Reply With Quote
N/M
The law states confrontation. Lying about why you got out of the car would be a good indicator for me.
N/M
He could have lied about getting out of the care and not started the confrontation though.
okay, here is my problem with this entire case. the majority of people who think cowardman is innocent always say "trayvon should have done, x, y, z" i never see anyone say what the grown man who applied for the police academy, went to college and took self defense courses, had a father who is a magistrate judge, took 18 hours of mma, should have done. its never "zimmerman never should have done x, y, z..." people have sided with him for a very sick and evil reason and the thought of it makes my stomach turn. they shift all the blame on the teenager.
we want to place all the responsibility on a 17 year old kid who was put in a situation above his limitations. no 17 year old kid should ever have to go through what trayvon went through that night and yet we expect him to think like us grown men. its easy to say what a person should have done when you have never been put in that situation, its crazier that we expect a 17 year old kid walking home with candy and tea to process all that information and make a smart decision. he tried to run away when he saw he was being followed and to me that is what any kid would do. as far as the confrontation, considering cowardman's violent past, i take his word with a grain of salt. i put the onus on him. he should have stayed in the car and waited for backup, but his "they always get away" mentality got the best of him.
the self dense law in florida is for cowards in my opinion. it makes it okay for a person to initiate a fight and if they are getting their ass handed to them, they can use deadly force if they think their life is in danger. wack law and i hope something is done about it before more innocent lives are taken by cowards like zimmerman.
He admitted to following Martin and the dispatcher told him he didn't need to do that. There was no street sign where he got out of the car and the fight took place 35 feet away.
know your role, coon
avi check
Great logic
Oh and he told the dispatcher that Martin run away before he went to go follow him.
Fuzzy continuing to bring the weak logic
Darrin once again failing to demonstrate how.
Martin runs away, Zimmerman follows him against the dispatchers recommendation, gets out of his car for a reason that he lied to cover up, and then went 12 yards away where the confrontation took place. You take from that Martin caused the confrontation huh?
You are assuming he knew no street sign was there. He may have been looking for one.
If someone gets out of their vehicle and axes you a question, you have no choice but to go MMA on that creepy ass crackah.
I have a problem with that too, which is why maybe 10 pages back or so whenever I first posted in this thread I basically laid out why both GZ and TM are responsible and acted unintelligently and how GZ should pay dearly for the way he acted and didn't act. I hope he rots in prison for a while.
GZ deserves sometime in the Jail Cell tbh...
I wonder what the scope of the word "confronting" is in Florida law. In its broadest sense the confrontation started once GZ started following him in his car. It could be defined more narrow than that though.
When its night time, I run away from you and you follow me in your car and then get out your car and track me down for 30 yards you bet I will get hostile. It was clear Martin was trying to get away from him and Zimmerman pursued. All you are doing is leaving out the rest of the content. Who knows what was said but Zimmerman had no business chasing a teenager at night that is trying to get away from him.
Really? You have trouble figuring out where a street sign is? How about the end of the street. Nevermind that during the dispatch call he was calling out street names or that he lived in the neighborhood or that the neighborhood had only three streets.
Then there is his account of him going to the store when he told the dispatcher that he was coming from the far side of his house from the store.
And oh so conveniently he claims that Martin said he was going to kill him and that is why he shot him.
Its pretty obvious that he lies and he knew damn well what the requirements for self defense were. He took the test to join the police academy as well as several criminology classes that covered that topic which once again he conveniently forgot.
Nevermind that he lied to get out of trouble before when he hid the donations that he was receiving so he could get out on his own recognizance.
There is absolutely no reason to trust this guy and he already admitted to following Martin.
It doesn't matter that GZ was following TM.
Does Fuzzylogic have any theories on what Trayvon was doing wandering around in the rain for the 40 minutes between the time he left the 7-11 and when he was shot?
that's all i want. he should be behind bars for his wrecklessness.
what i been preachin' this entire time:
What about Martin's right to 'stand his ground?'
(CNN) -- Like many people, I've been riveted by the George Zimmerman trial. I call it "the George Zimmerman trial" because that's what it is, but the more I watch, the more I wonder: Should it be renamed "the Trayvon Martin trial?"
