Getting involved post-Zimmerman

[Hoosierman]

He was just acquitted.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I believe Zimmerman used deadly force for the single purpose of stopping his attacker...

This is far from the first murder case where the defendant claimed self defense. This is just more high profile.

 

[VN Vet]

This is far from the first murder case where the defendant claimed self defense. This is just more high profile.

OK, I can see where you're coming from. I guess for me this was always a case of self-defence so my focus was not as wide as yours.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

To All,

In a bout of extreme loss of wisdom I stayed way too late (aka after 0330 or 3:30AM) at a friends house and took a goofy route home.

Regards,

Doug

Glad to see people helping others. While not today but about 2 weeks ago I was on my way home from work, and I saw a car parked alongside the country road I was on with a lady sitting in the grass next to it. So I stopped to see if she needed help. It turns out that her car was broke down but she had called her husband and he was on his way. I checked the car out while she was waiting for him and then helped him check it out when he got there. We determined it was probably a bad alternator. He thanked me and asked if he could give me a few bucks for my trouble, I told him nope and was just glad to help out. Again no one was shot, mugged or any lawsuits involved.

A few years ago the situation was reversed, I was broke down on the side of the road and was walking home. A older lady pulled over and asked if that was my car about a half mile back. I told her yep and she asked if I needed a ride into town (about another 6-7 miles). I told her yes please. A pleasant conversation and a uneventful ride followed. I was pretty sure I was out of gas and the lady offered to take me back to my car with a gas can to get it. I told her that wasn't necessary but thank you for the offer and offered her a few dollars for her gas, she refused and told me not to worry about it. And I wasn't a very clean cut guy at the time, hair past my shoulders and a beard halfway down my chest. Heck that almost describes me when I stopped to help the lady, although my hair isn't quite as long anymore.

Depends on context.

ci·vil·ian

[si-vil-yuhn] Show IPA
noun1.a person who is not on active duty with a military, naval, police, or fire fighting organization.

I've been wondering about something, when did Webster's change their definition? A couple of years ago it listed it as belonging to a military organization and didn't mention police or firefighters. When I went to look it up to post the definition it had police included.

 

[Lucas156]

The prosecution didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty. This is the way justice system should work to all you haters out there; get over it. It's done; he was guilty before proven innocent in the biased ignorant eyes of public opinion but he has been acquitted by the true justice system. God bless America

 

[Redhorse]

The prosecution didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty. This is the way justice system should work to all you haters out there; get over it. It's done; he was guilty before proven innocent in the biased ignorant eyes of public opinion but he has been acquitted by the true justice system. God bless America

With the liberal, worthless, media we have today, of course he was guilty before proven innocent.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I've been wondering about something, when did Webster's change their definition? A couple of years ago it listed it as belonging to a military organization and didn't mention police or firefighters. When I went to look it up to post the definition it had police included.

Dunno, its always been that way as far as "civilian". A police department consists of sworn (those with arrest powers) and civilian employees (those without). In that context, police are not civilians. I would figure some similar demarcation exists in firehouses where the folks who don't put on turnout gear and actually respond are civilian personnel. In the context of the military, anyone not currently serving is a civilian and non-military police are "the civilian authorities". So, again, it all depends on the context in which the word is being used.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

OK, I can see where you're coming from. I guess for me this was always a case of self-defence so my focus was not as wide as yours.

and I think that's where people get wrapped up. One side always saw it as a murder trial and one side always saw it as an indictment of self defense. I obviously wasn't one of the investigators, and don't claim to know the facts. Maybe Zimmerman got away with murder or maybe it was a righteous self defense shooting and justice was served, but from the beginning it looked like a lousy case where "beyond a reasonable doubt" couldn't be achieved. I'm sure that's why the original detectives didn't make an arrest and original prosecutors declined to file charges. Political pressure was the only reason this lousy case was filed. Every detective gets these cases sometimes. You have a known suspect, you have probable cause, but you know there's serious evidence problems and you simply won't make your case stick in court. You take your file to the prosecutor, they agree its a lousy case, and the case dies right there. Sometimes outside pressures get applied to the prosecutor's office, although thank God I've never had POTUS decide to stick his nose into my case.

I had a stabbing awhile back where the suspect claimed self defense, but his story didn't add up in a multitude of ways and he eventually admitted to making up the self defense claim and to stabbing the other person because he was angry over how that person was treating a third party. Had he stuck to his self defense claim he would have still been arrested due to other evidence, including witness statements I had, and had it gone to trial it would have been up to a jury to evaluate his self defense claim to determine if it was a justified use of force or if it was Aggravated Battery. Regardless of the hypothetical jury's decision in that case it would have no affect on existing law or case law. That's why I've been saying that the possible repercussions from this case if a guilty verdict had been reached were greatly overblown.

 

[templar223]

I hope the Zimmerman case doesn't cost the lives of good people who hesitate too long based upon worries from watching this case play out.

 

[Denny347]

...and on a side note: Police are civilians, too.

Yes, we know. It's an easy term to use. It takes more time to spit out "non-law enforcement officer". My fellow citizens use it to describe themselves, media uses it, TV shows use it, books use it, movies use it. We know, we get it.

 

[firefighterjohn]

Exactly...

and I think that's where people get wrapped up. One side always saw it as a murder trial and one side always saw it as an indictment of self defense. I obviously wasn't one of the investigators, and don't claim to know the facts. Maybe Zimmerman got away with murder or maybe it was a righteous self defense shooting and justice was served, but from the beginning it looked like a lousy case where "beyond a reasonable doubt" couldn't be achieved. I'm sure that's why the original detectives didn't make an arrest and original prosecutors declined to file charges. Political pressure was the only reason this lousy case was filed. Every detective gets these cases sometimes. You have a known suspect, you have probable cause, but you know there's serious evidence problems and you simply won't make your case stick in court. You take your file to the prosecutor, they agree its a lousy case, and the case dies right there. Sometimes outside pressures get applied to the prosecutor's office, although thank God I've never had POTUS decide to stick his nose into my case..

Here's a great FoxNews video interview with Judge Jeanine stating the same facts: 071513_pirro_216 | Fox News Video

 

[Cameramonkey]

-Your words can come back to haunt you. Calling people names, posting nasty stuff on Facebook, Twitter, etc. can clearly be used against you. In this case, for some reason, only what Zimmerman wrote can be used against him. Stuff that Martin wrote, either through words or photos (remember, a picture is worth 1,000 words), isn't allowed to be presented.

IANAL but I believe its because Zimmerman can still defend himself against that evidence, but Martin cannot.

 

[singlesix]

I've helped strangers out of hairy situations in the past and will continue to do so in the future. I trust my ability to judge what action is appropriate for a given situation.


A manager I worked under in a previous job was proud of himself one winter day because he avoided possible litigation and injury because he didn't stop to help or check on the occupants of a mini van that had slid off the road thirty feet into field in the rural area between Michigan City and Southbend. I was five minutes behind him on the same road. I stopped and helped the woman and her three grade school age children. I was twenty minutes late for work, he wasn't. But oh was he proud of not helping a stranger.

Very different from the Zimmerman situation. In your case the person was in distress. The reason you acted was to remove the person from distress. Most states have a Good Samaritan Law to the above situation.

 

[Redhorse]

Very different from the Zimmerman situation. In your case the person was in distress. The reason you acted was to remove the person from distress. Most states have a Good Samaritan Law to the above situation.

Indiana is one of them, correct?