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.
So sure, the Martins can sue Zimmerman, but the dirty tricks of suppressing discovery have alreadt been used, so the Zimmerman team will be better prepared. Then, there is the rest of the law:
(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).
So, if they try it, they will be suing a person who has no money, having spent it all in defense of his criminal trial. If they win, they get nothing. If they lose, they get to pay Zimmerman's legal costs.
So....
ReplyDeleteIf a jury of his peers has found that he was justified in causing the death of his assailant, that means he is immune from civil litigation in connection to the incident, right?
Why would any lawyer file a lawsuit that he not only knows he can't win, but also knows that will cause sanctions (legal expenses) to be levied against his clients?