No, the Florida Legislature did not pass a law legalizing murder, at
least not intentionally…we hope. The Florida Legislature creates and enacts
statutes. But the Florida Legislature does not make law. That is done in the
courts. That may seem a fine distinction, but it is an accurate distinction. The
trial of George Zimmerman accused of the murder, or at least manslaughter, of
Trayvon Martin has amply
demonstrated how a statute is frequently interpreted into law through the
judicial process in Florida.
There has been extensive discussion in the print and broadcast media as
to the absence of instruction by the judge regarding “Stand Your Ground”, the
statute section that initially protected Mr. Zimmerman from arrest at the time
of the incident. In fact, instructions to a jury or “charging the jury” by a
judge can be critical to the determination of guilt or innocence. Judge Debra S. Nelson ruled that the “Stand your
Ground” defense, as well as any discussion of first aggressor could not be
considered by the jury. But then, in the consideration of the charge of
Manslaughter, there is no need to specifically proscribe a “Stand your Ground”
defense, it is written in as a section of the statutory definition of
Manslaughter. Where are the investigative reporters? Have they all failed to
simply read the law?
Florida Statute 782.07 defines ”Manslaughter;
aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated
manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter,
an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.—
(1) The killing of a human being by the
act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful
justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which
such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the
provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree,
punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.”
So, what is this chapter 776 referring to “lawful justification”? This
statute contains the provisions of the so called “Stand Your Ground Statute:
Paragraph 3 of that statute chapter reads: “(3) 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.” Judge Nelson, by her charge to the jury has essentially eliminated Manslaughter
as a Florida crime. As for the manslaughter of a child, why the jury did not
consider 17 year old Trayvon Martin a child is anyone’s guess. For all of the
rest of us, it may be a good idea to bring a gun to a fistfight.
This leaves us with
questions about the determination of innocence. The motivation ascribed to Mr.
Zimmerman by his defense team used the term “imminent harm”. However, the
statutes considered by the jury refer to “prevent death or great bodily harm”.
Trayvon Martin was armed with a bottle of iced tea and a bag of skittles. Where
was that chunk of concrete in evidence or evidence that anything was happening
other than that George Zimmerman was on the bottom in a street fight? He had
apparently recovered sufficiently to get at his gun and chose to save himself
from the humiliation of defeat by an unarmed Black-American boy by firing
center mass into his chest at close range.
It is now accepted
into Florida law as precedent that there is no need to define “imminent bodily
harm”, “great bodily harm” or the factors that may contribute to believe that
there is a reasonable threat of death. Nor is it relevant by this precedent to
consider the antagonist or first aggressor when a death by deliberate deadly
action results in the course of a confrontation. Further, although the statute
specifically includes “aggravated manslaughter of a child” in the definition of
Manslaughter, it is apparently no longer necessary to consider an unarmed
juvenile as a child if they present as a cause for a reasonable belief that
there is a threat of “great bodily harm” or “death”. Although untested, why
would any other special group defined under this manslaughter statute be
protected if their killer can assert belief that deadly force was “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.”
While it is true that
no judge is forced to adhere to the precedents set by Judge Nelson, any good
defense attorney would assert these precedents in the defense of a client
facing similar charges as George Zimmerman. That defense is essentially the “Coward’s
Defense” meaning that anyone losing in a physical or emotional confrontation
can “bring a gun to a fistfight” and use it. Murder is legal in Florida whether
a racial confrontation, a bar fight or the aftermath of road rage, the
resulting manslaughter is moot.
