The George Zimmerman Verdict: How Does an Aggressor Successfully Argue Self Defence

After my initial shock at hearing the verdict and my attempt to rationalize it I have further reflected on the verdict.

Perhaps it all comes down to the difference between Canadian and Floridian/American attitudes to vigilantism.

I consider myself to be a reasonable man and my interpretation of self defence does not allow for an aggressor to claim self defence. For example, you cannot start a fight with someone and kill them and then argue that because they fought back you killed them in self defence.

In this case, perhaps because the actual physical altercation was not witnessed, the jury seemed to have difficulty seeing who the aggressor really was. I had no difficulty determining that at all. The aggression started with the vigilante stalking of Trayvon Martin (who was doing nothing wrong) by George Zimmerman. George Zimmerman was clearly the aggressor. George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin. George Zimmerman was guilty of murder.

The George Zimmerman Verdict and The British Justice System

The not guilty verdicts in the George Zimmerman trial for the murder of Travyon Martin may be a result of the British criminal justice system (that is shared by both Canada and the United States) and it's most important principle that it is better that the guilty go free than the innocent be convicted.

One of the earliest expressionless of this principle was Blackstone's formulation: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer", further amplified in the United States by Benjamin Franklin: "It is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer".

This principle is expressed in practice by the principle that juries must find an accused guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal prosecutions.

So we have a jury presented with a case involving an altercation with no witnesses and a defendant that apparently has significant injuries and that, along with other factors, may be enough to create reasonable doubt in the jurors minds and thus a not guilty verdict.

None of that changes the fact that Zimmerman, having a vigilante attitude, profiled Martin (whether racially or otherwise) and pursued him even after being advised not to by authorities - a chain of events set in motion by Zimmerman and controlled by him that led to the death of Trayvon Martin who was doing nothing wrong when Zimmerman set these actions into motion.

A reasonable person would conclude that, even if not criminally guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, George Zimmerman was responsible for the death of Trayvon Martin.

One would expect a very different outcome if a wrongful death claim was filed against Zimmerman where the standard of proof would not be beyond a reasonable doubt but a preponderance of the evidence.

Federal prosecution under federal civil rights law may also result in a different outcome.

The U.S. Department of Justice said Sunday it would review the Travyon Martin-George Zimmerman case to determine if it should consider prosecuting Zimmerman, who was acquitted in a Florida court in the shooting death of the unarmed black teenager.

"Experienced federal prosecutors will determine whether the evidence reveals a prosecutable violation of any of the limited federal criminal civil rights statutes within our jurisdiction, and whether federal prosecution is appropriate in accordance with the Department's policy governing successive federal prosecution following a state trial," said a statement released by the department.

As further events unfold we should all heed United States President Obama's call for calm.

Sudbury's Leo Gerard Speaks on West Virginia Coal Mining Disaster

West Virginia Coal Miners Murdered

Perhaps not in the legal sense, but this speaks of moral responsibility:

Massey Energy's sprawling Upper Big Branch mine has a history of violations involving the ventilation of combustible methane gas.

Last year, the mine faced 458 safety violation citations, and 50 of those were classified as "unwarrantable failures to comply," according to the Mine Safety and Health Administration.

At the time of Monday's explosion, the mine was facing more than $150,000 US in fines for pending safety violation charges.

In 2006, Massey Energy was fined $1.5 million for 25 violations that inspectors concluded contributed to the deaths of two miners who were trapped in a fire in another West Virginia mine owned by the company.

Click here for full CBC News report

Buses Speaking Truth to Power

Imagine these buses rolling down American streets.

Names of the Dead

Tragedy and Assumptions

Although very few details about the circumstances surrounding the tragic death of Aqsa Parvez are known it has not prevented many bloggers from making assumptions and putting forth their own theories.

What is known is that her father told police that he killed her and he has been charged with second degree murder, indicating the police do not believe the killing was premeditated or planned. We also know their was conflict between Aqsa Parvez and her father, possibly relating to his religious beliefs and her not wanting to wear a hijab.

We know that this happened in a suburban community in Ontario. We know that it is common, and even considered appropriate, for Canadian parents to want to instill their own sense of values in their children, and that these values are often based on religious beliefs, We also know that it is common for parents and teenagers, particularly teenage girls, to disagree over appropriate dress as it relates to “modesty”.

Many bloggers have tried to make that conflict the issue. That is not the issue. Parents and children are going to be in conflict. The problem is violence. No cultural or religious group in Canada accepts family violence. It is completely inappropriate and unacceptable for violence to become part of family disputes whether between spouses or between parents and children.

Royal Canadian Murderous Police Shame

Do we really need another blog stating it's disgust and shame for the murder of Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Unfortunately we do. This case is of such significance that I feel I must go on the record. However we all know the facts and have seen the videos so I will not repeat or reference them here.

Some have used this as an example of why the police should not use Tasers. The police argument has always been that Tasers are used as an alternative to guns and can allow police to avoid shooting and killing people. What that says is about this case is that if the RCMP did not have Tasers they would have shot him instead. This is not a case of whether the RCMP can be trusted with Tasers, it is a case of whether they can be trusted with any weapons. With four officers dealing with one unarmed man (who could not understand them) there was no need for any type of weapon to be used. We can only hope it was not a case of them wanting to try out their new toy.

One might be able to make a weak case that the first use of the Taser was bad judgment but the continued use on the victim, after he was down, was murder, pure and simple.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police must pull the wagons back out of the circle and join the rest of Canada in expressing their disgust and shame for this act of murder.