|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP. |
On March 26 2012 16:36 Zaqwe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 16:27 Defacer wrote:On March 26 2012 16:21 Zaqwe wrote:On March 26 2012 16:07 Defacer wrote:
Open question: if someone was following you for seemingly no reason, would you feel threatened?
Let's imagine what would happen if a young black man was following a women in his car. The woman walks faster, but the man gets out of his car and chases her. Would it not be understandable if the woman panicked and maced him in the face?
This whole case just has me wondering: what constitutes an 'imminent' threat, and how we perceive a threat differently based on gender and sex.
I will wholly admit that as a minority, if a strange White(ish) man was following me, it would make me nervous (it's happened to me, actually). I don't know if I would feel my life was in imminent danger, but I would do everything to evade the person, and if that didn't work, confront them head on.
Maybe that's the disconnect, and why some people on this board are more empathetic to Zimmerman than others. If your White, does the idea of a White male following you make you less nervous than, say, a young black male?
The woman has a cellphone on her. She phones police. She also avoids going around through a dark pathway behind two buildings instead of staying in the street lights. Wow, that was easy. Trayvon did neither of those. So because Trayvon reacted to a threat poorly, it justifies his death? That by choosing to fight the person following him (of course we can't be sure who instigated the fight, but I'll play along) that somehow, he should be faulted for being shot. You routinely come up with these hypothetical ways of how one should behave in a life and death situation -- as if that automatically exonerates the man that shot him. It's getting silly. Nothing Trayvon did indicates he thought Zimmerman was a threat at all. On the contrary, his actions demonstrate a casual attitude towards Zimmerman following him. When his girlfriend told him to run he refused, he traveled between two buildings instead of staying on well lit streets, he stayed on the phone with her instead of phoning police, and most importantly he stopped to pummel Zimmerman in the head instead of fleeing. The thing that exonerates the man that shot him is the evidence he was on the ground on his back screaming for help and getting beaten up when he fired. That's all. All your dramatization about how scared you think Trayvon was is worthless.
Look who's back, and still continuing to make shit up as you go.
For starters he did run when his girlfriend told him to; look at the phone log between the 911 officer and Zimmerman, Zimmerman explicitly says 'shit, he's running' to the 911 officer, so I have no idea where you are pulling that nugget fron. You also spend a lot of time critiquing a 17 year old minor for not thinking and acting in the most logical manner whilst he is under pressure being chased at night by somebody 100 pounds heavier than he is, as if his death is somewhat justifiable because he didn't act how you think he should have, and then proceed to yet again insist that despite absolutely no evidence confirming what you say, that he 'stopped to pummel Zimmerman in the head instead of fleeing'. You completely neglect the facts that are have been proven, and make up your own story for the ones that haven't.
Well done champ, is ~130 posts + a temp ban in one topic really not enough? You seem to have a serious vested interest in this topic.
|
He has to be either George Zimmerman or George Constanza.
Firsthand knowledge of events unknown to anyone else on the planet would suggest the former... but his reasoning ability certainly makes the latter suggestion viable as well.
|
One thing is sure, Zimmerman needs to go on trial. Police made a huge mistake by not arresting him, even if it would have been to let him go 2 hours later because he was innocent an arrest should have been done.
Still believe Zimmerman is not innocent though.
|
I don't know whats worse.
The fact that a completely innocent kid got killed for no reason. Or the fact that all these apologists are trying to defend the killer. Or the fact that the killer is still free and hasn;t even been arrested!
I have no faith in humanity anymore.
|
On March 26 2012 17:36 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 17:27 Defacer wrote:On March 26 2012 16:39 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 26 2012 16:29 Defacer wrote:On March 26 2012 16:27 Zaqwe wrote:
How could he be a vigilante when he phones police?
