Standing ‘Stand Your Ground’ On Its Head

Now that the verdict is in and the legal system has had it day-in-court on the Zimmerman/Martin (Z/M) case, it’s an opportune time to look at the Stand Your Ground (SYG) law and the Z/M case in a structural manner. The general premise of SYG laws is that you have the right to defend yourself without the condition of attempting to avoid, evade or flee from a confrontation. So if your person is at risk of harm, you can use force to protect yourself and be either immune from prosecution or use SYG as the basis of your defense that your actions were legal and justifiable. In the Z/M case, the SYG law was stated as the defense’s position for exempting a determination of murder and justifying the homicide as an act of self-defense. Whether you adhere to the defenses view of self-defense or the prosecutor’s view of murder, independent of the jury’s decision of ‘not-guilty’, you should be able to easily resolve and answer the following questions consistently and without any conflict.

Let’s imagine two individuals: AA and BB. Each is a male, they are of different ethnic backgrounds, and they differ in age by roughly 10 years. They interact with each other in an area that each has a reasonable and legal right to be. You don’t know these individuals and should be careful to not assume any fact or condition not explicitly stated to be applicable to the situations presented.

Situation 1: AA approaches BB, and AA inquires, “Why are you here?”  BB and AA begin engaging in back-and-forth shouts to the effect that “it’s none of your business”’ and “get out of my face”. After just a few minutes, AA believes that BB is going to escalate the confrontation to the point that AA’s well-being/person is at risk. BB uses a pointed-finger to poke AA in the chest. A struggle ensues and AA kills BB. When the police arrive, AA states that they were afraid for their life and this is a SYG case of self-defense.

                Does SYG apply, and was it self-defense?

Situation 2: BB has been following AA for several minutes, and AA becomes aware that BB is following them. BB approaches AA, and BB inquires, “Why are you here?”  BB and AA begin engaging in back-and-forth shouts to the effect that “it’s none of your business”’ and “get out of my face”. After just a few minutes, AA believes that BB is going to escalate the confrontation to the point that AA’s well-being/person is at risk. BB uses a pointed-finger to poke AA in the chest. A struggle ensues and AA kills BB. When the police arrive, AA states that they were afraid for their life and this is a SYG case of self-defense.

                Does SYB apply, and was it self-defense?

Situation 3: BB has been following AA for several minutes, and AA becomes aware that BB is following them. AA approaches BB, and AA inquires, “Why are you here?”  BB and AA begin engaging in back-and-forth shouts to the effect that “it’s none of your business”’ and “get out of my face”. After just a few minutes, BB believes that AA is going to escalate the confrontation to the point that BB’s well-being/person is at risk. BB uses a pointed-finger to poke AA in the chest. A struggle ensues and BB kills AA. When the police arrive, BB states that they were afraid for their life and this is a SYG case of self-defense.

Does SYB apply, and was it self-defense?

Situation 4: BB has been following AA for several minutes, and AA becomes aware that BB is following them. AA approaches BB, and AA inquires, “Why are you here?”  BB and AA begin engaging in back-and-forth shouts to the effect that “it’s none of your business”’ and “get out of my face”. After just a few minutes, AA believes that BB is going to escalate the confrontation to the point that AA’s well-being/person is at risk and BB believes that AA is going to harm them on an equivalent basis. AA uses a pointed-finger to poke BB in the chest. A struggle ensues and BB kills AA. When the police arrive, BB states that they were afraid for their life and this is a SYG case of self-defense.

                Does SYB apply, and was it self-defense?

Situation 5: BB has been following AA for several minutes, and AA becomes aware that BB is following them. AA approaches BB, and AA inquires, “Why are you here?”  BB and AA begin engaging in back-and-forth shouts to the effect that “it’s none of your business”’ and “get out of my face”. After just a few minutes, AA believes that BB is going to escalate the confrontation to the point that AA’s well-being/person is at risk and BB believes that AA is going to harm them on an equivalent basis. One of them uses a pointed-finger to poke the other in the chest. A struggle ensues and one kills the other. When the police arrive, ?? (the surviving individual) states that they were afraid for their life and this is a SYG case of self-defense.

Does SYB apply, and was it self-defense if AA is the survivor?
What if BB is the survivor?

Last situation: If the prosecution in the Z/M case were to have claimed that Trayvon was killed when he was reasonably and justifiably “standing his ground” in self-defense, is it logically and reasonably possible that someone SYG can kill someone else SYG and be completely acting in a legal and acceptable manner?  Does it depend upon who is SYG first? And if so, how do you determine that?

One of the problems with SYG is that it relies upon an assessment of when and what constitutes a condition of risk that cannot be guaranteed to be deterministic in a given case. So when you wind up with an absolute certainty of what the Z/M case was, no matter which side, would you be comfortable with that same clarity should you be in the AA or BB shoes?