HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Florida's "Right to ...

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 09:45 AM

Florida's "Right to speedy trial" & "Stand your ground" laws

"The 90 day speedy trial period for a misdemeanor or the 175 day speedy trial period for a felony begins with the defendant's initial arrest (or when the defendant is taken into custody on the charge), regardless of when the charges are ultimately filed."

http://www.criminaldefenseattorneytampa.com/FloridaDefenses/SpeedyTrial.aspx

Also, Zimmerman has claimed self defense which complicates things greatly for the state.

"In addition, the law does away with an earlier requirement that a person attacked in a public place must retreat if possible. Now, that same person, in the law’s words, “has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force.” The law also forbids the arrest, detention or prosecution of the people covered by the law, and it prohibits civil suits against them. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/us/07shoot.html

So, Zimmerman can't be arrested until the state has the evidence to show that he isn't covered by the law. Arresting Zimmerman the night of the shooting would have been foolish because the clock would have started ticking. While I believe Zimmerman is guilty as his actions lead to the death of Trayvon, under Florida's "Stand your ground" law, he may not be.

There's been several good discussions here about how Zimmerman's family, friends and lawyer have been caught lying to the media about what happened. That doesn't matter as far as George himself is concerned and doesn't refute his claim of self defense as we don't know what George himself told the police the night he was brought in for questioning.

Florida's "Stand your ground" law sucks and the citizens of Florida ought to demand that it be amended.

Edited to add quotation marks.

7 replies, 1119 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 10:06 AM

1. If only this had been explained well early on...

 

The media has been completely irresponsible in this case. They threw around all sorts of rumors and speculation and didn't bother to try to understand nor explain how the laws work which would have calmed accusations which now seem simply incendiary. Shame on the media for failing in their duty to inform.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dkf (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 11:37 AM

2. Zimmerman can't be arrested until the state has enough evidence...

to show he didn't act in self defense. At least enough evidence that would convince a PA that he has good chance of winning a conviction of Zimmerman.

Most everyone agrees that there was a scuffle between Zimmerman and Trayvon. Zimmerman had no obligation to retreat under the "Stand your ground" law and he had the right, under the law, to respond with force; including the use of deadly force. Trayvon also had the right to stand his ground and respond to force with force but he's dead and can't give his side of the story. Thus the state has to rely on physical evidence and the testimony of witnesses in order to try to build a case that Zimmerman didn't act in self defense.

My gut feeling at this time is that Zimmerman will be found innocent, if charged and put on trial, because of the "Stand your ground" law and that he may not even be charged with a felony in the first place. A federal charge against him for violating Trayvon's civil rights is another matter though.

The audio experts analysis of the wailing heard in the 911 calls may not do the state much good. Neither of the experts can confirm the voice is Trayvon's because they have no recording of Trayvon's voice they can compare it to. One expert said there was only a 48% probability that the voice belonged to Zimmerman but that's better, at least for Zimmerman, then a 0% probability.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 12:26 PM

5. I'm sure a recording of Trayvon Martin's voice exists somewhere.

 

In this day and age of digital cameras with video not to mention iPhones and android devices I can't imagine there is no trace of a voice recording. These experts obviously didn't get access to it but that doesn't mean officials couldn't get one. On the other hand a process that finds 60% match acceptable but 48% unacceptable...I don't know if I would feel comfortable sentencing a person based on that.

I think it should be easy enough to prove or disprove aspects of Zimmerman's story which would go to the credibility of his claim of self defense, like if he has a broken nose.

To me, his story is too pat, incorporating all the aspects needed to defend himself including the death threat Trayvon supposedly made, so I am suspicious of his version of events.

But if Zimmerman's version of events holds up under all the forensic evidence we can find then yes he may be exonerated.

Then again I wonder how a proper jury can be found.

What a mess.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 11:53 AM

3. I thought if you were handcuffed,

put in the back of squad car and taken to the station, you are under arrest. If this drags out, it would seem his lawyer will claim that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to safeinOhio (Reply #3)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 12:23 PM

4. An interesting question.

One I don't have an answer to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to safeinOhio (Reply #3)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 12:26 PM

6. Yes, this is exactly correct.....there's no imiplication that a person can go free if they're cuffed

...so police can't even play the "...I didn't tell you that you were under arrest..." crap either.

The cuffs means there a technical arrest under many state laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #6)

Fri Apr 6, 2012, 01:37 PM

7. After doing some reading, it appears that it varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

Some PDs have the policy that a person can be detained for questioning and handcuffs placed on that person but they must be told that they are not under arrest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread