Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Zimmerman TrialFollow

#52 Jul 03 2013 at 3:59 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts

Wrong. They have every right to follow and question you. They don't have the *authority* to require you to stop and answer their questions though. The bigger point is that someone else following you does *not* give you the right to attack that person.


Sure it does, if they're going to attempt a felony. Like assault, say. Did you read the statute? It's a stupid law, but you absolutely have the right to use force, deadly force, even if it becomes clear to you that you're going to be assaulted. Again, this is the lynch pin of the guy you presumably want to see walk after following, confronting, and fatally shooting a kid in the chest. Try to at least be consistent. The black kid gets the benefit of the same laws these days, even in your 1980s time warp.

Edited, Jul 3rd 2013 6:00pm by Smasharoo
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#53 Jul 03 2013 at 4:08 PM Rating: Good
******
20,020 posts
I haven't been following the trial too closely, but Zimmerman really doesn't seem to be doing himself any favors. He testified that he had never even heard of the stand your ground law... so they brought in his criminal justice professor who testified that they had spoken at length about it.

I just don't understand why he'd tell such an obvious lie.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#54 Jul 03 2013 at 4:28 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,518 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Oh look it's either varus or someone pretending to be varus.
Is it already that time of the month? Whose turn is it to fully engage this time?

Huh. I never even saw those posts and they're not even there. Looks like Kao perfected his stealth nuke.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#55 Jul 03 2013 at 4:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,245 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
I haven't been following the trial too closely, but Zimmerman really doesn't seem to be doing himself any favors. He testified that he had never even heard of the stand your ground law... so they brought in his criminal justice professor who testified that they had spoken at length about it.

I just don't understand why he'd tell such an obvious lie.



This is not a guy who thinks very well. Are you really surprised?

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#56 Jul 03 2013 at 5:00 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Smash wrote:
Sure it does, if they're going to attempt a felony. Like assault, say. Did you read the statute? It's a stupid law, but you absolutely have the right to use force, deadly force, even if it becomes clear to you that you're going to be assaulted. Again, this is the lynch pin of the guy you presumably want to see walk after following, confronting, and fatally shooting a kid in the chest. Try to at least be consistent. The black kid gets the benefit of the same laws these days, even in your 1980s time warp.


I don't get how anyone can make an argument for Zimmerman that he is at no fault of anything. I can understand fighting the charge, but to argue that he is at no fault of what happened is absurd. Both parties made mistakes. Martin paid for it with his life, at least be fair and make Zimmerman get his fair share of punishment. Whatever that might be.

Gbaji wrote:
The dispatcher has no authority to tell Zimmerman what he can or cannot do. The dispatcher did not say "You can't follow him", or "It's against the law to follow him", or even "If you follow him and he attacks you, it'll be your fault". I can't find a transcript at the moment, but IIRC the dispatcher told him something like "We don't need you to do that". It's a CYA for the police. Zimmerman has every right to follow Martin if he wants to.


You're right, but it paints the scenario that someone trained addressed the situation and told Zimmerman the correct action to take. So the argument of "I didn't know what I was getting myself into" is invalid. At that point, he went looking for trouble.

Gbaji wrote:
But to argue that Zimmerman somehow committed some grave offense simply by following Martin and is therefor completely 100% responsible for everything that happened after that point is completely wrong.


That is an exaggeration. Both Zimmerman and Martin were responsible for what happened, but ultimately, if Zimmerman would have acted within his duties of a neighborhood watch, none of that would have happened.

Gbaji wrote:
But not beyond his right to do as a normal concerned citizen. You don't need police powers to walk up to someone and talk to them.


He didn't do that. He chased after a person with a loaded gun to "prevent a crime". That is police work.

Gbaji wrote:
I wouldn't run away though. I *have* been approached by the equivalent of the nosy neighbor in a complex before.


The fact that you said "neighbor", means that you already knew who that person was, maybe not personally, but you knew it was the neighbor. If Zimmerman were his girlfriend neighbor and he came out of his house to "pick up his mail" and questioned him, Martin probably wouldn't have ran either.

Now let's assume that you didn't know that the neighbor was the neighbor and he was in a car potentially following you as you were walking around? You wouldn't at least get out of sight? I call BS. You may not have ran, but you would duck behind some bushes or got behind some houses.

Gbaji wrote:
At some point, Martin saw Zimmerman in the car talking on his phone, but instead of just walking on by like a normal person, he ran away. Then Zimmerman got out of his car and followed him. You can clearly hear this on the recording of Zimmerman's phone call.


How is "walking away" like a "normal person"? I had the cops called on me for not doing anything wrong. I ran away. Why put yourself in a situation where you'll be confronted? That's how Zimmerman got himself in that situation.

Gbaji wrote:
The actions of Martin far more match that of someone who was up to no good, was perhaps scoping out the neighborhood or looking for something to vandalize/steal

If that is true, it only proves the point that Zimmerman was looking for trouble.

Gbaji wrote:
and then when he realized that he was being watched, he didn't think "there's some creepy guy who might be a murderer", he almost certainly thought "There's a guy who might be part of the neighborhood watch, and he saw me poking around the houses along the road, so I'd better run before he gets a good look at me".

Speculation on my part? Absolutely. But who runs away just because they see someone sitting in a parked car on the side of the road? Not someone innocently walking home from the store.


Given the fact he had nothing on him to prove any guilt of anything else other than being at the wrong place at the wrong time, your speculation has no value. Not only was he on the phone with his Girlfriend, he had nothing on him to promote that he was about to do something. So, as much as you don't want to admit that he ran out of the suspicion of Zimmerman, nothing favors your speculation.

Furthermore, given the fact that Zimmerman got out of the car to chase him, only proves the point that it was not just some random guy sitting in a car. Just because he was smart enough to realize that he was being watched, doesn't make him a criminal.

Gbaji wrote:

Wrong. They have every right to follow and question you. They don't have the *authority* to require you to stop and answer their questions though. The bigger point is that someone else following you does *not* give you the right to attack that person.


That's right and fighting doesn't give you the right to kill.
.

Also remember, Martin RAN. If he wanted to fight, especially if he were a thug, he would have waved his glock and threatened him. By Martin running, that is an action of him not wanting to get involved. By Zimmerman chasing him, that is an action of him wanting to get involved.

Edited, Jul 4th 2013 1:03am by Almalieque
#57 Jul 03 2013 at 5:24 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

Wrong. They have every right to follow and question you. They don't have the *authority* to require you to stop and answer their questions though. The bigger point is that someone else following you does *not* give you the right to attack that person.


Sure it does, if they're going to attempt a felony. Like assault, say. Did you read the statute?


Yes, I did. Did you? Let me refresh your memory:

Quote:
76.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.


Again, neither were in their home, so 776.013 does not apply. So are you arguing that Zimmerman following Martin represents a reasonable belief by Martin that he's in risk of "imminent death or great bodily harm", or to prevent the "imminent commission of a forcible felony"? The law does not allow you to speculate that someone might do something bad and then attack them first. It requires that a reasonable person should believe they were in imminent danger in that circumstance.

You're also repeating the same ridiculous double standard I spoke of earlier. So Martin is justified to use force, even deadly force, based merely on the fact that Zimmerman followed him, but Zimmerman is *not* justified to use deadly force when he's actually being pinned to the ground and punched in the face? That makes no sense at all. No reasonable person assumes they're in imminent risk of great bodily harm or death just because someone is following them. Most reasonable people would assume so once they're on their back and being punched in the face by an assailant.

Quote:
It's a stupid law, but you absolutely have the right to use force, deadly force, even if it becomes clear to you that you're going to be assaulted.


Sure. But it requires a reasonable belief that this will happen. I don't think being followed meets that criteria. You have a point *if* the jury believes that Zimmerman actually took a clear act against Martin that would indicate this, but even Martin's girlfriends testimony doesn't come close to proving that. I've acknowledged all along that if the jury believes that Zimmerman took the first aggressive act (throwing a punch, trying to grab Martin, etc, not just following him), then they have a chance with this. But again, it comes down the the later section of the law. If we assume that Zimmerman was the aggressor, this gives Martin the right to defend himself, but the moment he pinned Zimmerman down and continued attacking him, Martin became the attacker and Zimmerman now has the right to defend himself.

Put another way, if Zimmerman attempted to grab or otherwise attack Martin, and Martin was armed, Martin would be within his rights at that moment to pull out his weapon and shoot Zimmerman. That's the use of deadly force. But he can't punch Zimmerman with his fists, then get the upper hand in the fight, and then pin him and continue punching him. Remember that the use of deadly force is still restricted to that force which the person believes is necessary to protect him from great bodily harm or death or to prevent a forcible felony. Once he's knocked Zimmerman to the ground, he's no longer in imminent danger of great bodily harm or death and cannot continue to attack Zimmerman under a claim of self defense.


Quote:
Again, this is the lynch pin of the guy you presumably want to see walk after following, confronting, and fatally shooting a kid in the chest. Try to at least be consistent. The black kid gets the benefit of the same laws these days, even in your 1980s time warp.


It's funny because you (and a lot of people) keep trying really hard to inject race into this, and claim that those who defend Zimmerman do so out of some innate racial need to defend the white guy against the black guy. But it really looks like you're the one racially biased here. No matter how incredibly skewed the facts are, you can't drop the assumption that this must have been a case of white racism targeting a black teenager. You just can't see past the narrative of "white guy shoots black kid". It's an incredible case of projection on your part.

Remove the race of the two involved, and no one would be arguing that Zimmerman was guilty. ****. If we reversed the races of the two, my position would be exactly the same, but you'd be arguing the opposite. So maybe you need to stop looking at this through race tinted glasses?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#58 Jul 03 2013 at 5:32 PM Rating: Good
******
20,020 posts
We're injecting race into it because race is part of it. Shocking.

Just like we're discussing whether or not Zimmerman following Martin is sufficiently threatening to be considered an act of aggression that voids the Stand Your Ground law. Shocking.

You know, instead of just assuming it doesn't and starting from there.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#59 Jul 03 2013 at 6:26 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
The dispatcher has no authority to tell Zimmerman what he can or cannot do. The dispatcher did not say "You can't follow him", or "It's against the law to follow him", or even "If you follow him and he attacks you, it'll be your fault". I can't find a transcript at the moment, but IIRC the dispatcher told him something like "We don't need you to do that". It's a CYA for the police. Zimmerman has every right to follow Martin if he wants to.


You're right, but it paints the scenario that someone trained addressed the situation and told Zimmerman the correct action to take. So the argument of "I didn't know what I was getting myself into" is invalid. At that point, he went looking for trouble.


No. It's pure CYA. Police dispatchers are trained to tell anyone on the other end of the phone line to not do *anything* and to wait for police to arrive on the scene. It's their automatic response to any action the person proposes because if they don't do that, they can be sued for not telling the person "we don't need you to do that" if that person gets hurt. It's about getting on record that the dispatcher did not tell the person to do something. Don't read anything more into it than that.

Quote:
That is an exaggeration. Both Zimmerman and Martin were responsible for what happened, but ultimately, if Zimmerman would have acted within his duties of a neighborhood watch, none of that would have happened.


At the end of the day, we have to weigh relative responsibility here. Zimmerman's responsibility for the outcome is no greater than any person walking through their own housing complex at night. Martin died because he pinned Zimmerman to the ground and beat him in the face with no sign of stopping. That's much more directly responsible for his death than the fact that Zimmerman was there to be pinned to the ground and beaten in the face. Don't you agree? You're trying to effectively blame the victim of a mugging for being mugged because if he hadn't walked down that street late at night, he wouldn't have been mugged. Then trying to blame him for shooting his mugger because he's somehow in the wrong for walking down a street late at night, knowing there's a possibility he might get mugged and then having the audacity to carry a concealed weapon just in case he is.

That's nutty thinking.

Quote:
He didn't do that. He chased after a person with a loaded gun to "prevent a crime". That is police work.


He followed someone. That he had a concealed weapon is irrelevant. There is no evidence he drew his weapon or made the presence of the weapon known until after he was pinned to the ground. His action is not made any more or less legal based on the presence of his weapon.

Quote:
Gbaji wrote:
I wouldn't run away though. I *have* been approached by the equivalent of the nosy neighbor in a complex before.


The fact that you said "neighbor", means that you already knew who that person was, maybe not personally, but you knew it was the neighbor.


Uh. No. I was at someone else's house (condo actually). I parked my car in one of the open spaces on the side of the complex and started walking towards my friends house, when this guy walked up and started asking me what I was doing in the complex, why I was there, which unit was I visiting, etc. I gave him the information and continued walking on. When I got to the friends house, I mentioned it and they kinda rolled their eyes because this particular guy was known to randomly wander around bugging people visiting the complex and to pay him no mind.

This is more or less the exact same scenario Martin found himself in, yet it never once occurred to me to flee this guy, or to be concerned about him. My immediate assumption was that he was someone who lived in the complex, and was part of the neighborhood watch (which they had, but he apparently wasn't part of it, but was just a busybody), and it was at worst a minor annoyance to me. The point is that Martin's reaction was ridiculously out of proportion to what Zimmerman was doing.

Quote:
Now let's assume that you didn't know that the neighbor was the neighbor and he was in a car potentially following you as you were walking around? You wouldn't at least get out of sight? I call BS. You may not have ran, but you would duck behind some bushes or got behind some houses.


First off. I know that this has been misreported at length, but at no point did Zimmerman follow Martin "in his car". His car was parked the whole time. Second, as I pointed out earlier, Martin did not flee when Zimmerman followed him. Martin fled as soon as he saw Martin sitting in his car talking on his cell phone. So let's put this in perspective. You're visiting a friend. You're walking alone back to that friends house through the complex at night. At some point, you realize there's someone sitting in a car on the side of the road talking on their cell phone. Do you run away to hide from this person, or do you just continue walking?

Most normal people just continue walking. Now, if that person got out of his car and started walking towards me, I would make note of it and say something to get a feel about what he wants. I'd expect him to say something about why he got out and is walking towards me. I'd be wary, but I wouldn't start running unless the guy pulled out a knife and started talking about sacrificing me to his god Bobo or something.

Martin, if we assume he wasn't doing anything wrong, way overreacted. His actions just don't match those of someone who's actually just walking home and not doing anything wrong. They perfectly match the actions of someone who was doing something he wasn't supposed to and realized that he'd been spotted doing it. And this part of the encounter is part of the recorded call to police, so we're not relying on Zimmerman's word for it. Martin ran before Zimmerman got out of the car, much less followed Martin. So let's stop pretending that Martin did what he did because he was being followed. He was only followed *after* he did something that looked incredibly suspicious.

Quote:
How is "walking away" like a "normal person"? I had the cops called on me for not doing anything wrong. I ran away. Why put yourself in a situation where you'll be confronted? That's how Zimmerman got himself in that situation.


Huh? I didn't say "walking away". I said "walking on by". You're walking down a street. You see someone sitting in a car on the side of the street talking on a cell phone. Why the **** run from that? You'd just keep walking in the direction you were walking, right? That's what a "reasonable person" would do. You only might consider running away *if* the other person does something to make you think he's a danger to you, but at that point, Zimmerman was just sitting in his car.

And are you seriously about having the cops called on you for not doing anything wrong and running? That's also wrong. Someone calls the cops on you and you actually haven't done anything wrong, you continue doing what you're doing (which is presumably "not wrong") and if the cops show up, you explain to them how you're not doing anything wrong and you let the other guy get the heat for wasting the police's time. WTF? You seriously run and hide in that situation? Or is this one of those situation where "not doing anything wrong" really means "I was doing something wrong, but I didn't think it was a big deal, so boo hoo, he shouldn't call the cops on me"?

How'd you know someone called the cops on you in the first place? And are you aware that the fastest way to make yourself look guilty is to run and hide when the cops show up (or are on the way)? Maybe more people need to learn how to act like law abiding citizens to get this.

Quote:
Gbaji wrote:
The actions of Martin far more match that of someone who was up to no good, was perhaps scoping out the neighborhood or looking for something to vandalize/steal

If that is true, it only proves the point that Zimmerman was looking for trouble.


Which, ironically, is precisely what he's supposed to do as part of the watch. Remember, he called the cops and reported the behavior. That's it. He only followed Martin after Martin ran away from him. Was he supposed to ignore the guy wandering back and forth through the area in the rain? No. He's supposed to call and report it. And if the person runs away once he realized Zimmerman is there? Sure, he's not required to follow the person, but if he does, he can give the police a better idea of where he is in the complex and maybe make it possible for them to catch someone. Remember, Zimmerman doesn't know who Martin is. He sees someone acting suspicious. He calls the police to report it, and then the person does something even more suspicious. Martin basically confirms to Zimmerman that he was doing something he shouldn't have by running. Fair or not, that's the reasonable assumption based on Martins reaction.

Remember also that the watch was formed because there were break ins and vandalism going on. So if he can assist in catching whomever is doing it, he's doing his job. Remember also that there's next to zero evidence that Zimmerman did anything other than just follow Martin. Which he's well within his right to do.

Quote:
Given the fact he had nothing on him to prove any guilt of anything else other than being at the wrong place at the wrong time, your speculation has no value. Not only was he on the phone with his Girlfriend, he had nothing on him to promote that he was about to do something. So, as much as you don't want to admit that he ran out of the suspicion of Zimmerman, nothing favors your speculation.


Other than the fact that he ran. The claims of the girlfriend are her claims. The police dispatch recording clearly shows that Martin ran from Zimmerman prior to Zimmerman doing *anything* other than sit in his car and talk on his cell phone. So the question becomes "what did he suspect about Zimmerman"? Did he really think "this is some crazy stalker guy planning to kill me?", or did he think "this guy might be part of the neighborhood watch, and saw me poking around the neighborhood".

Quote:
Furthermore, given the fact that Zimmerman got out of the car to chase him, only proves the point that it was not just some random guy sitting in a car.


Except that Martin didn't know that until after he ran. So why did he run in the first place? Do you run away every time you see someone sitting in a parked car? Seriously? That behavior makes no sense if we assume he was just innocently walking home from the store. Everything Martin did that night screams "kid up to no good, trying to avoid getting caught".

Quote:
Just because he was smart enough to realize that he was being watched, doesn't make him a criminal.


Watched doing what though? Realizing you're being watched doing nothing wrong should not be a concern. What makes him appear to be a criminal is when realizing he's being watched prompts him to run away from the person watching him. So yeah, running in that situation doesn't "make him a criminal", but it sure does look suspicious.

[quote]Also remember, Martin RAN. If he wanted to fight, especially if he were a thug, he would have waved his glock and threatened him. By Martin running, that is an action of him not wanting to get involved. By Zimmerman chasing him, that is an action of him wanting to get involved.[/quote]

We can debate that, and no one knows for sure what happened to cause them to meet, but given their relative physical statures, if Martin really just wanted to run home, he could have made it in under a minute and Zimmerman would never have caught up with him. If you've looked at the map of the complex, there was no reason for Martin to turn around, yet where the fight occurred is very near to the road where Zimmerman's car was parked. Martin's father's house was in the opposite direction. Martin could have simply run through the complex, hung a left at the end of the interior rows with the grass and sidewalk, and been like 2 houses from his dad's place. Yet the spot where he was shot was in the other direction. It suggests he ran into the complex, then took two left turns and came back out towards the main road. Which makes no sense if you're trying to evade someone.

It makes complete sense if your intent is to double back around behind someone who followed you for a short distance and is now heading back to hiss car (as Zimmerman claims). Martin was a 17 year old football player. Zimmerman was a 29 (28 then?) year old some what out of shape guy. No way does he catch up to Martin if Martin is running away from him. And no possible way that he catches him where they ended out if that's how it went down.

It's just that all the physical evidence corroborates Zimmerman's story. The claims being made by the prosecution require some incredible stretches of possibility to even entertain. We have to assume that Zimmerman somehow magically became a track star and caught up with Martin, despite Martin having a head start and running straight home. We have to also assume that "straight home" for Martin consisted of taking a U turn through the complex and going back to the same road where he first ran into Zimmerman about 80-100 feet from where he first entered the complex rather than running out the other side of the interior where it opens out near to where home is. It requires that we accept that its perfectly reasonable for someone to assume grave danger presented by a person sitting in a car talking on their cell phone, yet at the same time insist that having suffered a bloody nose and contusions on the back of your head doesn't qualify as being in grave danger at all.

It's just bizarre the lengths people seem to need to go to with regard to ignoring or twisting the facts of this case in order to make it fit a "white racist kills innocent black teen" narrative. At some point, don't we stop and look at the facts and evidence and ignore people's skin color? Is that even possible?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#60 Jul 03 2013 at 6:29 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
We're injecting race into it because race is part of it. Shocking.


Why is race part of it? Is there any indication that Zimmerman did what he did because of Martin's race?

People are choosing to see this through the lens of race. The fact that one person is black and another white (hispanic actually), doesn't mean that the issue is about race. But many people just can't get past the fact that Martin is black, and therefor we must assume a racial motive for his death. That's projection though.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#61 Jul 03 2013 at 6:38 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Oh, and because I still think it's strange as ****: No. I have never hidden in the bushes because I saw someone nearby. Ever. If I'm perfectly in the right to be where I am, why the **** would I hide? That's not normal behavior.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#62 Jul 03 2013 at 6:41 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,381 posts
Neither is following someone.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#63 Jul 03 2013 at 6:47 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,936 posts
I think if I saw someone following me at night, trying to hide from them would not be completely out of the question. A coworker of mine did exactly that as he was was being followed at night by someone while we were out of town for a work related thing. He noticed he was being followed, turns a corner, ducked down behind a bush and watched as the person came around the corner, stopped, looked around (presumably for him) then after a few moments being unable to see him, continued on.

Now, when he told us the story the following morning on our way to work, we did not think that he did anything abnormal. We all thought the person following him was some sort of creep.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#64 Jul 03 2013 at 7:36 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Neither is following someone.


Explain how following differs from "walking towards"? If I walk towards you and stop a distance away and say something like "Hi. I'm with the local neighborhood watch and didn't recognized you. Are you staying in the complex?", there's nothing unusual. If I walk towards you and you turn and run away, what the ****? If I continue to try to walk up to you in order to have that same conversation, and you continue trying to get away from me, am I "following you"? Sure. But one of us is acting strangely, and the other is not. I'll give you a hint: It's the guy who's so paranoid that someone simply walking in their direction causes them to flee in terror.

Now if you're walking along and someone is following you (as described above), never attempting communication, or going elsewhere, but keeping pace, then you might start to get a bit nervous. And this is what people keep implying happened in this case, but there's no evidence to support it (other than the claims of Martin's girlfriend). It's why we keep getting these repeated claims that Zimmerman "stalked" Martin. But that's not what happened. We know from the recorded phone call that Martin ran away before Zimmerman ever even got out of the car.


So I'll ask again: What did Zimmerman do that was so suspicious that it would cause Martin to flee? Zimmerman only followed Martin *after* he ran away. So the $64k question is: Why did Martin run away? If he really was just innocently walking home, there's no reason to run away at all. Even if he was nervous about someone sitting in a parked car (and why would he be?), from the information and map of the complex, Zimmerman's car was facing the entrance of the complex. Martin was walking towards him from that entrance. Martin was on the other side of the street (the street runs along the outside edge of the complex, with the houses to the right side when heading in). Even if Zimmerman exited the car and initiated a conversation with Martin, he would have been standing 20-30 feet away. Certainly, not such a close encounter that a young healthy 17 year old should feel alarmed at all.

So why did Martin run? If we're going to look at suspicious behavior leading up to the physical confrontation, his act was the first one (second if you count the alleged suspicious behavior which prompted Zimmerman's call in the first place). And if we buy the claim that Martin wasn't doing anything wrong, and wasn't fleeing from an "authority" (watch in this case), but honestly thought that Zimmerman was such a creepy threat that he felt the need to flee while Zimmerman was still sitting in his car on the other side of the street, then why didn't he keep running home? I don't know about you, but if I've openly decided to flee someone cause I think he's going to do something to me, and the he starts following me, I don't stop until I know I'm safe. And I certainly don't then turn around and walk back in the direction the guy was when I first ran from him.


There are just too many things about the physical locations involved that don't make any sense if we accept that Martin was the one who was afraid and running away from someone he viewed as a criminal threat. Everything perfectly matches Zimmerman's claim that he followed Martin a short distance, lost him, then was heading back to his car when Martin approached him. We could then speculate that Zimmerman then decided to attack Martin, but that would just be speculation. At a bare minimum, we can say that only reason for Martin to double back around is if he was intending to confront Zimmerman. At the very least that calls into question the claim that he was afraid of Zimmerman and just trying to get away from him and to his home.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#65 Jul 03 2013 at 8:35 PM Rating: Good
******
20,020 posts
gbaji wrote:
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
We're injecting race into it because race is part of it. Shocking.


Why is race part of it? Is there any indication that Zimmerman did what he did because of Martin's race?

People are choosing to see this through the lens of race. The fact that one person is black and another white (hispanic actually), doesn't mean that the issue is about race. But many people just can't get past the fact that Martin is black, and therefor we must assume a racial motive for his death. That's projection though.


People are choosing to take the time to consider whether or not race could be a factor because, shocker, racism is still alive in our culture and it needs to be examined if this could have been a case of racially-motivated profiling.

The fact of the matter is that Zimmerman profiled Martin as being a potential threat to the neighborhood. If his race was a factor, it's relevant. If his race wasn't a factor, it's not relevant.

The only way you can find out if it was a factor is to examine that at trial.

Why is that a difficult concept for you?
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#66 Jul 03 2013 at 8:48 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Gbaji wrote:
No. It's pure CYA. Police dispatchers are trained to tell anyone on the other end of the phone line to not do *anything* and to wait for police to arrive on the scene. It's their automatic response to any action the person proposes because if they don't do that, they can be sued for not telling the person "we don't need you to do that" if that person gets hurt. It's about getting on record that the dispatcher did not tell the person to do something. Don't read anything more into it than that.


None of what you said contradicted the point that the dispatcher gave Zimmerman the correct action to take. The dispatchers are trained to tell people what to do in certain situations. It's not so much as "CYA", but the right action to take. Just because avoiding contact with a criminal is always the right action, doesn't make it any less legit. Given that to be the right action, Zimmerman went looking for trouble.

Gbaji wrote:
At the end of the day, we have to weigh relative responsibility here. Zimmerman's responsibility for the outcome is no greater than any person walking through their own housing complex at night.


Zimmerman CHASED Martin with a loaded weapon. You keep trying to downplay his actions by saying "walking" and "sitting". If Martin ran away, then there is no way that Zimmerman could have caught him without running after Martin. I'm being as unbiased as I can, but you are obviously bigoted towards Zimmerman.

Gbaji wrote:
Martin died because he pinned Zimmerman to the ground and beat him in the face with no sign of stopping. That's much more directly responsible for his death than the fact that Zimmerman was there to be pinned to the ground and beaten in the face. Don't you agree? You're trying to effectively blame the victim of a mugging for being mugged because if he hadn't walked down that street late at night, he wouldn't have been mugged. Then trying to blame him for shooting his mugger because he's somehow in the wrong for walking down a street late at night, knowing there's a possibility he might get mugged and then having the audacity to carry a concealed weapon just in case he is.

That's nutty thinking.


On the contrary. Unlike you, I don't know what happened between Zimmerman catching up with Martin and Martin dying. All I know (or anyone for that matter)is the following:

1. Zimmerman saw Martin.
2. Martin ran.
3. Zimmerman ran
4. Zimmerman and Martin were together
5. Zimmerman shot Martin

We don't know what happened at "4", so you cannot give any blame. The point of the trial is to find out what happened at "4". Until those facts come out, blame can only be given at "1" and "2", neither in which justifiably results in "5". If Martin were looking for a fight (removing "2"), then you can not assume that "4" and "5" wouldn't have happened. It couldn't have easily went "1", "3", "4","5".

So, as a result, the only thing anyone can confirm is that if "3" never happened, then neither would have "4" or "5".

Gbaji wrote:
He followed someone. That he had a concealed weapon is irrelevant. There is no evidence he drew his weapon or made the presence of the weapon known until after he was pinned to the ground. His action is not made any more or less legal based on the presence of his weapon.


No. He chased him. You can't meet up with a running person simply by "following" him. The fact that he had a concealed weapon is relevant because it was that weapon that killed him. If he had drawn the weapon, as a Police officer would have done, what would have been the result? Neither of us know, but I doubt it would have been the same.

Gbaji wrote:
Uh. No. I was at someone else's house (condo actually). I parked my car in one of the open spaces on the side of the complex and started walking towards my friends house, when this guy walked up and started asking me what I was doing in the complex, why I was there, which unit was I visiting, etc. I gave him the information and continued walking on. When I got to the friends house, I mentioned it and they kinda rolled their eyes because this particular guy was known to randomly wander around bugging people visiting the complex and to pay him no mind.


That's what I said.

Gbaji wrote:
This is more or less the exact same scenario Martin found himself in, yet it never once occurred to me to flee this guy, or to be concerned about him. My immediate assumption was that he was someone who lived in the complex, and was part of the neighborhood watch (which they had, but he apparently wasn't part of it, but was just a busybody), and it was at worst a minor annoyance to me. The point is that Martin's reaction was ridiculously out of proportion to what Zimmerman was doing.


The neighbor was not chasing you. That's the point that you conveniently overlooked. As I stated, if Zimmerman asked him the same questions outside of his girlfriends house, none of that would have happened. At most, it would have been a "Eff you" with a middle finger.

Gbaji wrote:
First off. I know that this has been misreported at length, but at no point did Zimmerman follow Martin "in his car". His car was parked the whole time. Second, as I pointed out earlier, Martin did not flee when Zimmerman followed him. Martin fled as soon as he saw Martin sitting in his car talking on his cell phone. So let's put this in perspective.


Mistake on the usage of words. I'm fully aware of that, that's why I asked you if you would get out of sight. If he were following you, then he would have moved to be in your sight again. At that point, you would know if he were following you or not. I should have used "watched" as a more accurate word.



At some point, you realize there's someone sitting in a car on the side of the road talking on their cell phone. Do you run away to hide from this person, or do you just continue walking?
....

Most normal people just continue walking. Now, if that person got out of his car and started walking towards me, I would make note of it and say something to get a feel about what he wants. I'd expect him to say something about why he got out and is walking towards me. I'd be wary, but I wouldn't start running unless the guy pulled out a knife and started talking about sacrificing me to his god Bobo or something.

Martin, if we assume he wasn't doing anything wrong, way overreacted. His actions just don't match those of someone who's actually just walking home and not doing anything wrong. They perfectly match the actions of someone who was doing something he wasn't supposed to and realized that he'd been spotted doing it. And this part of the encounter is part of the recorded call to police, so we're not relying on Zimmerman's word for it. Martin ran before Zimmerman got out of the car, much less followed Martin. So let's stop pretending that Martin did what he did because he was being followed. He was only followed *after* he did something that looked incredibly suspicious.

....
Huh? I didn't say "walking away". I said "walking on by". You're walking down a street. You see someone sitting in a car on the side of the street talking on a cell phone. Why the **** run from that? You'd just keep walking in the direction you were walking, right? That's what a "reasonable person" would do. You only might consider running away *if* the other person does something to make you think he's a danger to you, but at that point, Zimmerman was just sitting in his car.
...

Except that Martin didn't know that until after he ran. So why did he run in the first place? Do you run away every time you see someone sitting in a parked car? Seriously? That behavior makes no sense if we assume he was just innocently walking home from the store. Everything Martin did that night screams "kid up to no good, trying to avoid getting caught".



Are you suggesting that Martin ran away from every person sitting in a car on the phone? Is it too hard to believe that Zimmerman was just as suspicious as Martin was, sitting there in a parked car?


As stated, if Martin was THAT suspicious, then Zimmerman knowingly went towards trouble.

And are you seriously about having the cops called on you for not doing anything wrong and running? That's also wrong. Someone calls the cops on you and you actually haven't done anything wrong, you continue doing what you're doing (which is presumably "not wrong") and if the cops show up, you explain to them how you're not doing anything wrong and you let the other guy get the heat for wasting the police's time. WTF? You seriously run and hide in that situation? Or is this one of those situation where "not doing anything wrong" really means "I was doing something wrong, but I didn't think it was a big deal, so boo hoo, he shouldn't call the cops on me"?

How'd you know someone called the cops on you in the first place? And are you aware that the fastest way to make yourself look guilty is to run and hide when the cops show up (or are on the way)? Maybe more people need to learn how to act like law abiding citizens to get this.


When you're in a foreign country, your "rights" don't always carry over.

Option 1. Stay there and hope that the locals don't have any bias against Americans and understand the situation.

Option 2: Just leave because it's not worth risking getting in trouble. I didn't know she was calling the police, but felt like that I needed to leave. As I continued to walk home, I saw the Cops stop by a neighboring shop and got back in the car and pulled up to the shop that I was in. If I didn't 5-10 second buddy rush myself out of sight, I would have had some splainin' to do.

Which, ironically, is precisely what he's supposed to do as part of the watch. Remember, he called the cops and reported the behavior. That's it. He only followed Martin after Martin ran away from him. Was he supposed to ignore the guy wandering back and forth through the area in the rain? No. He's supposed to call and report it. And if the person runs away once he realized Zimmerman is there? Sure, he's not required to follow the person, but if he does, he can give the police a better idea of where he is in the complex and maybe make it possible for them to catch someone. Remember, Zimmerman doesn't know who Martin is. He sees someone acting suspicious. He calls the police to report it, and then the person does something even more suspicious. Martin basically confirms to Zimmerman that he was doing something he shouldn't have by running. Fair or not, that's the reasonable assumption based on Martins reaction.

Remember also that the watch was formed because there were break ins and vandalism going on. So if he can assist in catching whomever is doing it, he's doing his job. Remember also that there's next to zero evidence that Zimmerman did anything other than just follow Martin. Which he's well within his right to do.


Once again. He did not "follow" him. He chased him. If he wanted to follow him to ensure that he didn't "get away", then he would have stayed in his car and followed him via car. The fact that he chased him on foot, means that he was looking for trouble. WTF would you expect a person running from you to do when you catch him? "Oh, hey what's up?". Given the facts that Martin is running and Zimmerman is not a cop, what makes you think that Martin would listen to any words that Zimmerman would have to say and not escalate at some level?

There is no way that anyone could conjuncture a non-violent ending from that scenario.

Other than the fact that he ran. The claims of the girlfriend are her claims. The police dispatch recording clearly shows that Martin ran from Zimmerman prior to Zimmerman doing *anything* other than sit in his car and talk on his cell phone. So the question becomes "what did he suspect about Zimmerman"? Did he really think "this is some crazy stalker guy planning to kill me?", or did he think "this guy might be part of the neighborhood watch, and saw me poking around the neighborhood".


But it was a crazy guy who killed him!


We're talking about your speculation. He could not have thought, "I'm about to get caught", because he had nothing on him to suggest that he was about to commit a crime. You said yourself that he shouldn't have run. So you don't think this child just made a stupid mistake and shouldn't have ran? You can't possibly fathom that maybe he was scared and ran? Whether or not that was the best thing to do is irrelevant to the fact that he had nothing on him to suggest that he was about to commit a crime.

