[2ndDivisionVet]

How much of that is true?

[hinckley buzzard]

How much of that is true?

On the "facts," about half. The legal mumbo jumbo, who knows.

[shhrubbery!]

When the 911 operator said to not get involved, Zimmerman disobeyed the operator and confronted Martin. By not obeying the order, this can be grounds for obstruction of justice, an arrestable offense, therefore, satisfying two of three within the laws of second degree murder.

This is an absurd misconstruction of the concept of "obstruction of justice."

I heard someone on the radio try this line on his audience this morning. I laughed myself silly, had the dog wondering what had come over me.

[ctdonath2]

“When the 911 operator said to not get involved, Zimmerman disobeyed the operator and confronted Martin.”

Z had just complained about how uncomfortable/inconvenient following M would be (cold, dark, etc). What the operator said amounted to “don’t bother doing what you don’t want to do, we don’t need you to do it”.

[Lionheartusa1]

,,,, if Martin had gotten Zimmerman’s gun away from him and killed him no one in the media would have even known or cared about the details and it would be considered just another run of the mill homocide where a black kills someone . It happens everyday ,,,, the difference is 0bama’s minions need a distraction from the dismal economy and an excuse to riot .

[Rockingham]

When a jury retires to consider their verdict, they are read and given copies of jury instructions as to what the law is. Here is the current Florida standard jury instruction for second degree murder as promulgated by the Florida Supreme Court:

--

7.4 MURDER—SECOND DEGREE

§ 782.04(2), Fla.Stat.

To prove the crime of Second Degree Murder, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Victim) is dead.

2. The death was caused by the criminal act of (defendant).

3. There was an unlawful killing of (victim) by an act imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life.

Definitions.

An “act” includes a series of related actions arising from and performed pursuant to a single design or purpose.

An act is “imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind” if it is an act or series of acts that:

1. a person of ordinary judgment would know is reasonably certain to kill or do serious bodily injury to another, and

2. is done from ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent, and

3. is of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.

In order to convict of Second Degree Murder, it is not necessary for the State to prove the defendant had an intent to cause death.

--

The jury will also be instructed as to manslaughter and justifiable and excusable homicide, the standard instructions for which are:

--

7.7 MANSLAUGHTER

§ 782.07, Fla. Stat.

To prove the crime of Manslaughter, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Victim) is dead.

Give 2a, 2b, or 2c depending upon allegations and proof. 2. a. (Defendant) intentionally committed an act or acts that caused the death of (victim).

b. (Defendant) intentionally procured an act that caused the death of (victim).

c. The death of (victim) was caused by the culpable negligence of (defendant).

The defendant cannot be guilty of manslaughter by committing a merely negligent act or if the killing was either justifiable or excusable homicide:

Negligence:

Each of us has a duty to act reasonably toward others. If there is a violation of that duty, without any conscious intention to harm, that violation is negligence.

Justifiable Homicide:

The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an attempt to murder or commit a felony upon the defendant, or to commit a felony in any dwelling house in which the defendant was at the time of the killing. § 782.02, Fla. Stat.

Excusable Homicide:

The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:

1. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or

2. When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or

3. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner.

§ 782.03, Fla. Stat.

--

On this statement of the law and my understanding of the facts, Zimmerman is not guilty of anything because the homicide was justifiable or excusable.

I surmise that the special prosecutor's argument is going to be that Zimmerman provoked a confrontation and shot Martin as a vigilante angry about break ins in the neighborhood and determined to deal with a young Black male of the sort who commonly responsible for such crimes. I do not see this argument as sufficient for a valid conviction.

[octex]

fta: 02) When the 911 operator said to not get involved, Zimmerman disobeyed the operator and confronted Martin. By not obeying the order, this can be grounds for obstruction of justice, an arrestable offense, therefore, satisfying two of three within the laws of second degree murder.
****************************
I haven’t read any comments here yet. The author’s second premise is blatantly incorrect. That premise doesn’t satisfy any prerequisite for second degree murder, because it’s false.

Zim did NOT disobey any lawful order. The 911 phone operator only said “we don’t need you to do that”, after Zim said he was going to follow Martin to see what he was up to.