I'm not just talking about some of the media's tabloid-like focus on Martin's background, his personal history, his school records and -- outside the courtroom -- the toxicology report. I'm talking about an aspect of the case that never comes up in the media coverage, one that I would argue is key.
This murder trial, in and out of the courtroom, has been boiled down to one question: Was Zimmerman in fear for his life and thus justified in defending himself by shooting and killing Martin?
It has been framed this way -- in terms of Zimmerman's mortal fear -- since the shooting in 2012.
Some people have forgotten that Zimmerman was not even arrested initially. It took more than a month for the special prosecutor to bring the second-degree murder charge. And if not for mass protests across the country, he might not be the defendant in a murder trial at all.
The question that has not surfaced in the courtroom -- the elephant in the room -- is this: Did Martin fear for his life after being followed and confronted by a stranger while going to the store to buy candy and a soft drink? Was he, Martin, justified in standing his ground and defending himself when this stranger, an apparent stalker, approached him in a threatening manner?
Zimmerman didn't identify himself and never said he was part of the neighborhood watch group.
Think about it: We're told over and over that if Zimmerman was afraid of Martin. According to Florida law, he had the right to put a bullet in the chamber of his concealed handgun, get out of his car after being told not to by the 911 dispatcher and follow and confront Martin and shoot him to death.
At the same time, we are told that Martin, who had far greater reason to fear Zimmerman, practically and for reasons of American history, did not have the right to confront his stalker, stand his ground and defend himself, including by using his fists. We are told that this was entirely unjustified and by doing so, Martin justified his own execution.
The phrases "stand your ground" and "self-defense" have been repeated endlessly by anchors, pundits, analysts and experts, but rarely applied to Martin.
How could this be? Why is this other question ignored? Surely it will come up as we approach the trial, I thought. But it hasn't. What's going on here? How can the Florida law apply only to Zimmerman and not to Martin?
I remembered the sharp, sometimes bitter commentary provoked by e Lee's 1989 film "Do the Right Thing," particularly in reaction to its climactic scenes, when the police murder a black teenager and Lee's character throws a trash can through the window of the white-owned pizza place.
Years after the movie came out, Lee told an interviewer, "White people still ask me why Mookie threw the can through the window. ...Twenty years later, they're still asking me that."
"No black person ever, in 20 years, no person of color has ever asked me why," he said.
This speak volumes about race and power relations in this country.
Here's what I think: Assuming Martin did engage Zimmerman physically, perhaps if the teen had hit back a little bit harder, perhaps if he had been able to prevent Zimmerman from grabbing his concealed and loaded gun and perhaps if witnesses had come to Martin's aid, then maybe he would be alive today. That's speculation.
One thing I feel sure of is that if Martin, in fear for his life, had used Zimmerman's own gun to shoot and possibly kill his attacker, when the police arrived on the scene, they would not have failed to charge him with murder.
Why hasn't the prosecution team used Florida law to argue strongly for Martin's right of self-defense, his right to stand his ground against a stalker? Why not turn the tables on Zimmerman's exclusive claim to that argument?
It will be interesting to see whether this question even gets posed for the jury at all. It certainly will be front and center as this case is tried by the jury of history. And future generations will likely puzzle over how the term "racial profiling" could have been banned by the judge before the trial even began.
This country's racial history, the list of names, like Sean Bell, Amadou Diallo, Oscar Grant and other victims of "deadly force" by the police—these represent an even bigger Elephant in the Room.
They may have been ruled irrelevant in the courtroom, but they are certainly relevant to those who seek justice in this society.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/11/opinio...html?hpt=hp_t4
TRMS had 3 prosecutors on last night. They made great points for 2nd degree murder conviction
Z went out loaded for bear, carrying a gun, ready to shoot (to kill).
He showed clear animus towards young black males when reporting to 911: "punk assholes" " ing rs"
He was clearly the aggressor getting out of his truck to go after M.
otoh, M did nothing wrong other than Walking While Black, Young, Hoodied (in the rain).
But the prosecutors did say the prosecutors missed lots of opportunities. iow, incompetent.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions