So what will it be? 1st degree murder, murder, manslaughter?

[CosmicCowboy]

I'm betting on manslaughter. We will know in 45 minutes so get your votes in...

[coyotes_geek]

Probably manslaughter.

[Spawn]

Well I don't think it is murder since the grand jury was dismissed or whatever. I thought I heard that only a grand jury can approve of murder 1 could be wrong though.

[Yonivore]

I'll speculate it will be manslaughter, as well.

Either his story doesn't pass her "reasonable person" measure meaning, the prosecutor is going to have to claim a reasonable person, in Zimmerman's position, would not have believed they were in danger of imminent death or serious injury.

Of course, Trayvon Martin fans would be incensed if she chose to file manslaughter based on section 782.11 of Florida's homicide statutes; "Unnecessary killing to prevent unlawful act."

That will mean there is evidence Martin was engaged in a criminal act but, that Zimmerman's shooting him was unnecessary. Considering there was obviously a physical altercation, I doubt this will be raised but, I couldn't resist bringing it up.

Lawyers will duke it out, I suppose.

Of course, she could be in possession of evidence that points to a more serious charge of murder. If there's no new information at the press conference, I doubt this will be the charge but, you never know.

[Yonivore]

I'm hearing he's already in custody for 2nd Degree Murder.


(2) The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

[cantthinkofanything]

Do4fA8tONY4

[Sec24Row7]

She's hamming it up for the camera God almighty... you don't smile at one of these things...

[CosmicCowboy]

2nd degree.

hmmm

They set an even higher threshold to prove. Intentionally, maybe? This is going to be interesting.

[TheSkeptic]

Not a doubt in my mind that it was murder 2.

Forget what I said just now. What?

Does anybody have a link?

[clambake]

before its too late, i say 2nd degree!

[CosmicCowboy]

before its too late, i say 2nd degree!

:lol

[JoeChalupa]

She did a fine job. My bet was on manslaughter. She has more evidence than we will ever see or hear so....

[JoeChalupa]

I did notice that FoxNews cut away from the conference pretty quickly after it was announced Zimmerman had been charged.

[cheguevara]

let's hope they truly have enough evidence and are not just trying to postpone LA riots v2.0...

[CosmicCowboy]

She did a fine job. My bet was on manslaughter. She has more evidence than we will ever see or hear so....

That, or she knew that the facts didn't warrant it but politically they had to prosecute and to "make it right" she set the bar so high they wouldn't possibly be able to reach it.




















naaaa

Bitch is going for her 15 minutes of fame...:lol

Court TV is gonna love this shit.

*see Marcia Clark*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcia_Clark

[cheguevara]

the korean community breathes a sigh of relief

[clambake]

I did notice that FoxNews cut away from the conference pretty quickly after it was announced Zimmerman had been charged.

that is pretty typical.

[Yonivore]

2nd degree.

hmmm

They set an even higher threshold to prove. Intentionally, maybe? This is going to be interesting.
Yep. Reckless or negligent is a bit different than criminal intent.

I didn't get to see the press conference, was there any new information that may have shed light on why they went with murder?

[clambake]

Yep. Reckless or negligent is a bit different than criminal intent.

I didn't get to see the press conference, was there any new information that may have shed light on why they went with murder?

they're still translating the documents lol

[DarrinS]

Probably no pressure on her to bring the higher charge.

[Yonivore]

Probably no pressure on her to bring the higher charge.
True...conviction isn't important, just get us past November, please.

[ElNono]

Don't forget kids. Innocent until proven guilty.

[spursncowboys]

let's hope they truly have enough evidence and are not just trying to postpone LA riots v2.0...

x2

[JoeChalupa]

"If Stand Your Ground becomes an issue...we fight it." --Angela Corey

[JoeChalupa]

Yep. Reckless or negligent is a bit different than criminal intent.

I didn't get to see the press conference, was there any new information that may have shed light on why they went with murder?

That will come out in court and to go with this charge I would hope/think she has enough evidence to back up the charge.

[JoeChalupa]

That, or she knew that the facts didn't warrant it but politically they had to prosecute and to "make it right" she set the bar so high they wouldn't possibly be able to reach it.




















naaaa

Bitch is going for her 15 minutes of fame...:lol

Court TV is gonna love this shit.

*see Marcia Clark*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcia_Clark


So what you are saying is that this is all political and in your view Zimmerman should not have been charged?

[Yonivore]

That will come out in court and to go with this charge I would hope/think she has enough evidence to back up the charge.
Why would you pick sides? If Zimmerman is innocent, I hope he's acquitted. If Zimmerman's guilty, I hope he's convicted.

[Drachen]

Why would you pick sides? If Zimmerman is innocent, I hope he's acquitted. If Zimmerman's guilty, I hope he's convicted.

I read his statement as "I would hope that she has enough evidence to back up her charge" not "I would hope that she gets the conviction"

[clambake]

why hasn't fox already cut away from his new lawyer?

[JoeChalupa]

I read his statement as "I would hope that she has enough evidence to back up her charge" not "I would hope that she gets the conviction"

That is correct. I always felt there should have been an ongoing investigation and from what she said there was but the investigation was not completed before she was appointed. She was just being nice to the PD, IMHO.
It is all up to the jury now.

[ElNono]

Zimmerman will now be tried by a jury of his peers... that's all you can ask for.

[EVAY]

Man, just imagine how interesting jury selection is going to be for this trial. This IS going to be something to check out. I assume the trial will be fair, but I'd love to take a look at the potential jury questionnaire, wouldn't you?

[TheSkeptic]

Zimmerman will now be tried by a jury of his peers... that's all you can ask for.

I agree with you on the trial thing but I'm not convinced about the jury..for all we know his "peers" could be idiots.

[clambake]

i just wish all the speculation would end.

all we know for sure is that a guy stalked another guy and killed him.

[ElNono]

I agree with you on the trial thing but I'm not convinced about the jury..for all we know his "peers" could be idiots.

That's our system of justice. tbh, should I be on those shoes, I much rather be tried by a bunch of idiots than "experts" like Nancy Grace et all.

[Yonivore]

I read his statement as "I would hope that she has enough evidence to back up her charge" not "I would hope that she gets the conviction"
Fair enough.

[CosmicCowboy]

Man, just imagine how interesting jury selection is going to be for this trial. This IS going to be something to check out. I assume the trial will be fair, but I'd love to take a look at the potential jury questionnaire, wouldn't you?

If I'm Zimmerman and things went down like I claimed I would SO just let a judge decide and not throw it to a jury.

[EVAY]

If I'm Zimmerman and things went down like I claimed I would SO just let a judge decide and not throw it to a jury.

Oh, yeah. In a heartbeat.

But if it did go to a jury...what a fascinating thing to watch.

[TheSkeptic]

That's our system of justice. tbh, should I be on those shoes, I much rather be tried by a bunch of idiots than "experts" like Nancy Grace et all.

I think she's an idiot too though...

[ElNono]

What sucks for Zimmerman too is that this got so politicized that I suspect it would be tough for his lawyer to get some sort of favorable plea-bargain...

[CosmicCowboy]

Zimmerman needs a change of venue to the Florida panhandle.

[TheProfessor]

If it does get to a jury, they will be able to issue jury instructions on lesser-included offenses, so the prosecution is not necessarily tied to second degree even in a trial.

One question I'm interested in - how in the hell does Zimmerman get a fair trial in Florida? It's normally extremely difficult to get a change of venue for what's called "presumed prejudice" from pretrial publicity - Jeff Skilling's argument that he could not obtain a fair trial in Houston after the Enron collapse was rebuked by the Supreme Court. If Zimmerman is tried in Florida, it will be a huge issue.

[spursncowboys]

If it does get to a jury, they will be able to issue jury instructions on lesser-included offenses, so the prosecution is not necessarily tied to second degree even in a trial.

One question I'm interested in - how in the hell does Zimmerman get a fair trial in Florida? It's normally extremely difficult to get a change of venue for what's called "presumed prejudice" from pretrial publicity - Jeff Skilling's argument that he could not obtain a fair trial in Houston after the Enron collapse was rebuked by the Supreme Court. If Zimmerman is tried in Florida, it will be a huge issue.

Where would he go to get a fair trial? If it is the racial thing, then Orlando is as good of a place as any in Florida.

[TheProfessor]

Where would he go to get a fair trial? If it is the racial thing, then Orlando is as good of a place as any in Florida.
A good question, though I disagree with it being a "racial" issue (though race is certainly involved here). It's more about the amount of pretrial publicity infecting any potential jury panel before voir dire is conducted. I think the defense has a good argument to at least get this trial moved out of state, though I doubt any state trial judge facing election will grant that request and outrage his or her constituents.

[spursncowboys]

A good question, though I disagree with it being a "racial" issue (though race is certainly involved here). It's more about the amount of pretrial publicity infecting any potential jury panel before voir dire is conducted. I think the defense has a good argument to at least get this trial moved out of state, though I doubt any state trial judge facing election will grant that request and outrage his or her constituents.

So if they do move it to a different state, which state penal codes are used?

[TheProfessor]

So if they do move it to a different state, which state penal codes are used?
Florida's state penal code would control.

[CosmicCowboy]

They can't move it to another state but the Florida panhandle IS another state compared to the lower part.

[jack sommerset]

We pretty much saw the trial already. Guy walks. If I was Zimmermans lawyer I would ask for the fastest trial imaginable. God bless.

[Winehole23]

We pretty much saw the trial already. Guy walks. The latter perhaps, the former not so much. Legal process is very hard to predict.

[Wild Cobra]

Where would he go to get a fair trial? If it is the racial thing, then Orlando is as good of a place as any in Florida.
He's already been found guilty by the mainscream national media. I don't think we can get a fair trial if anything is on the fence.

[Casey Anthony]

You all don't give jurors much credit.

[Wild Cobra]

You all don't give jurors much credit.
And rightfully so. I'm north of 50 and I have served on enough juries to see people's ability to want to place agenda over justice appalling.

Have you been on any serious jury cases?

[Casey Anthony]

And rightfully so. I'm north of 50 and I have served on enough juries to see people's ability to want to place agenda over justice appalling.

Have you been on any serious jury cases?

Are you serious!? The jurors in my case went with the facts and not all the media hype.

[Wild Cobra]

Are you serious!? The jurors in my case went with the facts and not all the media hype.
Go fuck yourself troll.

Use your real ID or STFU.

[bobbyjoe]

2nd degree.

hmmm

They set an even higher threshold to prove. Intentionally, maybe? This is going to be interesting.

The 2nd degree charge came out of left field. If Corey is overcharging intentionally, that is a very high-risk move that increases the chances of a Not Guilty Verdict.

One thing to remember is that no solid facts about forensic evidence or the autopsy were leaked. There is gamechanging potential in each of these aspects.

One theory is that forensic and autopsy evidence led her to believe that Zimmerman shot Martin in the back. Remember that Martin was found lying face down with both hands underneath his body.

If Zimmerman was initially losing the fight (numerous 911 calls mentioned 2 guys wrestling outside, so the person in control could easily have changed a few times over the course of the fight), but then gained control and pinned Trayvon down and shot him in the back it would explain quite a few things:

1) Why there was no blood on Zimmerman. Zimmerman claims he was on the bottom and shot Trayvon who was on top of him. Yet 30 minutes later there didn't appear to be any blood on his body. Blood should have splattered all over his body in this scenario. If there was blood, surely the police would have been wearing gloves.

2) The yells for Help on the 911 call. In a scenario where Zimmerman has Trayvon pinned down, the yells for help pass the common sense test because Trayvon knew George had a gun and could have been bracing to shoot him.

If one is to believe that the voice on the 911 call was George Z and he was on the ground, then they have to believe that George endured a beating for nearly one full minute that did not ultimately result in the EMT who arrived at the scene at least putting one bandage on him. This story would be much easier to believe had we not heard the screams last as long as they did.


3) The statements by Mary Cutcher and her roommate Cutcher and her roommate claim to have seen George straddling Trayvon. That is consistent with George having Trayvon pinned down but inconsistent with George being on the ground. Why would George get up and straddle Trayvon after shooting him if he was on the bottom?

4) Trayvon's body positioning. If George was on the bottom and shot Trayvon, does Trayvon fall forward and have both his arms tucked underneath his body instead of to his side? George Z pinning Trayvon down seems more consistent with this fact.

The credibility of Trayvon's girlfriend is going to be huge in this case if it goes to trial. She may be the only witness present when the fight actually commenced, even though she is an ear witness.

Corey was also quoted the day she took over as prosecutor that the question of who's voice was on the 911 call was vital in her determination of how to proceed with the case. She hired an expert to analyze the voice. Assuming Corey hasn't done this for political reasons (which is definitely very plausible), one other reason for the strong charge could be that she's seen some sort of evidence to indicate it was Trayvon screaming. I see no scenario in which 12 jurors are convinced it is Trayvon's voice that they don't convict Zimmerman of at least some wrongdoing.

As of now, a conviction seems hard to envision even though many think the media has already convicted George.

[Sportcamper]

I can’t believe this guy has not been shot already…Mike Tyson…

[Wild Cobra]

The 2nd degree charge came out of left field. If Corey is overcharging intentionally, that is a very high-risk move that increases the chances of a Not Guilty Verdict.

Agreed. I wonder if it's what the parents want, or if it's because there isn't evidence of anything and makes it the PC right political play.


One thing to remember is that no solid facts about forensic evidence or the autopsy were leaked. There is gamechanging potential in each of these aspects.

Yep. that's why I haven't taken a solid viewpoint, but with the evidence this far leaked, see Zimmerman as being innocent of the charges.


One theory is that forensic and autopsy evidence led her to believe that Zimmerman shot Martin in the back. Remember that Martin was found lying face down with both hands underneath his body.

I seriously doubt that. This would have been obvious with the initial investigation. If this were true, there is either a conspiracy within the Sanford system, or complete incompetence, and several officials will be prosecuted or fired too.


If Zimmerman was initially losing the fight (numerous 911 calls mentioned 2 guys wrestling outside, so the person in control could easily have changed a few times over the course of the fight), but then gained control and pinned Trayvon down and shot him in the back it would explain quite a few things:

Again, I don't believe "in the back." This would have resulted in an arrest right away, where he didn't walk out the same day.


1) Why there was no blood on Zimmerman. Zimmerman claims he was on the bottom and shot Trayvon who was on top of him. Yet 30 minutes later there didn't appear to be any blood on his body. Blood should have splattered all over his body in this scenario. If there was blood, surely the police would have been wearing gloves.

The chest/lung area doesn't spurt out. Martin's hoodie would also possible contain all nut a few spatters of blood.


2) The yells for Help on the 911 call. In a scenario where Zimmerman has Trayvon pinned down, the yells for help pass the common sense test because Trayvon knew George had a gun and could have been bracing to shoot him.

Assumption.


If one is to believe that the voice on the 911 call was George Z and he was on the ground, then they have to believe that George endured a beating for nearly one full minute that did not ultimately result in the EMT who arrived at the scene at least putting one bandage on him. This story would be much easier to believe had we not heard the screams last as long as they did.

He was treated for injuries. Did you miss that, or are you intentionally not believeing the accounts?


3) The statements by Mary Cutcher and her roommate Cutcher and her roommate claim to have seen George straddling Trayvon. That is consistent with George having Trayvon pinned down but inconsistent with George being on the ground. Why would George get up and straddle Trayvon after shooting him if he was on the bottom?

He just got up. He may have been assessing the situation. One can only guess, but that doesn't mean anything by itself.


The credibility of Trayvon's girlfriend is going to be huge in this case if it goes to trial.
Why?

If her testimony is limited to what we already have heard, then there is nothing important. The call records piece together time, and that's about it.

I'm surprised you didn't mention martin's mother saying that was her son screaming for help. I will contend that this was her assumption when she heard her son was dead, and later the tape. I'll bet that Trayvon had never cried for help like that in earshot of his mother since he started puberty, and it was nothing but her assumption.

[Wild Cobra Kai]

I'll bet that whole post is nothing buy YOUR assumption, Wild and Crazy.

[Wild Cobra]

I'll bet that whole post is nothing buy YOUR assumption, Wild and Crazy.
The post is plausible explanations that blow away the other assumptions. If you have an ounce of intelligence, you know I see this could go either way.

Why do we have so many trolls here who are to scared to use their real ID?

Fucking coward.

[Casey Anthony]

Go fuck yourself troll.

Use your real ID or STFU.

:lmao Like Wild Cobra is your real ID. STFU and kiss my acquited white ass.

[Wild Cobra]

:lmao Like Wild Cobra is your real ID. STFU and kiss my acquited white ass.
It's a handle I have used for a very long time. Well before the turn of the century.

How long have you pretended to be someone else? At least I created mine, and am not pretending to be someone else. This is the only ID I use here. How many other troll ID's do you have loser?

[jack sommerset]

It's a handle I have used for a very long time. Well before the turn of the century.

How long have you pretended to be someone else? At least I created mine, and am not pretending to be someone else. This is the only ID I use here. How many other troll ID's do you have loser?

Trolling is disruptive behavior for no apparent reason. Most often we see it in children that were abused and/or that never bonded with family, friends or any particular group of society. They are lonely reaching out for attention of any kind and they get that quick fix when you react. As much help as these people need their is nothing you, the one being trolled can do about it. Best to move on, that's what most people do. You must understand that it's a cry out for help.They are saying "why doesn't anyone love me" instead of asking for love, attention, they chose to get angry. They kid themselves into thinking its funny, amusing, entertaining, justified but at the end of the day they do not know how to express themselves like civilized adults. God bless

[CosmicCowboy]

The 2nd degree charge came out of left field. If Corey is overcharging intentionally, that is a very high-risk move that increases the chances of a Not Guilty Verdict.

One thing to remember is that no solid facts about forensic evidence or the autopsy were leaked. There is gamechanging potential in each of these aspects.

One theory is that forensic and autopsy evidence led her to believe that Zimmerman shot Martin in the back. Remember that Martin was found lying face down with both hands underneath his body.

I have never heard this theory from any legitimate news source, just wild blogger speculation like this.

If Zimmerman was initially losing the fight (numerous 911 calls mentioned 2 guys wrestling outside, so the person in control could easily have changed a few times over the course of the fight), but then gained control and pinned Trayvon down and shot him in the back it would explain quite a few things:

1) Why there was no blood on Zimmerman. Zimmerman claims he was on the bottom and shot Trayvon who was on top of him. Yet 30 minutes later there didn't appear to be any blood on his body. Blood should have splattered all over his body in this scenario. If there was blood, surely the police would have been wearing gloves.

You clearly haven't ever shot anything and have watched too much TV. The entry wound from a 9mm is about the size of a pencil. There is no splatter and little to no leakage. The only time you get splatter is if there is an exit wound where the expanded bullet takes blood and tissue with it as it exits. Most likely the 9mm did not exit from the back (its a matter of ballistics and depth of the chest) 9's are obviously enough to kill someone with a well placed shot but we aren't talking about a real high power round here.

2) The yells for Help on the 911 call. In a scenario where Zimmerman has Trayvon pinned down, the yells for help pass the common sense test because Trayvon knew George had a gun and could have been bracing to shoot him.

At least be consistent. You are saying the screaming went on for a full minute. Zimmerman was "bracing" this whole time?


If one is to believe that the voice on the 911 call was George Z and he was on the ground, then they have to believe that George endured a beating for nearly one full minute that did not ultimately result in the EMT who arrived at the scene at least putting one bandage on him. This story would be much easier to believe had we not heard the screams last as long as they did.

Fighters routinely go 15 rounds without needing bandages. This was apparently a close proximity where they were landing rabbit punches at best. No room for haymakers.


3) The statements by Mary Cutcher and her roommate Cutcher and her roommate claim to have seen George straddling Trayvon. That is consistent with George having Trayvon pinned down but inconsistent with George being on the ground. Why would George get up and straddle Trayvon after shooting him if he was on the bottom?

Who knows...Checking for sign of life?

4) Trayvon's body positioning. If George was on the bottom and shot Trayvon, does Trayvon fall forward and have both his arms tucked underneath his body instead of to his side? George Z pinning Trayvon down seems more consistent with this fact.

You seem to put a lot of faith in the fact that Martins hands were in front of his body. That's very consistent with a shooting victim clutching the entry wound as they bled out and passed out and fell over.

The credibility of Trayvon's girlfriend is going to be huge in this case if it goes to trial. She may be the only witness present when the fight actually commenced, even though she is an ear witness.

She didn't hear enough. She claims only to have heard the opening words and then Martin dropped the phone.

Corey was also quoted the day she took over as prosecutor that the question of who's voice was on the 911 call was vital in her determination of how to proceed with the case. She hired an expert to analyze the voice. Assuming Corey hasn't done this for political reasons (which is definitely very plausible), one other reason for the strong charge could be that she's seen some sort of evidence to indicate it was Trayvon screaming. I see no scenario in which 12 jurors are convinced it is Trayvon's voice that they don't convict Zimmerman of at least some wrongdoing.

As of now, a conviction seems hard to envision even though many think the media has already convicted George.

agree

[Yonivore]

I think it's useless to speculate any more until we have more information about why the prosecutor chose 2nd Degree Murder. The facts we do know don't seem to point that direction so, there's either evidence we don't have or the prosecutor is reaching for political reasons (she spent a lot of time in the news conference petting the Martin family and praising their legal counsel -- not exactly a hallmark of impartiality but, who knows, maybe she sees this as her 15 minutes and she's already looking at movie and book deals).

What we do know about the incident is completely consistent with Zimmerman's claim of self defense. What we don't know about the incident could negate his claim.

Right now, I think the most important pieces of information are the time stamps on all the phone calls, particularly the 911 call from Zimmerman and the phone call between Martin and his girlfriend. The shorter the time span between the end of the 911 call and the when the call between Martin and his girlfriend disconnected, the more likely it is, in my opinion, Martin is the aggressor.

It's apparent to me, from the 911 call, that Zimmerman had stopped following Martin by the end of the 911 call; 1) he was walking to the next street to verify the address, 2) he was whining about how "they always get away," and 3) it doesn't sound like he's running on the recording.

The longer the gap between the end of the two calls the more possible it is that Zimmerman resumed his "pursuit" of Martin, after hanging up and did, in fact, catch up to him and instigate a confrontation. The shorter the gap, the more possible it is Martin laid in wait until Zimmerman hung up and then confronted him.

Why do I believe the latter to be the more likely scenario? Martin speaks first (according to the girlfriend) and the shooting happened fairly close to where Zimmerman claims he is in the 911 call. There was also the point in the 911 call when Zimmerman claims Martin was approaching him while he sat in his truck talking to police on the phone.

What we can't know is (assuming this is true) why did Martin change his mind about approaching Zimmerman and, instead, take off running? Did he overhear the conversation and realize police were being called to check him out? Did he realize Zimmerman was on the phone and that approaching him would mean someone would hear the exchange between he and Zimmerman and he didn't want that? Did Zimmerman brandish his weapon and frighten Martin off?

Another thing to consider is that police were familiar with Zimmerman; I think I read somewhere he had made something like 46 911 calls in the recent past. Zimmerman was also involved in an action where at least one of the officers that responded to the shooting were also facing disciplinary action because of Zimmerman's community activism.

I mention this only because it might lend credence to the assumption there was was no love lost between Zimmerman and the Sanford Police and, therefore, no reason for them to cover his ass or falsify reports or fabricate evidence -- unless, of course, it was to incriminate.

Why was there no blood on Zimmerman in the police video?

My understanding is medical personnel treated and cleaned his injuries at the scene. Additionally, he was wearing a red and black coat/sweater. Blood comes out red and dries dark. Also, it is entirely possible -- as someone else said -- Trayvon Martin retreated after being shot and made it a few feet before collapsing and dying...adrenalin is an amazing drug.

If any of us have seen the video where the plate umpire collapsed and died before the first pitch of a season opener in Cincinnati, a few years ago, we know the body can continue to function for a short time after the heart ceases functioning. In my experience, only catastrophic head, brain stem, and mobility impairing spinal injuries produce a DRT ("Dead Right There") result.

I don't know if there was an exit wound but, CosmicCowboy makes a valid point; the entry wound wouldn't necessarily produce a lot of blood unless the bullet pierced a major artery without affecting the function of the heart. The way it sounds, the Trayvon may have been shot in the heart and the heart may have suffered an immediate, fatal arrhythmia that caused it to cease pumping blood. No pump, no bleeding.

It's possible any bleeding from George Zimmerman's head wound ran down his neck and soaked into whatever garmet he was wearing under the red and black sweater/coat.

I wonder if the criminal complaint will be released.

[rjv]

Also, it is entirely possible -- as someone else said -- Trayvon Martin retreated after being shot and made it a few feet before collapsing and dying...adrenalin is an amazing drug.

and how did blood get diverted to the brain and muscles without a heart pumping blood ? and adrenaline is not a 'drug'. it's a hormone.

[Yonivore]

"...and how did blood get diverted to the brain and muscles without a heart pumping blood?"
The blood already in the brain and muscles remains oxygenated for a period of time after the blood stops flowing. Body processes don't leech oxygen out of the blood 100% and so, the residual will last a few seconds.

Besides, I've witnessed it -- on more than one occasion.


"...and adrenaline is not a 'drug'. it's a hormone."
An imprecise generalization; prescription hormone therapies are called drugs by some; are you going to quibble with those people too?

[CosmicCowboy]

and how did blood get diverted to the brain and muscles without a heart pumping blood ? and adrenaline is not a 'drug'. it's a hormone.

Death is not immediate with a chest shot, especially from a 9mm which is a relatively light round. It takes a few seconds for blood pressure to drop enough from internal bleeding for the brain to lose cognizance. There's no doubt in my mind Martin knew he was shot, clutched his chest, and gradually lost consciousness and motor function.

[rjv]

Death is not immediate with a chest shot, especially from a 9mm which is a relatively light round. It takes a few seconds for blood pressure to drop enough from internal bleeding for the brain to lose cognizance. There's no doubt in my mind Martin knew he was shot, clutched his chest, and gradually lost consciousness and motor function.

the question is whether or not he had the capacity to keep walking. if he went into v-fib, it would be microseconds before he lost consciousness. measurable brain activity is not the equivalent to consciousness.

i'm sure the prosecutor has reviewed the autopsy report with the medical examiner. it may not fall into place with your steady stream of 'what-ifs '.

not to mention the improbability of a child weighing less than 150 lbs and being shot from close distance remaining standing.

[Yonivore]

Trayvon's mom says 'shooting was accident,' Zimmerman to face judge (http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-12/news/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-charged-jail-20120412_1_face-murder-charges-today-show-accident)



"I believe it was an accident. I believe it just got out of control and he couldn't turn the clock back," Fulton said, revealing her opinion about what happened the night her 17-year-old son was shot to death. "I would ask him, did he know that that was a minor, that that was a teenager and that he did not have a weapon."

Fulton said even if Zimmerman is found not guilty, the arrest achieves the goal of their campaign to raise awareness and bring him to justice.

"We just want him to be held accountable for what he done," Fulton said. "We are happy that he was arrested so that he can give his side of the story."
A perfectly reasonable position -- by the one of the few people I would consider to have every right to be unreasonable, under the circumstances.

Meanwhile, the hyperventilating by the race-baiters continues...

Mike Tyson on George Zimmerman: ‘It’s a disgrace he hasn’t been shot yet’ (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/mike-tyson-trayvon-martin-case-disgrace-george-zimmerman-221115400.html)


http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/vL68esXpzgM11r5pjFGawA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/thelookout/mike-tyson-tattoo-lg.jpg

[clambake]

yoni is propping up mike tyson?

[CosmicCowboy]

the question is whether or not he had the capacity to keep walking. if he went into v-fib, it would be microseconds before he lost consciousness. measurable brain activity is not the equivalent to consciousness.

i'm sure the prosecutor has reviewed the autopsy report with the medical examiner. it may not fall into place with your steady stream of 'what-ifs '.

not to mention the improbability of a child weighing less than 150 lbs and being shot from close distance remaining standing.

You don't have much real world experience with guns and gun shot wounds do you?

[DarrinS]

Trayvon's mother: "I believe it was an accident."

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/04/trayvons-mother-says-shooting-was-accident-while-zimmerman-hopes-bail/51054/


This should make the trial even more interesting.

[rjv]

You don't have much real world experience with guns and gun shot wounds do you?

were you in combat or a gang ? how many times have you been shot or seen someone shot ? (right there at that very moment)

that aside, your argument of authority is pure fallacy. what does the autopsy report say? what did the crime scene look like ?

are you suggesting the defense will ask the jurors such a simple question after offering highly speculative scenarios or in the face of palpable evidence ?

[Spur_Fanatic]

I dont get it. Tons of kids die every year by guns.
Some by accident, some not...

But this case got so much attention, why?

[Spur_Fanatic]

(for the record, been out of the states for 2 years now, so not following this story much)

[rjv]

but please tell me, CC, how many times you've shot or stood next to a 140 lb person being shot in the chest at close range ?

[DarrinS]

I dont get it. Tons of kids die every year by guns.
Some by accident, some not...

But this case got so much attention, why?


Had the struggle resulted in the death of Zimmerman, you wouldn't have heard of this story.

[DarrinS]

the question is whether or not he had the capacity to keep walking. if he went into v-fib, it would be microseconds before he lost consciousness. measurable brain activity is not the equivalent to consciousness.


Really? Microseconds?

[Yonivore]

the question is whether or not he had the capacity to keep walking. if he went into v-fib, it would be microseconds before he lost consciousness. measurable brain activity is not the equivalent to consciousness.
Okay, you're pretty much in my wheelhouse [well, from a few decades ago -- anyway] here, rjv. I have had conversations with people in asystole -- briefly, but, longer than "microseconds," I assure you.

I have seen a person who was kicked in the chest by a bull, breaking his ribs and driving one through his heart, walk from the arena and die as he was climbing the fence.

You are right, v-fib is a fatal arrhythmia but, not necessarily one that induces unconsciousness immediately. You're probably thinking of v-fib that is subsequent to another arrhythmia caused by a disease process or acute illness. Yes, people who suffer heart attacks will, sometimes fall unconscious when their heart rhythm converts to ventricular fibrillation but, that usually after the heart has been struggling to maintain a normal beat, for some time, while the victim became increasingly weak and lethargic.

Immediate onset of a fatal arrhythmia, in an otherwise healthy heart, does not necessarily result in immediate unconsciousness or loss of motor skills.

Find the video of that umpire collapsing (I've searched You Tube unsuccessfully) -- it's one of the better examples. You can tell when his heart converted to an abnormal rhythm because he notices and tries to leave the field, he walks about 10 to 15 feet before losing consciousness.


i'm sure the prosecutor has reviewed the autopsy report with the medical examiner. it may not fall into place with your steady stream of 'what-ifs '.
One would hope but, the prosecutor did say the decision to charge Zimmerman was made last week. I forget when she was appointed but, certainly, there would have been time to review the physical evidence.


not to mention the improbability of a child weighing less than 150 lbs and being shot from close distance remaining standing.
From what's reported, he wasn't standing but, on top of Zimmerman fighting. But, to your point, it's absolutely possible for someone, suffering a chest wound -- even involving the heart, to not only remain standing for a period of time but, to actually get up off the ground and walk.

[Yonivore]

There's also another possibility that would explain Trayvon's apparent ability to continue moving around after being shot in the chest.

It could be the bullet only perforated a major vessel or the heart and it was only after Martin, realizing he was shot, jumped up and started moving that the perforation dissected and resulted in a catastrophic loss of blood pressure and the resulting death.

I've seen that happen too.

[CosmicCowboy]

but please tell me, CC, how many times you've shot or stood next to a 140 lb person being shot in the chest at close range ?

That's your straw man.

As a hunter all my life and later a part time professional hunting guide I have shot or seen shot hundreds of animals with bigger bullets traveling faster than a 9mm pistol slug. I've seen real world gun shots and done autopsies on the wounds as part of the eviceration and meat preparation process. I have trailed deer hundreds of yards that were shot squarely in the heart destroying the heart completely but running and dodging obstacles etc. for at least a minute before finally collapsing and bleeding out.

And yes, I know I'm talking about deer and not humans but the physiology is not that different. Deer don't just collapse when shot unless bone is broken making them unable to run, but they still don't die immediately from a center body mass shot. People are the same.

This ain't TV buckwheat.

[rjv]

That's your straw man.

As a hunter all my life and later a part time professional hunting guide I have shot or seen shot hundreds of animals with bigger bullets traveling faster than a 9mm pistol slug. I've seen real world gun shots and done autopsies on the wounds as part of the eviceration and meat preparation process. I have trailed deer hundreds of yards that were shot squarely in the heart destroying the heart completely but running and dodging obstacles etc. for at least a minute before finally collapsing and bleeding out.

And yes, I know I'm talking about deer and not humans but the physiology is not that different. Deer don't just collapse when shot unless bone is broken making them unable to run, but they still don't die immediately from a center body mass shot. People are the same.

This ain't TV buckwheat.

great. all the defense has to do is bring in an expert on shooting quadripeds. i'm sure the jurors will be convinced.

[CosmicCowboy]

great. all the defense has to do is bring in an expert on shooting quadripeds. i'm sure the jurors will be convinced.

Here ya go dumbass. A similar shooting of a man caught on video close up.

Your ignorance is showing.

This is real life and not some movie stunt man flopping over dead at the gunshot.

vB5uu7QPvoY

[Sportcamper]

I've seen that happen too.

Yonivore- What do you do for a living?

[Yonivore]

That's your straw man.

As a hunter all my life and later a part time professional hunting guide I have shot or seen shot hundreds of animals with bigger bullets traveling faster than a 9mm pistol slug. I've seen real world gun shots and done autopsies on the wounds as part of the eviceration and meat preparation process. I have trailed deer hundreds of yards that were shot squarely in the heart destroying the heart completely but running and dodging obstacles etc. for at least a minute before finally collapsing and bleeding out.

And yes, I know I'm talking about deer and not humans but the physiology is not that different. Deer don't just collapse when shot unless bone is broken making them unable to run, but they still don't die immediately from a center body mass shot. People are the same.

This ain't TV buckwheat.
Well, I'm not a hunter [which would explain why I didn't think of it] but, videos of this process would be a lot easier to find on the internet than of humans going through it.

Here's one...

NCoGVzqCimw

When I lost sight of the lion, it was still running through the forest...no doubt it collapsed shortly but, nonetheless, it suffered a catastrophic chest wound and still had the capacity to remain conscious and move.

A) I specifically chose one where the wound produced copious blood flow so there would be no mistaking there was an injury to a major vessel or the heart.

B) I apologize for the rednecks.

[Yonivore]

Yonivore- What do you do for a living?
I'm retired.

[Sportcamper]

I'm retired.

OK may I ask what did you used to do? Where did you acquire all this medical knowledge?

[rjv]

But, to your point, it's absolutely possible for someone, suffering a chest wound -- even involving the heart, to not only remain standing for a period of time but, to actually get up off the ground and walk.

to what degree of probability ? i mean, how many people have you seen shot at point blank range in the chest get up and walk several feet ?

[Yonivore]

Here ya go dumbass. A similar shooting of a man caught on video close up.

Your ignorance is showing.

This is real life and not some movie stunt man flopping over dead at the gunshot.
Or, you could find a real video...even though I'm not sure I would have posted it.

[JudynTX]

to what degree of probability ? i mean, how many people have you seen shot at point blank range in the chest get up and walk several feet ?

:) Hello, I haven't seen you in ages. Take care. :lol

[Yonivore]

to what degree of probability ? i mean, how many people have you seen shot at point blank range in the chest get up and walk several feet ?
I think we all just did.

But, to your question, I've only personally seen one person who was shot multiple times, get out of a car and run about 30 feet before collapsing. Three of the bullet wounds were to his chest and one hit his heart. The shots were fired from about six inches to four feet as the officer retreated away from the car, firing his revolver (four of his six shots hit their target).

Incidentally, the man survived.

However, I've seen quite a number of dead (not many injured because well, unless you were lucky enough - as the man I just described was - to have emergency medical personnel right there to begin resuscitation and blood volume replacement treatments, such injuries usually result in death) that physically moved, on their own, from the point where they incurred the fatal injury to the point where they died. Probably in the dozens but, less than 50.

[CosmicCowboy]

to what degree of probability ? i mean, how many people have you seen shot at point blank range in the chest get up and walk several feet ?

I just posted a video for you of the cops shooting a guy about Martins size dead center in the chest right in the heart and he is still walking around and talking until he finally bleeds out.

How much more proof do you need that you are wrong?

[Yonivore]

OK may I ask what did you used to do? Where did you acquire all this medical knowledge?
Spent some time in emergency medicine...a lifetime ago.

[Sportcamper]

Spent some time in emergency medicine...a lifetime ago.

As a doctor, nurse, technician?

[Yonivore]

As a doctor, nurse, technician?
Why is that important? Any of those would be exposed, and have a great deal of familiarity, with what I've described.

I'm not interested in revealing more about myself that necessary. You can take my claims at face value or not, makes no difference to me.

[clambake]

OR tech

[Sportcamper]

Why is that important? Any of those would be exposed, and have a great deal of familiarity, with what I've described.

I'm not interested in revealing more about myself that necessary.

I am just curious who I am conversing with…Nothing more than that…You seem to have medical knowledge…I thought maybe you were a medic, EMT or something…

[rjv]

I just posted a video for you of the cops shooting a guy about Martins size dead center in the chest right in the heart and he is still walking around and talking until he finally bleeds out.

How much more proof do you need that you are wrong?

this is not about an instance. this is about an exact same instance. and probability. if the medical examiner shows that the autopsy indicates trayvon was shot in the aorta that would strongly indicate death within a matter of heartbeats. the further from the heart the slower the bleed.

fortunately, the prosecutor will not have to rely on youtube but rather an actually autopsy and testimony from the medical examiner.

[Yonivore]

I am just curious who I am conversing with…Nothing more than that…You seem to have medical knowledge…I thought maybe you were a medic, EMT or something…
Yes, I was, in a high trauma area for about 10 years.

It wasn't that you asked it's the trolls that will start sniping and needling -- as Clambake has already.

I'm really not interested in making that much personal information about myself available on here.

[clambake]

Yes, I was, in a high trauma area for about 10 years.

It wasn't that you asked it's the trolls that will start sniping and needling -- as Clambake has already.

I'm really not interested in making that much personal information about myself available on here.

whats your problem? OR techs watch people die every day.

[CosmicCowboy]

this is not about an instance. this is about an exact same instance. and probability. if the medical examiner shows that the autopsy indicates trayvon was shot in the aorta that would strongly indicate death within a matter of heartbeats. the further from the heart the slower the bleed.

fortunately, the prosecutor will not have to rely on youtube but rather an actually autopsy and testimony from the medical examiner.

:lmao




not to mention the improbability of a child weighing less than 150 lbs and being shot from close distance remaining standing.

I gave you irrefutable visual proof of a similar sided person being shot dead square in the chest/heart at point blank range and not even realizing he had been shot for several seconds and still walking around and talking until he bled out.

Just admit you didn't know what you were talking about and move on.

People don't normally just fall over dead like in the movies or video games.

[Sportcamper]

It wasn't that you asked it's the trolls will start sniping and needling
I get that...:lol
I don’t like to brag but I have a rewarding career dealing with vinegar syndrome and binder separation…What I really like to do is spend my day immersing damaged tapes & film in 1,1,1-Trichloroethane and Perchloroethane…

[cantthinkofanything]

I'm retired.

1sg8G7gZV7E

[Yonivore]

I get that...:lol
I don’t like to brag but I have a rewarding career dealing with vinegar syndrome and binder separation…What I really like to do is spend my day immersing damaged tapes & film in 1,1,1-Trichloroethane and Perchloroethane…
Awesome...I think.

[Wild Cobra]

and how did blood get diverted to the brain and muscles without a heart pumping blood ? and adrenaline is not a 'drug'. it's a hormone.
You don't die instantly from loss of blood flow. The brain still functions for a few seconds, and the muscles longer.

[Wild Cobra]

Trayvon's mother: "I believe it was an accident."

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/04/trayvons-mother-says-shooting-was-accident-while-zimmerman-hopes-bail/51054/


This should make the trial even more interesting.
If it makes it through a trial:

There's a "high likelihood it could be dismissed by the judge even before the jury gets to hear the case," Florida defense attorney Richard Hornsby said.

[Wild Cobra]

I dont get it. Tons of kids die every year by guns.
Some by accident, some not...

But this case got so much attention, why?
Opinion:

Because initially it was thought to be the election year case. Zimmerman was initially reported as white instead of only half. Gun control proponents you can bet fueled this too, using it as a case to change law. It would have never been a national story if Zimmerman was black, or thought of as another minority. Only a story because he was thought to be a white male.

[Yonivore]

I dont get it. Tons of kids die every year by guns.
Some by accident, some not...

But this case got so much attention, why?
Race baiters and Brady Bunchers both thought it fit a narrative so, instead of looking at the facts George Zimmerman became the white man that shot a black kid because he was black and then tried to claim he was standing his ground.

So, out come the Race Baiters trying to foment racial unrest in all corners of the country.

And, out come the Brady Bunch lobbyists trying to get legislation written and passed before the dust settles.

It's what they do...

What I don't understand is why a good portion of Americans fall for it every fucking time it's tried. Particularly with the racial issue...

Tawana Brawley...

Duke La Cross Players...

Crown Heights...

Freddie's Fashion Mart...

Henry Gates...

Rodney King...

and now,

Trayvon Martin...

I'm sure I'm forgetting some.

[clambake]

no yoni, people are upset that a guy stalked a kid and then murdered him.

these are the only facts known.

[Wild Cobra]

no yoni, people are upset that a guy stalked a kid and then murdered him.

these are the only facts known.

Wow...

You're not only a bully, but have a short memory too.

[clambake]

those are the only known facts.

[Yonivore]

Wow...

You're not only a bully, but have a short memory too.
Actually, he's neither. He's irrelevant.

[clambake]

Actually, he's neither. He's irrelevant.

what are the known facts, mr. relevant?

[CosmicCowboy]

no yoni, people are upset that a guy stalked a kid and then murdered him.

these are the only facts known.


Technically you currently have no basis to say he murdered him. No one denies he killed him, but murder by definition requires a specific set of circumstances which have yet to be proven.

You know that, too. You are just trolling.

[Wild Cobra]

Actually, he's neither. He's irrelevant.
True. That's why every now and then, I place him, Fuzzy, and a few others on IGNORE. Sometimes I just don't even want to see anything they write. Very rarely does it add anything to a discussion. Almost always negativity. I could never understand how such people live with themselves, always being so spiteful, angry, etc.

[clambake]

Technically you currently have no basis to say he murdered him. No one denies he killed him, but murder by definition requires a specific set of circumstances which have yet to be proven.

You know that, too. You are just trolling.

yes, i'm trolling the stupid. they always bite.

[clambake]

yes, i'm trolling the stupid. they always bite.

its not called ignore. its called white flag.

[clambake]

Technically you currently have no basis to say he murdered him. No one denies he killed him, but murder by definition requires a specific set of circumstances which have yet to be proven.

You know that, too. You are just trolling.

listen, i know you don't like that word "murder", but he is charged with murder.

remember, i called it! :p:

[Yonivore]

Now, we have Malik Shabazz -- Leader of Eric Holder's favorite group, the New Black Panther Party -- threatening to raise an army to "kill" in Florida. Oh, this was on the Al Sharpton radio show, I understand.

http://content.bitsontherun.com/previews/x7Mj3g59-dh3Zgtip

By the way, the guy that preceded Jay Carney -- wow, how forgettable they are -- had to do a similar song and dance, as did Carney over Rosen, when asked why Malik Shabazz and Bill Ayers showed up in the White House visitors log.

[Yonivore]

True. That's why every now and then, I place him, Fuzzy, and a few others on IGNORE. Sometimes I just don't even want to see anything they write. Very rarely does it add anything to a discussion. Almost always negativity. I could never understand how such people live with themselves, always being so spiteful, angry, etc.
I never want to see anything he writes but, people keep giving that moose a muffiin and quoting him.

[clambake]

wut?

[clambake]

bill ayers lol

[ChumpDumper]

Now, we have Malik Shabazz You know, you're the only guy who cares about the NBBP. Everyone else knows there's nothing to it.

[Yonivore]

You know, by the sound of it (from her earlier statement she believed the shooting was an accident), Trayvon's mother sounds like a good and decent woman.

I wonder if she regrets involving the national cadre of race baiters.

There's a good likelihood innocent people will be killed -- some have already been injured -- in the name of avenging her son. That's not a good thing for a person to have to live with.

[clambake]

yep, poor zimmerman.

[Al Sharpton]

no yoni, people are upset that a guy stalked a kid and then murdered him.

these are the only facts known.

Damn right!

[Al Sharpton]

You know, by the sound of it (from her earlier statement she believed the shooting was an accident), Trayvon's mother sounds like a good and decent woman.

I wonder if she regrets involving the national cadre of race baiters.

There's a good likelihood innocent people will be killed -- some have already been injured -- in the name of avenging her son. That's not a good thing for a person to have to live with.

I'm sure you would want justice if your child was gunned down.

[TheSkeptic]

You know, by the sound of it (from her earlier statement she believed the shooting was an accident), Trayvon's mother sounds like a good and decent woman.

I wonder if she regrets involving the national cadre of race baiters.

There's a good likelihood innocent people will be killed -- some have already been injured -- in the name of avenging her son. That's not a good thing for a person to have to live with.

You're usually fairly balanced, but in this case I think you need to come off it.

The cops closed the case and overruled the lead investigator who wanted to charge Zimmerman for this killing.

I might not like most of the news networks or Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson but if my child had been shot dead under these circumstances I guarantee you that I would be all over CNN/MSNBC/FOX and I'd be on the phone with Jesse Jackson while travelling to the studio for my next interview if I thought that's what had to be done.

Most parents would. I highly doubt you wouldn't have done the same thing if you found yourself without any other options.

Yes the media has handled the situation badly but there's no need to start shifting the guilt onto a mother who was seeking justice for her son. Have some empathy for other people. My goodness.

[ElNono]

Damn right!

sup Al

[Spur_Fanatic]

So... we all assume he is guilty? I mean, is there any evidence/witnesses to this?
(sorry, only now just catching up with this case)

[Drachen]

Opinion:

Because initially it was thought to be the election year case. Zimmerman was initially reported as white instead of only half. Gun control proponents you can bet fueled this too, using it as a case to change law. It would have never been a national story if Zimmerman was black, or thought of as another minority. Only a story because he was thought to be a white male.

why was trevor dooley charged? he was being attacked by a 41 year old while he himself was 71 years old. That alone is a good reason to believe that his life was threatened. Was that a political decision too? Just curious since it seems, at first glance, that trevor has a better case than Zim.

[Yonivore]

You're usually fairly balanced, but in this case I think you need to come off it.

The cops closed the case and overruled the lead investigator who wanted to charge Zimmerman for this killing.
That's not factual. But, by the way, that's the first time anyone has ever said I was "fairly balanced." Thanks, I think.

The investigation was ongoing and would have been presented to a Grand Jury within weeks. I know of no criminal jurisdiction in the United States that would allow the police to make the final determination on whether or not a person will be prosecuted for a homicide. The lead investigator wasn't overruled by other cops; the prosecutor declined to seek an arrest warrant because he did not believe there was enough evidence to arrest...that doesn't mean he did not intend to present the evidence to a Grand Jury and allow them to make the final determination on whether to indict or no bill Zimmerman.


I might not like most of the news networks or Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson but if my child had been shot dead under these circumstances I guarantee you that I would be all over CNN/MSNBC/FOX and I'd be on the phone with Jesse Jackson while travelling to the studio for my next interview if I thought that's what had to be done.

Most parents would. I highly doubt you wouldn't have done the same thing if you found yourself without any other options.
I was merely suggesting she does not appear to believe Zimmerman had any malice in killing her son and that it would be a shame for her to be further burdened by any racial violence that is brought about in her son's name.

I'm not sure what her options were. I don't know if she bothered to ask Sanford officials if, in fact, they were going to proceed to a Grand Jury. You know, some parents wait years for the criminals to be brought to justice because prosecutors don't have the evidence -- even when they know who committed the crime -- to successfully prosecute.

But, the case was far from closed when the racialist circus began. After that, I don't think anyone much cared about the facts so long as Zimmerman was arrested.

So, they got their wish. But, at what price? Will the New Black Panther Party now "stand down" because he is arrested? Doesn't look that way, judging from Malik Shabazz's appearance on Sharpton's radio show.

And, what of the innocent people that will be attacked by those incited by Sharpton, et. al.?

I wasn't blaming Trayvon's mother, I was merely wondering if she's concerned at what has come about. I pray she doesn't suffer any guilt but, as I mentioned, she seems to be a good and decent woman -- and I would be similarly affected if I accidentally unleashed a pack of rabid dogs -- even if it was to seek justice for one of my children.


Yes the media has handled the situation badly but there's no need to start shifting the guilt onto a mother who was seeking justice for her son. Have some empathy for other people. My goodness.
Badly? They've lied, misrepresented, steered, and all but changed Zimmerman's DNA to make him a white man. Badly? That doesn't begin to describe how the media behaved.

I can see where my other post may be read to indicate I thought Trayvon's mother should feel guilty. That wasn't my intent.

Given that she seems to be a good and decent woman of faith, I wondered if she is horrified by what is happening as a result of her son's death being "racialized." I pray she doesn't feel guilty.

The blame lays directly at the feet of Al Sharpton, Malik Shabazz, and the media -- principally ABC and NBC. But, there's not a chance in hell of any of them feeling any guilt. Hell, if Freddie's Fashion Mart didn't shame Al Sharpton into non-existence -- nothing will. Malik Shabazz and the NBPP are just a bunch of racists on par with the Ku Klux Klan.

[Yonivore]

I'm sure you would want justice if your child was gunned down.
Yeah, well threatening to burn down Florida and "kill whitey" isn't exactly justice for Trayvon Martin, now, is it?

So, what happened to you on Easter Sunday? You were going to be in Sanford.

[clambake]

she said the "accident" was that they ever crossed paths.

try to keep up.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-04/69353440.pdf

Thats a link to the affidavit. This cannot be good for Zimmerrman:


Zimmerman confronted Martin and a struggle ensued.

[ElNono]

I can see where my other post may be read to indicate I thought Trayvon's mother should feel guilty.

If there's an ankle to bite...

[Yonivore]

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-04/69353440.pdf

Thats a link to the affidavit. This cannot be good for Zimmerrman:
I think that is possibly the most poorly written affidavit I've seen in quite a long time.

They should be ashamed.

None of the statements -- all based on a reason to believe since neither of them were there -- are not supported with the facts that caused them to reasonably believe what they were writing.

Profiled? Assumed Martin was a criminal?

Zimmerman saw a suspicious person and called 911 -- he reported Martin as being suspicious because he was walking around in the rain and, in his opinion, he appeared intoxicated.

Later, they totally muck up the gist of the 911 call.

The police dispatcher asked if Zimmerman was following the person and said he "didn't need to do that." It wasn't an instruction. And, he wasn't in pursuit.

Yep, they needed an affidavit like this to get a 2nd Degree Murder charge because the truth based on the known facts wouldn't have...but, a good lawyer will absolutely shred this.

If this is the quality of work to come from the Special Prosecutor, I don't think Zimmerman has much to worry about.

[Yonivore]

By the way, Fuzzy. Who's Davis?

[Yonivore]

I just browsed the 911 call transcript again and nowhere in there does it indicate the 911 operator told Zimmerman to "wait for the officer." In fact, there are a couple of places where the 911 operator asked Zimmerman to let them know if the person did anything...indicating to me, anyway, they expected him to keep an eye on the person.

The officer just made that up out of whole cloth and put it in a sworn affidavit.

Shoddy -- and perjury (not that it will ever be prosecuted).

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I think that is possibly the most poorly written affidavit I've seen in quite a long time.

They should be ashamed.

None of the statements -- all based on a reason to believe since neither of them were there -- are not supported with the facts that caused them to reasonably believe what they were writing.

Profiled? Assumed Martin was a criminal?

Zimmerman saw a suspicious person and called 911 -- he reported Martin as being suspicious because he was walking around in the rain and, in his opinion, he appeared intoxicated.

Later, they totally muck up the gist of the 911 call.

The police dispatcher asked if Zimmerman was following the person and said he "didn't need to do that." It wasn't an instruction. And, he wasn't in pursuit.

Yep, they needed an affidavit like this to get a 2nd Degree Murder charge because the truth based on the known facts wouldn't have...but, a good lawyer will absolutely shred this.

If this is the quality of work to come from the Special Prosecutor, I don't think Zimmerman has much to worry about.

Brain fart.

and lol perhaps you should read the last paragraph. and your interpretation is pretty fucking stupid.

The important part is that Zimmerman confronted Martin. You have read none of the police reports and none of us have all of the facts of the case. They knew the affidavit would be made public and limited disclosure. But by all means continue as if you kow everything that transpired.

If you know wtf you are talking about you consider discovery and how that works.

[Yonivore]

And, if you read the transcript, there's a point where it's obvious Zimmerman no longer has Martin in sight. When the dispatcher asks for his address, he starts to give it to him and realizes he's giving it out loud says, "Oh crap, I don't want to give it all out, I don't know where this kid is."

Yeah, that affidavit leaves out quite a bit of pertinent information.

[Yonivore]

The important part is that Zimmerman confronted Martin.
You're right, and that's why they wrote it that way -- leaving out facts that might indicate otherwise.

They have no clue whether or not Zimmerman confronted Martin. But, the affidavit has to indicate that for a 2nd Degree Murder charge.

And, I do know a bit about what I'm saying.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

From the 911 call


Zimmerman:

We’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood and there’s a real suspicious guy. It’s Retreat View Circle. The best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle.

This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around looking about. [00:25]


911 dispatcher:

Are you following him? [2:24]

Zimmerman:

Yeah. [2:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK.

We don’t need you to do that. [2:26]

Zimmerman:

OK. [2:28]

[Yonivore]

Limited disclosure doesn't mean you leave out facts that would contradict your affidavit and just make other shit up; does it?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You're right, and that's why they wrote it that way -- leaving out facts that might indicate otherwise.

They have no clue whether or not Zimmerman confronted Martin. But, the affidavit has to indicate that for a 2nd Degree Murder charge.

And, I do know a bit about what I'm saying.

You have no clue. Quit speaking for what they know because you have no basis for it. Its funny watching you make shit up though.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Limited disclosure doesn't mean you leave out facts that would contradict your affidavit and just make other shit up; does it?

Lol limited disclosure precisely means that you don't give out everything.

What do limited mean?

And how do you know they don't have more evidence that supports what you claim they made up?

[Yonivore]

From the 911 call
Your point?

I've read the 911 transcript.

Zimmerman never claimed or verbally assumed Martin was committing a crime. He never said he was profiling. He only said he was suspicious because it was raining and he looked intoxicated. That there had been burglaries made his conduct more suspicious. Zimmerman never claimed he was committing a crime except, perhaps, being drunk in public.

The police dispatcher never said -- anywhere in the call -- for Zimmerman to wait for officers as is written and underlined in the first page of the affidavit. The police dispatcher didn't instruct Zimmerman to stop following Martin either.

Words have meaning.

[Yonivore]

Lol limited disclosure precisely means that you don't give out everything.

What do limited mean?

And how do you know they don't have more evidence that supports what you claim they made up?
But intentionally withholding information -- similar to what is being released -- that would contradict your affidavit is deceitful.

[Yonivore]

And how do you know they don't have more evidence that supports what you claim they made up?
Because I've listened to the phone call and read the transcript twice and nowhere does the dispatcher tell Zimmerman to wait.

The two officers swore in an affidavit that the dispatcher told Zimmerman an officer was on the way and to wait for the officer.

That's factually incorrect.

One lie could mean the affidavit is full of lies. It's certainly full of pertinent omissions -- such as the dispatcher asking Zimmerman to let him know if the subject does anything.

A good defense attorney will have this chewed up and laying in a wet pile on the Judges Bench in no time.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

But intentionally withholding information -- similar to what is being released -- that would contradict your affidavit is deceitful.

:downspin: :lol

Words have meaning?

What do limited mean?


Your affiants along with other law enforcement officials have taken sworn statements from witnesses, spoken with law enforcements who have provided sworn testimonies in reports, reviewed other reports, recorded statements, phone records, recorded calls to police, photographs, videos, and other documents in detailing the following:

I do find it interesting that you have an emotional interest that Zimmerman is innocent. I just take the affidavit for what it is.

[Yonivore]

You have no clue. Quit speaking for what they know because you have no basis for it. Its funny watching you make shit up though.
Tell me where in the 911 call the dispatcher tells Zimmerman to wait for officers.

He doesn't. And that's an important fact.

They are trying to establish Zimmerman disregarded police instructions when, in fact the 911 call indicates, if not the opposite, certainly a request by police to keep them informed of the suspicious persons actions.

That's and important difference.

It's also important to know how, if Zimmerman lost sight of Martin, he was able to confront him. The 911 call clearly indicates Zimmerman lost sight of Martin.

[Yonivore]

:downspin: :lol

Words have meaning?

What do limited mean?
What does the word wait mean and where, in the 911 call does it appear?

They lied in the affidavit.


I do find it interesting that you have an emotional interest that Zimmerman is innocent. I just take the affidavit for what it is.
I don't have any connection to Zimmerman, emotional or otherwise; I've just had considerable experience reading and writing affidavits. This is a bad one that contains information, stated as fact, that isn't true...and is known not to be true.

If that's the case, what else isn't factual about the affidavit?

[Yonivore]

Zimmerman:

We’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood and there’s a real suspicious guy. It’s Retreat View Circle. The best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle.

This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around looking about. [00:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK, is he White, Black, or Hispanic?

Zimmerman:

He looks black.

911 dispatcher:

Did you see what he was wearing?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, a dark hoodie like a gray hoodie. He wore jeans or sweat pants and white tennis shoes. He’s here now … he’s just staring. [00:42]

911 dispatcher:

He’s just walking around the area, the houses? OK.

Zimmerman:

Now he’s staring at me. [00:48]

911 dispatcher:

OK, you said that’s 1111 Retreat View or 111?

Zimmerman:

That’s the clubhouse.

911 dispatcher:

He’s near the clubhouse now?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, now he’s coming toward me. He’s got his hands in his waist band.

And he’s a black male.[1:03]

911 dispatcher:

How old would you say he is?

Zimmerman:

He’s got something on his shirt. About like his late teens.

911 dispatcher:

Late teens?

Zimmerman:

Uh, huh.

Something’s wrong with him. Yep, he’s coming to check me out.

He’s got something in his hands. I don’t know what his deal is. [01:20]

911 dispatcher:

Let me know if he does anything, OK?

Zimmerman:

OK.

911 dispatcher:

We’ve got him on the wire. Just let me know if this guy does anything else.

Zimmerman:

OK.

These assholes. They always get away.

When you come to the clubhouse, you come straight in and you go left. Actually, you would go past the clubhouse. [1:39]

911 dispatcher:

OK, so it’s on the left hand side of the clubhouse?

Zimmerman:

Yeah. You go in straight through the entrance and then you would go left. You go straight in, don’t turn and make a left.

He’s running. [2:08]

911 dispatcher:

He’s running? Which way is he running?

Zimmerman:

Down toward the other entrance of the neighborhood. [2:14]

911 dispatcher:

OK, which entrance is that he’s headed towards?

Zimmerman:

The back entrance.

Fucking [unintelligible]

911 dispatcher:

Are you following him? [2:24]

Zimmerman:

Yeah. [2:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK.

We don’t need you to do that. [2:26]

Zimmerman:

OK. [2:28]
Now, tell me where, for the rest of the call it appears Zimmerman is disregarding this advice?


911 dispatcher:

Alright, sir, what is your name? [2:34]

Zimmerman:

George. He ran.

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, what’s your last name?

Zimmerman:

Zimmerman.

911 dispatcher:

What’s the phone number you’re calling from?

Zimmerman:

407-435-2400

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, we do have them on the way. Do you want to meet with the officer when they get out there?

Zimmerman:

Yeah.

911 dispatcher:

Alright, where are you going to meet with them at?

Zimmerman:

Um, if they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the clubhouse and, uh, straight past the clubhouse and make a left and then go past the mailboxes you’ll see my truck. [3:10]

911 dispatcher:

Alright, what address are you parked in front of? [3:21]

Zimmerman:

Um, I don’t know. It’s a cut-through so I don’t know the address. [3:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK, do you live in the area?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, yeah, I live here.

911 dispatcher:

OK, what’s your apartment number?

Zimmerman:

It’s a home. It’s 1950 – oh, crap, I don’t want to give it out – I don’t know where this kid is [inaudible] [3:40]
This tells me he wasn't still following, how about you? What does it say to you?


911 dispatcher:

OK, do you just want to meet with them at the mailboxes then? [3:42]

Zimmerman:

Yeah, that’s fine. [3:43]

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, I’ll let them know you’ll meet them at …

Zimmerman:

Could you have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at? [3:49]

911 dispatcher:

OK, that’s no problem.

Zimmerman:

My number … you’ve got it?

911 dispatcher:

Yeah, I’ve got it. 435-2400?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, you got it.

911 dispatcher:

OK, no problem. I’ll let them know to call you when they’re in the area. [4:02]

Zimmerman:

Thanks.

911 dispatcher:

You’re welcome.

Call ends 4:07


The affidavit is written to make it appear Zimmerman was pursuing Martin the entire time he was on the 911 call, that he disregarded an instruction to wait for officers and that disobeyed an instruction to stop pursuing and, as a result, he confronted Martin.

This 911 call tells a different story.

[Yonivore]

Alan Dershowitz seems to agree with me.

Charges Against Zimmerman Won’t Hold Up (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/ns/msnbc_tv-hardball_with_chris_matthews/#47034974).


“It’s irresponsible and unethical. . . . This affidavit doesn’t even make it to probable cause. Everything in this affidavit is consistent with a defense of self-defense. . . . A good judge would throw this case out.”

[Blake]

What does the word wait mean and where, in the 911 call does it appear?

They lied in the affidavit.


I don't have any connection to Zimmerman, emotional or otherwise; I've just had considerable experience reading and writing affidavits. This is a bad one that contains information, stated as fact, that isn't true...and is known not to be true.

If that's the case, what else isn't factual about the affidavit?

anyone have a link to or copy of the affidavit?

[Blake]

Alan Dershowitz seems to agree with me.

Charges Against Zimmerman Won’t Hold Up (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/ns/msnbc_tv-hardball_with_chris_matthews/#47034974).

good interview.

[Yonivore]

anyone have a link to or copy of the affidavit?

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-04/69353440.pdf

[Stringer_Bell]

Alan Dershowitz seems to agree with me.

Charges Against Zimmerman Won’t Hold Up (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/ns/msnbc_tv-hardball_with_chris_matthews/#47034974).

Oh shit. We agree on something. Campaign speech, for sure. Bunch of horseshit.

[Nbadan]

Alan Dershowitz seems to agree with me.

Does Alan Dershowitz ever disagree with you? He's a FAUX News hack

:lol

[FuzzyLumpkins]

There is more than jsut the 911 call. Martin's gf indicated that he was scared because someone was following him. Additionally we have no idea what various witnesses including Zimmerman himself said to the police. Thats why I think its important that the affidavit says he confronted Martin which is contra what the board 'conservatives' have been asserting.

Its fun and all to claim that the prosecutor is making that up in a sworn affidavit, but another plausible scenario is that of the various police reports, witness interviews, etc that we are not privy to that they have proof that was what happened.

The dispatcher advised him not to follow and then talked to him about meeting up with the officers that were being dispatched. Of course Zimmerman can claim that he was confused by the dispatchers wording but its pretty coy to claim that they weren't intimating for him not to do that.

Either way i do not see how that matters. There is no law stating that he couldn't follow. Whats key to me is that Zimmerman started the confrontation.

As for Dershowitz, he sounds like he is trying to argue for the defense rather than be objective. He claims that everything was in the public record but there has been claims here that Zimmerman did not continue following him and that Martin initiated the confrontation. He concedes that all of the evidence is not included in the affidavit and that both parties are trying to get the case sealed.

i would imagine that the judge would have questions about the specifics. We will see.

If Zimmerman was the provocateur, that is probable cause. That does not make him guilty but i have heard of two cases both going different ways in a Florida courtroom about the provocateur initiating the conflict but in both cases that was enough for probable cause. the area of contention was whether or not stand your ground prohibited prosecution.

[Stringer_Bell]

There is more than jsut the 911 call. Martin's gf indicated that he was scared because someone was following him.

I'm curious, is there a video interview with her? ANy affadavits from her? Did she state anything about Martin mentioning that he wanted to call his dad or get out of there quickly because he was scared about the SUV trailing him? Did she say he felt like running away? Just curious........................................... ...DOT DOT DOT........

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'm curious, is there a video interview with her? ANy affadavits from her? Did she state anything about Martin mentioning that he wanted to call his dad or get out of there quickly because he was scared about the SUV trailing him? Did she say he felt like running away? Just curious........................................... ...DOT DOT DOT........

Its in the affidavit so its sworn testimony i am guessing. I do not presume to know.

[Stringer_Bell]

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-04/69353440.pdf

Hmmmm, never heard anything about Martin living in that gated community too. It's a pretty small place, interested to see the timeline they give for Zimmerman following him "home." Can't believe he didn't try running away.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Oh and here is a transcript of a part of thehearing today. I am guessing that the unidentified man is the judge. Looks like Dershowitz was wrong:


(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Zimmerman, appearing here for your first appearances, a first appearance at this time for a charge of murder in the second degree, and you are represented by Mr. O'Mara. Is that true?

GEORGE ZIMMERMAN, DEFENDANT: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Remember your right to remain silent. All the other rights that he has told you about, you have to say nothing, and we will go forward here on some procedural matters only at this time.

After reviewing the short affidavit for probable cause, I do find that probable cause for the charge as put in the information.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/12/cnr.07.html

And i have to say you guys suck at getting information. Sounds like confirmation bias based on supposition is the way to go here.

Wait theres more:


Herr found the affidavit legally sufficient to establish probable cause and ordered Zimmerman to appear for arraignment — when defendants formally enter a plea — on May 29 before Circuit Judge Jessica Recksiedler.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-12/news/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-charged-jail-20120412_1_face-murder-charges-today-show-accident

I guess the affidavit didn't suck.

[bobbyjoe]

Now, tell me where, for the rest of the call it appears Zimmerman is disregarding this advice?


This tells me he wasn't still following, how about you? What does it say to you?


The affidavit is written to make it appear Zimmerman was pursuing Martin the entire time he was on the 911 call, that he disregarded an instruction to wait for officers and that disobeyed an instruction to stop pursuing and, as a result, he confronted Martin.

This 911 call tells a different story.

I'm not sure where you got the above transcript from, but there's a pretty key omission.

At 3:49, just seconds after agreeing to meet the police officer at the mailbox, Zimmerman says "Actually, could you have him just call me and I'll tell him where I'm at".

This pretty clearly shows that Zimmerman's intent was not to stay put and supports the affidavit's statement that he planned on continuing his pursuit.

If you disagree with this, why did he change his mind just seconds after agreeing to meet the police at the mailboxes?

[bobbyjoe]

I do agree with Yonivore that the affidavit is underwhelming, except for the part about Zimmerman confronting Trayvon (assuming they have good evidence to back that up).

Second Degree Murder seems like a reach based on the affidavit, unless for some reason the most incriminating facts were withheld from the affidavit (which is illogical).

[Wild Cobra]

I never want to see anything he writes but, people keep giving that moose a muffiin and quoting him.
Moose?

Please don't disrespect Bullwinkle like that.

[bobbyjoe]

-OK, your clutching his wound theory makes perfect sense and is a very plausible explanation for Trayvon's hands winding up underneath his body.

However, the comparison to boxers duking it out 15 rounds and not being bandaged is seriously flawed. In this particular case, Zimmerman is asserting it was his voice on the 911 calls yelling for help. The yelling is incessant throughout a period of nearly 45 seconds. It is very high pitched, indicating a person who was in severe distress.

If you are to believe the voice is Zimmerman, this wasn't a fight like a boxing match where 2 guys were exchanging punches. The defendant claims his head was being bashed in and Trayvon was on top beating the living shit out of him. So, a more appropriate analogy would be a fight where one guy has complete control and is pounding the hell out of another for 45 seconds. In these scenarios, fights are called quickly because severe injury is around th corner.

In that scenario, unconsciousness or significant bleeding worthy of at least one bandage is what you'd expect.

What makes more sense: Scenario 1: That 45 seconds of yelling help is a guy who knows another guy on top of him has a gun and is thus struggling to avoid being pinned down (this is what I meant by bracing...that Zimmerman was trying to keep him pinned and Trayvon was fighting to wriggle out)?

Scenario 2: A guy underneath an attacker endures a beating for 45 seconds so severe he is audibly crying for help, yet he miraculously recovers to the point where he doesn't have to get a single bandage and doesn't have blood on his clothes?

Which scenario is more likely to produce injuries that are minor enough to not result in significant blood loss or require bandages?

Yes, Zimmerman had clear injuries, but how many times have you heard of an EMT observing major bleeding head wounds and making a determination to not even bandage one of them, much less take te victim to a hospital immediately?

[Yonivore]

Its in the affidavit so its sworn testimony i am guessing. I do not presume to know.
Actually, it's all hearsay from the girlfriend. Not much of which, by the way, matches early accounts -- by the girlfriend -- in media reports.

[TheSkeptic]

^^ I don't think that's actually true.

And in any case, I get what you're saying even if I completely disagree with the perspective you've taken. Re: Trayvon's mother.

[Yonivore]

I do agree with Yonivore that the affidavit is underwhelming, except for the part about Zimmerman confronting Trayvon (assuming they have good evidence to back that up).
Which is precisely what makes it an awful affidavit.

They were supposed to provide probably cause to believe that confrontation was initiated by Zimmerman.

They didn't.

What they did is characterize the 911 call in a way to make it look like Zimmerman disregarded police instructions to wait (which is never said in the 911 call) and to stop following (they used pursue), for which they provide absolutely no probable cause to believe he didn't stop following.

Sorry bobbyjoe, if the police thought it was relevant to establishing probable cause, they would have mentioned that Zimmerman asked police to call him for a meeting place instead of returning to his truck to meet them. In fact, the 911 call -- after the dispatcher tells Zimmerman he doesn't need to follow the subject -- indicates Zimmerman, to me, Zimmerman had lost sight of Martin and was probably just going to stand around at the place he last saw him and have police meet him there.

But, all the affidavit says is:

1) We looked at a bunch of stuff -- reports, statements, what not and based on that we say...

2) Zimmerman defied police instructions (I believe this is important to the police because they believe it goes to establishing the depraved disregard required by 2nd Degree Murder) but, they provided no reason why they believe Zimmerman defied police instructions. None. In fact, they completely make up a "fact" out of whole cloth by stating Zimmerman was told an officer was on the way and that he should "WAIT" for the officer.

3) Zimmerman confronted Martin. Again, a statement for which they provide absolutely zero rationale for believing.


Second Degree Murder seems like a reach based on the affidavit, unless for some reason the most incriminating facts were withheld from the affidavit (which is illogical).
I think what they did was unprofessional and unethical...bordering on criminal.

[Yonivore]

I guess the affidavit didn't suck.
Did you happen to see the entire hearing? It lasted less than two minutes and the Judge was a nervous wreck. He didn't even recognize Zimmerman standing next to his attorney.

I don't think that judge wasn't about to throw out the affidavit. Hell, I wonder if he even read it.

[Yonivore]

^^ I don't think that's actually true.

And in any case, I get what you're saying even if I completely disagree with the perspective you've taken. Re: Trayvon's mother.
Unless the phone call between Trayvon Martin and his girlfriend was recorded -- anything she says it contained is hearsay.

In the first media report I read, that contained any information about the phone call between Trayvon and the girlfriend, here is what she said...


"He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he lost the man," Martin's friend said. "I asked Trayvon to run, and he said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run, but he said he was not going to run."
Then she describes the confrontation.


"Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What are you doing here.' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell. I called him again, and he didn't answer the phone."
That's all that was reported.

So, it begs the question, how did Zimmerman ever catch up with Martin to confront him in the first place? The article I pulled these quotes from is from March 19 and, while I'm not sure it was the actual article I read back then, I am sure of the quotes.

Elsewhere in the article it says this phone conversation took place 5 minutes before police arrived. They don't say how long before police arrived it was when the Zimmerman 911 conversation took place but, I would suggest, since the dispatcher indicated they'd be there soon, the calls were pretty close to concurrent.

So, that begs the next question; which call disconnected first? Obviously it was Zimmerman's. Otherwise, the 911 Operator would have heard the same thing as the girlfriend. Now comes the next series of questions. How long after Zimmerman's 911 call ended did the confrontation occur? Was it enough time for Zimmerman to resume a "pursuit" and catch up with Martin? Why is it Martin that speaks first? (A clear indication he initiated an exchange -- if not the controntation) Who is actually pushing who when the girlfriend says, "Next thing I hear is somebody pushing?" And, was the phone disconnected because Trayvon was pushed or did his "headset just fall" because he was assaulting Zimmerman?

Also, Zimmerman's description of the dialog is much different than what the girlfriend describes. And, unless you have a third witness to the conversation -- which, so far, we know of none -- there's no reason to believe either Zimmerman or the girlfriend over the other.

But, in my opinion, the length of time between the end of the 911 call and the end of the girlfriend call is the primary determining factor of whether or not Zimmerman confronted Martin or vice versa. The shorter the time, the more likely it is Martin either returned to Zimmerman or was laying in wait -- waiting for him to terminate the 911 call -- to confront him. The longer the time span, the more possible it is Zimmerman resumed looking for Martin, after ending the 911 call, and found him. But, either way, that still doesn't explain who initiated a physical altercation.

[CosmicCowboy]

Did you happen to see the entire hearing? It lasted less than two minutes and the Judge was a nervous wreck. He didn't even recognize Zimmerman standing next to his attorney.

I don't think that judge wasn't about to throw out the affidavit. Hell, I wonder if he even read it.

It wasn't the judges place to question the "facts" presented in the affidavit. Just to rule if the affidavit gave a reasonable cause to press charges. There is a good chance this won't even go to trial once they start the pre-trial hearings and start putting actual facts on the table. Zimmerman's lawyers would only have to prove by a preponderance of evidence - a relatively low legal standard - that he acted in self-defense in order to get a judge to drop the second degree murder charges.

[Yonivore]

It wasn't the judges place to question the "facts" presented in the affidavit. Just to rule if the affidavit gave a reasonable cause to press charges. There is a good chance this won't even go to trial once they start the pre-trial hearings and start putting actual facts on the table. Zimmerman's lawyers would only have to prove by a preponderance of evidence - a relatively low legal standard - that he acted in self-defense in order to get a judge to drop the second degree murder charges.
My point is, I don't think the affidavit even arrived at "reasonable cause" to charge him with 2nd Degree Murder.

[CosmicCowboy]

My point is, I don't think the affidavit even arrived at "reasonable cause" to charge him with 2nd Degree Murder.

Doesn't matter what you think. They had to let this dog and pony show start for political reasons. Doesn't mean they will get a conviction or even actually go to trial.

[Yonivore]

Doesn't matter what you think. They had to let this dog and pony show start for political reasons. Doesn't mean they will get a conviction or even actually go to trial.
I'd be embarrassed to be any part of it.

[CosmicCowboy]

I'd be embarrassed to be any part of it.

Are you kidding? The prosecutor is gonna make millions off of this.

[clambake]

the guy stalked a kid and killed him.

absolutely worthy of trial.

[boutons_deux]

shameless PussyEater saying he'd be embarrassed.

[clambake]

when did pussy eater become a bad thing?

[CosmicCowboy]

when did pussy eater become a bad thing?

:lol :toast

[boutons_deux]

you said it was a bad thing, not I

[Drachen]

when did pussy eater become a bad thing?

Peach? I could eat a peach for hours.

[clambake]

i think stand your ground as a defense should be inadmissible.

he stalked a kid with a gun.....and killed him.

[Wild Cobra]

Did you happen to see the entire hearing? It lasted less than two minutes and the Judge was a nervous wreck. He didn't even recognize Zimmerman standing next to his attorney.

I don't think that judge wasn't about to throw out the affidavit. Hell, I wonder if he even read it.
Can you imagine the media scandal if the judge threw it out on perfectly good grounds, when so many people want an old fashion lynching?

[Wild Cobra]

My point is, I don't think the affidavit even arrived at "reasonable cause" to charge him with 2nd Degree Murder.
It doesn't matter. Zimmerman was already found guilty by the media.

[clambake]

It doesn't matter. Zimmerman was already found guilty by the media.

you saying he didn't stalk the kid with a gun and kill him?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It doesn't matter. Zimmerman was already found guilty by the media.

Who cares what some pundits think. So far all that matters is that the judge determined that there was probable cause. Our justice may be flawed but its one of if not the best in the world.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Actually, it's all hearsay from the girlfriend. Not much of which, by the way, matches early accounts -- by the girlfriend -- in media reports.

She is reporting what he said. Martin thought someone was follwing him and he was scared. Seeing that Martin is dead there may be a provision for leeway on that testimony. I do not presume to know but you certainly like making stuff up that wins the case for Zimmerman. Maybe he really was getting the shit beat out of him. i do not presume to know.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Did you happen to see the entire hearing? It lasted less than two minutes and the Judge was a nervous wreck. He didn't even recognize Zimmerman standing next to his attorney.

I don't think that judge wasn't about to throw out the affidavit. Hell, I wonder if he even read it.

More making shit up. Its all moot. Zimmerman is charged but posture more; its cute. I prefer facts not supposition.

[CosmicCowboy]

It would seriously suck to be the judge on this case. No matter how he rules he's fucked.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Can you imagine the media scandal if the judge threw it out on perfectly good grounds, when so many people want an old fashion lynching?

Well there has been Anthony, OJ, The Rodney King, Michael Jackson, and I am sure quite a few others to go by.

You really lack critical thinking skills.

Media scandal would be the worst of the concerns.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It would seriously suck to be the judge on this case. No matter how he rules he's fucked.

Maybe thats a good thing because in that situation typically the best thing to do is be fair and impartial ie do the right thing by rule of law.

[CosmicCowboy]

Maybe thats a good thing because in that situation typically the best thing to do is be fair and impartial ie do the right thing by rule of law.

:lmao

If he dismisses it you will be one of the first to grab a torch and pitchfork.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

:lmao

If he dismisses it you will be one of the first to grab a torch and pitchfork.

Hardly. I would need to see the facts of the case. If you notice I stayed out of this when it hit. You can review the thread.

I only took any stance at all after the affidavit said Zimmerman confronted Martin. The prosecuter saying that probably means they do not believe Zimmerman's story about returning to his car. They are mutually exclusive.

I

DO

NOT

PRESUME

TO

KNOW

Your the one that continually argues like your his defense attorney. And I do believe in the underlying US principle of rule of law and burden of proof. Thats what is important to me.

[Stringer_Bell]

My point is, I don't think the affidavit even arrived at "reasonable cause" to charge him with 2nd Degree Murder.

To my Repug compatriots, I was talking to my lawyer today and he stated that "man with gun admits to shooting unarmed individual, with evidence that the kill shot came from the man's gun" is actually more than enough to establish probable cause for an indictment...which is all that has happened so far. Basically, the Special Prosecutor is correcting what she percieves to be a mistake by the police of not holding Zimmerman under arrest given the fact that he was a "man with gun who admits to shooting unarmed individual, evidence that the kill shot came from the man's gun."

That's all she needed to issue the capias. The ones I issue require a lot more evidence, but that's besides the point. Just think of it as Zimmerman being put through the process that the media/public believes should have occured on the night of the shooting.

Also, pay close attention to the judge in this case. She doesn't want to preside. Hmmmmm....I wonder why? And no, nothing to do with that phony conflict of interest. Nothing.

[rjv]

To my Repug compatriots, I was talking to my lawyer today and he stated that "man with gun admits to shooting unarmed individual, with evidence that the kill shot came from the man's gun" is actually more than enough to establish probable cause for an indictment...which is all that has happened so far. Basically, the Special Prosecutor is correcting what she percieves to be a mistake by the police of not holding Zimmerman under arrest given the fact that he was a "man with gun who admits to shooting unarmed individual, evidence that the kill shot came from the man's gun."

That's all she needed to issue the capias. The ones I issue require a lot more evidence, but that's besides the point. Just think of it as Zimmerman being put through the process that the media/public believes should have occured on the night of the shooting.

Also, pay close attention to the judge in this case. She doesn't want to preside. Hmmmmm....I wonder why? And no, nothing to do with that phony conflict of interest. Nothing.

your mistake here is that the universe of probability yoni resides in is one that lends itself to highly speculative scenarios-unless of course they fail to favor the rooting interest.

[Wild Cobra]

you saying he didn't stalk the kid with a gun and kill him?
No and yes. Stalking, no. Kill in self defense, yes.

Have you looked at the definition of "stalk" or "stalking?"


Definition of STALK

1: to pursue quarry or prey stealthily

Was Zimmerman even attempting to be "stealthily?" Are you on the record as saying martin was already designated prey?

When it comes to the legal definition of "stalker," it means something to the effect or repeated unwanted contact attempts.

Please stop mis-characterizing things. You just show your ignorance. but then, my bad. Why should I expect you to change?

[Wild Cobra]

It would seriously suck to be the judge on this case. No matter how he rules he's fucked.
Agreed, at least if there is little more evidence than what we know of. Without a solid piece of evidence one way or another, it doesn't matter what the ruling is. It will appear to be a fucked up ruling by some.

I hope there is a clear decision on way or another. We need a clear conviction of Zimmerman or a clear Not guilty or even Innocent verdict.

The verdict of Innocent is rarely used in cases. I hope if the evidence warrants it, that Zimmerman's council asks for that possible ruling.

[Wild Cobra]

I

DO

NOT

PRESUME

TO

KNOW


LOL...

LOL...

You do that all the time.

[Wild Cobra]

To my Repug compatriots, I was talking to my lawyer today and he stated that "man with gun admits to shooting unarmed individual, with evidence that the kill shot came from the man's gun" is actually more than enough to establish probable cause for an indictment...which is all that has happened so far. Basically, the Special Prosecutor is correcting what she percieves to be a mistake by the police of not holding Zimmerman under arrest given the fact that he was a "man with gun who admits to shooting unarmed individual, evidence that the kill shot came from the man's gun."

That's all she needed to issue the capias. The ones I issue require a lot more evidence, but that's besides the point. Just think of it as Zimmerman being put through the process that the media/public believes should have occured on the night of the shooting.

Also, pay close attention to the judge in this case. She doesn't want to preside. Hmmmmm....I wonder why? And no, nothing to do with that phony conflict of interest. Nothing.
I don't know if that's the way things are perceived under Florida law, but in most jurisdictions, that makes sense.

It's a hard thing to decide on. Should Zimmerman be released as long as he cooperates, or should he be incarcerated?

Which of you, if you shot someone in self defense, would think it's proper to be in jail awaiting your not guilty verdict?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

LOL...

LOL...

You do that all the time.

Not in this case certainly and I am not like you where i just make up shit so that it fits your world view. How do you know it was self defense? You clairvoyant? You are so transparent its pathetic.

[Wild Cobra]

Not in this case certainly and I am not like you where i just make up shit so that it fits your world view. How do you know it was self defense? You clairvoyant? You are so transparent its pathetic.
But I don't make things up. Not my fault if you are too stupid to understand.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

But I don't make things up. Not my fault if you are too stupid to understand.

Yeah I am dumb.... :rolleyes

So smart guy, how do you know its self defense so that you can claim it as declarative?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Agreed, at least if there is little more evidence than what we know of. Without a solid piece of evidence one way or another, it doesn't matter what the ruling is. It will appear to be a fucked up ruling by some.

I hope there is a clear decision on way or another. We need a clear conviction of Zimmerman or a clear Not guilty or even Innocent verdict.

The verdict of Innocent is rarely used in cases. I hope if the evidence warrants it, that Zimmerman's council asks for that possible ruling.

The verdict of innocent is never used. its always guilty or not guilty. Its that way because of how presumption is used. This is an example of you making shit up and talking out of your ass.

[Wild Cobra]

Yeah I am dumb.... :rolleyes

So smart guy, how do you know its self defense so that you can claim it as declarative?
See...

You are too damn stupid.

I never said that. I have only gone as far as saying with the information we know of, it appears he is innocent. i am completely open to the possibility Zimmerman is guilty. I just don't believe that will be the case.

[Wild Cobra]

The verdict of innocent is never used. its always guilty or not guilty. Its that way because of how presumption is used. This is an example of you making shit up and talking out of your ass.

No...

There have been rare cases in history that have allowed a verdict of innocent.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No and yes. Stalking, no. Kill in self defense, yes.


See...

You are too damn stupid.

I never said that. I have only gone as far as saying with the information we know of, it appears he is innocent. i am completely open to the possibility Zimmerman is guilty. I just don't believe that will be the case.

Declaring that is was self defense. There is no 'open to possibility' in that phrasing.

And really if you are going to call me stupid point to specifics. Like capacitors, flywheelsor verdicts in American courts. Otherwise it just sounds petulant.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No...

There have been rare cases in history that have allowed a verdict of innocent.

Point to one.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The verdict of innocent is never used. its always guilty or not guilty. Its that way because of how presumption is used. This is an example of you making shit up and talking out of your ass.

http://trial.laws.com/innocent


The Innocent Verdict

When it comes it comes to criminal trials there are often two parties present. There is the plaintiff, who can often be backed by law enforcement and then there is the defendant side; this is the side where the accused individual or people are found.

In the United States, one of the most common phrases used regarding criminal law is “innocent until proven guilty”; what this means is that before and while an individual is on trial, they are still considered to be innocent; the statements made against these individuals are allegations, and not yet deemed factual.

When court is in session both the prosecutor and the attorney will take turns questioning witnesses, the accused, and whoever they deem necessary in order to prove their cases. At this point the defendant is presumed innocent by the court of law, and it is the job of the prosecution to use the evidence that they have against the individual in order to prove guilt. Innocence is one of the rights the United States has guaranteed to the citizens, until a trial by jury is conducted.

Once a trial has been followed through in its entirety, the jury makes the decided vote regarding the innocence of the accused. If the jury finds insufficient evidence has been presented against the defendant, they can vote for a verdict of not guilty. Once the verdict has been handed out, the defendant can remain presumed innocent, and be released from the court, regarding the charges he or she had been affixed with.

YOU

ARE

DUMB

[Wild Cobra]

Declaring that is was self defense. There is no 'open to possibility' in that phrasing.

Except to conclude that is my standing point, you have to intentionally deny what I have repeatedly said all along, cherry picking one statement. Is that how you want to be remembered?

Isn't there room in your world for one omission of thought?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Except to conclude that is my standing point, you have to intentionally deny what I have repeatedly said all along, cherry picking one statement. Is that how you want to be remembered?

Isn't there room in your world for one omission of thought?

Typical dissembling from you. I didn't really mean that i just said its possible that combustion in the trophosphere caused the whole planet to flood. Oh and...


See...

You are too damn stupid.

I never said that. I have only gone as far as saying with the information we know of, it appears he is innocent. i am completely open to the possibility Zimmerman is guilty. I just don't believe that will be the case.

And i am the stupid one? Oh and:


Point to one.

Or did you not mean that either?

[Wild Cobra]

Typical dissembling from you. I didn't really mean that i just said its possible that combustion in the trophosphere caused the whole planet to flood. Oh and...



Or did you not mean that either?
My God... You really are an idiot.

I'm done with you tonight. I have better things to do.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

My God... You really are an idiot.

I'm done with you tonight. I have better things to do.

:rollin:blah:rollin:rolleyes:rollin:blah:rollin :rolleyes

[Wild Cobra]

Fuzzy Wuzzy the hairless bear,
Fuzzy Wuzzy was fully bare.
Not so fuzzy, Wuzzy thought,
looking funny was Fuzzy Wuzzy.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No...

There have been rare cases in history that have allowed a verdict of innocent.


Point to one.

[bobbyjoe]

Which is precisely what makes it an awful affidavit.

They were supposed to provide probably cause to believe that confrontation was initiated by Zimmerman.

They didn't.

What they did is characterize the 911 call in a way to make it look like Zimmerman disregarded police instructions to wait (which is never said in the 911 call) and to stop following (they used pursue), for which they provide absolutely no probable cause to believe he didn't stop following.

Sorry bobbyjoe, if the police thought it was relevant to establishing probable cause, they would have mentioned that Zimmerman asked police to call him for a meeting place instead of returning to his truck to meet them. In fact, the 911 call -- after the dispatcher tells Zimmerman he doesn't need to follow the subject -- indicates Zimmerman, to me, Zimmerman had lost sight of Martin and was probably just going to stand around at the place he last saw him and have police meet him there.

But, all the affidavit says is:

1) We looked at a bunch of stuff -- reports, statements, what not and based on that we say...

2) Zimmerman defied police instructions (I believe this is important to the police because they believe it goes to establishing the depraved disregard required by 2nd Degree Murder) but, they provided no reason why they believe Zimmerman defied police instructions. None. In fact, they completely make up a "fact" out of whole cloth by stating Zimmerman was told an officer was on the way and that he should "WAIT" for the officer.

3) Zimmerman confronted Martin. Again, a statement for which they provide absolutely zero rationale for believing.


I think what they did was unprofessional and unethical...bordering on criminal.

I disagree that Zimmerman's curious change of heart regarding the meeting venue was something that needed to be listed in the affidavit. That is a fact that supports the allegation in the affidavit that Zimmerman pursued and confronted Trayvon, but the affidavit doesn't need to list every fact that supports a listed allegation.

I can almost guarantee that part of the tape willl be presented as evidence by the prosecution if this goes to trial. It's pretty persuasive evidence that Zimmerman intended to be in a different location when the police arrived than the mailboxes.

I also think it's a stretch to say that Zimmerman planned to stay exactly where he was. If that was his plan, why wouldn't he simply given the location to the 911 dispatcher? You have to look at the context of his change of heart. He was clearly upset and frustrated once he lost sight of Martin. Look at his "these assholes always get away" comment and the fact that he admitted to initially following Martin and can be heard running. That doesn't sound like a guy who would be content simply reporting a suspicious sighting to the police and calling it a day. There's every reason to believe he wanted to continue to follow Martin so that he could provide the police as good of information as he could regarding Martin's precise location.

This said, I believe Zimmerman initiating the confrontation does not necessarily mean he is guilty of murder or kill his self-defense theory. I know that is what many believe, but my understanding of the law is simply that if Zimmerman reasonably felt his life was in jeopardy or serious bodily harm was imminent he can sucessful claim self-defense.

Think of it this way. Suppose I have a fender bender with you and we argue and you start a confrontation by shoving me (let's call it a moderate shove). Is the mere fact that you shoved me sufficient for me to feel my life is in danger and allow me to pull out a gun and shoot you and by doing so, not commit a crime? I would say absolutely not.

However, suppose my reaction to you shoving me is to pull out a knife and come charging at you. You now absolutely have reason to fear for your life and your shooting me would (pretty clearly in my opinion) be self-defense, even though you initiated the confrontation.

I believe this is why Zimmerman's father and brother and Joe Oliver have been on the tube articulating much moreso about George's head being beaten in and him fearing for his life than about who started the altercation.

"Who started it" is an important fact, but the make or break issue at the end of the day is whether Zimmerman was truly in a situation where Trayvon's physical actions were at a level where 12 jurors would reasonably agree that Zimmerman had reason to fear for his life or for major bodily harm. I think that's what the case boils down to.

[Yonivore]

I disagree that Zimmerman's curious change of heart regarding the meeting venue was something that needed to be listed in the affidavit. That is a fact that supports the allegation in the affidavit that Zimmerman pursued and confronted Trayvon, but the affidavit doesn't need to list every fact that supports a listed allegation.

I can almost guarantee that part of the tape willl be presented as evidence by the prosecution if this goes to trial. It's pretty persuasive evidence that Zimmerman intended to be in a different location when the police arrived than the mailboxes.

I also think it's a stretch to say that Zimmerman planned to stay exactly where he was. If that was his plan, why wouldn't he simply given the location to the 911 dispatcher? You have to look at the context of his change of heart. He was clearly upset and frustrated once he lost sight of Martin. Look at his "these assholes always get away" comment and the fact that he admitted to initially following Martin and can be heard running. That doesn't sound like a guy who would be content simply reporting a suspicious sighting to the police and calling it a day. There's every reason to believe he wanted to continue to follow Martin so that he could provide the police as good of information as he could regarding Martin's precise location.

This said, I believe Zimmerman initiating the confrontation does not necessarily mean he is guilty of murder or kill his self-defense theory. I know that is what many believe, but my understanding of the law is simply that if Zimmerman reasonably felt his life was in jeopardy or serious bodily harm was imminent he can sucessful claim self-defense.

Think of it this way. Suppose I have a fender bender with you and we argue and you start a confrontation by shoving me (let's call it a moderate shove). Is the mere fact that you shoved me sufficient for me to feel my life is in danger and allow me to pull out a gun and shoot you and by doing so, not commit a crime? I would say absolutely not.

However, suppose my reaction to you shoving me is to pull out a knife and come charging at you. You now absolutely have reason to fear for your life and your shooting me would (pretty clearly in my opinion) be self-defense, even though you initiated the confrontation.

I believe this is why Zimmerman's father and brother and Joe Oliver have been on the tube articulating much moreso about George's head being beaten in and him fearing for his life than about who started the altercation.

"Who started it" is an important fact, but the make or break issue at the end of the day is whether Zimmerman was truly in a situation where Trayvon's physical actions were at a level where 12 jurors would reasonably agree that Zimmerman had reason to fear for his life or for major bodily harm. I think that's what the case boils down to.
I don't disagree with much of what you said.

However, I don't believe the end of the 911 call is as incriminating as you do. I think defense could characterize it as I did but, it will all depend on how close to the point of the altercation and how soon before it occurred that the 911 call ended.

George Zimmerman claims he was attacked from behind by Trayvon Martin. If it happened as soon as the 911 call ended, I think Zimmerman makes a good case for being blindsided by Martin who may have been laying in wait.

I've hear a couple interviews with Zimmerman's father and he always states his son was confronted by Martin...he doesn't play it down.

But, you are right in one regard. It doesn't matter who confronted who if, in fact, Zimmerman was having his head bashed into the concrete at the time he feared for his life, pulled his gun, and shot Martin.

That is clear self-defense, no matter who started the argument.

And, without any serious injuries (other than the bullet wound, of course) prosecutors will have a difficult time saying Martin was inflicting proportional injuries on Zimmerman or defending himself when he was on top of Zimmerman, dribbling his head on the sidewalk.

[clambake]

they should be able to get stand your ground defense thrown out.

he had a gun....was in his car looking for prey....found his prey.....stalked his prey....killed his prey.

[Yonivore]

they should be able to get stand your ground defense thrown out.

he had a gun....was in his car looking for prey....found his prey.....stalked his prey....killed his prey.
He's not claiming Stand Your Ground. Never has. In fact, he's claiming he never had a chance to retreat.

That was a figment of the Brady Bunch's imagination in order to get gun control issues back in game at Congress.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

He's not claiming Stand Your Ground. Never has. In fact, he's claiming he never had a chance to retreat.

That was a figment of the Brady Bunch's imagination in order to get gun control issues back in game at Congress.

He hasn't even been arraigned. How do you know what he intends to claim one way or another? And he never had a chance to retreat but its not stand your ground? Are you really that dumb?

If you cannot retreat and you claim you did not initiate the conflict then what are you doing?

[TheSkeptic]

He hasn't even been arraigned. How do you know what he intends to claim one way or another? And he never had a chance to retreat but its not stand your ground? Are you really that dumb?

If you cannot retreat and you claim you did not initiate the conflict then what are you doing?

Self-defence maybe? I'm guessing that his case will hinge on the justifiable use of deadly force.

Given what we've seen so far, the only thing that could possible save Zimmerman, in my view, is the bullet forensics. I'm guessing that if the jury is rational he'll probably go down for manslaughter or perhaps a negligence-related charge depending on what's on the list.

[spursncowboys]

He hasn't even been arraigned. How do you know what he intends to claim one way or another? And he never had a chance to retreat but its not stand your ground? Are you really that dumb?

If you cannot retreat and you claim you did not initiate the conflict then what are you doing?

This seems to be a reoccurring thing with you for ones who debate your views.

[MannyIsGod]

He's not claiming Stand Your Ground. Never has. In fact, he's claiming he never had a chance to retreat.

That was a figment of the Brady Bunch's imagination in order to get gun control issues back in game at Congress.

:lmao

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This seems to be a reoccurring thing with you for ones who debate your views.

I just call it like I see it. That was a very stupid thing to say and if you notice i do not say that about you. With you I can tell that you say things without having thought it through nor done any research. You have told me you cannot because of your personal life. i consider that understandable.

I dodnt even say Yoni was dumb. i said he cannot be that dumb because to say the least it was not well thought out.

There are quite a few people that say incredibly stupid things over and over again. I point to specifics when i make those claims. there actually are stupid people in this world.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Self-defence maybe? I'm guessing that his case will hinge on the justifiable use of deadly force.

Given what we've seen so far, the only thing that could possible save Zimmerman, in my view, is the bullet forensics. I'm guessing that if the jury is rational he'll probably go down for manslaughter or perhaps a negligence-related charge depending on what's on the list.

Stand you ground is just a pretrial consideration determined by a judge. From what i understand self defense in and of itself is not precluded. i agree with the latter outcome but really i have no horse in this race. To me its a tragedy that could have been prevented if Florida had vigilante laws. I may not like cops but i like the idea that any yahoo can decide to get a gun and play cop to be even worse.

This tragedy is an example of why.

[spursncowboys]

I just call it like I see it. That was a very stupid thing to say and if you notice i do not say that about you. With you I can tell that you say things without having thought it through nor done any research. You have told me you cannot because of your personal life. i consider that understandable.

I dodnt even say Yoni was dumb. i said he cannot be that dumb because to say the least it was not well thought out.

There are quite a few people that say incredibly stupid things over and over again. I point to specifics when i make those claims. there actually are stupid people in this world.
You misunderstood what I was stating in my circumstance. As a Green Beret soldier once told me "jack of all trades and expert in none."
I just cannot spend countless hours researching every topic.
I do appreciate putting a human element into these posts. Few do and it allows a better engagement of ideas when people do.:toast

[Yonivore]

:lmao
From March 24, 2012

Zimmerman’s lawyer: ‘Stand your ground’ doesn’t apply in Trayvon Martin case (http://wtvr.com/2012/03/24/zimmermans-lawyer-stand-your-ground-doesnt-apply-in-trayvon-martin-case/)


A lawyer for the man at the center of the Trayvon Martin death investigation said Florida’s “stand your ground” law doesn’t apply to the shooting that killed the unarmed teen.

“In my legal opinion, that’s not really applicable to this case. The statute on ‘stand your ground’ is primarily when you’re in your house,” said Craig Sonner, attorney for George Zimmerman. [Incidentally, I think he's wrong about this. -Y]

“This is self-defense, and that’s been around for forever — that you have a right to defend yourself. So the next issue (that) is going to come up is, was he justified in using the amount of force he did?”
Can you point to one statement by anyone representing Zimmerman that claims the "stand your ground" provision of Florida's use of force statute was being relied upon?

All they've ever claimed is George Zimmerman was exercising his right to defend himself against death or seriously bodily injury.

[Yonivore]

He hasn't even been arraigned. How do you know what he intends to claim one way or another? And he never had a chance to retreat but its not stand your ground?
Stand your ground implies you had a choice to retreat and chose not to -- you chose to stand your ground. So, no, if you never had a chance to make that choice, it's not stand your ground -- it self defense.

The stand your ground provisions were included -- in states where they exist -- to protect people who reasonable believe that retreating from a confrontation will expose them to more harm than if they just stood their ground and fought.

It could be, and I think Zimmerman will probably claim this, that he turned to walk away from Martin (retreat) after the exchange Martin's girlfriend describes hearing on the phone and that Martin attacked him when his back was turned.

That certainly fits the known facts and statements so far.


If you cannot retreat and you claim you did not initiate the conflict then what are you doing?
You're being assaulted from behind. This is what Zimmerman claimed. And, we know this because that's what he said in his statement to police the night of the shooting.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

From March 24, 2012

Zimmerman’s lawyer: ‘Stand your ground’ doesn’t apply in Trayvon Martin case (http://wtvr.com/2012/03/24/zimmermans-lawyer-stand-your-ground-doesnt-apply-in-trayvon-martin-case/)


Can you point to one statement by anyone representing Zimmerman that claims the "stand your ground" provision of Florida's use of force statute was being relied upon?

All they've ever claimed is George Zimmerman was exercising his right to defend himself against death or seriously bodily injury.

He got rid of that attorney. You miss that part? i don't know what hes claiming one way or another. He hasn't even been arraigned yet.

I don't see how he could claim to have been walking back to his car and have been attacked and not invoke that statute. The again i question the claim that he even said that to begin with. Theres a lot of bullshit going around and i am to the point that i do not want to hear anything but straight from the horses mouth.

[ElNono]

Can you point to one statement by anyone representing Zimmerman that claims the "stand your ground" provision of Florida's use of force statute was being relied upon?

Zimmerman's new attorney, Mark O'Mara, said Zimmerman will plead not guilty and will invoke Florida's powerful "stand your ground" law, which gives people wide leeway to use deadly force without having to retreat in the face of danger.

4 days ago (http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpps/news/zimmerman-to-be-charged-by-florida-special-prosecutor-dpgonc-20120411-to_19073426)

[Yonivore]

Stand you ground is just a pretrial consideration determined by a judge. From what i understand self defense in and of itself is not precluded. i agree with the latter outcome but really i have no horse in this race. To me its a tragedy that could have been prevented if Florida had vigilante laws. I may not like cops but i like the idea that any yahoo can decide to get a gun and play cop to be even worse.
1) George Zimmerman saw a suspicious person in a neighborhood -- his neighborhood, by the way -- that had been experiencing a rash of property crimes.

2) George Zimmerman called 911 and reported the suspicious person.

3) George Zimmerman kept 911 on the phone and tried to keep the suspicious person in sight.

4) George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin became involved in a physical altercation that resulted in George Zimmerman shooting Trayvon Martin.

None of us know the facts of what happened between #3 and #4.

There's no indication Zimmerman was acting like a cop or acting like a vigilante.

Hell, if that had been the case, Trayvon Martin might have noticed the gun way before he decided to ask George Zimmerman "What are you following me for?" (according to his girlfriend.)

In fact, if George Zimmerman were a vigilante cop wanna be, I'm surprised he would call 911 at all -- well, at least before the shooting anyway.

When you're calling Zimmerman a vigilante and wanna be cop, you're making characterizations you can't support with any facts.


This tragedy is an example of why.
You don't know what this tragedy is an example of until you know why it happened.

[Yonivore]

Zimmerman's new attorney, Mark O'Mara, said Zimmerman will plead not guilty and will invoke Florida's powerful "stand your ground" law, which gives people wide leeway to use deadly force without having to retreat in the face of danger.

4 days ago (http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpps/news/zimmerman-to-be-charged-by-florida-special-prosecutor-dpgonc-20120411-to_19073426)
Thanks, I hadn't heard.

But, in reading the story, I still don't see how it fits. I guess we'll hear at trial.


"If you're the aggressor, you're not protected by this law," said Carey Haughwout, public defender in Palm Beach County.
I pulled this from the story to make the point that, even though the Haughwout is correct in saying an aggressor cannot invoke "stand your ground" they can still use deadly force -- even if they started an altercation that results in them having to use that force to save themselves from death or serious bodily injury.

[ElNono]

I don't think the lawyers are about to lay all their cards out there for scrutiny before they need to.

[Yonivore]

He got rid of that attorney. You miss that part?
Actually, I missed the part where it was said they were going to invoke "stand your ground."


i don't know what hes claiming one way or another. He hasn't even been arraigned yet.
Actually, I think I got the idea Zimmerman was claiming he was attacked from behind from a March 26 Orlando Sentinel article (http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-26/news/os-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-account-20120326_1_miami-schools-punch-unarmed-black-teenager), based (according to them) on police reports, that said:


In his version of events, Zimmerman had turned around and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from behind, the two exchanged words and then Trayvon punched him in the nose, sending him to the ground, and began beating him.
So, I guess, in the act of turning around and having the verbal exchange, his attorney is claiming that is stand your ground?

But, I stand corrected, he did not claim he was attacked from behind but, that he was approached from behind.


I don't see how he could claim to have been walking back to his car and have been attacked and not invoke that statute. The again i question the claim that he even said that to begin with. Theres a lot of bullshit going around and i am to the point that i do not want to hear anything but straight from the horses mouth.
You're right, it would be hard to claim it if, in fact, the attacked occurred as I had earlier thought.

If the conversation went as the girlfriend described, Trayvon spoke first and, there's nothing saying he didn't speak those words to a George Zimmerman that was walking away.

George Zimmerman could have turned at that point and responded with, "What are you doing here?" (again, as claimed by the girlfriend), at which point -- she claims -- the physical altercation begin.

Zimmerman has injuries consistent with his story.

Martin has no injuries indicating he was struck first.

[Yonivore]

I don't think the lawyers are about to lay all their cards out there for scrutiny before they need to.
That wouldn't be prudent.

[TheSkeptic]

Stand you ground is just a pretrial consideration determined by a judge. From what i understand self defense in and of itself is not precluded. i agree with the latter outcome but really i have no horse in this race. To me its a tragedy that could have been prevented if Florida had vigilante laws. I may not like cops but i like the idea that any yahoo can decide to get a gun and play cop to be even worse.

This tragedy is an example of why.

Oh really? That's interesting then and I agree with that.


Zimmerman's new attorney, Mark O'Mara, said Zimmerman will plead not guilty and will invoke Florida's powerful "stand your ground" law, which gives people wide leeway to use deadly force without having to retreat in the face of danger.

4 days ago (http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpps/news/zimmerman-to-be-charged-by-florida-special-prosecutor-dpgonc-20120411-to_19073426)

...Now I'm convinced there's evidence we don't know about. That's strange. Very strange.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Actually, I missed the part where it was said they were going to invoke "stand your ground."


Actually, I think I got the idea Zimmerman was claiming he was attacked from behind from a March 26 Orlando Sentinel article (http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-26/news/os-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-account-20120326_1_miami-schools-punch-unarmed-black-teenager), based (according to them) on police reports, that said:


So, I guess, in the act of turning around and having the verbal exchange, his attorney is claiming that is stand your ground?

But, I stand corrected, he did not claim he was attacked from behind but, that he was approached from behind.


You're right, it would be hard to claim it if, in fact, the attacked occurred as I had earlier thought.

If the conversation went as the girlfriend described, Trayvon spoke first and, there's nothing saying he didn't speak those words to a George Zimmerman that was walking away.

George Zimmerman could have turned at that point and responded with, "What are you doing here?" (again, as claimed by the girlfriend), at which point -- she claims -- the physical altercation begin.

Zimmerman has injuries consistent with his story.

Martin has no injuries indicating he was struck first.

You were just shown what his current attorney is planning on doing. Also i am only going by what documents i have seen and testimony that I have heard.

Martin's father says in an actual interview that anyone can see that it is his son's voice.

The affidavit claims that Zimmerman initiated the conflict.

Have you seen the coroner's report about Martin and any injuries he had or did not have?

Have you seen the police report that the Orlando Sentinel was told by an unknown source that is supposed to claim that Zimmerman said he was attacked?

Have you heard the testimony of his girlfriend or a police report of the interview with her?

All I see is you using confirmation bias to pick and choose what you want to believe. If it does not corroborate what you want the outcome to be you discount it.

There is so much misinformation, innuendo and straight out bullshit that i think it is irresponsible to take anything not straight from the horses mouth to be true.

[Wild Cobra]

Zimmerman's new attorney, Mark O'Mara, said Zimmerman will plead not guilty and will invoke Florida's powerful "stand your ground" law, which gives people wide leeway to use deadly force without having to retreat in the face of danger.

4 days ago (http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpps/news/zimmerman-to-be-charged-by-florida-special-prosecutor-dpgonc-20120411-to_19073426)
They said they will invoke it. Now that this is going to court, they will use all things that may help their case. This was never initially about stand your ground, but self defense.

[Wild Cobra]

1) George Zimmerman saw a suspicious person in a neighborhood -- his neighborhood, by the way -- that had been experiencing a rash of property crimes.

2) George Zimmerman called 911 and reported the suspicious person.

3) George Zimmerman kept 911 on the phone and tried to keep the suspicious person in sight.

4) George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin became involved in a physical altercation that resulted in George Zimmerman shooting Trayvon Martin.

None of us know the facts of what happened between #3 and #4.

There's no indication Zimmerman was acting like a cop or acting like a vigilante.

Hell, if that had been the case, Trayvon Martin might have noticed the gun way before he decided to ask George Zimmerman "What are you following me for?" (according to his girlfriend.)

In fact, if George Zimmerman were a vigilante cop wanna be, I'm surprised he would call 911 at all -- well, at least before the shooting anyway.

When you're calling Zimmerman a vigilante and wanna be cop, you're making characterizations you can't support with any facts.


You don't know what this tragedy is an example of until you know why it happened.
For the record, Zimmerman did not call 911. He called the non-emergency line.

[ElNono]

There's seem to be a confusion here.

"Stand your ground" is one of the group of statutes that fall within "self-defense" in Florida.

Claiming "Stand your ground" *IS* invoking self-defense. Or, you can elect to claim one of the other statutes that cover the self-defense group of statutues in the state.

[Wild Cobra]

There's seem to be a confusion here.

"Stand your ground" is one of the group of statutes that fall within "self-defense" in Florida.

Claiming "Stand your ground" *IS* invoking self-defense. Or, you can elect to claim one of the other statutes that cover the self-defense group of statutues in the state.
Stand your ground is a specific subset of self defense, at least as I take it.

Like a square and rectangle. A square is also a rectangle, but a rectangle is rarely a square.

[Yonivore]

There's seem to be a confusion here.

"Stand your ground" is one of the group of statutes that fall within "self-defense" in Florida.

Claiming "Stand your ground" *IS* invoking self-defense. Or, you can elect to claim one of the other statutes that cover the self-defense group of statutues in the state.
I'm not confused.

It all falls under Florida's "Justifiable Use of Force" law, Chapter 776 of their statute.

I was mistaken on how I thought Zimmerman described the altercation. I read an early article that I thought said Zimmerman claimed to have been attacked from behind when, in reality, it said Zimmerman claimed he was approached from behind. An important distinction.

Invoking the "stand your ground" provision of the statute implies you had a choice between retreating from and, well, standing your ground in, a confrontation.

In my mistaken understanding of how Zimmerman claimed the altercation began, I didn't think could apply since he was never given the opportunity to make the choice to retreat or stay. The first attorneys' statement the provision didn't apply only tended to support my mistaken belief.

I missed O'Mara's statement of four days ago. But, even so, I think it's going to depend on how long Zimmerman was given to make the choice as to whether or not it still applies. And, the bottom line is, it really doesn't matter if he eventually shot in self-defense anyway.

All the stand your ground provision does then is relieve him of the responsibility of being judged later to have had the obligation to retreat before the confrontation escalated to violence. Which doesn't matter if he didn't even have to time.

Now, in typing this out, it occurs to me O'Mara may be claiming the entire period -- prior to the encounter -- is an act of standing his ground. That Zimmerman, contrary to the affidavit, had no obligation to retreat from attempting to locate a suspicious person for police.

[Yonivore]

Believing Trayvon Martin to be suspicious and trying to keep him in sight until Police arrived is not a crime but, I suppose it could be characterized as "standing your ground," particularly since we know how it all ended.

[Yonivore]

776.013(3)


"(3) a person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."