How does this scenario play out?

Let's say that Zimmerman approached Trayvon and Trayvon saw the gun before any type of altercation occurred. Would he not be within his rights to defend himself under the Stand Your Ground law assuming he felt he was being threatened? And if so, if Zimmerman then defended himself, what would be his defense since Trayvon felt that he was the that feeling threatened? Would he still be allowed to defend himself by taking a life and be 'justified'?
Lots of ifs and buts I know.....just a thought I had.

What would a reasonable person do? For all that Martin knew, Zimmerman could have been a police officer. Would it be okay for Martin/anyone to assault an off-duty police officer who was driving through the neighborhood and saw someone who he thought might be up to no good?

I would think a reasonable person would tell the person who they were and why they were in the neighborhood, not assault them.

Depends where I saw the gun I suppose. If it is Police Officer, I believe they are required to identify themselves first and foremost. So as soon as he doesn't do that, he is just a kook with a gun.

You mean like the plain clothes officers who didn't identify themselves when Zimmerman went to his friends aid while being harassed by some "kook with a gun"?
************************

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012

Must have missed that story....but if a Police officer doesn't identify himself and he is coming at me and I see a gun....not sure anything good could come of that.

How does this scenario play out?


Let's say that Zimmerman approached Trayvon and Trayvon saw the gun before any type of altercation occurred. Would he not be within his rights to defend himself under the Stand Your Ground law assuming he felt he was being threatened? And if so, if Zimmerman then defended himself, what would be his defense since Trayvon felt that he was the that feeling threatened? Would he still be allowed to defend himself by taking a life and be 'justified'?
Lots of ifs and buts I know.....just a thought I had.

I don't think that a reasonable person would fear for their life and attack someone for doing something as simple as legally carrying a gun. If someone did feel threatened by someone with a gun a reasonable reaction would be to call the police. Open carry and concealed carry are legal in Idaho. I occasionally see people carrying when out and about. I don't fear for my life or bounce their head off the sidewalk.

Ok but in my scenario can we not just assume that Trayvon saw the gun and felt his life was in danger. Does the scenario change and is he now allowed to use the "Stand Your Ground law" to instigate defending himself first? So if he saw the gun, he would be justified in beating Zimmerman since he felt his life was in danger?

CruseVegas wrote:

Are you saying if I'm walking down the street and open carrying or you see or think you see a gun printing under my shirt you are justified in punching me in the nose and pounding my head into the concrete until I'm unconscious? That is what your last post comes across as.

Ok but in my scenario can we not just assume that Trayvon saw the gun and felt his life was in danger...

The law doesn't include a provision for justifying an attack based on subjective feeling. It provides for self-defense based on "reasonable belief" and elaborates on what the latter means. I quoted the language in this recent post.

I can imagine a scenario under which Zimmerman could have been brandishing his gun in a threatening manner, giving Martin grounds for reasonable belief that his life was in danger. But I know of absolutely no evidence that the scenario actually occurred.

Whether or not Martin saw the weapon it seems very plausible that both individuals believed themselves to be in danger and both within their rights. Making the whole mess a tragic misunderstanding. Ultimately, the trier of fact must determine whether a reasonable person in the defendant's position would be in fear of death or serious bodily injury even if in hindsight, that belief was mistaken. So had this turned out that Martin sees gun on strange man following him and succeeds in bashing Zimmerman's head in, he may be able to successfully raise self defense.

There are probably some conceivable situations where #2 is present but #1 isn't, but they would be somewhat peculiar IMO. Maybe if the person was motivated by something other than fear for his life, such as hate or revenge, although rationally he should have feared for his life?

I think one of the things that will be prominent in the trial is that Zimmerman did what a good citizen should do when they see something out of the ordinary, call the police. If Martin was scared that someone was following him, he should have also called the police. The fact that he did not call the police will be a key in Zimmerman being found not guilty.