|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP.
If you make an uninformed post, or one that isn't relevant to the discussion, you will be moderated. If in doubt, don't post. |
On June 28 2013 03:02 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:00 farvacola wrote:On June 28 2013 02:59 Esk23 wrote: Some idiots don't think you have the right to defend yourself and defend yourself with deadly force. That's what this comes down to.
Zimmerman did nothing wrong, he did not follow or chase or hunt down anyone. He got out of his car to get an address for the police when he was jumped by Trayvon Martin. When you get attacked by someone who's 6'3" in almost complete darkness especially when you're suspicious of the person because of what he was doing, it should scare the shit out of anyone who values their life. He had trauma to the back of his head that is consistent with his head being slammed into the concrete. He shot Trayvon in self defense, for all he knows Trayvon won't stop until he kills him.
This case shouldn't have even gone to trial. The prosecution's witnesses are all impeachable. Trayvon was only 5'11. Pfft. Maybe when he was 12. In that 7-11 he towered over the 5'10" clerk.
On June 28 2013 03:01 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:00 farvacola wrote:On June 28 2013 02:59 Esk23 wrote: Some idiots don't think you have the right to defend yourself and defend yourself with deadly force. That's what this comes down to.
Zimmerman did nothing wrong, he did not follow or chase or hunt down anyone. He got out of his car to get an address for the police when he was jumped by Trayvon Martin. When you get attacked by someone who's 6'3" in almost complete darkness especially when you're suspicious of the person because of what he was doing, it should scare the shit out of anyone who values their life. He had trauma to the back of his head that is consistent with his head being slammed into the concrete. He shot Trayvon in self defense, for all he knows Trayvon won't stop until he kills him.
This case shouldn't have even gone to trial. The prosecution's witnesses are all impeachable. Trayvon was only 5'11. No he wasn't. When he stood next to the cashier at the 7/11 (who is 5'10") he towered over him. I don't know where this 5'11" even comes from.
On June 28 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:01 Esk23 wrote:On June 28 2013 03:00 farvacola wrote:On June 28 2013 02:59 Esk23 wrote: Some idiots don't think you have the right to defend yourself and defend yourself with deadly force. That's what this comes down to.
Zimmerman did nothing wrong, he did not follow or chase or hunt down anyone. He got out of his car to get an address for the police when he was jumped by Trayvon Martin. When you get attacked by someone who's 6'3" in almost complete darkness especially when you're suspicious of the person because of what he was doing, it should scare the shit out of anyone who values their life. He had trauma to the back of his head that is consistent with his head being slammed into the concrete. He shot Trayvon in self defense, for all he knows Trayvon won't stop until he kills him.
This case shouldn't have even gone to trial. The prosecution's witnesses are all impeachable. Trayvon was only 5'11. No he wasn't. When he stood next to the cashier at the 7/11 (who is 5'10") he towered over him. I don't know where this 5'11" even comes from. autopsy report. The initial police report from the night of the shooting lists Martin's height as 6'0" (1.83 m) and weight as 160 lb (73 kg).[15][39]Zimmerman estimated Martin's height at 5'11" to 6'2" on the night of the shooting.[40] The morning after the shooting, an autopsy found that Martin's body was 5'11" (1.80 m) long and weighed 158 lb (72 kg).[41][42] Other values for Martin's height of 6'2" (1.88 m) and 6'3" (1.91 m), and weight of no more than 150 lb (68 kg), were reported as being given by Martin's family.[39][43]
And this is why we need a trial
|
On June 28 2013 03:01 m4inbrain wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:00 xDaunt wrote: Finally cross is over. The State has some work to do on redirect. Feel free to LR. It's hard enough to me to follow in a foreign language, let alone writing it down while doing so. ^^ Sorry, don't have the time. I have my own trial that I'm getting ready for. =)
I'm being bad enough by even watching this.
|
On June 28 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 02:58 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:56 ragz_gt wrote:On June 28 2013 02:53 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:50 czylu wrote:On June 28 2013 02:48 ranshaked wrote: I think everyone has a different idea of what they consider "danger of their life"
When I was jumped years ago, I was genuinely in danger of my life. If I had a gun on me, I would have shot the people, but I didn't. Instead, I had to have someone drive me to a hospital with blood everywhere. It turns out I was fine (didn't crack the orbital), but at the time I genuinely would have used a gun if I had one.
In the heat of the moment, anything can happen, so in a way I see why Zimmerman shot Trayvon. and after the moment has passed, you suffer the consequences, as Mr. Zimmerman has/will. Why should I get in trouble? I was jumped, they instigated it? How do I know that I'm not going to die unless it happens? If I'm bleeding everywhere, and I'm having the shit kicked out of me, at what point do I get to shoot? Or, do I just let them continue to beat the hell out of me until they stop? Why isn't lethal force on my end allowed in order to say myself from bodily harm/possible death? (you CAN die from freak shit like being punched once and fall down unconscious) Personally, if someone ever does it again to me, I'd have no problem shooting them in self defense. If you want to punch me in the face, fine, then take a bullet to the face imo If you instigated the situation in the first place, then you will be, and that's what's on trial now: did Zimmerman instigate the situation? No. I told them to quit being rude to the lady behind me. They didn't like what I said, and started throwing punches. What is considered instigating? To me, the first person to throw a punch is the instigator, regardless of what chit chat went on before. You: "I don't like your personality" Him: Throws a punchYou: Shoots HimSome people find that line of logic problematic. So what am I supposed to do? Take the punch and do nothing about it? The entire point of having a gun is to protect yourself.
If someone punches me, and I have a weapon on me to protect myself, you bet I'm going to use it.
|
On June 28 2013 03:04 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:01 m4inbrain wrote:On June 28 2013 03:00 xDaunt wrote: Finally cross is over. The State has some work to do on redirect. Feel free to LR. It's hard enough to me to follow in a foreign language, let alone writing it down while doing so. ^^ Sorry, don't have the time. I have my own trial that I'm getting ready for. =) I'm being bad enough by even watching this.
Then someone else does it, i can't. And i feel bad for that since daphreak explained quite alot to me. ._.
|
lol judge says "objection sustained, I believe the words were "creepy ass cracker".
|
On June 28 2013 03:02 ranshaked wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:00 czylu wrote:On June 28 2013 02:59 Esk23 wrote: Some idiots don't think you have the right to defend yourself and defend yourself with deadly force. That's what this comes down to.
Zimmerman did nothing wrong, he did not follow or chase or hunt down anyone. He got out of his car to get an address for the police when he was jumped by Trayvon Martin. When you get attacked by someone who's 6'3" in almost complete darkness especially when you're suspicious of the person because of what he was doing, it should scare the shit out of anyone who values their life. He had trauma to the back of his head that is consistent with his head being slammed into the concrete. He shot Trayvon in self defense, for all he knows Trayvon won't stop until he kills him.
This case shouldn't have even gone to trial. The prosecution's witnesses are all impeachable. You have the right to defend yourself w/ deadly force. You also have the right to go to jail for it. Why should you have to go to jail for using something that you have the right to use? Why should I have to go to jail because I shot someone that is beating the shit out of me? That makes zero sense. Why am I being punished for someone else' wrongdoing. This is the same logic that goes on in classrooms today in which we suspend both kids, even though ONE of them started it.
have u never heard of a manslaughter charge? It doesn't matter how you did, why you did it, or if u did it self-defense. You can go to jail just for being responsible of a death.
|
On June 28 2013 03:04 ranshaked wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 28 2013 02:58 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:56 ragz_gt wrote:On June 28 2013 02:53 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:50 czylu wrote:On June 28 2013 02:48 ranshaked wrote: I think everyone has a different idea of what they consider "danger of their life"
When I was jumped years ago, I was genuinely in danger of my life. If I had a gun on me, I would have shot the people, but I didn't. Instead, I had to have someone drive me to a hospital with blood everywhere. It turns out I was fine (didn't crack the orbital), but at the time I genuinely would have used a gun if I had one.
In the heat of the moment, anything can happen, so in a way I see why Zimmerman shot Trayvon. and after the moment has passed, you suffer the consequences, as Mr. Zimmerman has/will. Why should I get in trouble? I was jumped, they instigated it? How do I know that I'm not going to die unless it happens? If I'm bleeding everywhere, and I'm having the shit kicked out of me, at what point do I get to shoot? Or, do I just let them continue to beat the hell out of me until they stop? Why isn't lethal force on my end allowed in order to say myself from bodily harm/possible death? (you CAN die from freak shit like being punched once and fall down unconscious) Personally, if someone ever does it again to me, I'd have no problem shooting them in self defense. If you want to punch me in the face, fine, then take a bullet to the face imo If you instigated the situation in the first place, then you will be, and that's what's on trial now: did Zimmerman instigate the situation? No. I told them to quit being rude to the lady behind me. They didn't like what I said, and started throwing punches. What is considered instigating? To me, the first person to throw a punch is the instigator, regardless of what chit chat went on before. You: "I don't like your personality" Him: Throws a punchYou: Shoots HimSome people find that line of logic problematic. So what am I supposed to do? Take the punch and do nothing about it? The entire point of having a gun is to protect yourself. If someone punches me, and I have a weapon on me to protect myself, you bet I'm going to use it.
You can easily use it to deter the person
|
The prosecutor now asked if Martin referred to Zman as "nigger", which i knew he would do. Man i could almost be a lawyer, i can twist things and manipulate stuff!
edit: throwing out "objection" without having the reason to tell is maybe not a good idea if the judge already is "meh" at you.
|
On June 28 2013 03:04 ranshaked wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 28 2013 02:58 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:56 ragz_gt wrote:On June 28 2013 02:53 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:50 czylu wrote:On June 28 2013 02:48 ranshaked wrote: I think everyone has a different idea of what they consider "danger of their life"
When I was jumped years ago, I was genuinely in danger of my life. If I had a gun on me, I would have shot the people, but I didn't. Instead, I had to have someone drive me to a hospital with blood everywhere. It turns out I was fine (didn't crack the orbital), but at the time I genuinely would have used a gun if I had one.
In the heat of the moment, anything can happen, so in a way I see why Zimmerman shot Trayvon. and after the moment has passed, you suffer the consequences, as Mr. Zimmerman has/will. Why should I get in trouble? I was jumped, they instigated it? How do I know that I'm not going to die unless it happens? If I'm bleeding everywhere, and I'm having the shit kicked out of me, at what point do I get to shoot? Or, do I just let them continue to beat the hell out of me until they stop? Why isn't lethal force on my end allowed in order to say myself from bodily harm/possible death? (you CAN die from freak shit like being punched once and fall down unconscious) Personally, if someone ever does it again to me, I'd have no problem shooting them in self defense. If you want to punch me in the face, fine, then take a bullet to the face imo If you instigated the situation in the first place, then you will be, and that's what's on trial now: did Zimmerman instigate the situation? No. I told them to quit being rude to the lady behind me. They didn't like what I said, and started throwing punches. What is considered instigating? To me, the first person to throw a punch is the instigator, regardless of what chit chat went on before. You: "I don't like your personality" Him: Throws a punchYou: Shoots HimSome people find that line of logic problematic. So what am I supposed to do? Take the punch and do nothing about it? The entire point of having a gun is to protect yourself. If someone punches me, and I have a weapon on me to protect myself, you bet I'm going to use it.
Yes, basically you just admitted that you shot him as revenge, not as defense, off to jail you go.
|
Well, in fairness, we don't know for sure the relative heights of the two areas of floor they are standing on. They aren't side by side, in other words. But he does look inches "higher" than the clerk.
|
On June 28 2013 03:06 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:04 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 28 2013 02:58 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:56 ragz_gt wrote:On June 28 2013 02:53 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:50 czylu wrote:On June 28 2013 02:48 ranshaked wrote: I think everyone has a different idea of what they consider "danger of their life"
When I was jumped years ago, I was genuinely in danger of my life. If I had a gun on me, I would have shot the people, but I didn't. Instead, I had to have someone drive me to a hospital with blood everywhere. It turns out I was fine (didn't crack the orbital), but at the time I genuinely would have used a gun if I had one.
In the heat of the moment, anything can happen, so in a way I see why Zimmerman shot Trayvon. and after the moment has passed, you suffer the consequences, as Mr. Zimmerman has/will. Why should I get in trouble? I was jumped, they instigated it? How do I know that I'm not going to die unless it happens? If I'm bleeding everywhere, and I'm having the shit kicked out of me, at what point do I get to shoot? Or, do I just let them continue to beat the hell out of me until they stop? Why isn't lethal force on my end allowed in order to say myself from bodily harm/possible death? (you CAN die from freak shit like being punched once and fall down unconscious) Personally, if someone ever does it again to me, I'd have no problem shooting them in self defense. If you want to punch me in the face, fine, then take a bullet to the face imo If you instigated the situation in the first place, then you will be, and that's what's on trial now: did Zimmerman instigate the situation? No. I told them to quit being rude to the lady behind me. They didn't like what I said, and started throwing punches. What is considered instigating? To me, the first person to throw a punch is the instigator, regardless of what chit chat went on before. You: "I don't like your personality" Him: Throws a punchYou: Shoots HimSome people find that line of logic problematic. So what am I supposed to do? Take the punch and do nothing about it? The entire point of having a gun is to protect yourself. If someone punches me, and I have a weapon on me to protect myself, you bet I'm going to use it. You can easily use it to deter the person I don't know where you grew up, but where I grew up, if you pull a gun on someone, you better shoot it because they will quickly take that gun and shoot you instead.
For instance, if I was being jumped, and I pull my gun out and just say "Hey mofos I've got a gun", they are going to keep punching me to try and get the gun.
|
On June 28 2013 03:06 czylu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:02 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 03:00 czylu wrote:On June 28 2013 02:59 Esk23 wrote: Some idiots don't think you have the right to defend yourself and defend yourself with deadly force. That's what this comes down to.
Zimmerman did nothing wrong, he did not follow or chase or hunt down anyone. He got out of his car to get an address for the police when he was jumped by Trayvon Martin. When you get attacked by someone who's 6'3" in almost complete darkness especially when you're suspicious of the person because of what he was doing, it should scare the shit out of anyone who values their life. He had trauma to the back of his head that is consistent with his head being slammed into the concrete. He shot Trayvon in self defense, for all he knows Trayvon won't stop until he kills him.
This case shouldn't have even gone to trial. The prosecution's witnesses are all impeachable. You have the right to defend yourself w/ deadly force. You also have the right to go to jail for it. Why should you have to go to jail for using something that you have the right to use? Why should I have to go to jail because I shot someone that is beating the shit out of me? That makes zero sense. Why am I being punished for someone else' wrongdoing. This is the same logic that goes on in classrooms today in which we suspend both kids, even though ONE of them started it. have u never heard of a manslaughter charge? It doesn't matter how you did, why you did it, or if u did it self-defense. You can go to jail just for being responsible of a death. that is false.
+ Show Spoiler +7.7 MANSLAUGHTER § 782.07, Fla. Stat.
To prove the crime of Manslaughter, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. (Victim) is dead.
Give 2a, 2b, or 2c depending upon allegations and proof.
2. a. (Defendant) intentionally committed an act or acts that caused the death of (victim).
b. (Defendant) intentionally procured an act that caused the death of (victim).
c. The death of (victim) was caused by the culpable negligence of (defendant).
The defendant cannot be guilty of manslaughter by committing a merely negligent act or if the killing was either justifiable or excusable homicide:
Negligence:
Each of us has a duty to act reasonably toward others. If there is a violation of that duty, without any conscious intention to harm, that violation is negligence.
Justifiable Homicide:
The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an attempt to murder or commit a felony upon the defendant, or to commit a felony in any dwelling house in which the defendant was at the time of the killing. § 782.02, Fla. Stat.
Excusable Homicide:
The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:
1. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or
2. When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or
3. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner.
§ 782.03, Fla. Stat.
Give only if 2a alleged and proved.
In order to convict of manslaughter by act, it is not necessary for the State to prove that the defendant had an intent to cause death, only an intent to commit an act that was not merely negligent, justified, or excusable and which caused death.
Give only if 2b alleged and proved.
To “procure” means to persuade, induce, prevail upon or cause a person to do something. 128
Give only if 2c alleged and proved.
