Martin was also older than 16.
He had his phone. He should have called the police. It is a good find, but the key to this statute, and I will cite the harsher punishment, is as follows:
Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses a minor under 16 years of age commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, so. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
Please note that the statute uses "and" and not "or". The question I would ask is Was Zimmerman repearedly following and harassing Martin? Without a definition of repeatedly, I am going to argue that it would have to have happened more than once.
Martin was also older than 16.
Looks like I was beating a dead horse.
Well at least you've admitted your racism up front. I give you props for that (Seriously)
I would disagree with the school records. If Martin really did the things stated, it goes towards his character.
What is Martin on trial for, counselor?
I thought being purposely obtuse was Chump's m.o., not yours.
Trayvon Martin's character, good, bad or middling, is irrelevant to this case.
If the kid had a hoody on and had a grill, I'd consider it a perfectly reasonable su ion.
The Republicans in this thread seem to disagree
That's not racism, it's statistical reality. A person that is dressed like a gangsta and is wandering around in an upscale neighborhood that they don't live in is going to draw some attention.
Here are all of the kids Tweets...
http://www.scribd.com/doc/86809463/T...e-Daily-Caller
If Zimmerman is claiming self-defense, it most certainly is not.
disagree...Trayvon Martin's actions on the day he died may matter, but speculation about his character based on past behaviors doesn't...whether or not Trayvon Martin was a good kid or a bad one has more rhetorical than legal significance, by miles...
Last edited by Winehole23; 03-27-2012 at 03:45 PM.
if anything it's prejudice, which we all are.
not the same as racism
Apprehended under what law? You do realize that if they arrest Zimmerman without probable cause, which they do not have despite all the public outrage, Zimmerman can turn around and file a 1983 case against the police department.
The main legislatures who authored the law seem to disagree that it applies to Zimmerman at all. Peaden specifically said that Zimmerman lost his right to claim self defense under his law the minute he admitted to following him.
Then again I'm sure you know more about it than they do.
You have to remember, there are several people who don't understand the definitions of words like "if," "or," "and," etc. they know all the four letter words, but fall short in real comprehension.
He was defending himself from being defamed on Twitter!
Dude... They don't get it... it's not about the color of the kid its about the costume...
You see a black kid with a gun... and they will say are are racially profiling... never mind the fact that if you see a white kid with a gun you are going to act the same way...
Same deal with a hoody and ghetto clothes... walking around in a nice neighborhood... doesn't matter what color the dude is...
Read the Tweets... tell me if you don't think it is plausible that someone who had apparently bought into the hood rat lifestyle would be acting su ious...
The fact that you think being black is being "dressed like a gangsta" is racism.
And from being pelted with skittles
Again with the Twitter.
Sure, I understand their point. There is heavy political pressure and it looks bad for them to say otherwise. However, I had served as defense lawyer for criminals in the past. Although I no longer do this kind of work, I can speak freely without having to worry about my elected office.
I learned how to read a law and argue a case based on how the law was written. Not on how the drafters intended the law to read or to whom they intended it to apply. In this case, whether they want to acknowlege it or not, they drafted a law that prohibits law enforcement from arresting Zimmerman for the shooting of Martin based on a theory of self-defense, that the police accepted after taking the statement of an eye-witness.
that's definitely an area CC has got you in
or are you just racist on the anonymity of the internet?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions