Vipam,
I see no reason why you should resort to calling names. I have not called you an names. I am participating in a rational discussion and am asking for more information so I might learn more about the case. Although I have some opinions about the case I am sure I could be convinced the other way with the right evidence. I would hope you would be as open minded. I'll respond to your points and may bring up several of my own as well.
1) I don't think anything about how slow he was jogging, or even if he was not jogging has any bearing on my beliefs about the case. From what has been reported I don't think there is any indication that he was doing anything to provoke a fight in any way, shape, or form.
2) Same thing, walking, jogging, etc. doesn't matter to me, no evidence that the guy was doing anything but minding his own business.
3) I am not sure which article that you read to get these facts. I've read at least 3. All of them said that the assailant planned to attack the jogger and did so. At that point, according to Florida law, if the jogger had a reasonable belief that his life was in danger then he had the right to use deadly force against his attacker. If somebody attacked me, without any apparent provocation, and swung at me, I believe it is reasonable to conclude that my life may be in danger and that I am entitled to defend myself.
As for the reported words to the mugger, I am not sure how much credibility to give it. It appeared in one article that I read and that article considerably after the fact. Did the youth report that to the police at the time of the incident? Did he only tell it to the reporter much later? That would cause me to think harder.
4) I do not know all the facts of the hows and whys of the shooting, there are not enough facts in evidence to determine anything definitive. That is why I said I would like to see the police report, for example. It might have more facts from which stronger conclusions could be drawn. Did he miss with the first four shots because his vision was blurred after being hit? We don't know. How fast did he empty his magazine? We don't know. Did he shot his attacker in the back as his attacker was attempting to engage in hand to hand combat? Or was his attacker 100 yrs. away and fleeing? We don't know. Those are relevant facts and firm answers could sway my opinion.
5. Question, for people who seem to know---what were the details of the alleged argument between the mugger and the jogger's brother? I have seen it alleged that they had an altercation but no details about the when, how and whys of that argument?
6. Question on people's opinions---I've seen a lot of allegations that this was a setup--but it appears from all accounts that the mugger attacked first and without provocation. How can somebody be set up when they threw the first punch? Nobody seems to dispute that he threw the first punch. I also tend to disagree with the idea that it was a setup because the shooter stayed with the victim and called authorities after he shot the guy. I think if he was out looking to shoot somebody he would have run--more likely---though not definitive.
7. I don't know all the facts of this case--probably nobody does except the people involved. It is possible that the shooter was up to no good as people have alleged, but there is no actual evidence of this. Whether you think it is wise to walk around at that time of night with money in your pocket and a concealed weapon is not really relevant--there is nothing illegal about any of this. Here is what I know:
The police, who do have as many of the facts as any of us ever will, concluded that Baker's belief that his life was in danger was a reasonable belief and that he was entitled to use deadly force. His actions apparently did not convince the police that he was out there looking for trouble.
Regardless, this thread is about a civil case. I posted the statute above, it is a defense against a civil action for wrongful death to argue that the person who died was engaged in felonious conduct and died as a result. This can be proven either by a criminal conviction (which won't happen because he died) or by a preponderance of the evidence (a lesser standard). Since the witness said that the mugger planned to attack him and actually did attack him, that would seem to meet the standard to me. Assault qualifies as felonious conduct and would serve as a bar to any wrongful death action.