Shooting of Trayvon Martin - Page 39

7.4 MURDER—SECOND DEGREE

To prove the crime of Second Degree Murder, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Victim) is dead.
2. The death was caused by the criminal act of (defendant).
3. There was an unlawful killing of (victim) by an act imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life.

Definitions.

An ―act includes a series of related actions arising from and performed pursuant to a single design or purpose.
An act is ―imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind‖ if it is an act or series of acts that:
1. a person of ordinary judgment would know is reasonably certain to kill or do serious bodily injury to another, and
2. is done from ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent, and
3. is of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.
In order to convict of Second Degree Murder, it is not necessary for the State to prove the defendant had an intent to cause death.

On April 12 2012 08:02 TheGeneralTheoryOf wrote:
Has anyone considered the possibility that Zimmerman decided to detain Martin until the police arrived?

On April 12 2012 09:08 syn0r wrote:
I'm not a law student, but after reading what you just posted, and looking back at the OJ case, along with the Casey Anthony case, it does seem like this prosecutor is over-reaching. With the Casey Anthony case being so fresh, if GZ can get a fair trial, I have a strong feeling that he's just going to fight it to the bitter end and walk away on the other side unscathed, criminal conviction-wise.

On April 12 2012 09:00 dAPhREAk wrote:
I added the jury instruction on second degree murder to the OP for those who would like to review it. it is also below.



Not only do they have to show all of the elements of second degree murder, but they also apparently have to disprove the self defense claim.

Specific to the second degree murder, I am not sure how they are going to be able to show "a deprived mind." Specifically, how are they going to show "ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent?" The only way I can see that they will be able to show that is if they show he hated Trayvon personally (or blacks generally) and killed for that reason. However, the evidence seems to show that it was not race related (and Zimmerman will parade his black friends and mentees in front of the Court if they try), and Zimmerman apparently did not know Trayvon before the incident.

I think this is a classic case of prosecutors overpleading cases with the hope of a plea bargain to a lesser offense (e.g., manslaughter).

On April 12 2012 09:10 Hawke5811 wrote:

What right does he have to "detain" him? Police were contacted, but no crime was being committed. Simply appearing suspicious, whether it's because it was dark and raining, he was wearing a hoody, he was black, or whatever Zimmerman's motive was, does not warrant a situation in which someone should be detained.

I know for damn sure that I'm not letting anyone that's not law enforcement "detain" me for walking to and from a gas station, or any other reason where I'm minding my own business/not committing a crime. I would simply keep walking the way I was... let them call the cops and make a fool of themselves. Obviously this didn't happen in this situation, but no one can argue that had Zimmerman just called the cops and left it alone, he wouldn't be in this situation and Martin would still be alive.

Sometimes people just need to mind their own damn business. Neighborhood watches are supposed to be a good thing, but are meant to report suspicious activity, not act upon it.

On April 12 2012 09:14 aksfjh wrote:

The depraved could be justified through his vigilante attitude caught on the 911 call, as well as his repeated calls to 911 in the past. Not saying that's the way their going to go or that it would hold up in a court of law, but it's not really a stretch to see where it could come from. What's more, it seems like a small leap from getting past the self defense claim, as in, if they can prove it wasn't justified self defense, it wouldn't be hard to prove the 3rd point as well. It may even be part of how they claim it's not self defense.

On April 12 2012 09:00 dAPhREAk wrote:
I added the jury instruction on second degree murder to the OP for those who would like to review it. it is also below.



Not only do they have to show all of the elements of second degree murder, but they also apparently have to disprove the self defense claim.

Specific to the second degree murder, I am not sure how they are going to be able to show "a depraved mind." Specifically, how are they going to show "ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent?" The only way I can see that they will be able to show that is if they show he hated Trayvon personally (or blacks generally) and killed for that reason. However, the evidence seems to show that it was not race related (and Zimmerman will parade his black friends and mentees in front of the Court if they try), and Zimmerman apparently did not know Trayvon before the incident.

I think this is a classic case of prosecutors overpleading cases with the hope of a plea bargain to a lesser offense (e.g., manslaughter).

On April 12 2012 09:26 AUGcodon wrote:
Wait, I thought the jury point would be moot anyways since the prosecutor said that she will not bring it in front of the grand jury? Also in the case of a jury trial, the prosecutors would certainly bring less severe charges compared to a non-jury one.

On April 12 2012 09:26 AUGcodon wrote:
Wait, I thought the jury point would be moot anyways since the prosecutor said that she will not bring it in front of the grand jury? Also in the case of a jury trial, the prosecutors would certainly bring less severe charges compared to a non-jury one.

On April 12 2012 09:19 dAPhREAk wrote:

if the prosecutor gets to bring in evidence of his past "neighborhood watch" actions then Zimmerman can just point to all of his successful work in preventing crime and apprehending criminals. there were mixed reactions from the community, but i saw a lot of people coming forward and saying that he was great for the community. maybe you disagree, but do you think a reasonable jury would call his actions "depraved" when his own community approves of his actions?

On April 12 2012 09:00 dAPhREAk wrote:
I added the jury instruction on second degree murder to the OP for those who would like to review it. it is also below.



Not only do they have to show all of the elements of second degree murder, but they also apparently have to disprove the self defense claim.

Specific to the second degree murder, I am not sure how they are going to be able to show "a deprived mind." Specifically, how are they going to show "ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent?" The only way I can see that they will be able to show that is if they show he hated Trayvon personally (or blacks generally) and killed for that reason. However, the evidence seems to show that it was not race related (and Zimmerman will parade his black friends and mentees in front of the Court if they try), and Zimmerman apparently did not know Trayvon before the incident.

I think this is a classic case of prosecutors overpleading cases with the hope of a plea bargain to a lesser offense (e.g., manslaughter).

On April 12 2012 09:29 [Agony]x90 wrote:


Given the arguments about what was said on the phone and the history of Zimmerman - attitude towards blacks (whether justifiable or not), case of his run in with the cop some years ago, restraining order, etc. - I feel like the prosecutors wouldn't have as much of a problem getting this point through than the second. The second (The death was caused by [a] criminal act) has been and I believe will be the question of whether or not this was second degree murder, since current standing states that Zimmerman was within right to have shot and killed Trayson out of defense for himself.

At least, if I were Zimmerman's lawyer, I wouldn't be shooting for the "ill will, evil intention" one as my trump card, since the wording of that makes it just as easy to dis spell as to prove, especially since there is actually potential evidence of this. The recording of "F-ing LSFKSLIFJSILFJ" seems to vary from person to person as to what was heard. You might say that I misheard, but 1000 people can say the same thing to you. Despite what audio analysis and what not will say, there is always the chance that the people sitting in the jury will pick their own words, regardless of what Zimmerman had said. Likewise, racism, ill will, hate, evil intent, etc are all legal in themselves (there's still no thought police), but only when coupled with "criminal" acts can it become illegal.

The self defense case, though, would invalidate the fact that this was a criminal act, meaning that Zimmerman wouldn't be prosecuted on the full charges. Since there is no evidence beyond hearsay on this, at least much less so than the recording from the police, Zimmerman has a better chance to avoid evidence against him by playing this card. Of course, I guess it is possible that this could backfire, in that because there was a lack of evidence, it could be interpreted either way.

Oh lastly, according to Trayson's parents, apparently they aren't looking for a guilty verdict, as they feel that is up to the courts entirely to decide, but they just want him arrested and tried, for the sake of justice, rather than letting him go without digging as deep as possible. Unfortunately, I don't think any one else will pay any heed to this and probably just want one extreme or the other: absolute guilt or complete acquittal.

On April 12 2012 09:19 dAPhREAk wrote:

if the prosecutor gets to bring in evidence of his past "neighborhood watch" actions then Zimmerman can just point to all of his successful work in preventing crime and apprehending criminals. there were mixed reactions from the community, but i saw a lot of people coming forward and saying that he was great for the community. maybe you disagree, but do you think a reasonable jury would call his actions "depraved" when his own community approves of his actions?

On April 12 2012 09:29 [Agony]x90 wrote:


Given the arguments about what was said on the phone and the history of Zimmerman - attitude towards blacks (whether justifiable or not), case of his run in with the cop some years ago, restraining order, etc. - I feel like the prosecutors wouldn't have as much of a problem getting this point through than the second. The second (The death was caused by [a] criminal act) has been and I believe will be the question of whether or not this was second degree murder, since current standing states that Zimmerman was within right to have shot and killed Trayson out of defense for himself.

At least, if I were Zimmerman's lawyer, I wouldn't be shooting for the "ill will, evil intention" one as my trump card, since the wording of that makes it just as easy to dis spell as to prove, especially since there is actually potential evidence of this. The recording of "F-ing LSFKSLIFJSILFJ" seems to vary from person to person as to what was heard. You might say that I misheard, but 1000 people can say the same thing to you. Despite what audio analysis and what not will say, there is always the chance that the people sitting in the jury will pick their own words, regardless of what Zimmerman had said. Likewise, racism, ill will, hate, evil intent, etc are all legal in themselves (there's still no thought police), but only when coupled with "criminal" acts can it become illegal.

The self defense case, though, would invalidate the fact that this was a criminal act, meaning that Zimmerman wouldn't be prosecuted on the full charges. Since there is no evidence beyond hearsay on this, at least much less so than the recording from the police, Zimmerman has a better chance to avoid evidence against him by playing this card. Of course, I guess it is possible that this could backfire, in that because there was a lack of evidence, it could be interpreted either way.

Oh lastly, according to Trayson's parents, apparently they aren't looking for a guilty verdict, as they feel that is up to the courts entirely to decide, but they just want him arrested and tried, for the sake of justice, rather than letting him go without digging as deep as possible. Unfortunately, I don't think any one else will pay any heed to this and probably just want one extreme or the other: absolute guilt or complete acquittal.

On April 12 2012 09:35 Blennd wrote:


Do we know how unanimous the support is, and how well-informed his community supporters are about the entirety of his actions? If I heard someone in my neighborhood had made two 911 calls in the past year (just an example) that resulted in arrests and convictions, my immediate reaction would be "holy shit nicely done sir." If I then learned that he calls 911 a 50 times a month (again, an example I don't know the ratio Zimmerman maintained, or what is reasonable for a neighborhood watch leader), my judgment would change radically.