Response to demwing (Original post)
Sat Jun 29, 2013, 09:40 PM
demwing (15,071 posts)
7. With COLGATE4's "affirmative defense" clue
I found a related Florida statute #775.027
775.027 Insanity defense.—
(1) AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE.—All persons are presumed to be sane. It is an affirmative defense to a criminal prosecution that, at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the defendant was insane. Insanity is established when:
(a) The defendant had a mental infirmity, disease, or defect; and
(b) Because of this condition, the defendant:
1. Did not know what he or she was doing or its consequences; or
2. Although the defendant knew what he or she was doing and its consequences, the defendant did not know that what he or she was doing was wrong.
Mental infirmity, disease, or defect does not constitute a defense of insanity except as provided in this subsection.
(2) BURDEN OF PROOF.—The defendant has the burden of proving the defense of insanity by clear and convincing evidence.
So if affirmative defenses share a common burden, then "clear and convincing evidence" is the responsibility of Zimmerman's defense team.
Granted, that's an "if." I'm still searching to confirm.
Here's Florida Jury Instructions defining clear and convincing evidence:
411.3 CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE
“Clear and convincing evidence” is evidence that is precise, explicit, lacking in confusion, and of such weight that it produces a firm belief or conviction without hesitation about the matter in issue.
That's quite a burden. I think maybe some folks predicting that Zimmerman will walk are doing an early chicken count.
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
With COLGATE4's "affirmative defense" clue
Please login to view edit histories.