Also, from a legal standpoint and as I understand it, SYG isn't even applicable here, since George Zimmerman was on his back getting thumped, and in that situation any "duty to retreat" is obviously moot since you can't retreat.
Also, from a legal standpoint and as I understand it, SYG isn't even applicable here, since George Zimmerman was on his back getting thumped, and in that situation any "duty to retreat" is obviously moot since you can't retreat.
” The freedom-hating leftmedia has been, quite predictably, short-stroking this whole episode as a foil against SYG laws since the beginning”
50% cut in violent crime? Oh yeah, what the hell, get rid of SYG!!
Joe, Joe, Joe. You misunderstand the “legal standpoint”.
SYG simply says that IF you are lawfully in a place and are attacked that you may meet force with force and if faced with imminent death or great bodily injury you may use deadly force.
If it is established that you acted validly in self defense then you are IMMUNE from prosecution AND civil liability. It is not just an affirmative defense it provides for immunity. Very rare in law.
A motion to dismiss, PRIOR TO TRIAL, is critical as it allows you a “free shot” (no pun intended, of course ;-) to dismiss all charges and obtain IMMUNITY from any civil damages lawsuits - wrongful death, civil assault, etc.
With SYG, at such a hearing you need only establish by a preponderance of the evidence (50% +1) that, using the reasonable man standard, you were in fear of imminent death or severe bodily injury, for you or another, to act with deadly force.
The judge acts as both trier of fact (normally the province of the jury) and of law.
If the judge finds self-defense all charges are dismissed and the neither perp nor his family can sue without having to pay all costs just for bringing suit.
Even at trial, if a motion to dismiss fails, the law is in effect I believe.
No cases that I know of but aside from the prosecution needing to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, one could argue that as a matter of self defense, the reasonable man/preponderance of evidence burden of proof may be applicable allowing a dismissal at that level of proof before a jury.
Even then the prosecution alternatively has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the elements of 2nd degree murder.
The last three paragraphs are speculation the rest is not. Trust me! Been there, done that. SYG applies here. ;-)