<p>Wolverine86–No. Nothing on response in kind. You might argue that self defense by statute allows for greater force in response to a lessor force. See the following from the Florida statute. Imminent “great bodily harm” allows intentional lethal force if there is a reasonable belief that lethal force is necessary to prevent it. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“Based on Sipple’s statement to the police, which was admitted into evidence, we conclude that Sipple met his burden of presenting a prima facie case of self-defense …”</p>
<p>I believe a fair reading of the Sipple case shows that the “fact” that provided the prima facie case for self defense was that the victim brought the gun to the confrontation and threatened Sipple with it.</p>
<p>“reasonably believes”</p>
<p>Is the FL law that harsh, that it actually insists on reasonability?</p>
<p>Thanks 07DAD. That’s pretty much what I was wondering about. I would assume that GZ’s lawyers will try to argue the imminent death or great bodily harm issue.</p>
<p>NewHope…Just a hunch, but I’m guessing you’re not interested in my earlier suggestion of keeping an open mind until the process runs it’s course. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If he has neck muscles strong enough to resist someone over him banging his head on the ground he is probably strong enough to successfully extract himself from under the person as well.</p>
<p>newhope has made it quite clear that he/she does not want all the evidence before making up his/her mind. Although I don’t think I’m of the same opinion, I happily welcome the openness and honesty.</p>
<p>younghoss…I didn’t say NewHope’s posts weren’t entertaining. 
I’m fluent in sarcasm myself.</p>
<p>As someone who has been around a lot of fighting, both sponsored and more organic, his injuries are consistent with someone who was punched once, fell, and hit his head. I saw that dozens of times. The recollection of events he outlined, to a fighter, is at least partly a fabrication. Reality may be somewhere in between.</p>
<p>I don’t have any skin in the game here. It’s a tragedy involving two individuals who don’t appear to be very clever.</p>
<p>If it can be proved that Zimmerman hunted Martin down and shot him im cold blood in a premediated manner, he should be convicted of murder.</p>
<p>If Zimmerman started a physical altercation that got out of hand, he should be convicted of manslaughter.</p>
<p>If Martin doubled back and ambushed Zimmerman, Zimmerman should be acquitted.</p>
<p>I’m not a lawyer and haven’t followed the case very closely, but that’s what my common sense tells me.</p>
<p>^ that is logical…but many here want GZ found guilty simply because he was carrying and TM ended up dead…they really don’t care what actually happened.</p>
<p>^And just as many want him acquitted regardless of what happened.</p>
<p>^ I don’t think that is true at all…I want him found guilty if he stalked and physically started the altercation. If GZ was jumped, he should be acquitted…IMO.</p>
<p>Sally, I’m not sure who are you are talking about, but lets have a full hearing of the evidence and let the jury decide.</p>
<p>^^^ okay then…all should get off their virtual lives and spend time with real people ‘;)’ RE: 1390 and 1391</p>
<p>I just want this not to have happened, personally.</p>
<p>I wish Trayvon had kept walking home on the lighted street and called 911 himself when he realized he was being followed by this guy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That was like reading a piece in The Onion. I want to be a citizen’s judge and jury or maybe citizen’s King. Why not.</p>
<p>If you are going to be citizen’s King. I want to be citizen’s judge.</p>
<p>It’s crazy how emotional people on both sides are getting.</p>
<p>which people are getting emotional?</p>
<p>I imagine it is quite emotional for Trayvon’s parents. They will never see their 17 year old son alive again. I’d be pretty torn up over that, myself.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I can’t promise that you’ll have much power. If I agree with you, fine. If not, well I’m King. I’ll be the first female King too.</p>