The facts, ma'am, just the facts
Is it any wonder that some of the public, some police, and some prosecutors struggle with the concept of "stand your ground", i.e. 'no duty to retreat', when there are some law professors that apparently don't understand it. It's (SYG) a good law, with a sound concept, that is not difficult for most people to understand.
Recently, Andrew Branca reported:
I came across the University of Miami Law School Summer 2014 edition of their law review, and noted that it had a particular focus on Stand-Your-Ground... It did, of course, talk about several of the recent (and upcoming) self-defense cases, including Zimmerman, Dunn, and Alexander–none of which, of course, actually are Stand-Your-Ground cases...
I have to confess I didn’t make it all the way through myself, as I bumped up across an interesting factual claim [by University of Miami School of Law Professor Donna Coker] with regard to the Zimmerman trial.
Ah yes, it seems that a misunderstanding of the facts is the common denominator in these things; throw in a little emotion, and you always have a good news story...
I was invited to debate “Stand-Your-Ground” at UC Berkeley Law School... A law professor on the anti-SYG side asked me how Zimmerman’s conduct could have been defensible given that he got out of his car and pursued Trayvon Martin after being ordered by the 911 dispatcher not to do so...
I immediately offered her a $100 wager that her statement of fact was incorrect. She fell silent, but her debate partner, CNN Legal Analyst Sunny Hostin, fairly lunged at the opportunity: “I’ll take that bet.”
I’ve previously dealt in great detail with this issue of whether Zimmerman got out of his car contrary to police instructions. He did not.
In fact, the sequence of events as they actually occurred is:
(1) Zimmerman informed the dispatcher that Martin had fled from sight around the corner of a building.
(2) The dispatcher asked Zimmerman where Martin was running to.
(3) Unable to observe Martin from his vehicle, Zimmerman exited the vehicle and set out on foot to look around the corner of the building.
(4) The dispatcher, sensing that Zimmerman had exited his vehicle, asked Zimmerman if he was following Martin.
(5) Zimmerman affirmed that he was.
(6) The dispatcher advised Zimmerman, “We don’t need you to do that.”
(7) Zimmerman responded, “OK,” and began returning back to his vehicle.On the way back to his vehicle Zimmerman concluded his call with 911. It was then that Zimmerman and Martin had their fateful encounter.
Mr. Branca extended some professional courtesy to Professor Coker in an attempt to help her get her facts straight. We'll have to see if that has a better result than his wager with Sunny Hostin.
I've posted the link before, but if anyone has the time, and would like to watch the Zimmerman v. State of Florida trial, gavel to gavel, it can be found at this link.
/fl