If he had a crowbar, some spray paint and other tools, you and everyone on his defense would say "He was about to commit a crime. Why else would he have those tools?" Am I right?

The fact that a normal person wouldn't run away from a guy simply sitting in his car, should be evident enough that Zimmerman was suspicious. That doesn't make Zimmerman wrong. Neither does that make Martin wrong. Let me clarify, if I were Martin, I would have done my buddy rush as described in my previous story (assuming that Zimmerman was suspicious enough to think something was about to happen). Neither of the two should have ran, but to paint this picture as if Martin was a lunatic who ran away from cars is silly. Obviously Zimmerman must have been suspicious enough for Martin to run. Just as Martin was obviously suspicious enough for Zimmerman to call him in and/or chase him.

Gbaji wrote:
Watched doing what though? Realizing you're being watched doing nothing wrong should not be a concern. What makes him appear to be a criminal is when realizing he's being watched prompts him to run away from the person watching him. So yeah, running in that situation doesn't "make him a criminal", but it sure does look suspicious.


You must not get out much. Someone watching you is a flag for you're about to be mugged.

I remember when I was walking down a street in Rio once and a guy a few feet from me felt uncomfortable with me behind him. So, he conveniently slowed down and "looked" at something. I caught on to what he was doing and did the same thing and looked at a magazine rack. After once or twice of doing that, he finally decided to cross the street, heading in the same direction.

Did he run? No, nor should he have, as I'm not saying that what Martin did was the best thing to do. However, to believe that people don't have suspicion of being followed, or in potential danger without the questioned individual doing anything outrageous is asinine.

We can debate that, and no one knows for sure what happened to cause them to meet, but given their relative physical statures, if Martin really just wanted to run home, he could have made it in under a minute and Zimmerman would never have caught up with him. If you've looked at the map of the complex, there was no reason for Martin to turn around, yet where the fight occurred is very near to the road where Zimmerman's car was parked. Martin's father's house was in the opposite direction. Martin could have simply run through the complex, hung a left at the end of the interior rows with the grass and sidewalk, and been like 2 houses from his dad's place. Yet the spot where he was shot was in the other direction. It suggests he ran into the complex, then took two left turns and came back out towards the main road. Which makes no sense if you're trying to evade someone.

It makes complete sense if your intent is to double back around behind someone who followed you for a short distance and is now heading back to hiss car (as Zimmerman claims). Martin was a 17 year old football player. Zimmerman was a 29 (28 then?) year old some what out of shape guy. No way does he catch up to Martin if Martin is running away from him. And no possible way that he catches him where they ended out if that's how it went down.

It's just that all the physical evidence corroborates Zimmerman's story. The claims being made by the prosecution require some incredible stretches of possibility to even entertain. We have to assume that Zimmerman somehow magically became a track star and caught up with Martin, despite Martin having a head start and running straight home. We have to also assume that "straight home" for Martin consisted of taking a U turn through the complex and going back to the same road where he first ran into Zimmerman about 80-100 feet from where he first entered the complex rather than running out the other side of the interior where it opens out near to where home is. It requires that we accept that its perfectly reasonable for someone to assume grave danger presented by a person sitting in a car talking on their cell phone, yet at the same time insist that having suffered a bloody nose and contusions on the back of your head doesn't qualify as being in grave danger at all.


There's nothing to debate. If Zimmerman didn't want to get involved with a fleeing criminal, then he wouldn't have chased after him. Zimmerman was safe in his car with a loaded weapon. He put himself in danger. Now that doesn't mean that he was wrong for killing him, but it does prove that he was looking for trouble. What did he expect to happen when meeting him?

What makes you think that he's "out of shape"? Zimmerman saw Martin. He obviously knew his build. If Zimmerman thought that he couldn't "take him", then he wouldn't have ran after him.

As for that nonsense of him turning around looking for trouble? "A stranger is chasing me, let me run to my home because he'll never find me there!" GTFOWTBS! Why would you lead a person who's chasing you to your house?

It wasn't his complex, given the emotion that he was in, it is possible that he just started to run. With Zimmerman knowing the area presumably better than Martin, it is possible that Zimmerman cut him off. If Martin turned around and started running after him, at what point does Zimmerman start to feel threatened? Why didn't he pull out his gun BEFORE Martin caught up with him? I'm not saying that it didn't happen, but it would make less sense that Zimmerman stood there, trembling in his boots with his loaded weapon, as Martin ran towards him.

Personally, I think Zimmerman caught up with him and started fighting him. Martin took a couple of hits and then somehow got the upper hand.Zimmerman lost control of the fight and killed Martin before anyone saw the "Neighborhood watch" get his @$$ beat by a "punk". I have no idea if that's how it happened, but that seems more logical than any other presented story and it gives fault to both parties.

Gbaji wrote:

It's just bizarre the lengths people seem to need to go to with regard to ignoring or twisting the facts of this case in order to make it fit a "white racist kills innocent black teen" narrative. At some point, don't we stop and look at the facts and evidence and ignore people's skin color? Is that even possible?


Ironically, you're doing the exact same thing for Zimmerman. The fight is all debatable, but the fact that Zimmerman shouldn't have pursued Martin is not. The fact that you are relieving Zimmerman from any blame of this scenario is utterly bigotry. Just as Martin shouldn't have ran, neither should have Zimmerman.

Edited, Jul 4th 2013 4:49am by Almalieque
#67 Jul 03 2013 at 9:38 PM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts
People are choosing to see this through the lens of race. The fact that one person is black and another white (hispanic actually), doesn't mean that the issue is about race. But many people just can't get past the fact that Martin is black, and therefor we must assume a racial motive for his death.

