Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kevkrom; DonkeyBonker

Yep, its true in FL and really most other jurisdictions. It takes a certain mumber of provable elements to convict on a given crime. Where the greater crimes have more elements, the lesser included crimes require proof on a subset of those same elements. So for a crime that has, say, three elements, lesser included could be proven with only two of those same elements. It’s like giving the prosecution partial credit. He couldn’t get that third element, but if he showed the other two elements, he gets the corresponding “lesser included” as a consolation prize.

In this case, to get Murder Two the prosecution needed to show 1) the victim was dead, 2) the defendant unlawfully killed the victim, and 3) the defendant did so with a “depraved mind.” A depraved mind is demonstrated by a calloused disregard for human life (as opposed to premeditation, which would ratchet it up to Murder One).

Well, the prosecution lost on the depraved mind element, so they went down the list to manslaughter. The problem is, the killing still has to be unlawful for that element to hold, and if the jury buys the self-defense argument, then the killing was lawful, and that second element also fails, leaving the prosecution with only the single element of the victim’s death, for which there is no lesser included.


83 posted on 07/11/2013 10:46:06 AM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: Springfield Reformer
Well, the prosecution lost on the depraved mind element, so they went down the list to manslaughter. The problem is, the killing still has to be unlawful for that element to hold, and if the jury buys the self-defense argument, then the killing was lawful, and that second element also fails, leaving the prosecution with only the single element of the victim’s death, for which there is no lesser included.

I am not a lawyer, but as I read commentary and Florida law I come to the same conclusion... though not as eloquent. Zimmerman's lawyer argued against 3rd degree because George admitted to purposely pulling the trigger, i.e., it was not an accident.

Also the biggest problem the prosecution has is that Martin clearly punched and attacked Zimmerman. Even if one believes that Zimmerman is racist who was profiling black guys, the indisputable fact is the Martin made the decision to confront and attack Zimmerman. A lot has been made of "what if" scenarios in regards to Zimmerman's actions but no "what if" scenarios on Martin's action. "What if" Martin did not confront Zimmerman and simply walked home. And "What if" after Martin said "what is your problem" he then said "leave me alone" and left peacefully.

131 posted on 07/11/2013 11:42:53 AM PDT by 11th Commandment (http://www.thirty-thousand.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson