|
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 July 12 2013 14:32 SilverLeagueElite wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 13:51 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 12:47 FatChicksUnited wrote:On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:
Well from her testimony (which I do agree is shaky) it sounded like Zimmerman initially was the aggressor and tried to grab Trayvon or something 'she heard Trayvon saying, "Get off. Get off,"'. There wouldn't be much physical evidence if he didn't actually actually physically hit him, and under the circumstances it would be understandable that Trayvon felt the need to defend himself since he had done nothing wrong and (as far as we know) received no explanation, though of course at a certain point Trayvon got the upper hand and was no longer defending himself.
By "something wrong prior" I meant that assuming that the above scenario was the case, that he followed Trayvon (not inherently wrong), attempted to subdue him (not extremely wrong, possibly only worthy of an assault charge) and after fearing for his life he killed Trayvon. So if this were the sequence of events, what he did initially may not be worthy of a harsh conviction, the result was the death of a person and I still feel he would be responsible. So according to her testimony, Trayvon left his father's fiancee's backyard, and went out looking for Zimmerman. Then Zimmerman approached him and attempted to physically subdue him, despite having no good reason for doing so, as he only observed Trayvon walking in the rain and not doing anything unlawful (not being sarcastic here). Pretty odd behavior for Zimmerman. And now you, hearing her testimony, believe it over a much more plausible version of events, which is the version put forward by Zimmerman and his defensive team, and you want to send Zimmerman to jail for it? I realize that there's a non-zero chance that Zimmerman did act completely out of line that night, and it's really impossible to know for sure. But on balance, Zimmerman's story seems much likelier, to me at least. On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 11:56 sc2superfan101 wrote:
I want anyone to give me a scenario in which it is at all possible, given the evidence we've now seen, that Zimmerman somehow ran down a physically fit, 17 year old football player, and then started a fight only to get on the losing end (John Good's testimony), and then take back control of the fight (without injuring Trayvon in any way) and shoot him.
Because that sequence of events is 100% required to have occurred for Zimmerman to be guilty of what he's charged, and that, to me, is so unbelievably absurd a scenario that you might as well say that Zimmerman used his secret spiderman powers to do it. I was under the impression that he did most of his pursuing in his car, though correct me if I am wrong. He had to get out of his car to track Trayvon for a while. According to him, he lost Trayvon after a while, and was walking back towards his car when the incident occurred. Keep in mind that this is a good distance from Trayvon's home, where Rachel testified that Trayvon told her he was. I just can't see Trayvon, running scared on a rainy night, suddenly deciding "nah fuck it, I can take this guy" and sneaking up and attacking Zimmerman from some bushes, also without any explanation. I can understand that line of reasoning if it was coming from the jury but we, as third party onlookers have information the jury doesn't - namely the cell phone contents, which shows Trayvon leaning towards a thug life. The most ridiculous thing I've heard from CNN yet is the suggestion that the screams might be Zimmerman. But rather than screams for help, screams of joy as Zimmerman pummeled Trayvon. I have no idea how to square this.
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?
God, I'm glad I stopped watching CNN.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
You know, until this case, I thought the sentiment "the media is a bunch of liars" was blown way out of proportion.
Nope, it was completely accurate.
|
On July 12 2013 15:02 LegalLord wrote:
You know, until this case, I thought the sentiment "the media is a bunch of liars" was blown way out of proportion.
Nope, it was completely accurate.
Same. Honestly, being able to watch parts of the trial live and seeing how it has been reported has been an eye-opener.
|
On July 12 2013 14:45 kmillz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 14:32 SilverLeagueElite wrote:On July 12 2013 13:51 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 12:47 FatChicksUnited wrote:On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:
Well from her testimony (which I do agree is shaky) it sounded like Zimmerman initially was the aggressor and tried to grab Trayvon or something 'she heard Trayvon saying, "Get off. Get off,"'. There wouldn't be much physical evidence if he didn't actually actually physically hit him, and under the circumstances it would be understandable that Trayvon felt the need to defend himself since he had done nothing wrong and (as far as we know) received no explanation, though of course at a certain point Trayvon got the upper hand and was no longer defending himself.
By "something wrong prior" I meant that assuming that the above scenario was the case, that he followed Trayvon (not inherently wrong), attempted to subdue him (not extremely wrong, possibly only worthy of an assault charge) and after fearing for his life he killed Trayvon. So if this were the sequence of events, what he did initially may not be worthy of a harsh conviction, the result was the death of a person and I still feel he would be responsible. So according to her testimony, Trayvon left his father's fiancee's backyard, and went out looking for Zimmerman. Then Zimmerman approached him and attempted to physically subdue him, despite having no good reason for doing so, as he only observed Trayvon walking in the rain and not doing anything unlawful (not being sarcastic here). Pretty odd behavior for Zimmerman. And now you, hearing her testimony, believe it over a much more plausible version of events, which is the version put forward by Zimmerman and his defensive team, and you want to send Zimmerman to jail for it? I realize that there's a non-zero chance that Zimmerman did act completely out of line that night, and it's really impossible to know for sure. But on balance, Zimmerman's story seems much likelier, to me at least. On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 11:56 sc2superfan101 wrote:
I want anyone to give me a scenario in which it is at all possible, given the evidence we've now seen, that Zimmerman somehow ran down a physically fit, 17 year old football player, and then started a fight only to get on the losing end (John Good's testimony), and then take back control of the fight (without injuring Trayvon in any way) and shoot him.
Because that sequence of events is 100% required to have occurred for Zimmerman to be guilty of what he's charged, and that, to me, is so unbelievably absurd a scenario that you might as well say that Zimmerman used his secret spiderman powers to do it. I was under the impression that he did most of his pursuing in his car, though correct me if I am wrong. He had to get out of his car to track Trayvon for a while. According to him, he lost Trayvon after a while, and was walking back towards his car when the incident occurred. Keep in mind that this is a good distance from Trayvon's home, where Rachel testified that Trayvon told her he was. I just can't see Trayvon, running scared on a rainy night, suddenly deciding "nah fuck it, I can take this guy" and sneaking up and attacking Zimmerman from some bushes, also without any explanation. I can understand that line of reasoning if it was coming from the jury but we, as third party onlookers have information the jury doesn't - namely the cell phone contents, which shows Trayvon leaning towards a thug life. Don't the evidence/testimonies indicate Trayvon was nearly home and then went back a pretty decent distance (~200 ft?) where him and GZ had their confrontation? I'm a little fuzzy on the exact details but if that is the case, isn't that a pretty good indicator that he wasn't "scared" or "running away"?
I think Zimmerman did say Trayvon ran off and lost sight of him. Rachel said Trayvon was running and close to home. What happened immediately afterwards and Trayvon's state of mind is just conjecture on my part. I think Trayvon could've been scared and with it comes adrenalin and somewhere along the way, his flight turned to fight.
|
On July 12 2013 15:00 ConGee wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 14:48 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 14:01 ConGee wrote:On July 12 2013 13:51 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 12:47 FatChicksUnited wrote:On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:
Well from her testimony (which I do agree is shaky) it sounded like Zimmerman initially was the aggressor and tried to grab Trayvon or something 'she heard Trayvon saying, "Get off. Get off,"'. There wouldn't be much physical evidence if he didn't actually actually physically hit him, and under the circumstances it would be understandable that Trayvon felt the need to defend himself since he had done nothing wrong and (as far as we know) received no explanation, though of course at a certain point Trayvon got the upper hand and was no longer defending himself.
By "something wrong prior" I meant that assuming that the above scenario was the case, that he followed Trayvon (not inherently wrong), attempted to subdue him (not extremely wrong, possibly only worthy of an assault charge) and after fearing for his life he killed Trayvon. So if this were the sequence of events, what he did initially may not be worthy of a harsh conviction, the result was the death of a person and I still feel he would be responsible. So according to her testimony, Trayvon left his father's fiancee's backyard, and went out looking for Zimmerman. Then Zimmerman approached him and attempted to physically subdue him, despite having no good reason for doing so, as he only observed Trayvon walking in the rain and not doing anything unlawful (not being sarcastic here). Pretty odd behavior for Zimmerman. And now you, hearing her testimony, believe it over a much more plausible version of events, which is the version put forward by Zimmerman and his defensive team, and you want to send Zimmerman to jail for it? I realize that there's a non-zero chance that Zimmerman did act completely out of line that night, and it's really impossible to know for sure. But on balance, Zimmerman's story seems much likelier, to me at least. On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 11:56 sc2superfan101 wrote:
I want anyone to give me a scenario in which it is at all possible, given the evidence we've now seen, that Zimmerman somehow ran down a physically fit, 17 year old football player, and then started a fight only to get on the losing end (John Good's testimony), and then take back control of the fight (without injuring Trayvon in any way) and shoot him.
Because that sequence of events is 100% required to have occurred for Zimmerman to be guilty of what he's charged, and that, to me, is so unbelievably absurd a scenario that you might as well say that Zimmerman used his secret spiderman powers to do it. I was under the impression that he did most of his pursuing in his car, though correct me if I am wrong. He had to get out of his car to track Trayvon for a while. According to him, he lost Trayvon after a while, and was walking back towards his car when the incident occurred. Keep in mind that this is a good distance from Trayvon's home, where Rachel testified that Trayvon told her he was. Well I admit the idea that he went into the backyard and back out doesn't make sense to me, but the only explanation that makes sense to me is that she was confused and thought he made it back but he didn't, since I don't understand why she would lie about that since it does not help Trayvon's innocence, (assuming that it is implausible that he made there it back due to the distance). The part that I find more plausible is the actual confrontation and dialogue that she claims took place. Based on the evidence we do have, Zimmerman was following him and did not want him to get away, Trayvon was running away at some point, her description of the start of the actual encounter makes a lot more sense to me. I just can't see Trayvon, running scared on a rainy night, suddenly deciding "nah fuck it, I can take this guy" and sneaking up and attacking Zimmerman from some bushes, also without any explanation. I mean it is possible, I just don't see it as likely, if he could outrun Zimmerman easily, why not keep running? If someone is following you, wouldn't you try to find out why before attacking them and pummelling their face into the ground? Neither account fully adds up, they are both fairly sketchy. I'm not saying that he should be convicted based on this testimony alone, which is why I hoped for a recording of the phone conversation so we would have something solid, but based on the evidence it seems to me that he did something wrong and should be punished. Judging from his texts and his social media profiles, I can definitely see Martin doing something along those lines. But why run and then change his mind? How exactly do you propose that plays out? He's running away, loses Zimmerman takes it as an opportunity to sneak up on the creepy guy who is following him? And if we're going to make those kinds of judgements. Pretty odd behavior for Zimmerman. Did you listen to the 911 calls? All of his behaviour was odd, he sounded disturbed, not to mention he's a racist wannabe cop! (last parts are sarcasm, his behaviour was pretty odd). On July 12 2013 14:32 SilverLeagueElite wrote:On July 12 2013 13:51 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 12:47 FatChicksUnited wrote:On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:
Well from her testimony (which I do agree is shaky) it sounded like Zimmerman initially was the aggressor and tried to grab Trayvon or something 'she heard Trayvon saying, "Get off. Get off,"'. There wouldn't be much physical evidence if he didn't actually actually physically hit him, and under the circumstances it would be understandable that Trayvon felt the need to defend himself since he had done nothing wrong and (as far as we know) received no explanation, though of course at a certain point Trayvon got the upper hand and was no longer defending himself.
By "something wrong prior" I meant that assuming that the above scenario was the case, that he followed Trayvon (not inherently wrong), attempted to subdue him (not extremely wrong, possibly only worthy of an assault charge) and after fearing for his life he killed Trayvon. So if this were the sequence of events, what he did initially may not be worthy of a harsh conviction, the result was the death of a person and I still feel he would be responsible. So according to her testimony, Trayvon left his father's fiancee's backyard, and went out looking for Zimmerman. Then Zimmerman approached him and attempted to physically subdue him, despite having no good reason for doing so, as he only observed Trayvon walking in the rain and not doing anything unlawful (not being sarcastic here). Pretty odd behavior for Zimmerman. And now you, hearing her testimony, believe it over a much more plausible version of events, which is the version put forward by Zimmerman and his defensive team, and you want to send Zimmerman to jail for it? I realize that there's a non-zero chance that Zimmerman did act completely out of line that night, and it's really impossible to know for sure. But on balance, Zimmerman's story seems much likelier, to me at least. On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 11:56 sc2superfan101 wrote:
I want anyone to give me a scenario in which it is at all possible, given the evidence we've now seen, that Zimmerman somehow ran down a physically fit, 17 year old football player, and then started a fight only to get on the losing end (John Good's testimony), and then take back control of the fight (without injuring Trayvon in any way) and shoot him.
Because that sequence of events is 100% required to have occurred for Zimmerman to be guilty of what he's charged, and that, to me, is so unbelievably absurd a scenario that you might as well say that Zimmerman used his secret spiderman powers to do it. I was under the impression that he did most of his pursuing in his car, though correct me if I am wrong. He had to get out of his car to track Trayvon for a while. According to him, he lost Trayvon after a while, and was walking back towards his car when the incident occurred. Keep in mind that this is a good distance from Trayvon's home, where Rachel testified that Trayvon told her he was. I just can't see Trayvon, running scared on a rainy night, suddenly deciding "nah fuck it, I can take this guy" and sneaking up and attacking Zimmerman from some bushes, also without any explanation. I can understand that line of reasoning if it was coming from the jury but we, as third party onlookers have information the jury doesn't - namely the cell phone contents, which shows Trayvon leaning towards a thug life. I don't know, it's one thing to lean towards a thug life, and it's another to attack a grown man who's following you on a rainy night. Maybe you guys are right, maybe he was just stupid, but judging Zimmerman he was equally likely to do something stupid. Is pissed as he's running away from Zimmerman and decides that he wants to get revenge on him. Proceeds to attack him and gets carried away as he's attacking him. I'm not saying that's what happened, but with Trayvon's history, it's a plausible explanation,
Would be nice to have Trayvon's side of the story. It could easily be that when GZ was "reaching for his phone" he was actually reaching for his gun which was in almost the exact same location he said he reached for. Had Trayvon perceived An unidentified stranger armed with a gun following him home at night reaching for his weapon his use of force even after John Good would be perfectly justified. So the idea that there are not reasonable interpretations of the evidence that would demonstrate so is blinding yourself to the evidence.
Whether it's enough to convict is another story. Just to say there is a perfectly reasonable chance this is all GZ's fault instead of just partly. In which case while his acquittal may be legally just, it may just as well be a miserable failure.
|
On July 12 2013 14:48 Myrddraal wrote:But why run and then change his mind? How exactly do you propose that plays out? He's running away, loses Zimmerman takes it as an opportunity to sneak up on the creepy guy who is following him? And if we're going to make those kinds of judgements. Did you listen to the 911 calls? All of his behaviour was odd, he sounded disturbed, not to mention he's a racist wannabe cop! (last parts are sarcasm, his behaviour was pretty odd).
I guess you haven't been following the trial completely. I'll fill you in a bit with background history that was heard in court.
Zimmerman was the founder of the local neighborhood watch after a series of break-ins in the gated community. In his time in the watch, he had followed and reported quite a few individuals (he made something like 50+ calls to the local non-emergency number; I believe 6 were played for the jury). Before the incident with Trayvon, he had reported an individual who was later found to have committed some burglaries nearby. In all of those other calls, he had followed the same basic pattern: follow from a distance, report with phone call, and then disengage without confrontation.
The prosecution presented these facts to portray Zimmerman as a vigilante or a frustrated neighbor who suddenly snapped. But they show a pattern of behavior that was consistent with his version of the facts that evening, i.e. he followed Trayvon from a distance without confrontation, reported the details to the police, then headed back to his truck.
