PLEASE NOTE: The Reality TV World Message Boards are filled with desperate
attention-seekers pretending to be one big happy PG/PG13-rated family. Don't
be fooled. Trying to get everyone to agree with you is like herding cats,
but intolerance for other viewpoints is NOT welcome and respect for other
posters IS required at all times. Jump in and play, and you'll soon find out
how easy it is to fit in, but save your drama for your mama. All members are
encouraged to read the
complete guidelines.
As entertainment critic Roger
Ebert once said, "If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue
with me, correct me--but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way."
So the judicial branch should not in any way act as a check or balance against the excesses of the legislature.
That is not what I said.
Hopefully someone will deal with the law they just passed in Florida that could be used to outlaw all computers and smart phones. I dunno if I trust the legislature to fix that one.
I'm sorry. I'm not familiar with your reference.
So it is OK if everyone always escalates every fist fight to a killing.
That is not what I said.
Well, maybe people will stop punching other people if they know that it will almost always mean they will be shot to death and the shooter will always in every case be held blameless.
Given your scenario, perhaps. Or, given another, and with George Zimmerman’s current and prospective quality of life as an example, perhaps people will conclude that the costs attached to self-defense are more onerous and certain than are the consequences of being beaten.
I think the question is how much he reasonably was in fear for his life ...
It is my understanding that this is certainly one of the questions that the Judge will submit to the jury.
... and how much he did to provoke the fist fight.
It is my understanding that to the extent that the level of his provocation is indicative of Mr. Zimmerman's state of mind, it is properly a question for the jury to decide.
It wasn't like he was just walking down the street and got mugged. That feels more straight forward. Also would feel more straight forward self-defense if he announced he was from the neighborhood watch and he was just checking that everything was OK.
It is my understanding that if the totality of the evidence (including circumstantial evidence of Mr. Zimmerman’s state of mind) convinces a juror that, beyond any reasonable doubt, the defendant is guilty of a crime or crimes charged, then that juror has a legal obligation - is sworn - to return that verdict as to the applicable charge/charges.
If, however, after carefully considering the totality of the evidence, a reasonable doubt remains, then that juror has a legal obligation – is sworn – to return a verdict of not guilty.
Sure the judge happens to have a tendency to be harsh, but you shouldn't, IMO, change your logic because of what you fear the judge may do. After all the appeals courts are there to be a check and balance, or so I thought.
I agree. And I trust that, despite the many times that you have used the word during this discussion, you would not permit - have not permitted - your logic to be impacted by - fear.
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -