Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

[Old Pio]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Something to consider, given that we don't actually know what happened. If Zimmerman got out of his car, approached Martin and drew his gun, would Martin not have a pretty legit self-defense case for punching Zimmerman in the nose? And is there evidence that he did more than hit Zimmerman once?

I'm not saying this is what happened, because I obviously don't know what happened, but for those who feel that the fact that Zimmerman was injured proves he did nothing wrong, what if the reason he was injured is because he drew a gun on someone who wasn't going to be bullied? And I really do think it's important to remember that there is no one who can actually speak up for Martin.

That said, it's hard to imagine convicting Zimmerman, at least based on what evidence has been released to the media. There seems to be plenty of room for reasonable doubt.

I think an application of Occam's Razor here would suggest that a 17-year old attacking an older man who had drawn down on him would be possible but not probable. And extremely foolhardy. As to Zimmerman's injuries, one punch is not likely to have caused all of them. Plus, there are evidently witnesses who describe Martin as going all MMA on Zimmerman, which suggests multiple blows. No?

Zimmerman sustained injuries consistent with being beaten. Martin did not. While it's not possible to categorically rule out Zimmerman being very aggressive, pulling his pistol and threatening the kid, it just doesn't seem likely. Martin's girl friend suggested he beat feet and get out of there. He should have taken that advice. Zimmerman had the right to be there, he was a resident and part of the neighborhood watch. Martin was a guest (technically of his father's girl friend) and had no real status there. That's not to excuse any of your scenarios, just to point out Martin owed an explanation of what he was doing if asked. As I said simply saying "I'm staying with Ms Jones in 325 would have done it.

So many chances to avoid this outcome. As I've said repeatedly, I'm not comfortable with armed neighborhood watch types under any circumstances. That's what cops are for. As I've also said repeatedly my principal concern here is the hugely unfair, biased coverage of this event, starting with the president, through the networks and other MSM down to "the reverands" and other race pimps. Trying to put some of that in balance is not an effort to exonerate Zimmerman. I think both of them acted stupidly. Only one was armed.

 

[Foxton]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Something to consider, given that we don't actually know what happened. If Zimmerman got out of his car, approached Martin and drew his gun, would Martin not have a pretty legit self-defense case for punching Zimmerman in the nose? And is there evidence that he did more than hit Zimmerman once?

I'm not saying this is what happened, because I obviously don't know what happened, but for those who feel that the fact that Zimmerman was injured proves he did nothing wrong, what if the reason he was injured is because he drew a gun on someone who wasn't going to be bullied? And I really do think it's important to remember that there is no one who can actually speak up for Martin.

That said, it's hard to imagine convicting Zimmerman, at least based on what evidence has been released to the media. There seems to be plenty of room for reasonable doubt.

Duper just shut up, Zimmerman is the victim here, and nothing will ever change that. Old Pio makes 100% sense and is 100% correct about everything he'll ever say on this matter.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Duper just shut up, Zimmerman is the victim here, and nothing will ever change that. Old Pio makes 100% sense and is 100% correct about everything he'll ever say on this matter.

Thanks mom

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I'm not saying this is what happened, because I obviously don't know what happened, but for those who feel that the fact that Zimmerman was injured proves he did nothing wrong, what if the reason he was injured is because he drew a gun on someone who wasn't going to be bullied? And I really do think it's important to remember that there is no one who can actually speak up for Martin.
.

I'm not real sure that anyone is saying that.

What did happen though was that the national media looked at this and assumed that it was a racist hate crime before all of the facts were out. Minority religious types did their usual pandering. Senators and other famous types made fools of themselves wearing hoodies in solidarity. T-shirts were printed.

The court of public opinion was tilted severely against Zimmerman because a lot of people want the story to be about racism and hate so they can point at it and say "SEE, these poor teenagers are being unfairly persecuted!"

There are obviously plenty of real examples of profiling and hate, but this simply may not be one of those. Time will tell and many of the same people who were (figuratively) wearing hoodies on this, would be the first to wail about innocent until proven guilty.

I have no idea what happened that night, but I'm willing to wait it out and see how the court handles it - not that a court is gauranteed to get it right.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

If there was any race issue here it probably stemmed from the appearance that Zimmerman was just let go after he was known to be the shooter...and at that point it looked like police negligence due to race. And there is precidence for for police negligence due to race.

Although I'm sure comments were made about race, I don't see all the evidence that the media made this into a total race circus from the fact that a 'white guy killed a black'. Black people do get shot by whites periodically (and vice versa)...and it never become national news.

The vast amount of 'outrage' was sparked more that it was a foregone conclusion that one guy shot another, the victim looked to be an innocent and no arrest was made. In that case, folks are going to ask why.

 

[pirate]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

When the president says the victim looks like he could be his son he is putting the color of the victim firmly into play.

I have to disagree that race wasn't a huge factor in the reporting and the side-taking early on.

We had black people screaming for justice, hispanics saying they weren't racist and whites saying "since when is there a category called white hispanic, now we're to blame if a hispanic guy kills a black guy too?"

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I have to disagree that race wasn't a huge factor in the reporting and the side-taking early on.

Ya I guess so. The reason it blew up in the media was that it didn't move towards prosecution even though there was a known shooter.

 

[JF_Gophers]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I think the key piece of evidence is if they have tape of Law Enforcement (911, etc) telling him to not pursue/follow the kid. He does so anyways and ends up killing him.

That makes the entire incident avoidable, and makes him guilty of homicide.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I think the key piece of evidence is if they have tape of Law Enforcement (911, etc) telling him to not pursue/follow the kid. He does so anyways and ends up killing him.

That makes the entire incident avoidable, and makes him guilty of homicide.

I do agree and think they do have that evidence. Problem is that stand your ground may change the legal outcome...as even though the situation was as a result of Zimmerman actions, at some point he felt threatened.

 

[duper]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I think an application of Occam's Razor here would suggest that a 17-year old attacking an older man who had drawn down on him would be possible but not probable. And extremely foolhardy. As to Zimmerman's injuries, one punch is not likely to have caused all of them. Plus, there are evidently witnesses who describe Martin as going all MMA on Zimmerman, which suggests multiple blows. No?

Zimmerman sustained injuries consistent with being beaten. Martin did not. While it's not possible to categorically rule out Zimmerman being very aggressive, pulling his pistol and threatening the kid, it just doesn't seem likely. Martin's girl friend suggested he beat feet and get out of there. He should have taken that advice. Zimmerman had the right to be there, he was a resident and part of the neighborhood watch. Martin was a guest (technically of his father's girl friend) and had no real status there. That's not to excuse any of your scenarios, just to point out Martin owed an explanation of what he was doing if asked. As I said simply saying "I'm staying with Ms Jones in 325 would have done it.

So many chances to avoid this outcome. As I've said repeatedly, I'm not comfortable with armed neighborhood watch types under any circumstances. That's what cops are for. As I've also said repeatedly my principal concern here is the hugely unfair, biased coverage of this event, starting with the president, through the networks and other MSM down to "the reverands" and other race pimps. Trying to put some of that in balance is not an effort to exonerate Zimmerman. I think both of them acted stupidly. Only one was armed.

I think part of how someone responds might have a lot to do with HOW the question is asked. To me, the correct answer to "What are you doing here" is eith F you or None of your business. Now, if he had the good sense to ask it more like "do you live in this development" or something that makes it clear that he is not just being a jerk but is actually trying to serve a function, then the correct answer might be "I'm staying with a friend who lives here." And that isn't semantics, it's basic respect and common courtesy.

I do think you may be forgetting what being 17 is like. To me, the idea of getting belligerent in response to feeling that someone is being a jerk to you, even though it's stupid and dangerous, is VERY like something a 17-year-old would do, and possibly even quite likely.

So again, if Zimmerman pulled a gun, would Martin be within his rights to respond by punching Zimmerman once? Or five times? Or ten? Ten times might even look like "going all MMA on him." It might very well knock him down and cut the back of his head. It would quite likely give him a broken nose and a couple of black eyes. And, I think, would be well warranted.

However er, of course, Martin isn't on trial, so we don't need to create reasonable doubt for him. And I do realize that what this is is righteous indignation over the knee-jerk reaction that this was a purely racial thing. I guess my response to that is let it go. We don't know what happened. If I were to guess, I would say it's EXTREMELY likely that Zimmerman is a complete *******. I would also say it's extremely likely that Martin was an *******.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I think the key piece of evidence is if they have tape of Law Enforcement (911, etc) telling him to not pursue/follow the kid. He does so anyways and ends up killing him.

That makes the entire incident avoidable, and makes him guilty of homicide.

But they really didn't tell him not to. The wording from the 911 operator was real squishy, something like, "we'd rather you not do that" or something. I don't think that's strong enough to say the police directly told him not to continue on. Of course he should have followed the advice and nothing more would have happened, but I don't see that as being so key.

Other tidbits that came out. Trayvon had marijuana in his system. And several co-workers/acquaintances said that Zimmerman was racist, though the article I read didn't say much about what he did that made these folks say that about him.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I think part of how someone responds might have a lot to do with HOW the question is asked. To me, the correct answer to "What are you doing here" is eith F you or None of your business. Now, if he had the good sense to ask it more like "do you live in this development" or something that makes it clear that he is not just being a jerk but is actually trying to serve a function, then the correct answer might be "I'm staying with a friend who lives here." And that isn't semantics, it's basic respect and common courtesy.

I do think you may be forgetting what being 17 is like. To me, the idea of getting belligerent in response to feeling that someone is being a jerk to you, even though it's stupid and dangerous, is VERY like something a 17-year-old would do, and possibly even quite likely.

So again, if Zimmerman pulled a gun, would Martin be within his rights to respond by punching Zimmerman once? Or five times? Or ten? Ten times might even look like "going all MMA on him." It might very well knock him down and cut the back of his head. It would quite likely give him a broken nose and a couple of black eyes. And, I think, would be well warranted.

However er, of course, Martin isn't on trial, so we don't need to create reasonable doubt for him. And I do realize that what this is is righteous indignation over the knee-jerk reaction that this was a purely racial thing. I guess my response to that is let it go. We don't know what happened. If I were to guess, I would say it's EXTREMELY likely that Zimmerman is a complete *******. I would also say it's extremely likely that Martin was an *******.

Different 17 year olds react differently. If it was me when I was 17, and I thought an older man was following me in a threatening manner, the last thing I'd think about would be confronting him, especially if I wasn't that far from home. I'd be high-tailing it home as quick as my legs could go. But, there are 17-year olds that would be more aggressive in responding to someone following them. Probably some blame both ways that a confrontation happened.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I think the key piece of evidence is if they have tape of Law Enforcement (911, etc) telling him to not pursue/follow the kid. He does so anyways and ends up killing him.

That makes the entire incident avoidable, and makes him guilty of homicide.

That's an awfully huge leap you're making there.

I would guess that nearly every incident that ends in a death is "avoidable."

Having it be avoidable doesn't automatically make it murder.

 

[JF_Gophers]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

That's an awfully huge leap you're making there.

I would guess that nearly every incident that ends in a death is "avoidable."

Having it be avoidable doesn't automatically make it murder.

In the case of homicides, of course they are avoidable. The shooter doesn't shoot the shootee and its been avoided. However failing that, if you are told not to do something and then do it, you should be 100% responsible for any and all outcomes, regardless of what they are. If Zimmerman was the one who was shot, i'd say he deserved it, and in that case "stand your ground" had worked as intended.

It's stand your ground, not chase after someone and shoot them. Which is in essense what happened. Even if the kid assaulted him, it was his own fault for being there after being told not to.

Of course if he wasn't told directly to not follow the kid, then it becomes murky once again.

ETA: For the record, it sounds like the kid was pretty useless as well, so I am in no way defending him or saying he's a good person. He was only there because he had been suspended from school (for a 3rd time i think) for 10 days. Then there is the trace amounts of drugs found in his body.

 

[Slap Shot]

You know, if you'd been careful enough to use quotation marks around "privileged" in your description of Duke LAX players, we wouldn't have had this problem. Why don't you invest in a copy of Strunk and White, I think it might help. And I'll roll up my Tom Symkowski mats.

Fair enough.

Here's a thought on the whole, "Could be my son" kerfuffle. Why must we as a society always assume the lowest common denominator when analyzing what a politician says? Is it not possible that Obama meant he could relate to how Martin's parents felt when losing a child and not an omg moment? Every time I read a story in the Nice Planet thread about a child being abused my heart aches almost as if the child were my own. Why can't we on occasion give our leaders the benefit of the doubt in manners such as these and let the country collectively continue in civil discourse? Is that comment really going to make or break ANYONES vote? Probably not so let's move past it.

(btw that's not aimed art you specifically op)

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

In the case of homicides, of course they are avoidable. The shooter doesn't shoot the shootee and its been avoided. However failing that, if you are told not to do something and then do it, you should be 100% responsible for any and all outcomes, regardless of what they are. If Zimmerman was the one who was shot, i'd say he deserved it, and in that case "stand your ground" had worked as intended.

If you are told not to drink heavily on a date, is getting raped by your date your "100% responsibility?" Or are you guilty of bad judgement while the rapist is guilty of rape?

It's stand your ground, not chase after someone and shoot them. Which is in essense what happened. Even if the kid assaulted him, it was his own fault for being there after being told not to.

I can't follow that logic at all and I doubt that the courts would either. Even if you are told not to go somewhere (a bad neighborhood for example) it still doesn't excuse anyone else from committing a crime and you reacting to that crime. You don't forfeit your right to self-defense simply because you were warned off and ignored it or were somewhere that you should have known better than being.

If I go to a bad neighborhood, one that I know I shouldn't go to, and get murdered, they're still gonna look for and prosecute the murderer. Even if a cop told me before that to not go there. Even if I'm 100% guilty of bad judgement.

Even if Zimmerman bears some culpability for the incident happening, it doesn't automatically make him guilty of murder. Again, if someone is on top of you and slamming your head into the ground, you are in mortal danger and get to defend yourself.

ETA: For the record, it sounds like the kid was pretty useless as well, so I am in no way defending him or saying he's a good person. He was only there because he had been suspended from school (for a 3rd time i think) for 10 days. Then there is the trace amounts of drugs found in his body.

As far as the kid goes, him being a punk or high or truant wouldn't make it okay for him to be murdered either.

It will come down to what can be proven. Did the kid jump him or did Zimmerman chase him down and shoot him in cold blood? I think that the prosecution has a tough road unless more evidence comes to light.

 

[JF_Gophers]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

So as long as I claim it was bad judgement on my part there should be no punishment for anything I do. Got it.

 

[joecct]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

So as long as I claim it was bad judgement on my part there should be no punishment for anything I do. Got it.

Recriminations, yes. Punishment, not necessarily.

If you pick the wrong spouse, are you punished for the selection?

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

So as long as I claim it was bad judgement on my part there should be no punishment for anything I do. Got it.

If you break a law, there should be punishment. The key is whether Zimmerman broke the law.

You thinking it was his fault isn't going to be introduced as evidence.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

If there was any race issue here it probably stemmed from the appearance that Zimmerman was just let go after he was known to be the shooter...and at that point it looked like police negligence due to race. And there is precidence for for police negligence due to race.

Although I'm sure comments were made about race, I don't see all the evidence that the media made this into a total race circus from the fact that a 'white guy killed a black'. Black people do get shot by whites periodically (and vice versa)...and it never become national news.

The vast amount of 'outrage' was sparked more that it was a foregone conclusion that one guy shot another, the victim looked to be an innocent and no arrest was made. In that case, folks are going to ask why.

"I don't see all the evidence. . ." Were you out of the country? In a coma?