|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I hope at some time you can take "race" out of your thought process.
Not everything has to be based in or on "race".
None of that post had anything to do with race. At least my post didn't, I only rechecked mine, but I don't believe the other person who I was responding to did. So who really is riding the race wave?
You. You bring it up in most threads. Go back and check it out.
3 Threads. All three of which are highly connected with race. I also spoke about gay rights in a gay rights thread and feminism in a thread about women. I also spoke about drones as the next to eliminating our 4th amendment right.
However, this is not a thread about my posting history. Just like the gay rights thread was not a thread about housing discrimination against minorities or the woman thread was not a thread was about eugenics programs against minorities or that the redlight thread was not about how the ID requirement in elections serve as another poll tax to discriminate against minority voters, which is why I didn't post in those topics about any of that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
UM...they are evidence that Somebody hit Z. If you wish to believe he got beat up, and THEN went driving around looking for someone else to blame it on, that's possible but they can tell fairly accurately how long ago the injuries happened, so...
Maybe you think Z slammed Both sides of his head into a wall or something, then shot Martin.
Nothing I have ever seen has proposed that Z's injuries came from any other source.
The description of Martin's knuckles has changed several times. NBC has lost credibility on this story, having already doctored evidence. IIRC the word "bruising" had been used previously, although the initial report was "no indication of any kind." The race of the individual giving that initial report would appear to have been a factor.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
UM...they are evidence that Somebody hit Z.
Wait, we went from actual, factual evidence that Martin struck Zimmerman with a number of blows to 'somebody hit Z'?
Again, nothing you've brought up is 'actual, factual evidence' that Martin struck Zimmerman with a number of blows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
Quote:
UM...they are evidence that Somebody hit Z. If you wish to believe he got beat up, and THEN went driving around looking for someone else to blame it on, that's possible but they can tell fairly accurately how long ago the injuries happened, so...
Maybe you think Z slammed Both sides of his head into a wall or something, then shot Martin.
Nothing I have ever seen has proposed that Z's injuries came from any other source.
The description of Martin's knuckles has changed several times. NBC has lost credibility on this story, having already doctored evidence. IIRC the word "bruising" had been used previously, although the initial report was "no indication of any kind." The race of the individual giving that initial report would appear to have been a factor.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/17/trayvon.martin.autopsy.pdf
Page 3 right before "Evidence of Recent Medical Treatment"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
The race of the individual giving that initial report would appear to have been a factor.
Could you clarify what you meant by this?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
The description of Martin's knuckles has changed several times.
1/4 x 1/8 inch small abrasion on left fourth finger
autopsy report
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858 |
thanks arch.. I see it says "Probably" a dozen (12) times..
I still don't see 25 to 50 times.. did I just miss it?
He was hit,, no question. (see the pic of his nose and back of his head) I don't know that Martin did it. but he probably did.
personally, I think Zimmerman is lying. But that's more of a gut reaction then something I can prove.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
j/c
The defense is pretty much playing with house money at this point.
My jaw would hit the floor if Zimmerman was convicted.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
I wouldn't say my jaw would hit the floor, but I'd be surprised.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
I wouldn't say my jaw would hit the floor, but I'd be surprised.
The prosecution had a weak case to begin with, and the trial hasn't done them any favors.
I don't see how a jury could convict.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,728 |
If the jury finds him "Hispanic" I think he walks. If they find him "White" all bets are off. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,165
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,165 |
Quote:
If the jury finds him "Hispanic" I think he walks. If they find him "White" all bets are off.
If they get stuck on "White Hispanic" we have a hung jury, then?
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Eh, I think the medical experts who testified that his injuries weren't consistent with his story and law enforcement officials who testified that it's not common or normal for a civilian to carry his firearm with a round in the chamber (their words, not mine), combined with his propensity for calling in reports to the police and his frustrations at their failure to do anything, could potentially be viewed by jurors as a guy who went looking for trouble in hopes of doling out some vigilante justice. I'm not saying it's a particularly strong case, but it can be made nonetheless.
The prosecution's best bet is to get him on the stand but that probably won't happen.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195 |
Quote:
Quote:
If the jury finds him "Hispanic" I think he walks. If they find him "White" all bets are off.
If they get stuck on "White Hispanic" we have a hung jury, then?
But who's going to hang them?
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,133
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,133 |
Quote:
and law enforcement officials who testified that it's not common or normal for a civilian to carry his firearm with a round in the chamber (their words, not mine),
Then they don't know what they're talking about. Almost everyone that carries does so with a round in the chamber. Having to chamber a round under duress may be a life or death task that you don't want to rely on.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Eh, I think the medical experts who testified that his injuries weren't consistent with his story and law enforcement officials who testified that it's not common or normal for a civilian to carry his firearm with a round in the chamber (their words, not mine), combined with his propensity for calling in reports to the police and his frustrations at their failure to do anything, could potentially be viewed by jurors as a guy who went looking for trouble in hopes of doling out some vigilante justice. I'm not saying it's a particularly strong case, but it can be made nonetheless.
The prosecution's best bet is to get him on the stand but that probably won't happen.
Even if I think the guy is flat-out lying (which I do) ... that's still not enough to convict on a murder charge.
Juries tend to stick to the script as far as criteria for conviction. Look at the Casey Anthony trial ... just about every juror that talked to the media after said something to the effect of 'She killed her kid, we wish we could've convicted her, but the evidence wasn't there'.
I agree with the last part. But, you're right, it ain't happening. His lawyer would have to have a hole in his head to put that guy on the stand.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,418
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,418 |
From what I have seen, this was, by far, the weakest "high profile" (murder/manslaughter) case I can ever recall. The prosecution was downright inept. If the evidence they presented was all they had to go on, then the case should never have been brought to trial, because it's a waste of taxpayers dollars.
Now they can hope that the jury somehow manages to find him guilty, because they don't like the way he looks, or something ..... but there seems to me to be very little chance that they will convict him based on the horrible case put on by the prosecution.
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: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204
~ Legend
|
|
~ Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 18,204 |
Quote:
Quote:
Eh, I think the medical experts who testified that his injuries weren't consistent with his story and law enforcement officials who testified that it's not common or normal for a civilian to carry his firearm with a round in the chamber (their words, not mine), combined with his propensity for calling in reports to the police and his frustrations at their failure to do anything, could potentially be viewed by jurors as a guy who went looking for trouble in hopes of doling out some vigilante justice. I'm not saying it's a particularly strong case, but it can be made nonetheless.
The prosecution's best bet is to get him on the stand but that probably won't happen.
Even if I think the guy is flat-out lying (which I do) ... that's still not enough to convict on a murder charge.
Juries tend to stick to the script as far as criteria for conviction. Look at the Casey Anthony trial ... just about every juror that talked to the media after said something to the effect of 'She killed her kid, we wish we could've convicted her, but the evidence wasn't there'.
I agree with the last part. But, you're right, it ain't happening. His lawyer would have to have a hole in his head to put that guy on the stand.
Yep. And since they really have to say that Zimmerman dislike Martin, it's even harder.
But I have to say listening to after reading the statements that Zimmerman did not know how to throw a jab in a year of boxing/mma training is really baffling to me. He said he was really coachable too. So I'm not sure how you don't teach him to punch.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
His lawyer would have to have a hole in his head to put that guy on the stand.
His opening statement was a knock-knock joke...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Quote:
Quote:
and law enforcement officials who testified that it's not common or normal for a civilian to carry his firearm with a round in the chamber (their words, not mine),
Then they don't know what they're talking about. Almost everyone that carries does so with a round in the chamber. Having to chamber a round under duress may be a life or death task that you don't want to rely on.
Agreed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
and law enforcement officials who testified that it's not common or normal for a civilian to carry his firearm with a round in the chamber (their words, not mine),
Then they don't know what they're talking about. Almost everyone that carries does so with a round in the chamber. Having to chamber a round under duress may be a life or death task that you don't want to rely on.
Agreed.
+1
I dont know anyone who carry's w/o one in the pipe. Its kinda just a paperweight otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,259
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,259 |
Quote:
Then they don't know what they're talking about. Almost everyone that carries does so with a round in the chamber. Having to chamber a round under duress may be a life or death task that you don't want to rely on.
Oh they do know its ludicrous, but law enforcement is going to side with the prosecution. After all, they are on the same side. Both of my pistols are designed to be carried with a round in the chamber, I can't really think of any pistol where you would have an empty chamber as a standard carry condition.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 16,195 |
Every revolver that is fully loaded has one in the chamber.
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
law enforcement is going to side with the prosecution. After all, they are on the same side.
The particular witness was a defense witness...Zimmerman's best friend and author of a book about the case. Anyways, based on the responses here and my own lack of familiarity with CCW protocol, I went back and re-read his testimony. It turns out he said that he helped Z select his gun and advised him to keep a round chambered when carrying, he advises his wife to keep a round chambered and he himself does it, but he also agreed that it's normal for a law enforcement official to always keep a round chambered when carrying but not for a civilian to do so. So, I don't know if he was considering Z to be a "law enforcement official" based on his neighborhood watch position and/or career aspirations, or if he was just inconsistent in his testimony.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577 |
Today I watched this testimony from DiMaio . It's clear concice and believable. He took the prosecution apart. Zimmerman will be acquitted. Prepare Ye for the riots. web page Expert bolsters Zimmerman account of Trayvon Martin shooting By Barbara Liston | Reuters – 2 hrs 15 mins ago Dr. Vincent DiMaio, a forensic pathologist and gunshot wound expert, describes the injuries of George Zimmerman while testifying for the defense in the trial in Seminole circuit court, in … SANFORD, Florida (Reuters) - A forensic expert backed George Zimmerman's account of his fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin on Tuesday, testifying that evidence showed the neighborhood watchman was under the unarmed black teenager when he fired his gun. The forensic pathologist testifying for the defense cited the trajectory of the bullet that pierced Martin's chest and gun powder on his body in supporting Zimmerman's version of events of the shooting, in a setback to the prosecution. "It's consistent with somebody leaning over the person doing the shooting," said Dr. Vincent DiMaio, a former chief medical examiner in Texas, in testimony in the case, which has added to the national debate on race, profiling, gun rights and self defense. It was the latest in a series of blows to the prosecution, underscoring a widely held view among lawyers following the case that the state aimed too high in charging Zimmerman with murder. Zimmerman remained free for 45 days after the killing, because police initially declined to arrest him, accepting his claim he shot and killed the 17-year-old Martin in self-defense. A special prosecutor brought the charge of second-degree murder against Zimmerman, possibly bowing to public pressure, after protests and cries of injustice in Sanford and several major U.S. cities. DiMaio testified that Martin could have been conscious and able to move for five to 10 seconds after he was shot through the heart, based on the typical reserve oxygen in the brain. That testimony appeared to bolster Zimmerman's overall credibility and his claim that he placed Martin's arms out to the side after shooting him, despite a photograph taken of Martin after he died that showed his arms under his body. Prosecutors wrapped up their case against Zimmerman on Friday after nine days of witness testimony. Lead defense attorney Mark O'Mara said he hopes to rest by Wednesday. That means the case could go to the jury by this weekend. It is still unclear whether Zimmerman will testify in his own defense. Lawyers caution that no one knows the single piece of evidence or witness statement that could lead to a conviction or acquittal. But O'Mara certainly seems to have the upper hand as the case heads into closing arguments. "The trial is not over," said David Weinstein, a former prosecutor and Miami-area defense attorney who is not involved in the case. "However, from where things stand right now, a conviction does not appear likely." DEFENSE BOLSTERED The former neighborhood watch volunteer faces up to life in prison if convicted of second-degree murder, although either side can request that the jury also consider the lesser offense of manslaughter, with a maximum penalty of 30 years. In a setback for the prosecution on Monday, Seminole County Circuit Judge Debra Nelson ruled that defense lawyers could introduce evidence that Martin had the active ingredient of marijuana in his system when he was killed. Nelson was expected to rule later on Tuesday on whether jurors should see a digital reconstruction of Zimmerman's shooting of Martin, in a gated community in Sanford, Florida, on February 26, 2012. DiMaio testified that Zimmerman, 29, had at least six injuries after his clash with Martin - including two on the back of his head that appeared to indicate impacts with concrete - one on each temple, one on his forehead and one on his nose. Valerie Rao, a medical examiner testifying for the prosecution last week, said Zimmerman suffered "insignificant" injuries in the incident, as the state attempted to undermine Zimmerman's claim he feared for his life. DiMaio said the injuries could be worse than they appeared. Lacerations to Zimmerman's head suggested the use of "severe force," he said, lending credence to his claim that Martin slammed Zimmerman's head into a concrete walkway after knocking him to the ground with a punch that broke his nose. Once a verdict is rendered, it seems likely that many Americans will be disappointed however Zimmerman's fate is decided, because they have already made up their minds about the killing, an event became a virtual national obsession last year. Highlighting fears of racial tensions in Sanford, the Broward County Sheriff's Office in south Florida, the state's largest, said on Monday it was working closely with the Sanford Police Department and other local law enforcement agencies to coordinate "a response plan in anticipation of the verdict." Sanford's population of 54,000 is about 30 percent black. "We don't have information about a specific event that might take place at the conclusion of the trial, but we encourage everyone to keep any protests peaceful," Broward Sheriff Scott Israel said in a statement.
SaintDawg™
Football, baseball, basketball, wine, women, walleye
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
Jc
My main issue with this case is that the aggressor\instigator can claim self defense. They need to fix that law.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
either side can request that the jury also consider the lesser offense of manslaughter
I haven't been following the case extremely closely, but this is the first I've heard this. Is it a standard thing in criminal trial procedure?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577 |
I have no idea.. the post is from Yahoo news. Frankly, the prosecution has such a weak case I'd be shocked if they tried.
SaintDawg™
Football, baseball, basketball, wine, women, walleye
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 121
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 121 |
J/C
I haven't necessarily been following this case since the trial started, but I read through this thread and felt the need to respond to the notion of bodily injury vs. punches thrown as well as being followed from personal experience.
I used to work as a bouncer 10 or so years ago, and one night I got hit in my eye. One would think that only one eye would bruise or that one cheek would bruise, but both of mine did. From one punch to one eye, thus injuries and amount of punches to where are sometimes inconsistent.
Also, another time I hit a guy once (after he hit me first, of course) and he fell back on the concrete sidewalk. The police came and he wanted to press charges. He claimed I was on top of him beating him, as he had multiple lacerations on his face and head. I said, properly, to the officer that I hit him once and he fell backwards. Luckily for me there were witnesses that corroborated what I said, as the police were inclined to believe him and already had me in cuffs. Once again, I'm only bringing this up to say that sometimes an injury looks more horrific than what you would assume from the initial contact.
IMO, being followed and feeling threatened are two very uncomfortable feelings. I've had the distinct misfortune of being mugged twice, once at gunpoint. It was a scarring, jolting experience and made me feel hunted. In both instances, my first reaction was to stand up for myself and face my "stalker." I certainly can't blame TM if he decided to stand up and face his. However, once that gun comes out, all bets are off. I guess my personal/life experiences would make me sympathize with TM and think that GZ is in the wrong, as it is difficult to shake that feeling of having someone tailing you as long as this chase seems to have went on.
Back to the actual crux of the thread, I think that this whole experience for America has been/is a farce. Clem said it best in his post, and I can't put it any more beautifully than he so often does. It is a shame that agendas and intolerance have shaped this case from day one. Powerful words and images have been used by BOTH sides and it has given us all nothing but more of a gulf between group A and group B, not even talking in a racial sense, but in a practical "who do you believe" sense.
"If you need two yards, I'll get you two yards. If you need four yards, I'll get you two yards!" Ron Wolfley, Special Teams Madman
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,133
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,133 |
Quote:
Jc
My main issue with this case is that the aggressor\instigator can claim self defense. They need to fix that law.
Agreed. No civilian should be able to pursue someone with a firearm. I'm as pro gun as they come, and I think Zimmerman did a lot of harm to the cause. He's going to walk for several reasons:
He was defending himself according to the law as written. It doesn't account for precipitating behavior like pursuing someone.
The prosecution did not prove intent or malicious action, which is required for a murder conviction.
The prosecution's case is extremely weak. and they certainly proved nothing beyond a shadow of a doubt. Every witness they presented raised questions about the validity of their testimony.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
From a woman's point of view and a victim of stalking/home invasion I find it frightening.
Men stalk women all the time. I stood up to my attacker and fended him off. What if he murdered me and claimed self defense? And got off? I would roll in my grave. That is just wrong. The law needs to be changed.
I realize home invasion is different, but he could had just as easily attacked me on the street. He was following me back from the laundry room of the apartment complex in his car.
The instigator of a physical altercation should never be able to claim self defense. If you want to pick a fight and get your butt handed to you it doesn't give you the right to murder someone.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887 |
Quote:
The instigator of a physical altercation should never be able to claim self defense
They don't. Zimmerman claims Trayvon initiated the physical altercation. Following someone is not a crime. IF a person is upset that a man was following him and decides he was going to beat the snot out of that man and that man shoots him to protect his life then it's self defense.
Trayvon was 200 feet from his house. A young athletic kid would run that distance in seconds, Zimmerman lost sight of him while on the phone with police for over a minute. Not to mention Trayvon was on a cell phone, if he hid somewhere too scared to run home he could of called 911 and reported a man was following him and stayed hidden until cops showed up. IF trayvon was upset that Zimmerman was following him and he decided he was going to go and beat him up then he turned into the aggressor. JMO
Both sides made mistakes, one person lost his life. That's tragic and unfair but I don't believe Zimmerman is guilty of 2nd degree murder.
![[Linked Image from mypsn.eu.playstation.com]](http://mypsn.eu.playstation.com/psn/profile/Letherface.png)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,275
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,275 |
Quote:
The instigator of a physical altercation should never be able to claim self defense.
It would appear that the instigator of a PHYSICAL altercation in this case was Martin.
Quote:
If you want to pick a fight and get your butt handed to you it doesn't give you the right to murder someone.
Just like the person who is kicking your butt is not then justified in beating on you while you are on the ground and telling you that "you are going to die tonight". (If that's what really happened.)
Zimmerman should not have done what he did to start the conflict - even though he wasn't violating any laws. Martin should have simply gone on home but instead assaulted Zimmerman - breaking the law.
This case is far from being "cut and dried". (Not saying that you are claiming it is.)
FWIW...I'm not responding in disagreement to anything you've said in this regard. My personal feelings on the event are very similar to your own.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 66
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 66 |
Quote:
From a woman's point of view and a victim of stalking/home invasion I find it frightening.
Men stalk women all the time. I stood up to my attacker and fended him off. What if he murdered me and claimed self defense? And got off? I would roll in my grave. That is just wrong. The law needs to be changed.
I realize home invasion is different, but he could had just as easily attacked me on the street. He was following me back from the laundry room of the apartment complex in his car.
The instigator of a physical altercation should never be able to claim self defense. If you want to pick a fight and get your butt handed to you it doesn't give you the right to murder someone.
A jury of 6 women makes me believe that that Z may not be found innocent. And you just proved my hunch when you started your post with "From a womans point of view".
Don't let your feelings and emotions get in the way of justice
Martin didn't just "fend off" as you did. Z was getting the snot beaten out of him, and yelling for help.
Does snooping on someone necessarily mean they intend to engage in a physical altercation? He was snooping. That was all.
I may be wrong, but I believe Z was heading back to his car when Martin attacked.
Hope those women don't let their feelings and emotions tend to get into the way of justice.
I think Trayvons mom was crying wasn't she?
Thats not good for Z.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
Quote:
Quote:
The instigator of a physical altercation should never be able to claim self defense
They don't. Zimmerman claims Trayvon initiated the physical altercation. Following someone is not a crime. IF a person is upset that a man was following him and decides he was going to beat the snot out of that man and that man shoots him to protect his life then it's self defense.
Trayvon was 200 feet from his house. A young athletic kid would run that distance in seconds, Zimmerman lost sight of him while on the phone with police for over a minute. Not to mention Trayvon was on a cell phone, if he hid somewhere too scared to run home he could of called 911 and reported a man was following him and stayed hidden until cops showed up. IF trayvon was upset that Zimmerman was following him and he decided he was going to go and beat him up then he turned into the aggressor. JMO
Both sides made mistakes, one person lost his life. That's tragic and unfair but I don't believe Zimmerman is guilty of 2nd degree murder.
+1
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 919
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 919 |
The trial is a joke, he is TOTALLY innocent and had every right to use deadly force, but I guess it's free TV's when the riot starts.
GO BROWNS!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577 |
I'm watching it on CNN now. IMO, the defense is hammering the prosecution.
SaintDawg™
Football, baseball, basketball, wine, women, walleye
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
A jury of 6 women makes me believe that that Z may not be found innocent. And you just proved my hunch when you started your post with "From a womans point of view".
Don't let your feelings and emotions get in the way of justice
You think women have a problem letting their feelings and emotions get in the way of justice?
Go check out any thread on this forum in which someone is accused of committing a heinous act. There's a lot of men wanting to get medieval without much thought to the laws of justice.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,438 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The instigator of a physical altercation should never be able to claim self defense
They don't. Zimmerman claims Trayvon initiated the physical altercation. Following someone is not a crime. IF a person is upset that a man was following him and decides he was going to beat the snot out of that man and that man shoots him to protect his life then it's self defense.
Trayvon was 200 feet from his house. A young athletic kid would run that distance in seconds, Zimmerman lost sight of him while on the phone with police for over a minute. Not to mention Trayvon was on a cell phone, if he hid somewhere too scared to run home he could of called 911 and reported a man was following him and stayed hidden until cops showed up. IF trayvon was upset that Zimmerman was following him and he decided he was going to go and beat him up then he turned into the aggressor. JMO
Both sides made mistakes, one person lost his life. That's tragic and unfair but I don't believe Zimmerman is guilty of 2nd degree murder.
+1
I don't agree that TM instigated it. Z was stalking him, he provoked TM into doing something about it. If Z was minding his own business, none of this would have happened.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
he provoked TM into doing something about it.
That is the crux of the argument I think. Who made it physical encounter?
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Ex-Chicago Cop: Zimmerman
Acquittal to Cause Race Riots
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/Heldawg/rgiii2.jpg)
