Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Happening now there's new reaction after attorney general Eric holder's remarks on the George Zimmerman trial.
At an NAACP event yesterday mr.
holder condemned so called stand your ground laws.
He's calling for a review of the statute on the books in Florida and more than thirty other states.
That allows people to stand their ground pretty much anywhere instead of retreating.
If they believe it's necessary to present prevent death or great bodily harm with -- It's time to question laws.
-- senselessly expand the concept of self defense.
And so dangerous content look in -- neighborhood.
Joining us now -- -- answer criminal defense attorney Tom commit to the former prosecutor criminal defense attorney and former US army jag welcome to both of you.
-- this -- this wasn't a stand your ground defense why is the attorney general bringing it up.
I think the attorney general's bringing it up for the same reason that we constantly hear about racism even though there was no evidence.
Introduced the trolley George -- Zimmerman acted and it added any racist motive it makes for a better narrative it's something that the average.
Person out there who may not understand the nuances of the law.
IQ can sink their teeth into.
What this trial was about was an individual's inherent right of self defense.
That goes back not only to to the start of our nation in the back to English common law back to Roman law it's one of the principles.
-- -- common law and it it's been codified in statute and every one of our fifty states that if you reasonably believe.
That you -- under attack.
You have an inherent right to -- reasonable force to defend yourself.
Now you -- no reasonable minds can differ whether Zimmerman reasonably reasonably believe that and whether he was justified.
But that's an issue for the jury that's not an issue for Eric Holder and NAACP -- It's faster than the states worms were the laboratories.
Of laws move the federal government was not given.
A lot of power to enforce criminal laws because that's what the states are supposed to do so why.
Is the nation's top federal law enforcement officer opining on what the state of Florida he thinks ought to do.
I think that's that's exactly right I agree with Tom Eric Holder has no -- managed to tell that states what they should do it.
The states can decide by themselves very well what they want to deal.
And they have their own processes and procedures to determine what's in the best interest for -- -- our state.
Eric Holder doesn't -- he had say.
I guess the ability to influence because of his political position but he certainly doesn't have the -- -- mandate that any state.
Looks toward exchanging or stand your ground statutes it is solely up to the states to determine what.
The states should do about their own criminal laws -- I think he was just trying to.
Answer those who are looking for something positive to come out of the Zimmermann case and so I agrees you know.
-- he's answering constituents any outcry from those who thought that there was an injustice done.
By the verdict but really stay underground had no place in this trial.
And I agree with Tom this is you know this is just done to satisfy those who are had an outcry that there's no there's nothing real that's going to come up.
-- the testimony was that George Zimmerman is lying on the ground getting his head bashed in by a larger and stronger and younger opponent.
You know getting hit.
Mixed martial arts star Allen got his nose broken in the process.
Where is he supposed to go Tom what is he supposed to do.
What there and that's exactly -- -- -- crap punch I can play into this case because there was no.
Legal theory regarding -- duty to retreat introduced by either the prosecution.
For the defense again you don't believe no one has to agree with the Zimmerman verdict that there -- a reasonable -- the evidence that that it is contrary to what.
The jury found but merely because you don't agree with the verdict mean we admit it merely because you don't believe this.
The finders of fact the jury in this case got it right.
Is not justification.
For rewriting our law.
You know the problem with legislatures the problem with government in general is they're inherently.
You know we have all lately that you know the good populist thing in the last decade or two is the name -- law after victims.
Terrible -- -- in my opinion because what happens is.
You you creator reaction and then you have politicians -- well I you know I can't.
I don't agree with this but I can't vote against Trey bombs lost so once those law.
And he creates reactionary law making which is a terrible terrible idea and most situation.
It's interesting in and sometimes you -- Got it right sometimes you have unintended consequences that come from.
What some believe was a good idea -- to pass a -- and some of those consequences aren't felt -- years later.
So I agree.
And we'll have.
Bad cases make bad laws Esther vantage Tom can -- thank you -- thanks thank you.
Filter by section