Quote
Originally posted by: Campion
I thought this wasn't a SYG case though. The defense didn't invoke that, and it wasn't decided on that basis, correct?
To be honest I'm not sure I fully understand how that works. If anyone can enlighten me I'd love to understand it better.
C
Self-Defense, The Duty to Retreat, and The Castle Doctrine. and Stand Your Ground [simplified]
Self Defense is the right for civilians to engage in a level of violence, called reasonable force or defensive force, for the sake of defending one's own life or the lives of others, including, in certain circumstances, the use of deadly force. Typically deadly force is considered justified, and a defense of justifiable homicide applicable, in cases "when the actor reasonably fears imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm to himself or another".
The Duty to Retreat addresses a legal requirement in many States that, in order to claim self-defense a defendant must prove that he had first avoided conflict and secondly, had taken reasonable steps to retreat and so demonstrated an intention not to fight before eventually using force.
The Castle Doctrine designates a person's home (or, in some states, other legally-occupied place [e.g., a vehicle or workplace]) as a place in which that person has certain protections and immunities permitting him, in certain circumstances, to use force (up to and including deadly force) to defend against an intruder -- free from legal responsibility/prosecution for the consequences of the force used.
i.e. The Castle Doctrine removes the Duty to Retreat if one is in one's own home; "a man's home is his castle."
[This Law is the basis for the oft-repeated declaration that if one were to shoot someone dead, he would be well advised to make sure the deceased was found inside his domicile, . . . even if one had to drag him back inside.]
"Stand Your Ground" is nothing more than an extension of the Castle Doctrine beyond one's home, . . . and even beyond one's vehicle or workplace, . . . in fact, to "any place where one has a right to be".
Florida's Stand Your Ground Law:
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.
F.S. §776.013(3)
Re: State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman
The Defense could have invoked the Stand Your Ground Law, so as to avoid having to prove that Mr. Zimmerman had failed to retreat.
However, the Defense did not invoke the Stand Your Ground Law, and instead presented a straightforward Self Defense case on the basis that Mr. Zimmerman was attacked suddenly, could not retreat, and feared imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm to himself.
* * * EDITED TO ADD * * *
If the defense had invoked the "Stand Your Ground Law" there would have been a pretrial immunity hearing; a judge would have ruled whether Zimmerman's actions were protected under the law; a ruling in favor of the defendant would have meant that no criminal or civil trial could proceed.
The defense opined their case was strong enough to gain acquittal on the criminal charge.
The "Stand Your Ground Law" may still be invoked to prevent a subsequent civil trial. The Not Guilty verdict in the criminal trial may aid their argument.
