|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Very clear evidence supporting the case that Zimmerman was attacked.
No evidence showing a physical assault on Martin.
No evidence of any racist attitude on Zimmerman's part.
Lots of racists involved, however.
Get ready for the riots. Remember the Korean shopkeepers.
I have felt that when this was all said and done that Zimmerman would be found not guilty of murder. I've also felt that when that happens, it's gonna be the Watts riots all over again...and that there's a segment of our population that cannot wait for that to happen.
Racism fueled the Watts Riots, and racism can fuel these if he's found not guilty. Those feelings have always bubbled right below the surface of our social consciousness and all it takes for some is an excuse to let rage out. That's what happened in the 60's and it can still happen today.
I believe that a self-appointed neighborhood cop bit off more than he could chew, as he was filled with a false sense of confidence and entitlement...just because he carried a gun. He realized his mistake too late causing him to have to use that gun resulting in the death of a teenager.
Now here we are.
IMHO two wrongs happened here. Even if the correct judgement ultimately happens, there's gonna be more ugliness from people that are looking for nothing else than to find an excuse to let more ugliness out...
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Is there anyone who has seen the recently released pictures of Zimmerman's head and would agree that this shows "a small laceration to the back of the head"?
Anyone?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,524
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,524 |
I always had the same thoughts.. I didn't think they had a chance to get a murder charge on him... was really surprised they didn't go with Manslaughter...
either way, guilty or innocent, there will be a lot of people upset...
<><
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Quote:
I always had the same thoughts.. I didn't think they had a chance to get a murder charge on him... was really surprised they didn't go with Manslaughter...
I mentioned this before ... I think they went with 2nd degree murder because it was just an excuse to "put him on trial". They can at least say the tried to do something, but it doesn't put them at risk of losing a re-trial due to "double-jeopardy" if any new evidence surfaces for a voluntary manslaughter charge. I think the state has there hands tied a bit with the SYG law, so they went with the obvious over-charge just to do *something*.
I also saw that the analysis came back on the "screaming in the background" ... they couldn't conclude that it came from either Martin or Zimmerman. But it was nearly 20 seconds of screaming for help, and one guy has all kinds of injuries while the other has scraped knuckles. I'm not sure you need a forensic lab to figure that one out ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Anybody noticing that on the range of the gunshot, a very crucial piece of evidence, we are given the higher boundary, but not the lower one? They can usually tell within 6 inches or less, all they really said was that it was "intermediate range", and tell us where that ENDS.
How about where it STARTS? He could have been 3 feet away, or he could have been less than 18 inches, which is what my local news is saying. (Sanford is not far away).
Or as close as 6" to 12".
A "range" has an upper and a lower end. How tall are NBA players? "as much as 7' 8", or whatever". No shorter players, eh?
Some clear but subtle bias, a real lack of information.
The "small laceration" comment comes from the paramedics, they missed a broken nose, as well. I know these folks aren't brain surgeons, but damn.
On the 2nd degree murder charge, this seems like a clear over-stretch by the prosecutor, though starting with manslaughter might have caused a few "disturbances", as well. I know there is such a thing as a "lesser included charge", any info on if he could be found Not Guilty of murder but Guilty of Manslaughter? Or is the 2nd degree charge All-or-Nothing? If so, there be big trouble coming.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
He also lied at his bond hearing. He stated that he believed Martin was "a little bit younger" than he [Zimmerman] was. When he called the police dispatcher the night he killed Martin, he stated that Martin appeared to be "in his late teens".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,547
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,547 |
What an idiot this guy was. He also evidently had an extra copy of a passport.
There's no way he sees the outside of a jail cell between now and his trial ..... and that trial probably won't begin until mid 2013 at the very earliest from what I heard today.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,124
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,124 |
j/c
A kid who wasn't yet old enough to vote is now dead. The adult who took his life stands a chance to lose his freedom for the rest of his natural life. Only two people on this planet know what really happened, and only half of them are here to tell us.
This scenario was just waiting to happen. I have no problem at all with the basic tenets of "Stand Your Ground" legislation... but it's obvious to me that such laws need substantial tweaks.
This case wll be ground-breaking... for years to come.
"too many notes, not enough music-"
#GMStong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,547
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,547 |
I think that this was a gross misapplication of the "stand your ground" law. However, if Martin did attack Zimmerman, even if Zimmerman caused it, then the law may be such that it could be considered self defense .... even without the stand your ground statute.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,812
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,812 |
Quote:
I think that this was a gross misapplication of the "stand your ground" law. However, if Martin did attack Zimmerman, even if Zimmerman caused it, then the law may be such that it could be considered self defense .... even without the stand your ground statute.
I think the difference lies in "caused it or provoked it".
My question is, if someone appears to be stalking you or following your every movement, at what point do you feel threatenned and have a right to stand your ground?
I don't know that that's the case here, but it seems just as likely than not. It would almost seem at that point that both people have a right to stand their ground and the one who has the gun wins. There's omething clearly wrong with that picture if that is the case.
I know if a stranger was following me closely around the street at night, I may very well feel threatenned myself.
I'm pretty much with clem..... if you're going to have these kinds of laws on the books, details need to clearly be defined and they need to be tweaked to a point that both parties can't stand on the exact same defense and the one with the gun wins. That's just a little but too wild west for me.
And I believe even in the wild west, it was against the law to shoot an unarmed man......
JMHO
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
The key phrase in the law is "AND YOU ARE ATTACKED". This will be the second or third time I have pointed that out.
Zimmerman was on the phone with 911 during his entire initial approach. Nothing Happened. Martin abandoned any possible "stand your ground" defense by leaving the scene. He did not have to, he just did. I have pointed this out multiple, numerous times.
Think of this as two separate incidents. The second one is really all we, and the law, are concerned with. For instance, is there any actual proof that Martin was present for both situations, that there was not a SECOND young black man in a hoodie in this neighborhood?
As for shooting an unarmed man, should Zimmerman have waited until his brains began to leak out of his cracked skull before taking any defensive action?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,481
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,481 |
Question - how close to Zimmerman's car did the attack take place?
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Martin's assault on Zimmerman apparently occurred fairly close to Zimmerman's car.
Why do you ask?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,812
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,812 |
Quote:
Zimmerman was on the phone with 911 during his entire initial approach. Nothing Happened. Martin abandoned any possible "stand your ground" defense by leaving the scene. He did not have to, he just did. I have pointed this out multiple, numerous times.
Yes, something did happen. The police told him not to continue to follow the kid that he "didn't need to do that". Yet he ignored the directions of the police. Now the court has found that they felt decieved by him and revoked his bail. His credability doesn't look good.
But that's okay, let;s just keep saying it wasn't his fault. It appears the prosecutor in this case disagrees.....
Quote:
Think of this as two separate incidents.
How can you? It's all the same incident ad he ignored what he was told by police in this incident.
Quote:
The second one is really all we, and the law, are concerned with.
Really? It was plainly stated that a part of the equasion of charges being pressed was that he ignored what the police told him.
Quote:
For instance, is there any actual proof that Martin was present for both situations, that there was not a SECOND young black man in a hoodie in this neighborhood?
How abstract. There are multiple kids wearing hoodies in every neighborhood. Heck, we wore hoodies in the 70's. That grasping at a very thin straw.
Quote:
As for shooting an unarmed man, should Zimmerman have waited until his brains began to leak out of his cracked skull before taking any defensive action?
Should you wait for someone who has been stalking your every move to attack you? Stalking is a threat and a crime too. Considering you know as little as I do, you're really reaching to defend someone for shooting and killing an unnarmed kid. Especially when if he had just listenned and followed the instructions the police had given him in the first place, none of this would ever have happened.
So is that what we accept in society today? You call the police for help, ignore everything they tell you to do. Someone ends up dead, yet it is no fault of the person who ignored the police AFTER they called them in the first place?
Yeah, that sounds logical........
Had someone been attacking him in the first place, that would be different. But nobody was until he started following them. And was it in a threatenning manner? did he approach Martin in a threatenning way? Did he start the fight? Did he grab the kid? Had the kid been in trouble before? Did he have a history of violence at school or with the police?
You see, for your assertions, there should be some violent history on the kid, right? Or did he just turn into "instathug" that night?
As they say on ESPN..... "Come on man!"
Trayvon Martin had no history of violence.
No criminal record
Zimmermans father is a retired judge.
He has been arrested for Domestic violence
Resisting an officer
Resisting an officer with violence. (felony)
Yet somehow, he's managed to escape convictions. Hmmm....
All three of those arrests, however, were mysteriously closed with no charges for Zimmerman. So how was someone with a violent past including that of battery against an officer able to carry a 9 mm handgun?
Looking at the history of these two does not tell the story of what happened that night. But it sure paints some very interesting and telling clues.....
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
Yes, something did happen. The police told him not to continue to follow the kid that he "didn't need to do that". Yet he ignored the directions of the police. Now the court has found that they felt decieved by him and revoked his bail. His credability doesn't look good.
Just to be clear... "You don't need to do that" is very different than "Don't do that." and for the record, 911 dispatchers are not Police.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
Just to be clear... "You don't need to do that" is very different than "Don't do that." and for the record, 911 dispatchers are not Police.
Can anyone verify this? Because I thought the opposite was true when I lived in Bedford Heights.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887 |
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, something did happen. The police told him not to continue to follow the kid that he "didn't need to do that". Yet he ignored the directions of the police. Now the court has found that they felt decieved by him and revoked his bail. His credability doesn't look good.
Just to be clear... "You don't need to do that" is very different than "Don't do that." and for the record, 911 dispatchers are not Police.
And he was in the middle of following Trayvon when the dispatcher told him they don't need him to follow him he reply's "OK". He claims he was heading back to his truck when Trayvon confronted him and attacked him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,812
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,812 |
Prosecutors said in the affidavit that Zimmerman "profiled" Martin, who was unarmed and wasn't committing a crime. "Zimmerman ... observed Martin and assumed Martin was a criminal," the affidavit said. "Zimmerman felt Martin did not belong in the gated community and called the police." Prosecutors interviewed a friend of Martin's who was talking to him over the phone moments before the shooting. His parents' lawyer has said that Martin was talking to his girlfriend back in Miami. "During this time, Martin was on the phone with a friend and described to her what was happening," the affidavit said. "The witness advised that Martin was scared because he was being followed through the complex by an unknown male and didn't know why." During a recorded call to a police dispatcher, Zimmerman "made reference to people he felt had committed and gotten away with break-ins in his neighborhood. Later while talking about Martin, Zimmerman stated 'these a------s, they always get away' and also said 'these f-----g punks,' said the affidavit, available at http://apne.ws/Itn7Nu . It continued: "When the police dispatcher realized Zimmerman was pursuing Martin, he instructed Zimmerman not to do that and that the responding officer would meet him. Zimmerman disregarded the police dispatcher and continued to follow Martin who was trying to return to his home." Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/12/prosecutors-zimmerman-ignored-dispatcher-warning/#ixzz1x7JNi7TfIt explains that not following orders from a "police dispatcher" ad what transpired from that were a big part of the charges being filed. It also describes a phone call by Martin who was in fear from being followed by Zimmerman.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,547
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,547 |
Then there were other experts who reported that he said "xxx'ing cold", not punks.
For every expert who pulls up one thing on the tape, there will be another on the other side who will pull up something different. All the defense has to do is plant reasonable doubt in the jury's mind.
I do think that Zimmerman caused the whole situation, however I also believe that he was then attacked by Martin. I don't know how to reconcile the 2 disparate positions into one fair verdict.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, something did happen. The police told him not to continue to follow the kid that he "didn't need to do that". Yet he ignored the directions of the police. Now the court has found that they felt decieved by him and revoked his bail. His credability doesn't look good.
Just to be clear... "You don't need to do that" is very different than "Don't do that." and for the record, 911 dispatchers are not Police.
QFT...Dispatchers are low paid, hardly trained, mostly part time workers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
Shortly he was advised by a 911 dispatcher that he WAS NOT REQUIRED to follow, he did, in fact,stop following. AT NO TIME was he told to STOP FOLLOWING. No lawful order of any kind ocurred.
Example: "Do you want to open up the glovebox for me?" is NOT a lawful order. It is a polite request that you are in no way required to follow. It is stated that way to avoid an illegal search. This I know to an absolute certainty, and have pressed the issue in personal experience.
The first incident ended with NO confrontation, no action, no crime. The SECOND incident happened several minutes later, AFTER Martin had left the scene.
IMO, any criminal charges should, and can only, derive from the second incident, which definitely involved Martin. It is possible that the first one did NOT involve Martin. Probably, yes, but the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt". You seem to agree that it was likely there were multiple, similarly dressed young men in the neighborhood.
The girlfriend whose quotes you are referencing also stated that she thought he had been pushed from behind. The timeline from the 911 call shows clearly that this did not happen. Credibility issues.
Speaking of credibility, Zimmerman's "deception" was in regard to his finances, not in regard to his testimony. He may well have thought that monies donated for his legal defense were not available to pay a bail bond. This may even be legally accurate.
Following someone for a minute or two and looking at them does not constitute stalking.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,547
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,547 |
Actually, with regards to Zimmerman, he never directly testified about his finances, his wife did.
Since he did not testify as to his finances, he cannot be incriminated. He is under no responsibility to correct someone else's testimony. In fact, under the 5th amendment, he has no responsibility to say anything at all.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Actually, with regards to Zimmerman, he never directly testified about his finances, his wife did.
Since he did not testify as to his finances, he cannot be incriminated. He is under no responsibility to correct someone else's testimony. In fact, under the 5th amendment, he has no responsibility to say anything at all.
I would think that in order to get a lower bond, you'd have to declare that you're indigent in some way, shape or form, whether it's saying 'Yes, your honor' or signing a piece of paper or something. I don't know that you could get that break by not saying anything at all.
I actually have no clue how it works, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Trayvon Martin pt 2
|
|
![[Linked Image from mypsn.eu.playstation.com]](http://mypsn.eu.playstation.com/psn/profile/Letherface.png)