Politesub53 -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/7/2013 3:29:03 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Please don't poo in the pool When the jury goes off to decide the guilt or innocence of the man who shot Trayvon Martin, should they have the option of choosing to convict for manslaughter, or should they be restricted to the all or nothing of 2nd degree murder vs. the killer walking away to his book deal? As I understand Florida law, and I may be misinformed, it will be up to the judge, when the instructions are given. Under UK Law Zimmerman could have had that option, as well as one of self defence. Sometimes a murder trial is changed to a manslaughter trial as it progresses. The key would, in my opinion, be if a defendent could prove there was a qualifying trigger. From the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 "1)Where a person (“D”) kills or is a party to the killing of another (“V”), D is not to be convicted of murder if— (a)D's acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing resulted from D's loss of self-control, (b)the loss of self-control had a qualifying trigger, and (c)a person of D's sex and age, with a normal degree of tolerance and self-restraint and in the circumstances of D, might have reacted in the same or in a similar way to D."
|
|
|
|