He became a vigilante when he chose to take matters in his own hands instead of waiting for the police. Wow, that was easy. Edit: Vigilante is too badass a word. He became Paul Blartt, Incompetent Protector of the Neighborhood. im glad you see everything in black and white, but its not really that simple. the DOJ is involved now and the White House is paying attention. don't you think that they would have the guy arrested immediately if they thought it was so simple? I caught a question, because you seem to know the ins-and-outs of the legal system better than most -- do you think there is anything he could be charged with, assuming that it is determined that he was defending himself? Is he simply guilty of being an idiot? What kind of information would have to come to light for his idiocy to be considered illegal? i think he can and should be charged with the killing, and the self defense tested in court. however, assuming the self defense was reasonable, i dont think there is any criminal liability. there is also apparently civil immunity under Florida Law, so no to that as well.
Yeah this is what's been bothering me the most with this issue. Maybe someone more versed than me in US criminal procedure (or how the police/prosecution act generally) can help. The elements of murder (homicide) are present (this is beyond dispute), its up to the defendant to prove his defence following a complete police investigation. In UK law, self-defence has to be proportionate (as previously mentioned I know nothing/very little about US/florida criminal law). I don't understand how this is not enough for a charge to be brought.
|
On March 26 2012 22:32 froggynoddy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 17:36 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 26 2012 17:27 Defacer wrote:On March 26 2012 16:39 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 26 2012 16:29 Defacer wrote:On March 26 2012 16:27 Zaqwe wrote:
How could he be a vigilante when he phones police?
He became a vigilante when he chose to take matters in his own hands instead of waiting for the police. Wow, that was easy. Edit: Vigilante is too badass a word. He became Paul Blartt, Incompetent Protector of the Neighborhood. im glad you see everything in black and white, but its not really that simple. the DOJ is involved now and the White House is paying attention. don't you think that they would have the guy arrested immediately if they thought it was so simple? I caught a question, because you seem to know the ins-and-outs of the legal system better than most -- do you think there is anything he could be charged with, assuming that it is determined that he was defending himself? Is he simply guilty of being an idiot? What kind of information would have to come to light for his idiocy to be considered illegal? i think he can and should be charged with the killing, and the self defense tested in court. however, assuming the self defense was reasonable, i dont think there is any criminal liability. there is also apparently civil immunity under Florida Law, so no to that as well. Yeah this is what's been bothering me the most with this issue. Maybe someone more versed than me in US criminal procedure (or how the police/prosecution act generally) can help. The elements of murder (homicide) are present (this is beyond dispute), its up to the defendant to prove his defence following a complete police investigation. In UK law, self-defence has to be proportionate (as previously mentioned I know nothing/very little about US/florida criminal law). I don't understand how this is not enough for a charge to be brought.
Unlike most states, the burden of proof is on the prosecution in FL for SYG laws. Basically, there has to be enough evidence that not only was there a killing, but that the killing was unjustified, or else it is actually illegal to arrest the person in question claiming self defense, they are immune from arrest. This was discussed about ten pages back on 80-83, between stokes17, dAPhrEAK, and myself. The body alone is not enough to constitue a probable cause on which to arrest the suspect. dAPhrEAk is a lawyer by profession and has been a great contribution to the thread with his explanations, willingness to take the time to update the OP, and exemplary reasonable behavior in the threat, I advise you pay close attention to his posts in the thread.
|
Zimmerman's attorney has confirmed that they don't intend to base their defense on the stand your ground law. It's plain old self defense.
Lawyer: Family of Trayvon Martin to pursue civil caseMeanwhile, a lawyer for the man at the center of the death investigation said Florida's "stand your ground" law doesn't apply to the shooting that killed the teen. "This is self-defense, and that's been around for forever -- that you have a right to defend yourself. So the next issue (that) is going to come up is, was he justified in using the amount of force he did?" http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/24/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
And here's an older article where police have directly asserted that Mary Cutcher the "witness" who has been doing a great deal of paid media interviews is lying.
|
|
|
|
|
What's with the new posters joining just to defend Zimmerman? What big development are you talking about, Geosurface? Either I missed something or everything in the article has been discussed to death for the last pages. Except perhaps for the dialogue: "Do you have a problem?", "No.", "Well, you have now." *punch*
Sounds like a badly written movie to me, as long as Trayvon does not have a history of violence I don't buy that he attacked just like that, but whatever.
|
On March 26 2012 22:23 Gorguts wrote:
I don't know whats worse.
The fact that a completely innocent kid got killed for no reason. Or the fact that all these apologists are trying to defend the killer. Or the fact that the killer is still free and hasn;t even been arrested!
I have no faith in humanity anymore.
I'd say the fact that zimmerman is being demonized as a heartless killer when there's no proof that he did not do it in self defense is worse. But hey that's just me, I'd rather know the truth before making up my mind, most others just do what the media tells them.
|
On March 27 2012 01:31 silynxer wrote:
What's with the new posters joining just to defend Zimmerman? What big development are you talking about, Geosurface? Either I missed something or everything in the article has been discussed to death for the last pages. Except perhaps for the dialogue: "Do you have a problem?", "No.", "Well, you have now." *punch*
Sounds like a badly written movie to me, as long as Trayvon does not have a history of violence I don't buy that he attacked just like that, but whatever.
Apparently because his nose was broken that justifies killing a 17 year old kid when cops are literally minutes away. Even if he thought his life was at risk, it doesn't make it reasonable or true...
|
So if I'm getting this right, if I go into a bar and pick a fight with someone and then get the shit kicked out of me its okay for me to shoot the other guy if I'm scared for my life?
|
On March 27 2012 01:46 ZeaL. wrote:
So if I'm getting this right, if I go into a bar and pick a fight with someone and then get the shit kicked out of me its okay for me to shoot the other guy if I'm scared for my life?
Did you throw the first punch? How much were you instigating? Was your life in danger?
There's a clear difference between approaching someone to ask what they are doing, and walking up to someone and punching them out.
|
On March 26 2012 21:46 Batch wrote:Zaqwe, just a curious question. Do you live in Sanford or know Zimmerman personally? 127 of your 129 posts are made in this thread. I get the feeling your accout was created just to discuss this topic.
Every time a topic like race comes up, there are at least one or two people that come out of the woodwork that complain about the White man's burden; that they're the real victims; minorities bring it upon themselves; blabbity blabbity blabbity.
Zaqwe isn't even that bad, to be honest.
|
So its gone from chasing the kid "Oh shit he's running" phone call, to being attacked from behind? What the hell?
|
On March 27 2012 01:46 ZeaL. wrote:
So if I'm getting this right, if I go into a bar and pick a fight with someone and then get the shit kicked out of me its okay for me to shoot the other guy if I'm scared for my life?
If you did it in the backroom so you can claim you didn't instigate the fight, sure.
|
On March 27 2012 01:40 Wrongspeedy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 01:31 silynxer wrote:
What's with the new posters joining just to defend Zimmerman? What big development are you talking about, Geosurface? Either I missed something or everything in the article has been discussed to death for the last pages. Except perhaps for the dialogue: "Do you have a problem?", "No.", "Well, you have now." *punch*
Sounds like a badly written movie to me, as long as Trayvon does not have a history of violence I don't buy that he attacked just like that, but whatever. Apparently because his nose was broken that justifies killing a 17 year old kid when cops are literally minutes away. Even if he thought his life was at risk, it doesn't make it reasonable or true...
It's not about what is reasonable to you, a bystander with 25% of the details, days later, at your keyboard.
It's about what is reasonable in the moment, just before it happens
|
|
|
He screwed up and now everything's catching up. It's not natural to call the police hundreds of times in a year and he was clearly either too paranoid or too zealous, and now his obsessive nature has finally caught up with him. If he wants his life back, he just has to do one thing; pay his dues. The sooner he fesses up and serves his time - if any is deserved - then the sooner everyone will look past this situation. From then on he can pick up the pieces and move on with his life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
