On March 23 2012 06:53 Kickboxer wrote: It's next to impossible to kill a person with your bare hands if you're not absolutely intent on doing so - short of them falling and hitting their head against concrete or some other solid object.
The falling and headcracking actually happens quite often but if Zimmerman was already on the ground it's out of the equation.
If you're very strong and repeatedly punch them in the back of the head it's doable but extremely unlikely. You literally need to either keep beating on them for very, very long periods of time after they are already unconscious or hold a well executed choke for several minutes.
A simple fist fight is absolutely not a "lethal threat". That's why the idiotic statement "guns don't kill people etc..." is so idiotic.
Kids get into relatively brutal fistfights all the time, and martial artists beat the living fuck out of each other and hardly anyone is ever seriously injured. If you are unarmed, you are absolutely not a lethal threat and one should never, ever be able to fire at an unarmed person and get away with it.
You may be right, but the law doesn't say that he has to actually be in danger of losing his life to sue self-defense, Zimmerman only has to reasonably believe that he is in mortal danger OR in danger of great bodily harm (and I would call getting the crap beat out of you great bodily harm becasue it can and does send people to the hospital). So, if Martin did in fact attack Zimmerman first, it doesn't really matter tat it is difficult to kill someone with your bare hands.
Are you saying that if I have a gun and 3 guys come up and rob me by beating me up, I shouldn't legally be allowed to shoot them? Even though they can put me in the hospital? What about just 1 guy?
On March 23 2012 06:53 Kickboxer wrote: It's next to impossible to kill a person with your bare hands if you're not absolutely intent on doing so - short of them falling and hitting their head against concrete or some other solid object.
The falling and headcracking actually happens quite often but if Zimmerman was already on the ground it's out of the equation.
If you're very strong and repeatedly punch them in the back of the head it's doable but extremely unlikely. You literally need to either keep beating on them for very, very long periods of time after they are already unconscious or hold a well executed choke for several minutes.
A simple fist fight is absolutely not a "lethal threat". That's why the idiotic statement "guns don't kill people etc..." is so idiotic.
Kids get into relatively brutal fistfights all the time, and martial artists beat the living fuck out of each other and hardly anyone is ever seriously injured. If you are unarmed, you are absolutely not a lethal threat and one should never, ever be able to fire at an unarmed person and get away with it.
and then you have cases with in a bar fight a guy throws one punch hits the other in the jaw snapping his neck and him dying before hitting the ground, getting the other guy 9 years in jail for manslaughter
daPhREak - I get where you are coming from here. There is definitely a lot more information that needs to come out before a person can make a completely enlightened opinion. Jumping the gun happens, so no reason to get too annoyed at people that make up their minds beforehand.
I personally feel like the Zimmerman initiated the confrontation by getting out of his car, and escalated it by bringing his weapon with him. That feels to me like it should disqualify him from the SYG, but a lot of circumstances could change that of course.
Getting unbiased information about this case is difficult though. A few things people need to keep in mind though:
Martin was 6'3. From his pictures I had envisioned him as someone around the size of my younger brother, but he was not a tiny person, just lanky it seems. His ability to defend himself shouldn't be overlooked. Having weight on someone doesn't instantly make the fight over, so keep that in mind.
Also, keep in mind that no one has said if he had drawn his weapon before he used it or not. Seems many people are jumping to the conclusion that he ran after the kid with his gun drawn. There is no evidence of this that I have heard.
Another problem I have is something someone else brought up as well. How did Zimmerman catch him? Was he cornered? I can't see an overweight 28 year old catching up with a 17 year old football player that is built like many of the track runners I know. Has anyone seen where the final confrontation took place? It would seem it would have to have been near the street, since Zimmerman says that he stepped out of his car to check the street name he was on and was attacked from behind then. (although this sounds interesting to me as well, since there would be no reason in my mind why he would have to leave his car for that, nor does it sound normal for someone that does regular neighborhood watch in a gated community to not know where he is)
When it comes to Zimmerman himself, I think people are jumping the gun on the racism thing. I don't hear the coon comment, and describing a black male as a black male is definitely not racist. It sounds more like he was just an overzealous neighborhood watch guy. He put himself in a bad situation most likely just trying to do the right thing. Bad things can happen from good intentions too. Also, the operator didn't demand, nor actively seek to stop Zimmerman from pursuing Martin. He simply said 'you don't need to do that'. That is not a stand down, direct command.
