Wednesday, July 17, 2013

Lawrence O'Donnell Discusses Stand Your Ground and Its Role in the Zimmerman Verdict


Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The jury instructions included an explanation of the Stand Your Ground policy. Yet, our fanatical gun-rights friends still insist SYG had nothing to do with this case.

10 comments:

  1. Well, to quote Joe Horn:

    The operator told him not to go out with a gun because officers would be arriving.

    “O.K.,” Mr. Horn said. “But I have a right to protect myself too, sir,” adding, “The laws have been changed in this country since September the first, and you know it.”

    The operator said, “You’re going to get yourself shot.” But Mr. Horn replied, “You want to make a bet? I’m going to kill them.”

    Moments later he said, “Well here it goes, buddy. You hear the shotgun clicking and I’m going.”

    Then he said: “Move, you’re dead.”

    There were two quick gunshots, then a third.

    “I had no choice,” Mr. Horn said when he got back on the line with the dispatcher. “They came in the front yard with me, man.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Horn_shooting_controversy#9-1-1_call_transcript

    ReplyDelete
  2. We've said repeatedly that Zimmerman and attorneys never asserted Stand Your Ground. It's so hard for you to make logical distinctions--why is that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Greg, didn't you see Kurt's extremely eloquent capitulation on this matter? Why can't you learn something from him?

      Every time the SYG was mentioned in the way you're still doing it, I pointed out that it did not have to be cited by the lawyers. It was the law of the land in FL, it was understood by all, even the lying George Zimmerman, and it was specifically mentioned at length in the jury instructions. Finally, the juror B37 told us it was used in the deliberations.

      What's wrong with you? Are you that afraid to admit when you're wrong?

      I will say this, among the commenters on my blog, you stand alone, or nearly alone, as an example of this bizarre stubbornness. Based on that, I suppose I cannot assign such behavior to your average gun nut.

      Delete
    2. Mike,

      Kurt and I acknowledged that the Stand your ground language was a part of the same statute--as opposed to early misreporting we had put too much trust in. And, yes, standing his ground was mentioned in the jury instructions.

      A similar show of integrity from your side would be to admit that what Greg is saying is correct: Stand your ground was not invoked by the defense attorneys. They invoked the broad concept of self defense and focused on the main issues of Who started the fight and Would a reasonable person in Zimmerman's place have feared for their life.

      They didn't bring up any claims about his standing his ground because their narrative was that he was attacked, knocked on the ground, straddled, and beaten. Standing his ground was irrelevant at that point because when you're being sat on and beaten about the face and head, you can't exactly flee anywhere.


      Finally, with regards to that juror, as I said before, she mentioned SYG in a clumsy sentence where she used it as an equivalent of "self defense"--in context, her statement doesn't show any evidence that they evaluated the stand your ground component of the self defense law.


      Why do you insist on calling Greg a liar and trying to humiliate him when his statements are accurate?

      Delete
    3. Greg was no more correct on this than you or Kurt were. Now he's trying to avoid the indignity of admitting he was wrong by sticking to the strictest, narrowest definition of the "SYG argument was not used." It's total bullshit and it sounds like you're waffling on your own admission. I guess it stuck in your craw too badly to leave it alone. Oh well, that leaves Kurt, one honest, if extremely deluded and fanatical, man among you.

      Delete
    4. Mikeb, my comments have generally been in regard to what the defense attorneys presented. Did Zimmerman assert Stand Your Ground? No, he didn't. Again, you see everything in black and white and in poor definition. I can't help you there, since your problem is one of your own chosing.

      Delete
    5. I'm not contradicting myself Mike. My admission was that I'd been wrong to believe early reports that misstated the law.

      Here, you are refusing to admit that Greg is right because it doesn't fit with your narrative.

      Delete
    6. So which of us has no integrity and is incapable of admitting when and where he's wrong?


      Note--admitting when and where, not totally capitulating to everything the other side says, which seems to be what you're wanting me to do--otherwise you'll revoke your nice statements and tell me that I have no integrity.

      Delete
    7. You're hedging, Man. Now it's the fault of the "early reports that misstated the law." You're funny.

      Delete
    8. And again you bring up something, as if it's a new hedge that I've brought in, when it was part of the old discussion.

      My statements are consistent. Your attempts at embarrassing me by misrepresenting things I've said in the past are not funny. They're pitiful.

      Delete