehavior.
APD walked out tonight. Only 2 precincts active in the whole city. Trending on twitter. Surrounding counties and suburbs asked to come help and said no way. Mayor Kesia is fucked
Spez: media blackout on it, too.
Thanks for reporting this. If it wasn't for thedonald.win we would have no valid and truthful news whatsover.
Was that confirmed? Last I heard was still rumor.
CNN is reporting about it
https://mobile.twitter.com/CNNTonight/status/1273445831765614593
So its all a lie then? lol (kidding)
Thanks
I'm not 100% sure on Florida but we went over the NC statutes in class and I was shocked to see that you actually cannot confront someone and then proceed to kill them in self defense unless the confrontation was clearly in self defense, such as someone attacking another person or threatening, physically or verbally, to cause harm. In that case, you're not the aggressor even if you take the first "action". Witnesses and other evidence have to back up you were defending and not being the aggressor to make a good self defense case if its murky enough to result in you being charged.
This is why there is insurance for gunowners in the event of a self defense shooting.
I think easily is the bullshit but supposedly the way the Stand Your Ground law is written, you have to show that you did not aggravate the situation by engaging unnecessarily. The "unnecessarily" part would be debated but the prosecution would have put the responsibility of proving engagement was truly necessary. The shooting was necessary but as the product of unnecessary engagement, the prosecution could use the letter of the law to prove negligent homicide in violation of the Stand Your Ground law. That law didn't get Zimmerman off as the media claims, rather it was the fact they couldn't prove intent.
You might be right. My understanding was that he "engaged" by drawing his weapon. In most states, thats considered assault in the wrong context and is considered an act of aggression if not assault. I may be wrong though that he drew his weapon befofe he was on the ground, but that was my understanding of why he would be considered the aggressor.