The eyewitness accounts vary, but I haven't heard any that state they saw the start of the confrontation, only the conclusion. If someone had seen what initiated the fight, we would have a better understanding as well but it doesn't seem that is going to happen.
On March 23 2012 06:48 Playguuu wrote: He say's "fucking coons" during the first call. Not only is this guy racist he claims self defense when he has a gun and the other guy doesn't. He should be locked up no question.
You can still claim to have acted in self defense even if you have a gun, I dont know why you and some other people seem to think that you cant.
Saying racist things isnt a crime.
Not after you follow the guy, the law doesn't apply (or shouldn't according to the lawmaker). I didn't say saying racist things was a crime. I just said he had a gun and the other guy didn't. He went after him when he had no business doing so, especially after the dispatcher told him not to. Not a crime, but everything isn't black and white.
While some people are claiming that it was Zimmerman who was crying for help, there are some witnesses who claim it was Martin's voice. And the father went on Anderson Cooper 360 where he says he is positive it is his son on the tapes.
Interview with the Father on AC360:
3:45 "I'm sure that that's his voice. I'm positive that's his voice"
Interviews with witnesses who claim the crying for help was from a child and stopped immediately after the gunshot, and came outside to see Zimmerman straddled on top of the deceased Martin. Weshtv interview:
AC 360 interview:
The reporter in the wesh interview reported "[The Martin family attorney says] if the Sanford police department continues to say that one of the witness's statements were inconsistent, he will assist in filing a complaint against the department involving witness tampering, obstruction of justices, and witness intimidation"
Inconsistencies have abounded everywhere in the various reports of this emotionally charged story, but such an accusatory complaint against the department is no small charge. Unclear where this might go still, but it's interesting nonetheless.
Interestingly this witness never saw who was shouting for help but draws some pretty strong conclusions based on absolutely nothing.
She says she heard a "child" "crying", Trayvon was an almost fully grown young man. It is unlikely someone so far into puberty sounded like a child. She says she knows for certain it was Trayvon "crying" because the shouts for help stopped after the shooting and "if it was Zimmermann that was crying, Zimmermann would have continued crying after the shot went off". This is a bizarre conclusion. If Zimmermann was the one shouting for help why would he continue shouting for help after he used his pistol? On the flip side, if Trayvon was "crying" why wouldn't he continue crying until he lost conciousness?
This "witness" is making far too specific claims based on nothing. She is basically writing her own fictional account of what happened, loosely based around media accounts and what she heard but did not see.
Also interesting that Trayvon's father is now claiming it is his son's voice after initially telling police it was not.
You shouldn't speculate on how Trayvon's voice might sound just because he is 17. 17 isn't really full grown, and you don't know what he sounded like.
Trayvon wouldn't continue "crying" after he was shot because he didn't "lose conciousness", because he would be just dead(remember, police were there only 1 minute later and he was unresponsive). The woman said she heard crying and whining that stopped after the shot.
If Zimmerman was crying and whining, he may have stopped shouting for help afterwards, but not the crying and whining. It was an abrupt halt after the shot if you listen to the 911 call.
The killing did happen in their yard, they were likely outside pretty quickly. And they claim to have come outside and seen Zimmerman straddling Martin immediately afterwards. Seems to lean toward him being on top of Martin when he shot him. Inconclusive, but it's interesting nonetheless.
I could be wrong but when people die from a punch it's almost always because they fall and crack their skull. I've never heard of anyone dying from the actual punch.
love how all these videos have the extra pictures and everything other Trayvon looking like a saint and Zimmerman as some tv style ex-con, really makes it hard not to be biased
daPhREak - I get where you are coming from here. There is definitely a lot more information that needs to come out before a person can make a completely enlightened opinion. Jumping the gun happens, so no reason to get too annoyed at people that make up their minds beforehand.
I personally feel like the Zimmerman initiated the confrontation by getting out of his car, and escalated it by bringing his weapon with him. That feels to me like it should disqualify him from the SYG, but a lot of circumstances could change that of course.
Getting unbiased information about this case is difficult though. A few things people need to keep in mind though:
Martin was 6'3. From his pictures I had envisioned him as someone around the size of my younger brother, but he was not a tiny person, just lanky it seems. His ability to defend himself shouldn't be overlooked. Having weight on someone doesn't instantly make the fight over, so keep that in mind.
Also, keep in mind that no one has said if he had drawn his weapon before he used it or not. Seems many people are jumping to the conclusion that he ran after the kid with his gun drawn. There is no evidence of this that I have heard.
Another problem I have is something someone else brought up as well. How did Zimmerman catch him? Was he cornered? I can't see an overweight 28 year old catching up with a 17 year old football player that is built like many of the track runners I know. Has anyone seen where the final confrontation took place? It would seem it would have to have been near the street, since Zimmerman says that he stepped out of his car to check the street name he was on and was attacked from behind then. (although this sounds interesting to me as well, since there would be no reason in my mind why he would have to leave his car for that, nor does it sound normal for someone that does regular neighborhood watch in a gated community to not know where he is)
When it comes to Zimmerman himself, I think people are jumping the gun on the racism thing. I don't hear the coon comment, and describing a black male as a black male is definitely not racist. It sounds more like he was just an overzealous neighborhood watch guy. He put himself in a bad situation most likely just trying to do the right thing. Bad things can happen from good intentions too. Also, the operator didn't demand, nor actively seek to stop Zimmerman from pursuing Martin. He simply said 'you don't need to do that'. That is not a stand down, direct command.
The eyewitness accounts vary, but I haven't heard any that state they saw the start of the confrontation, only the conclusion. If someone had seen what initiated the fight, we would have a better understanding as well but it doesn't seem that is going to happen.
your thoughts seem reasonable enough to me. only thing to add is there is apparently at least one witness who says he/she saw the kid on top of zimmerman punching him and zimmerman was screaming for help. but, like people have said before, eyewitness accounts (as well as most witness testimony in general) can change. people say "i saw a gun" when they are talking to police, which turns into "i saw him reach for something in his pocket" when they are on the stand.
On March 23 2012 06:53 Kickboxer wrote: It's next to impossible to kill a person with your bare hands if you're not absolutely intent on doing so - short of them falling and hitting their head against concrete or some other solid object.
The falling and headcracking actually happens quite often but if Zimmerman was already on the ground it's out of the equation.
If you're very strong and repeatedly punch them in the back of the head it's doable but extremely unlikely. You literally need to either keep beating on them for very, very long periods of time after they are already unconscious or hold a well executed choke for several minutes.
A simple fist fight is absolutely not a "lethal threat". That's why the idiotic statement "guns don't kill people etc..." is so idiotic.
Kids get into relatively brutal fistfights all the time, and martial artists beat the living fuck out of each other and hardly anyone is ever seriously injured. If you are unarmed, you are absolutely not a lethal threat and one should never, ever be able to fire at an unarmed person and get away with it.
That is not even close to being true. It is very easy to kill someone with your fists. It is even easier to kill them with their own pistol after you have subdued them and taken it from them.
18 'killed by one-punch attacks' in Northern Ireland The PSNI has launched a new poster campaign to raise awareness of the issue.
Targeted at men aged 18-25, it highlights the risks of getting involved in an argument or fight which could lead to serious injury or death.
Dr Russell McLaughlin, clinical director for emergency care at the trust, said: "I have been treating the victims of injury for many years and unfortunately I am all too aware of the potentially fatal consequences of a single blow to the head. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-15095811
Google "one punch kill" or some variation to find many more similar stories. I wish people would stop outright lying in their quest to demonize Zimmerman.
And your assertion that nobody should ever be allowed to defend themselves against an unarmed attacker seems to me like a dystopian nightmare. Why should laws be designed to protect criminals and hamstring victims?
On March 23 2012 07:02 Kickboxer wrote: I could be wrong but when people die from a punch it's almost always because they fall and crack their skull. I've never heard of anyone dying from the actual punch.
My uncle (not related, just my dad's best friend for longer than I've been alive) got 9 years in jail from hitting a guy in a bar fight, the report said he died before he ever hit the ground. He didn't fall and hit his head just kind of crumbled over.
The human body is weird like that, I've trained boxing and now mma and have gotten hit thousands of times and never had an issue, this guy gets hit once and dies instantly.
On March 23 2012 07:04 NotSorry wrote: love how all these videos have the extra pictures and everything other Trayvon looking like a saint and Zimmerman as some tv style ex-con, really makes it hard not to be biased
you arent suggesting that putting zimmerman in an orange colored shirt, which is similar to prison garb, and having pictures of the kid when he was younger (not the strapping 6'2" (?) football player he apparently was) are intended to promote bias, are you? /s/
On March 23 2012 07:04 NotSorry wrote: love how all these videos have the extra pictures and everything other Trayvon looking like a saint and Zimmerman as some tv style ex-con, really makes it hard not to be biased
you arent suggesting that putting zimmerman in an orange colored shirt, which is similar to prison garb, and having pictures of the kid when he was younger (not the strapping 6'2" (?) football player he apparently was) are intended to promote bias, are you? /s/
Sounds so cute and innocent when you put it that way
I think much of the posts are getting pretty ridiculous. We all know that people are innocent until proven guilty. In this case the outrage is the way many of the events were handled by Zimmerman and the police.
The fact that the only person who says that Zimmerman was defending himself is Zimmerman, despite the fact that by his own admission and other audio it is absolutely clear he was the aggressor on Trayvon by pursuing him instead of retreating just to confront someone he perceived as a threat despite being told not to by authorities.
By the logic most are using the only thing that would prevent Trayvon from shooting Zimmerman is that he was too young to own a firearm. Otherwise a large stranger chased Trayvon down and confronted him with a gun so Trayvon would have been within his rights to have shot Zimmerman? Or would the police not just assumed that he was defending himself like they did Zimmerman despite witness reports to the contrary?
So somehow because based off only their own judgment they consider someone a threat they can execute someone and they only need to claim self defense? doesn't matter if they had to chase the threat down because it was trying to get away...
On March 23 2012 07:01 Playguuu wrote: Not after you follow the guy, the law doesn't apply (or shouldn't according to the lawmaker). I didn't say saying racist things was a crime. I just said he had a gun and the other guy didn't. He went after him when he had no business doing so, especially after the dispatcher told him not to. Not a crime, but everything isn't black and white.
As has been stated, the lawmaker made a mistake here. He intended for the law to do one thing, but in fact the way he wrote it leaves the law open to application to these type of events. Although what the author says matters, what the law itself self matters more because people, police officer, and DAs have access to the written records and not the mental records of what the legislator intended. Sometimes, there are loopholes and they need to be patched, it doesn't mean they done exist though simply because they were unintended.
On March 23 2012 06:48 Playguuu wrote: He say's "fucking coons" during the first call. Not only is this guy racist he claims self defense when he has a gun and the other guy doesn't. He should be locked up no question.
You can still claim to have acted in self defense even if you have a gun, I dont know why you and some other people seem to think that you cant.
Saying racist things isnt a crime.
Not after you follow the guy, the law doesn't apply (or shouldn't according to the lawmaker). I didn't say saying racist things was a crime. I just said he had a gun and the other guy didn't. He went after him when he had no business doing so, especially after the dispatcher told him not to. Not a crime, but everything isn't black and white.
Neighborhood watch are allowed to follow people. He wasnt breaking the law by firing. Assuming his girlfriend isnt lying, Zimmerman asked "what are you doing here?"
Taken at face value, your post makes it seem that all you need to do to be locked up is:
Say something racist. Claim self defense while having a gun and the other guy doesnt.
On March 23 2012 07:01 Playguuu wrote: Not after you follow the guy, the law doesn't apply (or shouldn't according to the lawmaker). I didn't say saying racist things was a crime. I just said he had a gun and the other guy didn't. He went after him when he had no business doing so, especially after the dispatcher told him not to. Not a crime, but everything isn't black and white.
As has been stated, the lawmaker made a mistake here. He intended for the law to do one thing, but in fact the way he wrote it leaves the law open to application to these type of events. Although what the author says matters, what the law itself self matters more because people, police officer, and DAs have access to the written records and not the mental records of what the legislator intended. Sometimes, there are loopholes and they need to be patched, it doesn't mean they done exist though simply because they were unintended.
It should be noted that people who opposed this law said events precisely like this would result and the supporters denied it...
On March 23 2012 07:11 GreenHorizons wrote: I think much of the posts are getting pretty ridiculous. We all know that people are innocent until proven guilty. In this case the outrage is the way many of the events were handled by Zimmerman and the police.
The fact that the only person who says that Zimmerman was defending himself is Zimmerman, despite the fact that by his own admission and other audio it is absolutely clear he was the aggressor on Trayvon by pursuing him instead of retreating just to confront someone he perceived as a threat despite being told not to by authorities.