Naturally not. A white kid in a sweatshirt walking around in the rain totally gets followed by a wannabe cop neighborhood watch guy then shot and killed. Happens all the time. Then after he's killed, the black guy who shot him is cleared by the police immediately. You just need to embrace your racism. It's ok, little fella, we know you're scared of the coloreds, you don't need to pretend any more.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#68 Jul 04 2013 at 4:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,381 posts
Quote:
Explain how following differs from "walking towards"? If I walk towards you and stop a distance away and say something like "Hi. I'm with the local neighborhood watch and didn't recognized you. Are you staying in the complex?", there's nothing unusual. If I walk towards you and you turn and run away, what the ****? If I continue to try to walk up to you in order to have that same conversation, and you continue trying to get away from me, am I "following you"? Sure. But one of us is acting strangely, and the other is not. I'll give you a hint: It's the guy who's so paranoid that someone simply walking in their direction causes them to flee in terror.
You're acting strangely.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#69 Jul 04 2013 at 5:42 AM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,152 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Quote:
Explain how following differs from "walking towards"? If I walk towards you and stop a distance away and say something like "Hi. I'm with the local neighborhood watch and didn't recognized you. Are you staying in the complex?", there's nothing unusual. If I walk towards you and you turn and run away, what the ****? If I continue to try to walk up to you in order to have that same conversation, and you continue trying to get away from me, am I "following you"? Sure. But one of us is acting strangely, and the other is not. I'll give you a hint: It's the guy who's so paranoid that someone simply walking in their direction causes them to flee in terror.
You're acting strangely.


To better answer his question, the difference is with intent. If someone were walking towards you, playing Angry Birds or listening to music, not paying attention to his surroundings, you wouldn't think anything about it. If that same person were walking towards you, looking directly at you, without taking his eyes off of you, you would think something was up.

I'm not sure why Gbaji is trying to paint Zimmerman as a person with absolutely no fault, while at the same time criticizing others for doing the same thing with Martin. Both were at some fault. To believe that Zimmerman did absolutely nothing suspicious to cause Martin to run asserts that Martin runs from random people. Given that there is no evidence of Martin committing a crime, it would only make sense that Zimmerman did something to scare Martin. That doesn't mean Martin should have ran, but that doesn't take away the fact that Zimmerman was acting just as suspicious as he portrayed Martin.
#70 Jul 04 2013 at 7:13 AM Rating: Good
******
49,907 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
racism is still alive in our culture
Don't be absurd. We put a black dude in the office.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#71 Jul 04 2013 at 8:04 AM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
To many cries of him being an evil Kenyan muslim terrorist. Yep, no racism there.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#72 Jul 04 2013 at 8:32 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
lolgaxe wrote:
We put a black dude in the office.

Well, some of us did. Gbaji tried to put the white guy in office.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#73 Jul 04 2013 at 8:47 AM Rating: Good
****
7,861 posts
Quote:
Zimmerman CHASED Martin with a loaded weapon. You keep trying to downplay his actions by saying "walking" and "sitting". If Martin ran away, then there is no way that Zimmerman could have caught him without running after Martin. I'm being as unbiased as I can, but you are obviously bigoted towards Zimmerman.

Quote:
No. He chased him.

Quote:
Once again. He did not "follow" him. He chased him. If he wanted to follow him to ensure that he didn't "get away", then he would have stayed in his car and followed him via car.

People here say you're stupid, but I always like to give the benefit of the doubt. It seems that no matter how many times it's been mentioned, you keep missing it. Zimmerman briefly pursued Martin, but lost sight of him quickly. It was while he was returning to his vehicle that he was "jumped" by Martin. At this point, Martin becomes the aggressor. If this is "in fact" how it happened, then Zimmerman is within his rights to use deadly force to defend himself. You don't know exactly what happened. I don't know exactly what happened. Let's wait for more evidence to be released at trial before we condemn this man, unlike what most of the country has already done.
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#74 Jul 04 2013 at 10:15 AM Rating: Good
******
20,020 posts
Kastigir wrote:
Quote:
Zimmerman CHASED Martin with a loaded weapon. You keep trying to downplay his actions by saying "walking" and "sitting". If Martin ran away, then there is no way that Zimmerman could have caught him without running after Martin. I'm being as unbiased as I can, but you are obviously bigoted towards Zimmerman.

Quote:
No. He chased him.

Quote:
Once again. He did not "follow" him. He chased him. If he wanted to follow him to ensure that he didn't "get away", then he would have stayed in his car and followed him via car.

People here say you're stupid, but I always like to give the benefit of the doubt. It seems that no matter how many times it's been mentioned, you keep missing it. Zimmerman briefly pursued Martin, but lost sight of him quickly. It was while he was returning to his vehicle that he was "jumped" by Martin. At this point, Martin becomes the aggressor. If this is "in fact" how it happened, then Zimmerman is within his rights to use deadly force to defend himself. You don't know exactly what happened. I don't know exactly what happened. Let's wait for more evidence to be released at trial before we condemn this man, unlike what most of the country has already done.


It's not as easy as "if he was returning to his truck, he's free." The jury is going to have to decide whether or not a pursuit of Martin warrants labeling him the aggressor, and whether or not simply ceasing to pursue Martin for that moment is sufficient to clear him with regards to the law.

The law isn't contingent on Zimmerman actively acting as an aggressor, it's contingent on him creating an atmosphere in which he could naturally be perceived as an aggressor.

This is with regards to the manslaughter charge, though. I can't decide if I think that would be meaningful for the murder charge, since that hangs more firmly on the idea of Zimmerman profiling and following Martin in the first place, with the intent of confronting him. I'm inclined to say it won't, but I honestly can't decide.

Either way, Zimmerman is going to have a tough time proving he was actually returning to his truck. He's already created doubt in his own testimony, and that's pretty much all he has.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#75 Jul 04 2013 at 12:06 PM Rating: Good
******
27,272 posts
I'd be surprised if he doesn't get convicted. public opinion isn't on his side, he's not exactly all that smart and he's had that money laundering problem right after it happened as well.

The dispatcher call won't do him any good either.
____________________________
Theophany wrote:
YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU.
someproteinguy wrote:
Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist.
Astarin wrote:
One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.
#76 Jul 04 2013 at 2:23 PM Rating: Decent
*
229 posts
Public opinion should have no place in a court of law.

...continue...
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 49 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (49)