Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Ayoob on Zimmerman
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Werewolf" data-source="post: 2248633" data-attributes="member: 239"><p>Ayoob mentions "disparity of force" and the implication is that the principle was not a small part of getting Zimmerman off.</p><p></p><p>Until I took the CCW class way back in 2003 I always thought that it was a legal principle universally recognized. Not so - at least not in OK and at least not according to the attorney who taught the course (Doug Friesen). The topic came up and was discussed. The class was told that disparity of force was not a legally recognized principle in OK.</p><p></p><p>My question is does that mean it couldn't be used in a self defense trial in OK as justification for reasonable fear of life and limb?</p><p></p><p>If Zimmerman had been in OK and tried here under identical circumstances would "disparity of force" have been allowed to have been brought up in his trial?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Werewolf, post: 2248633, member: 239"] Ayoob mentions "disparity of force" and the implication is that the principle was not a small part of getting Zimmerman off. Until I took the CCW class way back in 2003 I always thought that it was a legal principle universally recognized. Not so - at least not in OK and at least not according to the attorney who taught the course (Doug Friesen). The topic came up and was discussed. The class was told that disparity of force was not a legally recognized principle in OK. My question is does that mean it couldn't be used in a self defense trial in OK as justification for reasonable fear of life and limb? If Zimmerman had been in OK and tried here under identical circumstances would "disparity of force" have been allowed to have been brought up in his trial? [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Ayoob on Zimmerman
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom