Results 49 to 60 of 432
Thread: George Zimmerman Trial
-
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
? his motivation to following him is that he thought he was up to no good. again, his 911 call supports that his reason was "he was acting suspicious", which was walking home in the rain and looking around by his own definition.
Chasing? Where is it in the evidence presented thus far that he was chasing Martin?
Now he's running? Ok, where in the evidence is he now running?
For someone who earlier claimed to be basing their opinion on the facts in the case, you're certainly doing a TON of assuming here.
as a 40 year old man being followed by a 70 year old on a golf cart id assume you can understand the difference than being followed by a 28 year old in a car and eventually on foot when youre 17.-JAB
-
07-02-2013, 10:52 AM #50Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Houston, TX Y'all
- Posts
- 34,414
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
Zimmerman never said / knew that Martin was walking home so that can't be the basis for your reasoning of what Martin or did not do. Well, it can, but it's the height of MMQBing.
Zimmerman's job (any Neighborhood Watch volunteers job) is to keep an eye on people he does not recognize who walk through the neighborhood.
You're still assuming any motivation outside of that.
He's running = Trayvon running. You're assuming Zimmerman was running as well. And how do you "hear" someone run? I don't know how you can listen to that call and tell if someone is running, or simply walking at a fast pace. Again, you're making an assumption.
And the 911 operator doesn't tell Zimmerman to stop. The 911 operator says "OK, we don't need you to do that". Big difference. Follow behind a drunk driver and call 911, they will give you the same cautionary warning but won't really care if you continue to do so.
What exactly should I be assuming? That's a fallacious statement and one that assumes that Zimmerman had a clue how old Trayon was. If you look at Trayvon's more recent photos, he appears to me as being much older than 17.
-
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
As the lead investigator just said on the stand. Following someone is not a crime, confronting someone and asking them what they're doing her is not a crime.
I am still curios though how it is you think Zimmerman confronted Martin got on top of him first (which no one has testified to) and Martin was then able to get the best of a guy 10 years old and 40lbs heavier.
-
07-02-2013, 11:06 AM #52Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Posts
- 4,464
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
I don't have the time to follow the details closely. But 2 opinions I have about courtroom testimony in general and how juries relate it to findings of "fact":
> They give a lot of deference to prosecutors and police, because they are the "good guys". Mostly, yes, but not always. Police are just like any other party in a trial: They will spin their testimony to meet their case.
> Eye witness testimony is notoriously suspect with regards to establishing fact.
Not sure what this means in terms of guilt or innocence in terms of Zimmerman. Guess it just means my faith in the courtroom justice system is relatively low.Last edited by JohnBKistler; 07-02-2013 at 11:12 AM.
-
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
theres nothing suspicious about somebody walking down the street. his reasoning was defined by him. because "he was walking in the rain and looking around". his words, not mine. Why Zimmerman thought it was, i havent really touched on, just the fact that he did.
He's running = Trayvon running. You're assuming Zimmerman was running as well. And how do you "hear" someone run? I don't know how you can listen to that call and tell if someone is running, or simply walking at a fast pace. Again, you're making an assumption.
And the 911 operator doesn't tell Zimmerman to stop. The 911 operator says "OK, we don't need you to do that". Big difference. Follow behind a drunk driver and call 911, they will give you the same cautionary warning but won't really care if you continue to do so.
What exactly should I be assuming? That's a fallacious statement and one that assumes that Zimmerman had a clue how old Trayon was. If you look at Trayvon's more recent photos, he appears to me as being much older than 17.
Im not saying Zimmerman had a bad agenda in any of this. I truly think he thought he was doing the right thing. I just think he may have omitted some of what happened, not unlike some of the other discrepancies in his story.
I said the first for physical contact. meaning i think he grabbed him or tried to stop him from getting away or apprehend for when the cops got there. grabbed his arm or shirt and then Martin reacted by punching him and getting on top. He says he just showed up and asked him what he was doing before punching him. I think it could have just as easily been Zimmerman to ask him the same and try to grab him. theres no testimony or proof of either outside zimmerman's. you take it for face value, i feel there could be a difference.
if he doesnt go to jail im not going to feel like justice lost. if he does id probably feel worse about it even though i think he might be. there simply isnt enough to warrant a life sentence on what we know. which is why i take offense to saying "thank god youre not on the jury". i may think theres more to the story, but from the facts there is no "beyond a reasonable doubt". clearly ive been agreeing theres more than one way this went down since the beginning. thats doubt. if i was on the jury i wouldnt convict him either. on a message board, sure ill express my opinion.Last edited by JAB1985; 07-02-2013 at 12:38 PM.
-JAB
-
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
The thing about this is a guy standing around in the rain who appears to be looking in houses (who is actually on his phone (blue tooth I believe)) and I don't recognize him as living there would seem a little weir or suspicious.
Okay, I'm not trying to be argumentative, jsut trying to understand where you're coming from. Did you think Mora's testimony was that she saw him on top before the shot?
The main reason I don't think he should go to jail is it's clear if he didn't put a stop to the injuries that were being inflicted he was at the very least going to be seriously, seriously injured.
-
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
which is why im fine with him calling the police even though i personally wouldnt have. difference of opinion. i think i stated, it was odd to call (my opinion) but theres nothing wrong with it (fact).
Okay, I'm not trying to be argumentative, jsut trying to understand where you're coming from. Did you think Mora's testimony was that she saw him on top before the shot?
The main reason I don't think he should go to jail is it's clear if he didn't put a stop to the injuries that were being inflicted he was at the very least going to be seriously, seriously injured.
See above as well. even though im saying i think it may have went down differently, doesnt mean i think theres enough to convict him. maybe thats getting lost in all of this, but ive stated since the beginning hes not going to be convicted and theres more than one way this could have went down, which is doubt.Last edited by JAB1985; 07-02-2013 at 12:58 PM.
-JAB
-
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
Okay... so why were we arguing about Mora's testimony and Good being the only one that saw the acutal fight?
To my knowledge, I think this is correct. However that could change from state to state.
a) There were multiple scratches, bruises, cuts and a broken nose (which if you've ever had one you know you are not coherent for an good 10 -15 seconds after, at least) and b) the injuries stopped cause the gun shot, if he did not stop them it's logical to assume they would have gotten worse and there would have been more of them.
Meh. Someone who couldn't tell if they were men or women fighting orginally, I'm going to take anything she states as a certainty with a grain of salt
There is an actual law that says if you're getting you're ass beat by a smaller guy it's not considered deadly force?
-
07-02-2013, 01:20 PM #57Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 4,553
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
The law does say that, but only if the deadly force is the only reasonable way you can avoid great bodily harm.
No matter who starts the fight, you cannot, just because you are losing the fight, pull out a gun and shoot someone if you have the ability to run away instead.
And just because you start a fight/confrontation, even with a punch (in a bar for example), does not mean you have tacitly signed onto a fight-to-the-death in the instance where the other guy has you trapped/pinned/disabled to the point you cannot flee, is not letting up, and gives you reason to fear death or great bodily harm.
The entire issue is whether people believe Zimmerman was unable to flee and was reasonable in fearing great bodily harm. That is the entire issue. And this would be the issue with a manslaughter charge as well as the massive 'overcharge' of 2nd degree murder. With the 2nd degree murder charge the prosecutor also has to prove 'malice.'
All the other testimony about who followed whom, who attacked whom, who is/was a racist, who profiled whom is only relevant insofar as it helps the jury determine the credibility of the other testimony that relates to the main issue (did Zimmerman lawfully defend himself according to the law) and insofar as it indicates 'malice.'
And thus far there is a huge lack of any real evidence (of stalking, racism, aggression, etc.) that indicates Zimmerman's version of what occurred is false beyond a reasonable doubt or that there was any 'malice.'
Like I said, he should be found not guilty by a fair jury, especially considering the overcharge (manslaughter would be a closer but still not very close call, imo).
But....the law, as written, often takes a backseat to 'social justice' these days. It happens often in the court of public opinion, but also in actual criminal and civil courts. Juries ignore the law and rule on what 'feels right.' It is unfortunate, but it is 21st century Western culture. And for that reason, I think there is a real (but still below 50%) chance that he is found guilty. In this day and age, a juror who votes for acquittal subjects themselves to ridicule and charges of racism, etc., no matter how unfounded or despicable these charges are. A lot of people/jurors would bow to that pressure and get with the 'social justice' program and just convict.Last edited by Haloti92; 07-02-2013 at 01:28 PM.
-
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
not really sure. i think it was more on who was screaming. which Good even said he wouldnt say it was Zimmerman but logic makes him think it was. I said it could have been he pulled out his gun to which Martin screamed for help at that point. I also said it doesnt even matter to me the actual fight.
a) There were multiple scratches, bruises, cuts and a broken nose (which if you've ever had one you know you are not coherent for an good 10 -15 seconds after, at least) and b) the injuries stopped cause the gun shot, if he did not stop them it's logical to assume they would have gotten worse and there would have been more of them.
Meh. Someone who couldn't tell if they were men or women fighting orginally, I'm going to take anything she states as a certainty with a grain of salt
There is an actual law that says if you're getting you're ass beat by a smaller guy it's not considered deadly force?-JAB
-
07-02-2013, 01:35 PM #59Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Houston, TX Y'all
- Posts
- 34,414
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
So by your logic, someone has to be on the verge of incoherence to employ deadly force? By then it's too late. It's the same reasoning that allows deadly force if you're ever sprayed with pepper spray. The act may not be deadly in of itself, but the resulting incapacitation will put you in fear of your life.
If someone gets the advantage and is on top "ground and pound style", yeah, my first thought will be to get out of it, but once my head bounces off the concrete once or twice, that's the game changer. It can be argued that Trayvon may not have meant to bounce GZ's head off the ground, but it did happen, thus deadly force is justified.
-
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
Im saying ive had worse cuts by going through a briar patch but yet thats being thrown about as proof he was about to die. he was coherent enough to try and get off the pavement and succeed in doing so by his admission. It wasnt until Martin apparently went for the gun that he felt he needed to shoot him, which is open for interpretation as well based on his video, he says he felt him near it not necessarily going for it. If true though, I dont have much issue with that really. you dont use it in that case, hes likely going to use it on you.
-JAB
Bookmarks