George Zimmerman's lawyers are going to ask the State of Florida to refund Mr. Zimmerman some of the money spent on his legal defense.
State law requires that Florida cover all legal expenses — except lawyer’s fees — for an acquitted defendant, from expert witnesses to the 3D videos shown to jurors. Zimmerman is still preparing a motion that will ask for between $200,000 and $300,000, according to his lawyer.
Taxpayers have already shelled out an estimated $902,000 on the second-degree murder trial that ended July 13,... (source)
The case should never have been brought to court. Hopefully, the voters will remove the publicity hungry state attorneys who charged Zimmerman.
I am of the firm belief that whoever loses a court case should be the one paying ALL the bills. It should discourage cases that don't have a reasonable chance of success.
By that logic, the dead victim would be paying these particular fees.
Dead people don't push for court cases... wouldn't it be the state vs Zimmerman?
That verdict , however , does not chance the fact that Zimmerman is a vile , reprehensible human being .
What is your basis for this judgement?
I actually know one of his neighbors and she would beg to differ. Furthermore, Zimmerman has mentored black teenagers, and pushed aggressively to see that the policeman who beat a particular homeless person was brought to justice.
Said unarmed human being had punched him in the nose (breaking it) causing massive bleeding. Then while Z was flat on his back this unarmed human being straddled Z and began MMA punching him. Z was blinded by blood from the nose wound and having difficulty breathing, and was being punched repeatedly while pinned to the ground.
He then heard the unarmed human being tell him he was going to die, a threat made to an (otherwise) helpless person who could not see whether or how such a threat could be followed through upon.
Personally I think Z deserves maximum positive credit for restraint for not shooting earlier under those conditions.
"Not shooting an unarmed person" is bullshit as a judgement criteria. As a reductio ad absurdum say I come after you with a chainsaw. Or a baseball bat. Do you have to stand there and let me do it just because I don't have a gun? Does a 90 lb woman have to restrain herself from shooting when dealing with a 250 pound thug who is using nothing but his muscles?
There was a disparity of force and strength in this case and Zs life had been threatened. Unless I am wrong as to the factual statements I made above, Z was entirely justified.
Some fools actually believe that an unarmed person can't kill another person. Just ask a cop or an ER doctor how true that is.
I watched the trial and never got that impression. The whole trial wouldn't have happened if Trayvon Martin had simply gone on his way home instead of shadowing and then attacking Zimmerman.
Considering he should be in jail on at the very least manslaughter, I say fuck'em. They should charge him more for daring to ask for a refund.
Unless you think that the jury system is no good and flawed, then you are required to at least give lip service to the verdict. I think that anyone who says that Zimmerman is guilty now should be brought to civil court and pay damages.
Now as to whether the current system is the best we can do is a whole different question
The law may be an ass but in this case Mr. Zimmerman is due restitution. He was acquitted.