Please Donate Today, & Consider Donating Monthly!
Generous FReeper Sponsors are donating $10 for every New Monthly Donor & $1-A-DAY DONOR!
They always have an inquiry when a cop shoots someone.
Right. It is the same legal standard, but as we see here in Florida, not the same in practice.
Cop would have had a lay down. Lol
it is the difference between an amateur and a professional
A cop is assumed to have received more training than a civilian.
A cop is expected to know non-lethal means of ending a confrontation, and it is further assumed that in order for him to resort to lethal means he (or she) would have exhausted those means.
A cop will also expect a close investigation of the facts of the case, and that is expected to temper his response.
That’s the theory.
Henry Mark Holzer
Zimmerman: Talk of manslaughter is uninformed
Tonight I finally had enough. All these moronic talking heads on TV talking about how if George Zimmerman is not acquitted of murder he could be convicted of manslaughter as a lesser included offense. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
Under Florida law manslaughter is
“(1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. § 782.07(1), Fla. Stat. (2005).” (My emphasis.)
This is the Florida statute on lesser included offenses:
Fla. R. Crim. P. Rule 3.510
Rule 3.510. Determination of Attempts and Lesser Included Offenses
“On an indictment or information on which the defendant is to be tried for any offense the jury may convict the defendant of: * * * (b) any offense that as a matter of law is a necessarily included offense or a lesser included offense of the offense charged in the indictment or information and is supported by the evidence. The judge shall not instruct on any lesser included offense as to which there is no evidence. (My emphasis.)
There is no such evidence of manslaughter. None. To the contrary, there is overwhelming evidence of self-defense.
If the judge charges manslaughter over defenses objections, she will be reversed on appeal.
If she does not charge manslaughter, George Zimmerman will likely be acquitted because the jury will have murder or nothing.
If Zimmerman is convicted, because there is not a shred of evidence to satisfy the Florida murder second degree statute the appellate court will reverse. Indeed, the gutless judge lacked the courage to dismiss the case after the People rested because of the lack of evidence for murder II.
Talk of manslaughter is nonsense.
No, you are right. It is the same test.
The cops interviewed George several times and released him every time. No charges. The Police chief was fired. The local prosecutors were relieved, The President got his azz involved.
George’s attorneys knew going in that the deck was stacked. That is why they felt the need to DIS-prove all elements of the crime. Not just create a reasonable doubt, but to show they were bogus.
So the unethical prosecutors made up new make believe elements, which the Judge has gone along with with her winks and nods.
And her acts of disdain, impatience and rudeness (hostility) send a stong message to jury that George and his lawyers are Satan incarnate.
This case should never have been brought. George is Alice in Wonderland.
Then even if George wins, the original Judge forced proscutors to charge George AND his wife with perjury for failure to disclose the defense fund when they had the bond hearing. So these guys are toast either way.
Obama is loving it. win-win-win-win for him
Plus he gets his race war as a cherry on top
Actually, Zimmerman had the same legal standard and was cleared until some FL DNC operative called the Obama Admin. who then called Al Sharpton, and everything went out the window
According to the U.S. Supreme Court in Garner v. Tennessee, 471 U.S. 1 (1985), a private citizen has broader authority to use deadly force under the common law than law enforcement officers.
Because the lives of the King’s Men are more valuable than the lives of mere peasants like George Zimmerman.
Yes, they would
Go ask Miami cops who have to deal with Blacks. Hispanic Miami cops have been charged with murder for because black criminal suspects have died during arrest and custody.
There have been a few riots over the years with blacks rioting because black suspects died while in custody....and the cops who were charged with murder get acquitted
Riots in Florida from blacks is nothing new. I can remember Orlando being put under curfew in 1980 because of fear that Miami riots would fester in Orlando
Blacks rioting and trying to lynch innocents is nothing new in Florida. Until the Black community is forced to stop acting like feral animals and accept some responsibility...things will never change. Just look at every Black Racist commenting about this case on TV
This happened in Cincinnati. Google Roach shooting.
End result is that police have hands off policy and
News channels have limit on black crime reporting.
Some are more equal than others.
However, I have noticed recently that cops now shoot dogs rather frequently. So maybe things have changed.
An attack on a cop in uniform performing his duties is a violation of law in itself, being against a police officer and usually a felony. An attack on a private citizen may be provoked, part of a mutual affray, or otherwise justified. In both instances though, self-defense may justify the use of lethal force.
A police officer is an AGENT OF THE STATE and in many cases, an officer of the court. They have received (supposedly) additional training in the use of deadly force. As such, they are often granted a greater amount of leeway from the courts.
civillians who carry are not cops. generally they do not want to be. the difference comes from that they have certain immunities doing their official duties and different powers than civillians who carry.
for one they can shoot someone for lesser reasons than fear of death or great permanent harm. they have detain and arrest powers. they have search powers. they can get into trouble if they go nuts with them, as officers are fired and arrested and tried and jailed for gross felonies, but in the general carrying out of their duties if they aren’t abusing their powers they have immunity if unintended mistakes are made, and that’s something a regular citizen doesn’t have.
They are equal in Texas and maybe more-so for non-cops.
If someone attacks you, deadly force may be used because you don't know the future - you could be dead in the future if you don't act or you could not be dead if you don't act. The problem is, you don't have the luxury of waiting to find out. You have to protect your life right then, so deadly force may be used. The attacker is responsible for his own death, not the person saving his own life.