By the logic most are using the only thing that would prevent Trayvon from shooting Zimmerman is that he was too young to own a firearm. Otherwise a large stranger chased Trayvon down and confronted him with a gun so Trayvon would have been within his rights to have shot Zimmerman? Or would the police not just assumed that he was defending himself like they did Zimmerman despite witness reports to the contrary?
So somehow because based off only their own judgment they consider someone a threat they can execute someone and they only need to claim self defense? doesn't matter if they had to chase the threat down because it was trying to get away...
The police claim that they acted 100% in accordance with the law and were in fact legally prevented from arresting him. daphreak linked the letter earlier in the thread, 3 or 4 pages or so.
There is also some (disputed) physical and witness evidence that supports Zimmerman's story.
On March 23 2012 07:02 Kickboxer wrote: I could be wrong but when people die from a punch it's almost always because they fall and crack their skull. I've never heard of anyone dying from the actual punch.
My uncle (not related, just my dad's best friend for longer than I've been alive) got 9 years in jail from hitting a guy in a bar fight, the report said he died before he ever hit the ground. He didn't fall and hit his head just kind of crumbled over.
The human body is weird like that, I've trained boxing and now mma and have gotten hit thousands of times and never had an issue, this guy gets hit once and dies instantly.
Some are just predisposed (anuerisms) and there are certain vulnerable areas (throat, crushing the glottis) - just freak accidents which you can't really guard yourself against.
daPhREak - I get where you are coming from here. There is definitely a lot more information that needs to come out before a person can make a completely enlightened opinion. Jumping the gun happens, so no reason to get too annoyed at people that make up their minds beforehand.
I personally feel like the Zimmerman initiated the confrontation by getting out of his car, and escalated it by bringing his weapon with him. That feels to me like it should disqualify him from the SYG, but a lot of circumstances could change that of course.
Getting unbiased information about this case is difficult though. A few things people need to keep in mind though:
Martin was 6'3. From his pictures I had envisioned him as someone around the size of my younger brother, but he was not a tiny person, just lanky it seems. His ability to defend himself shouldn't be overlooked. Having weight on someone doesn't instantly make the fight over, so keep that in mind.
Also, keep in mind that no one has said if he had drawn his weapon before he used it or not. Seems many people are jumping to the conclusion that he ran after the kid with his gun drawn. There is no evidence of this that I have heard.
Another problem I have is something someone else brought up as well. How did Zimmerman catch him? Was he cornered? I can't see an overweight 28 year old catching up with a 17 year old football player that is built like many of the track runners I know. Has anyone seen where the final confrontation took place? It would seem it would have to have been near the street, since Zimmerman says that he stepped out of his car to check the street name he was on and was attacked from behind then. (although this sounds interesting to me as well, since there would be no reason in my mind why he would have to leave his car for that, nor does it sound normal for someone that does regular neighborhood watch in a gated community to not know where he is)
When it comes to Zimmerman himself, I think people are jumping the gun on the racism thing. I don't hear the coon comment, and describing a black male as a black male is definitely not racist. It sounds more like he was just an overzealous neighborhood watch guy. He put himself in a bad situation most likely just trying to do the right thing. Bad things can happen from good intentions too. Also, the operator didn't demand, nor actively seek to stop Zimmerman from pursuing Martin. He simply said 'you don't need to do that'. That is not a stand down, direct command.
The eyewitness accounts vary, but I haven't heard any that state they saw the start of the confrontation, only the conclusion. If someone had seen what initiated the fight, we would have a better understanding as well but it doesn't seem that is going to happen.
your thoughts seem reasonable enough to me. only thing to add is there is apparently at least one witness who says he/she saw the kid on top of zimmerman punching him and zimmerman was screaming for help. but, like people have said before, eyewitness accounts (as well as most witness testimony in general) can change. people say "i saw a gun" when they are talking to police, which turns into "i saw him reach for something in his pocket" when they are on the stand.
And this is why the police should have taken Zimmerman in, because if he was being punched repeatedly there would be some pretty clear evidence of that. The fact that this man just killed another person and wasn't even brought in to a police station is seriously fucked up. I don't believe Zimmerman acted in self defense, and honestly he put himself in a situation where Martin could have been acting in self defense himself, even if he was beating the shit out of Zimmerman at the time.
The issues of race are brought up because I cannot conceive of a situation where a 28 year old black man shoots a 17 year old white (or hispanic) under similar circumstances, and gets away. Maybe it wasn't a hate crime, but refusing to even ask the question is negligent.
EPT
