TemplarKormac
Political Atheist
Trayvon was doing absolutely nothing wrong. He was walking innocently home from the store. He was not commiting a crime. He did not provoke anything. The statute you posted has nothing to do with this situation. Innocent people walking alone at night do not deserved to be followed, stalking or chased. Period. However, an innocent person walking alone at night who is followed, stalked and chased by a stranger has every reason to feel threatened and in imminent danger of harm.
Not so...
According to the statute...Even if Zimmerman provoked the attack, if the attack is so forceful that there is a fear of great bodily harm or death and no possibility of escape...lethal force is still justified.
No matter how you slice it, Zimmerman was within his rights to defend himself.
But the fight was not deadly. Zimmerman was not in fear of great bodily harm or imminent death. He was barely injured, had a bloody nose, a black eye and some scrapes to his head. It was no more than a school yard fist fight. Deadly force was not justified.
Given enough blows to the head on the concrete, he could have suffered subdural hematomas, a concussion, skull fractures... and you say this fight wasn't deadly? So, that video of Martin egging on the senseless beating of a homeless man by his friends doesn't show you he had a propensity for senseless violence? Of course it doesn't. Not deadly? Well it was, Trayvon Martin died because he wanted to be mister macho.
Deadly force was justified.
Last edited: