Long before Kyle Rittenhouse’s shooting in Kenosha, one of the most controversial self-defense cases, similar cases fueled the country with polarizing opinions. One of these trials was a criminal prosecution of George Zimmerman, who shot and killed unarmed black adolescent Trayvon Martin in a gated community in Sanford, Florida (Francescani, 2012). The major role here plays in the context of constant burglaries and break-ins that were common in the community during 2011-2012 (Francescani, 2012). The actions of George Zimmerman were determined by the increasing alert of neighbors, the deteriorating health conditions of parents, and persistent feelings of insecurity.
This case provokes thoughts about distinguishing between the objective truth and statements made by a person who claims self-defense. In legal practice, lawyers differentiate between four criteria: attack, necessity, objective reasonableness, and immense (Funk & Volokh, 2022). The attack and necessity mean the defendant’s subjective belief that a victim’s actions were unlawful and that the severity of self-defense actions was adequate. This part derives from the personal feelings and considerations of the defendant. For example, in the Zimmerman trial, the defendant was sure that his actions were correct and provided personal justification based on facts.
At the same time, objective reasonableness is a major area of debate between the two parties. The factual truth cannot be acquired from participating parties but only through verified evidence (Funk & Volokh, 2022). In fact, there was no empirical evidence of what happened between Martin and Zimmerman. As Francescani (2012) points out, “after the phone call [with the police] ended, several minutes passed when the movements of Zimmerman and Martin remain a mystery”. Therefore, the jury’s major complexity was to figure out what a reasonable person standard would do in the mutual fight between a dead teenager and the defendant.
References
Francescani, C. (2012). George Zimmerman: Prelude to a shooting. Reuters. Web.
Funk, M., & Volokh, E. (2022). U.S. self-defense law – ‘harsh’ by international standards? Bloomberg Law Insights 2022. Web.