Replies

At the point where things turned physical, one party was at that point guilty of assault, possibly assault with a deadly weapon. SYG does not apply to this person. Since the other person is being assaulted without any potential to safely retreat (probably) SYG also does not apply to him, since the laws of self-defense would have covered him prior to SYG.

SYG does apply to that person in the events covered by Florida Statutes 776.041, and those events can happen in less than a minute. Hypothetically - and I'm not speaking about the Martin/Zimmerman situation, but you keep bringing up deadly weapons - I don't know how you intend to treat a struggle for a deadly weapon in your analysis,

At this point, you're having to throw in a non-definite 'probably' to assert your definite ''does not'. You don't have that leisure under the law.

I'll say it again. Stand Your Ground is available in Florida to an initial assailant under the circumstances found in Florida Statutes 776.041. I'm finished; have the last word and goodnight.

The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who: ...
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant.

Gotcha. For the law to apply if Zimmerman start the fight he would have to prove his belief he was in danger of death (or great bodily harm) was reasonable. And that he had exhausted all other means to avoid this result.

Thanks. I appreciate your assistance in understanding this law better. Sleep tight.

Now I'm more concerned than ever about this law. Sounds to me like a guy could intentionally start a fight and if he was losing it bad enough he could kill the opponent with a gun and claim self-defense.

As they say, that ain't right. Such a person should, IMO, be charged with something less than 1st degree murder, possibly. But he shouldn't just walk.

I'm speaking theoretically here, not specifically about the Zimmerman case.

Also "great bodily harm" is not specifically defined here. Does it mean paraplegia? Broken bones? Mild concussion? Black eye? A generalized *sswhooping? Broken fingernail?

Ah-hah. The preceding portion of the statute says: "The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who: (1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony"

Then there's an "or" and it goes into the "provoke force against himself" and "reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm" exceptions. Which means the "reasonable fear" part does not apply to someone committing a violent felony. He can't legally kill someone no matter how reasonable his fear might be. I don't know about Florida, but in many states a death occurring during the commission of a felony is by definition Murder One.

Let us assume Zimmerman assaulted Martin with a drawn gun. That's assault with a deadly weapon. It's a forcible felony.

If this were the case, Zimmerman could not claim the protection of SYG.

Similarly if Martin sucker-punched and assaulted Zimmerman, it would certainly be assault and might be aggravated assault. Which means, depending on the jurisdiction, that it might be a misdemeanor or it might be a forcible felony. If a misdemeanor Trayvon could claim self-defense if meeting the second criteria of the law. If a felony he could not claim self-defense under SYG.

I think.