I will now define “culpable negligence” for you. Each of us has a duty to act reasonably toward others. If there is a violation of that duty, without any conscious intention to harm, that violation is negligence. But culpable negligence is more than a failure to use ordinary care toward others. In order for negligence to be culpable, it must be gross and flagrant. Culpable negligence is a course of conduct showing reckless disregard of human life, or of the safety of persons exposed to its dangerous effects, or such an entire want of care as to raise a presumption of a conscious indifference to consequences, or which shows wantonness or recklessness, or a grossly careless disregard for the safety and welfare of the public, or such an indifference to the rights of others as is equivalent to an intentional violation of such rights.
The negligent act or omission must have been committed with an utter disregard for the safety of others. Culpable negligence is consciously doing an act or following a course of conduct that the defendant must have known, or reasonably should have known, was likely to cause death or great bodily injury.
|
On June 28 2013 03:06 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:04 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 28 2013 02:58 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:56 ragz_gt wrote:On June 28 2013 02:53 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:50 czylu wrote:On June 28 2013 02:48 ranshaked wrote: I think everyone has a different idea of what they consider "danger of their life"
When I was jumped years ago, I was genuinely in danger of my life. If I had a gun on me, I would have shot the people, but I didn't. Instead, I had to have someone drive me to a hospital with blood everywhere. It turns out I was fine (didn't crack the orbital), but at the time I genuinely would have used a gun if I had one.
In the heat of the moment, anything can happen, so in a way I see why Zimmerman shot Trayvon. and after the moment has passed, you suffer the consequences, as Mr. Zimmerman has/will. Why should I get in trouble? I was jumped, they instigated it? How do I know that I'm not going to die unless it happens? If I'm bleeding everywhere, and I'm having the shit kicked out of me, at what point do I get to shoot? Or, do I just let them continue to beat the hell out of me until they stop? Why isn't lethal force on my end allowed in order to say myself from bodily harm/possible death? (you CAN die from freak shit like being punched once and fall down unconscious) Personally, if someone ever does it again to me, I'd have no problem shooting them in self defense. If you want to punch me in the face, fine, then take a bullet to the face imo If you instigated the situation in the first place, then you will be, and that's what's on trial now: did Zimmerman instigate the situation? No. I told them to quit being rude to the lady behind me. They didn't like what I said, and started throwing punches. What is considered instigating? To me, the first person to throw a punch is the instigator, regardless of what chit chat went on before. You: "I don't like your personality" Him: Throws a punchYou: Shoots HimSome people find that line of logic problematic. So what am I supposed to do? Take the punch and do nothing about it? The entire point of having a gun is to protect yourself. If someone punches me, and I have a weapon on me to protect myself, you bet I'm going to use it. You can easily use it to deter the person
At what point do you think you're legally allowed to brandish a firearm to deter ? Brandishing the firearm alone is a threat of violence, use of force, and punishable if unjustified under the law.
|
On June 28 2013 02:28 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 02:26 Forgottenfrog wrote:On June 28 2013 02:24 PanN wrote:On June 28 2013 02:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 28 2013 02:14 Kaitlin wrote:On June 28 2013 02:12 czylu wrote:On June 28 2013 01:51 nihlon wrote:On June 28 2013 01:48 bugser wrote:On June 28 2013 01:44 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 28 2013 01:37 Kaitlin wrote: [quote]
You brought the gun thread here. This is a thread about one George Zimmerman and one Trayvon Martin and the circumstances surrounding the use of the gun to kill Trayvon Martin. Research is pretty fucking irrelevant. I didn't bring anything here. FallDownMarigold is suggesting that bringing guns to an altercation is dangerous, even for the carriers of the gun, and said that it is sad that Martin was shot because of the preconceived notion that guns equals safety. A gun saved George Zimmerman's life. In this case a gun certainly does "equal" safety. You do realize that whether it saved his life or not is one of the very core issues of the trial? All we know is that Martin was killed with a gun and whether or not that shot saved Zimmerman is very much up for debate. As much as I pity him for being thrown under the bus by the media and politics, he still shot and killed an unarmed child. Now if Trayvon had been carrying around that gun he had in the picture on his phone, I'd say it's a different story, but he didn't have anything. Even if he was getting beaten, it's still just fists. He needed to have the sense to know that if he was carrying around a loaded gun. Is it unreasonable for you to believe that Trayvon could have rendered Zimmerman unconscious had Zimmerman not shot him first ? Please just answer that one simple question for me. Being that evidence can only prove that only one punch was thrown, and that punch not being sufficient to knock out zimmerman, I fail to see why you even think its possible? Sorry If I'm understanding you wrong... just because that one punch didn't knock out zimmerman doesn't mean trayvon couldn't knock him unconscious yes? A lot of people can render someone unconscious but it does not mean he had the intent to or does he deserve to get shot? yes? It's not about deserving to be shot. If Zimmerman reasonably thought he could be rendered unconscious, then he would be in a position to not be able to defend himself from Trayvon getting his gun and shooting him with it.
