re: #1007 Targetpractice

No, I’m focused on the right one. The Florida jury instruction on self-defense requires that the prosecution prove “beyond reasonable doubt.”

No, TP, you’re not. You need to focus on the actual charge. The prosecution must prove the CHARGE beyond reasonable doubt. The charge is murder II, second degree homicide, which is a killing done by someone showing depraved indifference.

The defense wants to focus on the actual fight, on who punched whom, on who was on top, and all the confusion there-in. But that’s not where the charges lie. The charges are that Zimmerman acted in depraved indifference. And a proof of depraved indifference is, among other things, showing his actions contrary to reasonable expectations.

Did he exit the truck against the recommendation of dispatch? Yes.
Did he arm himself despite training that specified otherwise? Yes.
Did he pursue the suspect into a dark area? Yes.
How did he intend to force the suspect’s surrender? No answer. Reasonable expectation given no cuffs, no flashlight, no baton, no spray, is that he would have pointed the gun at the suspect making it a threat of surrender or be shot. This is, by the way, another violation of his training which included use of force evaluation.

Oh, an odd point. The only person who claims Zimmerman’s pistol was in his holster is Zimmerman. I’ve already pointed out that his testimony is suspect. I raise this due to your remark with which I agree: “I’m not aware of many hunters carrying their guns holstered until what they’re hunting is atop them.”