Zimmermann verdict in. Case for civil suits?

I was wrong. I predicted a hung jury. For once, I am happy to be wrong.

I believe this is a just and correct verdict. Zimmerman had to fight not only the unethical prosecution, but also the media and the judge. That he ultimately prevailed IMHO demonstrates that there is still hope for our court system.
 
Zimmerman -- Law (if any) precluding civil lawsuit

Is there any law on Florida books that will now preclude the ambulance chasers from
destroying Zimmerman (and his family) with wrongful death civil lawsuits?
 
Threads merged.

OK... Listen up.

I am against any thread discussing the verdict. It is what it is. However...

Mehavey above, has raised a valid question/concern to the aftermath of such criminal trials.

Therefore, while not first in the announcement of the verdict, it is the only basis for further discussion.

Be warned, ranting or raving over the verdict or the trial in general will get you suspended from TFL.
 
Being in Florida and watching the State Attorney appointed by the Gov. to pursue this case, I think that the State has wasted our tax money to sastify others. The families lawyer cost the state millions in Bay County years ago over a sickle cell anema case that no one could have avoided.

There should be a punishment for wasting our tax money.

To be clear, I am not discussing the verdict.

I am refering to the broadcast by the S.A. stating that she did not accept the verdict. Once the jury has spoken, it is over. "She" is stirring the pot on tv right now, which is wrong.

Sorry for any confusion.
 
Last edited:
Is there any law on Florida books that will now preclude the ambulance chasers from
destroying Zimmerman (and his family) with wrongful death civil lawsuits?
Click to expand...
I could be wrong but I think Zimmerman could ask for immunity from civil suit based upon self-defense. In the criminal trial, the government essentially had to prove beyond a reasonable Zimmerman did not act in self-defense. In a civil proceeding, Zimmerman would have the burden to prove self-defense in a claim for immunity. This would stop the civil proceeding at an early stage. Martin's family would still have to ultimately prove the wrongful death case.

BTW, I saw a crawl on one of the networks saying the NAACP was going to press the federal DOJ to prosecute a civil rights criminal violation.
 
The Home Owner's Association settled with the "family" before the court case started.

As a lawyer told me in a damage case, a dead one cost less than a injured live one. In these "cases", a dead one cost more. Depends on the "lawyer".

Sorry, but true.
 
I could be wrong but I think Zimmerman could ask for immunity from civil suit based upon self-defense.
Click to expand...
That's going to be difficult if not impossible to secure. The time to invoke the SYG immunity is through a hearing, not a jury trial. A civil suit is a very real, if not inevitable, possibility.

There are several other possibilities, none of them encouraging. As KyJim points out, the federal government can bring a civil-rights case. They can also charge him with a hate crime.

He will need to retain legal counsel for the forseeable future.
 
Now that he has been charged, tried, and formally acquitted, doesn't Florida law automatically protect Zimmerman from civil lawsuit? Or does he now have to seek a stand-your-ground determination in order to invoke that protection?
 
Thank you, pcp911 for that clarification.

Be warned... I meant what I said. The Verdict Is Not Up For Discussion. Violators will have their post deleted and will be banned for 7 days. Not Trial. No Notice. No Second Chances.
 
Is immunity from civil suit irrevocably and solely tied to a stand your ground defense? If anyone has the applicable statutes, I'd like to read them.

But I don't think that's Zimmerman's chief worry at this point anyway. I think DoJ is coming after him and their prosecutors will make the Florida prosecution team seem like puppy dogs by comparison. I look for a Monday announcement of DoJ's intentions - more than likely a hate crime charge. It would not surprise me to see an arrest and indictment before the end of the week.
 
One thing to consider, also, with respect to civil suits - not only is the burden of proof different, but so are the evidentiary standards. It's likely that at least some evidence which was ruled out of the criminal trial would be admissible in civil suit.
 
I am not a lawyer. So, the following thought could be totally off base. I noticed it was stated after the verdict Mr. Zimmerman was now free to leave the State of Florida. I suspect he is departing as quickly as he can. If nothing else but for he and his families safety.

I think it will be more difficult for him to be served with a Civil Suit originated in Florida if he is out of the State.

I too, have thought from the beginning of the trial a Violation of Travon Martin's Civil Rights Federal charge might be pursued in case of a Not Guilty Verdict. Also noted was a statement by the NAACP to pursued with the DOJ the legality of "Stand Your Ground."
 
Last edited:
not only is the burden of proof different, but so are the evidentiary standards.
Click to expand...
That's what worries me. In a civil suit, the plaintiff does not have to overcome reasonable doubt. He simply has to win on a preponderance of evidence. The actual burden is much lower.
 
I think it will be more difficult for him to be served with a Civil Suit originated in Florida if he is out of the State.
Click to expand...
No, not really. Once the suit is filed, the litigant just hires a process server in the jurisdiction the defendant is in and service is identical.

If the defendant chooses not to return to the jurisdiction in which the suit is filed, then the judge will almost certainly enter a summary judgement for the plaintiff - so you can pretty much count on Zimmerman attending any civil suits in which he's named as the defendant.
 
Chapter 776: JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.

(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top