Comment

Jim Hoft Says Man Arrested For Gunning Down Innocent Black Men Was 'Understandably Upset'

119
lawhawk4/09/2012 12:31:44 pm PDT

re: #113 Obdicut

My notion of precipitating event comes from my reading of the law:

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

The section in bold is an element of the SYG defense. It requires that the person be: 1) not engaged in an unlawful activity; (2) attacked in any other place where he/she has a right to be;

gets the right to SYG and meet force with force.

You’re right that the law as written creates the scenario where both parties to an altercation can claim SYG - that’s what I’m saying here too. I’m just wording it differently from you. And I’m further noting that the way Zimmerman and his backers are spinning SYG, they write out the part where it is Martin who gains the benefit of SYG.

Moreover, if Zimmerman had no business carrying out his following of Martin (and the 911 tapes would seem to support the claim that he should not have continued following Martin), then he might not qualify under the 1st element above (because he was told not to continue following Martin by a law enforcement officer).