If this is adequately true, then anytime someone punches someone with any force, you're legally allowed to shoot them and claim self defense because you could potentially be knocked unconscious?
|
On June 28 2013 03:08 ragz_gt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2013 03:04 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 28 2013 02:58 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:56 ragz_gt wrote:On June 28 2013 02:53 ranshaked wrote:On June 28 2013 02:50 czylu wrote:On June 28 2013 02:48 ranshaked wrote: I think everyone has a different idea of what they consider "danger of their life"
When I was jumped years ago, I was genuinely in danger of my life. If I had a gun on me, I would have shot the people, but I didn't. Instead, I had to have someone drive me to a hospital with blood everywhere. It turns out I was fine (didn't crack the orbital), but at the time I genuinely would have used a gun if I had one.
In the heat of the moment, anything can happen, so in a way I see why Zimmerman shot Trayvon. and after the moment has passed, you suffer the consequences, as Mr. Zimmerman has/will. Why should I get in trouble? I was jumped, they instigated it? How do I know that I'm not going to die unless it happens? If I'm bleeding everywhere, and I'm having the shit kicked out of me, at what point do I get to shoot? Or, do I just let them continue to beat the hell out of me until they stop? Why isn't lethal force on my end allowed in order to say myself from bodily harm/possible death? (you CAN die from freak shit like being punched once and fall down unconscious) Personally, if someone ever does it again to me, I'd have no problem shooting them in self defense. If you want to punch me in the face, fine, then take a bullet to the face imo If you instigated the situation in the first place, then you will be, and that's what's on trial now: did Zimmerman instigate the situation? No. I told them to quit being rude to the lady behind me. They didn't like what I said, and started throwing punches. What is considered instigating? To me, the first person to throw a punch is the instigator, regardless of what chit chat went on before. You: "I don't like your personality" Him: Throws a punchYou: Shoots HimSome people find that line of logic problematic. So what am I supposed to do? Take the punch and do nothing about it? The entire point of having a gun is to protect yourself. If someone punches me, and I have a weapon on me to protect myself, you bet I'm going to use it. Yes, basically you just admitted that you shot him as revenge, not as defense, off to jail you go. lol what? If I'm taking the punch(s), there is a possibility of me having great bodily harm.
I can't defend myself, thus I use my weapon. Why am I being charged? I'm 5'7 160...I don't know how to fight. The other guy is 6'4 220. What do I do? Just lie in a fetal position being beaten to death?
|
That was a really, really short re-direct. The State abandoned ship on this witness. They understand that the longer that she stays up on the stand, the more damage that will be done.
|
The defense is now re-crossing the witness as to her ability to speak English lol
|
On June 28 2013 03:12 farvacola wrote: The defense is now re-crossing the witness as to her ability to speak English lol Well, if the state was making a point that she wasn't completelly able to understand something, it's a pretty valuable line of reasoning.
|
Did you guys notice my post about the phrase "get off" on the previous page ? I thought it was a pretty important point and there was a raging conversation on another topic at the time, and nobody commented about it.
|
On June 28 2013 03:12 farvacola wrote: The defense is now re-crossing the witness as to her ability to speak English lol
That actually didn't help, it feels like the defense was surprised by the fact that she speaks "crayon" (thats what i understood) to her mother.
|
|
|
|