Results 277 to 288 of 432
Thread: George Zimmerman Trial
-
07-14-2013, 12:26 AM #277
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
Agree on everything 100%. I wasn't saying GZ should've been convicted because of the long and sad history of racial injustice in America. No innocent person should go to jail for that. I was really solely saying that the communities of color in the nation are probably feeling a special kind of pain right now. (Also agree the evidence wasn't quite there. Curious and circumstantial, but not damning.)
My Ravens Blog: Brittany Rants About Football
Ravens-Redskins: Dissecting the Final Drive
"The days are long. But the years are short." - John Harbaugh
-
07-14-2013, 12:27 AM #278
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
Master of 'Gifs for dummies'
"The world called for wetwork, and we answered. No greater good. No just cause." - Kazuhira Miller
-
07-14-2013, 12:27 AM #279Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Houston, TX Y'all
- Posts
- 34,414
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
In all 50 states, you don't have to wait until your skull is actually bashed to employ deadly force.
You only have to fear your skull is *about* to be bashed.
Same standard applies to police officers.
Once his head hit once off the pavement, that's all he needed under the letter of the law since it shows intent. The "scratches" are irrelevant.
-
07-14-2013, 12:29 AM #280
-
07-14-2013, 12:30 AM #281Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 4,553
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
No. And that is my point. It is a fact, not conjecture, that Martin was within yards of where he turned the corner 4 minutes after he turned the corner.
Now we can use conjecture as to why he waited around. He was suddenly paralyzed with fear, for example. He tripped and fell hit his head and blacked out for a few minutes. But I don't see how anything is more plausible than, he wanted a confrontation.
If you are being followed and then turn the corner and decide to stop and wait for the follower, are you not most likely looking for a confrontation? And again, I am not talking fistfight, but simply a 'confrontation,' including verbal, including possibly amicable and short-lived confrontation until everyone goes their way.
-
-
07-14-2013, 12:31 AM #283
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
Master of 'Gifs for dummies'
"The world called for wetwork, and we answered. No greater good. No just cause." - Kazuhira Miller
-
07-14-2013, 12:31 AM #284
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
Agree. But the peculiarity of it is that if your skull is bashed or about to be bashed as the result of situation that you initiated, self-defense goes out the window. (I already said earlier that I/we don't know who started the physicality of the encounter. The incident in totality, though, was started by GZ when he started trailing.)
Well, isn't that a neat little story of how it all transpired! Really, though, no one knows who was on top or who was screaming. To answer your hypothetical, of course I wouldn't take that beating, but your question assumes/implies that was how it happened that night, which is probably a mistake to do since no one truly knows.My Ravens Blog: Brittany Rants About Football
Ravens-Redskins: Dissecting the Final Drive
"The days are long. But the years are short." - John Harbaugh
-
-
07-14-2013, 12:35 AM #286
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
Master of 'Gifs for dummies'
"The world called for wetwork, and we answered. No greater good. No just cause." - Kazuhira Miller
-
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.
-
07-14-2013, 12:40 AM #288Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Houston, TX Y'all
- Posts
- 34,414
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
No, it doesn't.
Lets assume GZ "initiated" this (for the record, I don't believe he did). He still had a legal right to (1) be there, (2) follow Trayvon and (3) call the cops. None of those actions are illegal or negate a self defense claim.
Speaking from an evidentiary standpoint, there's nothing to convict upon.
Bookmarks