Reply With Quote
Sure they do. in this case a real murderer got off and you aren't ing about it and in Florida there wasn't a murderer and you are ing because the guy isn't going to jail.
Sure they do. in this case a real murderer got off and you aren't ing about it and in Florida there wasn't a murderer and you are ing because the guy isn't going to jail.
Who "initiates the violence" doesn't preclude charging somebody with involuntary manslaughter and the like. I'd like to see the legal precedent behind that claim...
But he didn't got off... he's going to stand trial... even if not for the murder charge...
pfft...two years for a capital murder?
if Trayvon and a friend were attempting to commit aggravated robbery on Zimmerman's property, you'd have a real good argument.
All of it?
Without looking at the plea is hard to know why that is.
pfft...two years for a capital murder?
That still doesn't preclude the fact that he was charged and he was waiting on a trial before he plead guilty to the other charge...
In a nuts , very different cases. The shooter in the Martin case wasn't charged at all, IIRC.
Sure it does...
In Florida, manslaughter, is defined as: The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder .
bold/underline mine.
Florida law considers fearing for your life or serious injury lawful justification for shooting someone.
BTW, Florida makes no distinction between involuntary manslaughter and manslaughter
So who "initiated the violence" has nothing to do with it.
And I asked you the legal precedent backing up your claim, not your opinion. I already know what you think.
All the time?
Please link another case where a murder charge was dropped in exchange for ratting out a drug supplier.
Damn you are trying hard to be obtuse.
The initiation of violence by Martin is the core of the lawful justification of the shooting.
sammy the bull, tbh. goodfellas
Please go yourself. Are you really that ignorant?
Second time I ask... has it been established that Martin initiated the violence?
CosmicCowboy claims blue ink too often to tell.
The evidence that has been made public appears to indicate that Martin initiated the violence. Since Zimmerman hasn't been charged with anything despite the uproar it is logical to assume that law enforcement and the special prosecutor agree with this. If they charged him tomorrow I would have to assume they had acquired new evidence to the contrary.
It was just a matter of time before you pulled down your Wranglers to really expose that hurting ass of yours.
It's your claim that it happens all the time.
I think it's a claim you made up because you're a ing idiot.
This is where I feel that Zimmerman's following of Martin caused or played a major part in Martin initiating the violence by "standing his ground" against an unknown man who was following him late at night for no apparent reason.
actually, I think a grand jury is scheduled to hear the case on the 20th of this month. Charges could be brought after that date. I heard Zimmerman's new attorney basically saying that all the so-called "evidence" in the media is not to be relied on b/c police don't leak that stuff to the media or even to defense counsel before the suspect is actually charged. The grand jury will get the case and the evidence. They decide, not us or the media or the black panthers.
Had they done a thorough investigation at the scene they may well have found enough evidence to at least place him under custody.
Are you ing serious? Do you REALLY not know how most law enforcement drug busts are made? They get the kid with the baggie to flip on the guy he bought from then set that guy with the pound up and get him to flip on his supplier, etc. right up the chain. It's all wheeling and dealing and plea bargains. you honestly didn't know this? Do you live under a ing rock or something?
you watch too much TV
What evidence is that?
The fact there's no charges presented doesn't automatically means it's been established who "initiated the violence".
As a matter of fact, cases like Joe Horn included charges that later on a grand jury determined not to have sufficient evidence behind them to warrant a trial.
So, presenting charges without all the evidence isn't uncommon. The question is why hasn't he been charged yet.
See, this I didn't know, and it's exactly what I think should happen. A grand jury should determine if the evidence warrants a charge and trial.
That's my beef with this whole thing. And I'm glad it's happening.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
