Unarmed teen shooting: Is Florida law to blame?

[Clinton Huxley]

Someone from outside the States has to say it...

You live in a society where private possession of handguns is widespread and accepted.

From that, flow consequences...

Yawn.

Typically complacent reaction.

[Coito ergo sum]

Indubitably, and appropriately...

[Svartalf]

Hec, Claude Nougaro did sing that he wanted to be danced on for his funeral

[Clinton Huxley]

Just to check....if I wanted to shoot CES, as long as no-one saw me do it and I maybe punched myself in the face, the police couldn't touch me?

Mmmmmmm.......no, tempting, but no.

[MrJonno]

I think its more a vigilante issue rather than a gun one.

The public role is to assist the police with information and general cooperation not to try and do their job. While the police may screw up they at least have some sort of training/vetting so they are suitable for the role of upholding the law

[Coito ergo sum]

Just to check....if I wanted to shoot CES, as long as no-one saw me do it and I maybe punched myself in the face, the police couldn't touch me?

No, they could touch you.

Mmmmmmm.......no, tempting, but no.

[Clinton Huxley]

What if I said it was self-defence, that you were trying to steal my monocle?

[Coito ergo sum]

What if I said it was self-defence, that you were trying to steal my monocle?

It is supposed to depend on the evidence.

What would happen in the UK if I attacked you and tried to steal your monocle, and you beat me up, but nobody was around to see?

[Clinton Huxley]

What if I said it was self-defence, that you were trying to steal my monocle?

It is supposed to depend on the evidence.

What would happen in the UK if I attacked you and tried to steal your monocle, and you beat me up, but nobody was around to see?

We'd both get arrested and charged with a fracas, perhaps an aggravated contretemp.

As I heard on the radio today, under Florida law, as no-one else witnessed the shooting and the chap claimed self-defence, the police wouldn't investigate. Is this not so?

[klr]

What if I said it was self-defence, that you were trying to steal my monocle?

It is supposed to depend on the evidence.

What would happen in the UK if I attacked you and tried to steal your monocle, and you beat me up, but nobody was around to see?

We'd both get arrested and charged with a fracas, perhaps an aggravated contretemp.

As I heard on the radio today, under Florida law, as no-one else witnessed the shooting and the chap claimed self-defence, the police wouldn't investigate. Is this not so?

It's a charter for armed murder if that's the case.

[Coito ergo sum]

What if I said it was self-defence, that you were trying to steal my monocle?

It is supposed to depend on the evidence.

What would happen in the UK if I attacked you and tried to steal your monocle, and you beat me up, but nobody was around to see?

We'd both get arrested and charged with a fracas, perhaps an aggravated contretemp.

It's a crime to defend yourself in the UK? Nice.

As I heard on the radio today, under Florida law, as no-one else witnessed the shooting and the chap claimed self-defence, the police wouldn't investigate. Is this not so?

No, that is not so. The police say that they based their decision not to arrest him at the scene based on evidence at the scene. It's possible here that the police dropped the ball, and it's possible that they didn't arrest Zimmerman for some irrelevant reason (racism or otherwise). But, at the moment, the cops are saying that what they saw at the scene did not justify an arrest. We shall see how it shakes out.

It is not, however, Florida law that if a person shoots another person and there happen not to be witnesses present that the police will not investigate. That ought to sound ludicrous on its face, and perhaps one ought hesitate to accept such nonsense reports at face value, given the track record of "journalists" for inaccurate reporting of legal matters.

[laklak]

As I heard on the radio today, under Florida law, as no-one else witnessed the shooting and the chap claimed self-defence, the police wouldn't investigate. Is this not so?

Your radio is incorrect. The whole problem here is the police did not conduct an investigation as they are required to do.

[Clinton Huxley]

Ah, thanks for clarification. Re CESs point, above, no, it is not a crime to defend yourself in the UK. If you shot someone dead, you could probably expect to stand trial but would be acquited if you had been judged to have used appropriate force.

[FBM]

My impression is that they looked at the crime scene (cursory investigation) and found nothing to contradict Zimmerman's claim. I think the least they should've done was to detain him without charges for 24hrs or whatever the legal limit is while the scene was more thoroughly investigated and other evidence, such as the phone recordings, was collected.

[Clinton Huxley]

My impression is that they looked at the crime scene (cursory investigation) and found nothing to contradict Zimmerman's claim. I think the least they should've done was to detain him without charges for 24hrs or whatever the legal limit is while the scene was more thoroughly investigated and other evidence, such as the phone recordings, was collected.

I'm sure the police would have done just the same if it was this Zimmerman chap who'd ended up shot.