Jury time deliberating good or bad?

[FXjohn]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI


This should have been a very quick Not Guilty verdict. The state did not prove their case in the least.


what is the level of proof needed for a manslaughter charge?

 

[carwreck]

Live update. Judge and lawyers in court. Jury asked for definition of "manslaughter".
( wildabouttrial or legalinsurrection for live stream )

 

[yucca]

Originally Posted By: Vikas

what? you let that guy walk? Given he was Mexican national, he has to be guilty! Otherwise, he would not have been charged.

Said sarcastically,


The next jury was able to get the info they needed for conviction. They put him away.

 

[GreeCguy]

According to Wikipedia

Voluntary manslaughter

Voluntary manslaughter occurs either when the defendant kills with malice aforethought (intention to kill or cause serious harm), but there are mitigating circumstances that reduce culpability, or when the defendant kills only with an intent to cause serious bodily harm. Voluntary manslaughter in some jurisdictions is a lesser included offense of murder. The traditional mitigating factor was provocation; however, others have been added in various jurisdictions.

Involuntary manslaughter

Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought, either express or implied. It is distinguished from voluntary manslaughter by the absence of intention. It is normally divided into two categories; constructive manslaughter and criminally negligent manslaughter, both of which involve criminal liability.

 

[Falken]

I'll bet he is acquitted and everyone is panicking with the bombshell.

They already know the answer, and they are trying to figure out damage control now.

 

[Swarmlord]

Originally Posted By: GreeCguy
According to Wikipedia

Voluntary manslaughter

Voluntary manslaughter occurs either when the defendant kills with malice aforethought (intention to kill or cause serious harm), but there are mitigating circumstances that reduce culpability, or when the defendant kills only with an intent to cause serious bodily harm. Voluntary manslaughter in some jurisdictions is a lesser included offense of murder. The traditional mitigating factor was provocation; however, others have been added in various jurisdictions.

Involuntary manslaughter

Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought, either express or implied. It is distinguished from voluntary manslaughter by the absence of intention. It is normally divided into two categories; constructive manslaughter and criminally negligent manslaughter, both of which involve criminal liability.


Prosecution could not prove the first and the second does not apply. Therefor...

 

[FXjohn]

it could apply.

 

[Swarmlord]

Originally Posted By: FXjohn
it could apply.


The key is the unlawful part. If GZ feared for his life, the law states very clearly that he can use deadly force to protect himself.

 

[FXjohn]

Originally Posted By: Swarmlord
Originally Posted By: FXjohn
it could apply.


The key is the unlawful part. If GZ feared for his life, the law states very clearly that he can use deadly force to protect himself.


right, and the killing part is where they can decide the manslaughter part of it, even if it is a light sentence or even no sentence.

 

[BISCUT]

Originally Posted By: FXjohn
Originally Posted By: Swarmlord
Originally Posted By: FXjohn
it could apply.


The key is the unlawful part. If GZ feared for his life, the law states very clearly that he can use deadly force to protect himself.


right, and the killing part is where they can decide the manslaughter part of it, even if it is a light sentence or even no sentence.


No! If they decide he was in "fear for his life" the answer is acquit....that is why I'm "guessing" all women there will be at least one that says she cant and hang that jury/

 

[Falken]

If the glove doesn't fit, Must Acquit.

 

[FXjohn]

Originally Posted By: BISCUT


No! If they decide he was in "fear for his life" the answer is acquit....that is why I'm "guessing" all women there will be at least one that says she cant and hang that jury/


that's arbitrary. one person's fear isn't another's.

 

[BISCUT]

Originally Posted By: GreeCguy
According to Wikipedia

Voluntary manslaughter

Voluntary manslaughter occurs either when the defendant kills with malice aforethought (intention to kill or cause serious harm), but there are mitigating circumstances that reduce culpability, or when the defendant kills only with an intent to cause serious bodily harm. Voluntary manslaughter in some jurisdictions is a lesser included offense of murder. The traditional mitigating factor was provocation; however, others have been added in various jurisdictions.

Involuntary manslaughter

Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought, either express or implied. It is distinguished from voluntary manslaughter by the absence of intention. It is normally divided into two categories; constructive manslaughter and criminally negligent manslaughter, both of which involve criminal liability.



FL statue is all that matters...and stand your ground mitagates and possibly negates the manslaughter in this particular case. End of day it is the jurt instruction allowed by the judge that matters most.

 

[dparm]

Deliberation time means nothing. Plenty of "high profile cases" had very long deliberations that returned guilty and not guilty verdicts.

 

[salv]

I'm sure the jury doesn't want "OJ: The Sequel", but at the same time, they don't want to hand down a verdict that will invalidate Florida state laws that allow for lethal force to be used in a self defense scenario.
Zimmerman will probably be found guilty of a far lesser charge than 2nd degree murder because he needlessly followed an innocent pedestrian who, feeling threatened, defended himself by turning and attacking a strange man pursuing him.
Stand your ground can go both ways in this case. That doesn't negate the outcome of the confrontation. A kid died because an overzealous guy decided to play policeman without a legal mandate, in fact, against the instructions given by the law enforcement authorities.
Both parties should have been held liable for their actions, but one is too dead for that, so the remaining party has to answer for disallowing the other his day in court.
The jury has to balance justice with the political ramifications of their verdict. Lengthy deliberation is absolutely appropriate.

 

[Swarmlord]

Originally Posted By: salv
I'm sure the jury doesn't want "OJ: The Sequel", but at the same time, they don't want to hand down a verdict that will invalidate Florida state laws that allow for lethal force to be used in a self defense scenario.
Zimmerman will probably be found guilty of a far lesser charge than 2nd degree murder because he needlessly followed an innocent pedestrian who, feeling threatened, defended himself by turning and attacking a strange man pursuing him.
Stand your ground can go both ways in this case. That doesn't negate the outcome of the confrontation. A kid died because an overzealous guy decided to play policeman without a legal mandate, in fact, against the instructions given by the law enforcement authorities.
Both parties should have been held liable for their actions, but one is too dead for that, so the remaining party has to answer for disallowing the other his day in court.
The jury has to balance justice with the political ramifications of their verdict. Lengthy deliberation is absolutely appropriate.


911 dispatchers are NOT law enforcement...

 

[Jarlaxle]

I wonder if one juror is determined to hang the jury. I might, were I on the jury...given that a verdict either way could get me killed, I would probably hang the jury.

I honestly wonder if one or more jurors might vote to convict because they truly fear for their lives if they acquit Zimmerman.

 

[bdcardinal]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
I wonder if one juror is determined to hang the jury. I might, were I on the jury...given that a verdict either way could get me killed, I would probably hang the jury.

I honestly wonder if one or more jurors might vote to convict because they truly fear for their lives if they acquit Zimmerman.


If they genuinely fear for their lives, they should let the judge know. Intimidating a jury is looked down upon by the Feds.

 

[carwreck]

Originally Posted By: FXjohn
what is the level of proof needed for a manslaughter charge?

The full jury instructions with definintions of levels.
http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2013/07/12/jury_instructions.pdf

Originally Posted By: FXjohn
...the killing part is where they can decide the manslaughter part of it, even if it is a light sentence or even no sentence.

Under Florida's 10-20-Life law, 2nd degree murder or manslaughter with a gun can have the same sentence, 25 years to Life. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10-20-Life

 

[yonyon]

Originally Posted By: salv

The jury has to balance justice with the political ramifications of their verdict.


No. They don't have to balance any freaking thing against political ramifications. That's what bad judges with an activist bent do. The jury have to decide whether or not the prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime has been committed.