General Discussion

jmowreader

(50,554 posts)

63. Read this...

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 08:00 PM

Mar 2012

http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/flsupct/sc08-744/op-sc08-744.pdf

“Killing with premeditation” is killing after consciously deciding to do so. The decision must be present in the mind at the time of the killing. The law does not fix the exact period of time that must pass between the formation of the premeditated intent to kill and the killing. The period of time must be long enough to allow reflection by the defendant. The premeditated intent to kill must be formed before the killing.

If they can prove he said the thing about "those people always getting away" before he went out and hunted down Trayvon, a jury has evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that there's premeditation. Whether you can get a conviction on it is another thing; you know how lethal Arizona Iced Tea is.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

65 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Zimmerman: anything less than 1st degree murder is not acceptable [View all] Hugabear Mar 2012 OP

Agree. Anything less than 1st degree murder madaboutharry Mar 2012 #1

Charged or convicted? nt Snake Alchemist Mar 2012 #2

Both. - nt Hugabear Mar 2012 #9

Agree! The innocent teenager will spend the rest of his life dead. Lint Head Mar 2012 #3

I guess that everyone has all the evidence they need to convict Zim without a trial. L0oniX Mar 2012 #4

You do get tiresome. We want him arrested and tried for first degree murder. peacebird Mar 2012 #6

And if he is ruled innocent? nt Snake Alchemist Mar 2012 #10

Tisk tisk ...we won't let details get in the way of the mob mentallity. L0oniX Mar 2012 #14

Again, you do get tiresome. If you are interested in my response it is posted. peacebird Mar 2012 #22

Then that is the end of it. Obviously. peacebird Mar 2012 #19

Imagine all the money we can save by replacing our current legal system ... spin Mar 2012 #15

Well, it didn't work for the Casey Anthony case... Lost-in-FL Mar 2012 #27

Our legal system is far from perfect ... spin Mar 2012 #39

Hell to the 'yes'! Lost-in-FL Mar 2012 #44

I'm satisfied FarPoint Mar 2012 #21

I guess my version of being progressive is different than yours. onenote Mar 2012 #43

My progressive posture does have limits. FarPoint Mar 2012 #47

last time I checked people on internet sites can't convict people Johonny Mar 2012 #57

I thought the "fu$@&ng c00ns" was debunked. Lost-in-FL Mar 2012 #5

Has that been accepted as evidence in a court of law? L0oniX Mar 2012 #11

Nope... at least 'it is being investigated'. nt Lost-in-FL Mar 2012 #13

In the clip I extracted guitar man Mar 2012 #18

I think it was in a TYT video. Lost-in-FL Mar 2012 #24

Cenk never said punks. vaberella Mar 2012 #48

Got it. Lost-in-FL Mar 2012 #51

Cenk can say what he wants guitar man Mar 2012 #58

You are very wrong. It has NEVER been debunked. n/t vaberella Mar 2012 #26

Regardless of what he said, c--n or punk... Lost-in-FL Mar 2012 #37

I agree with you fully on that. vaberella Mar 2012 #41

WHAT?? Three days?? Lost-in-FL Mar 2012 #46

Yeah, you didn't know. This is what is killing me about this case. It's in a huffpo article. vaberella Mar 2012 #50

Incompetence in the police force is nothing new to me living here in FL. Lost-in-FL Mar 2012 #54

You can't. USArmyParatrooper Mar 2012 #7

All he has to do is say he was in "fear for his life" and then let the court prove he wasn't. L0oniX Mar 2012 #12

The realistic charge would be USArmyParatrooper Mar 2012 #16

I agree. He would have to have known when arthritisR_US Mar 2012 #17

Premeditation doesn't require weeks of forethought jmowreader Mar 2012 #55

Not even close. USArmyParatrooper Mar 2012 #59

Read this... jmowreader Mar 2012 #63

No, it's NOT "beyond a reasonable doubt." USArmyParatrooper Mar 2012 #65

Maybe the DU lawyer contingent could weigh in here RZM Mar 2012 #8

What I want is for someone to do to him what he did. alarimer Mar 2012 #20

What will you do if the grand jury doesn't agree with you? slackmaster Mar 2012 #23

If he is tried and found not guilty then that is the end. We are a nation of laws. peacebird Mar 2012 #29

Thanks peacebird. I don't see an action statement in your answer. slackmaster Mar 2012 #49

I'll be pissed off. Hugabear Mar 2012 #52

Thank you. slackmaster Mar 2012 #56

Agree! workinclasszero Mar 2012 #25

He needs to go to prison for life. Stan Smith Mar 2012 #28

Before the trial or after? nt Snake Alchemist Mar 2012 #30

Well, clearly one gets prison for life only after a trial, right? peacebird Mar 2012 #31

Some seem ready to get the posse together. nt Snake Alchemist Mar 2012 #34

And some seem intent on posting strawman arguements on every single thread about Trayvon. peacebird Mar 2012 #36

Wanting evidence to be judged at a trial is a strawman argument? Learn something new every day. nt Snake Alchemist Mar 2012 #40

Accusing the rest of us of not wanting a trial... Posting repeatedly that we are all bad evil people peacebird Mar 2012 #42

If you can't see the foaming of the mouth, then there is nothing I can do. Snake Alchemist Mar 2012 #45

the only foaming at the mouth i see is from you in your desire to accuse good Duers n/t Bodhi BloodWave Mar 2012 #64

Last time I checked, DU wasn't a courtroom Hugabear Mar 2012 #53

Mob rules. L0oniX Mar 2012 #38

After the trial of course. Stan Smith Mar 2012 #32

I think he looks guilty as sin, but I'm going to wait for the trial before calling for sentencing. Snake Alchemist Mar 2012 #33

Since my opinion has no impact on what will happen I feel I can express what I think should happen. Stan Smith Mar 2012 #35

So you can switch your "fair mindedness" on and off like a light switch... is that right? cherokeeprogressive Mar 2012 #62

Statements like yours get people dismissed from juries post haste. cherokeeprogressive Mar 2012 #61

"He told the 911 dispatcher... this time he meant to make sure that didn't happen." cherokeeprogressive Mar 2012 #60