Page 40 - Doesnt Support News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

>> page, you hear rich manti, the prosecutor saying because trayvon martin was 17 years old, under 18, there was third degree felony murder charge available because of what he described as child abuse. he's making that case right now. >> he has to first prove the underlying felony, prove there was actual child abuse that occurred in this case. i agree with paul, it's a stretch here, i don't think the judge would give it. a lot of people are wondering why at this point are we trying to figure out what we are charging george zimmerman with. the fact is the law allow as lesser included offense li...

Language as a mirror of the change -- >> they're not objecting. >> but i am. in the sense -- >> you don't want it included in what you put in yours? >> no. i put beyond a reasonable doubt in there and the state agrees, so we're past that. >> okay. >> i included this whole section, which is based upon mr. zimmerman initially provoking the use of force against him. >> i don't think they have an objection to the section. >> no. i do. but -- >> then, why did you put it in your instructions? >> for discussions. >> okay. >> because it only becomes relevant if indeed there is substantial evidence to ...

Homicide be offered. >> but the evidence doesn't support that and the state's argument is at first yesterday when they provided the court with the possible lessers and one of them was aggravated assault, i didn't have any information available to me that led me to believe that that would be a charge that would be given because the facts did not support an aggravated assault lesser included offense. their argument today is that the facts support a third degree felony murder with the underlying enumerated felony being child abuse. that is permissible under the statute. if you need -- i'm not goi...

This was a trick? >> my intention right now is to get through the rest of the jury instructions because if we have any arguments about the other, i would like to get them lresolve. >> unusually heated arguments as they're trying to decide on the instructions to jury. let go back in live. >> other than this sense that she sensed movement or shadows or something. so let's assume even -- we can't assume that's true because it makes no sense compared with the other evidence in the case. that the evidence would support provoking? jam jane could not have seen what she claims to have seen. i it's phy...

>> yes. >> also there are some instructions to give only if there is evidence of what is seeking to be defined. >> the court just read it correctly that it requires, one, justified in the use of deadly force doesn't have the duty to retreat if, one -- >> that's not 776.012. i'm looking at the instruction. >> but what i'm saying the ininstruction refers you to the statute and i'm reading the statute. the statute says person is justified this using force