On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:
I don't know, it's one thing to lean towards a thug life, and it's another to attack a grown man who's following you on a rainy night. Maybe you guys are right, maybe he was just stupid, but judging Zimmerman he was equally likely to do something stupid.
They weren't "equally likely" to do something stupid.
On one hand, you have Zimmerman, a volunteer neighborhood watchman who was going back to school in the hopes of eventually being a prosecutor. Some of the law enforcement officers who had dealt with him before said he was always meek and respectful, and his gym trainer said he was soft and not a fighter at all.
On the other hand, you have Trayvon, a 17 year-old with a character so questionable that the prosecution completely avoided any character testimony to prevent the defense from submitting such evidence. I'm not suggesting he was a bad person or that he deserved to die, but maybe he was in that phase of life where guys like to test their limits and challenge authority.
Out of the two I think it's pretty clearly Trayvon who'd be more likely to start a fistfight in the dark.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 12 2013 15:27 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:00 ConGee wrote:On July 12 2013 14:48 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 14:01 ConGee wrote:On July 12 2013 13:51 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 12:47 FatChicksUnited wrote:On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:
Well from her testimony (which I do agree is shaky) it sounded like Zimmerman initially was the aggressor and tried to grab Trayvon or something 'she heard Trayvon saying, "Get off. Get off,"'. There wouldn't be much physical evidence if he didn't actually actually physically hit him, and under the circumstances it would be understandable that Trayvon felt the need to defend himself since he had done nothing wrong and (as far as we know) received no explanation, though of course at a certain point Trayvon got the upper hand and was no longer defending himself.
By "something wrong prior" I meant that assuming that the above scenario was the case, that he followed Trayvon (not inherently wrong), attempted to subdue him (not extremely wrong, possibly only worthy of an assault charge) and after fearing for his life he killed Trayvon. So if this were the sequence of events, what he did initially may not be worthy of a harsh conviction, the result was the death of a person and I still feel he would be responsible. So according to her testimony, Trayvon left his father's fiancee's backyard, and went out looking for Zimmerman. Then Zimmerman approached him and attempted to physically subdue him, despite having no good reason for doing so, as he only observed Trayvon walking in the rain and not doing anything unlawful (not being sarcastic here). Pretty odd behavior for Zimmerman. And now you, hearing her testimony, believe it over a much more plausible version of events, which is the version put forward by Zimmerman and his defensive team, and you want to send Zimmerman to jail for it? I realize that there's a non-zero chance that Zimmerman did act completely out of line that night, and it's really impossible to know for sure. But on balance, Zimmerman's story seems much likelier, to me at least. On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 11:56 sc2superfan101 wrote:
I want anyone to give me a scenario in which it is at all possible, given the evidence we've now seen, that Zimmerman somehow ran down a physically fit, 17 year old football player, and then started a fight only to get on the losing end (John Good's testimony), and then take back control of the fight (without injuring Trayvon in any way) and shoot him.
Because that sequence of events is 100% required to have occurred for Zimmerman to be guilty of what he's charged, and that, to me, is so unbelievably absurd a scenario that you might as well say that Zimmerman used his secret spiderman powers to do it. I was under the impression that he did most of his pursuing in his car, though correct me if I am wrong. He had to get out of his car to track Trayvon for a while. According to him, he lost Trayvon after a while, and was walking back towards his car when the incident occurred. Keep in mind that this is a good distance from Trayvon's home, where Rachel testified that Trayvon told her he was. Well I admit the idea that he went into the backyard and back out doesn't make sense to me, but the only explanation that makes sense to me is that she was confused and thought he made it back but he didn't, since I don't understand why she would lie about that since it does not help Trayvon's innocence, (assuming that it is implausible that he made there it back due to the distance). The part that I find more plausible is the actual confrontation and dialogue that she claims took place. Based on the evidence we do have, Zimmerman was following him and did not want him to get away, Trayvon was running away at some point, her description of the start of the actual encounter makes a lot more sense to me. I just can't see Trayvon, running scared on a rainy night, suddenly deciding "nah fuck it, I can take this guy" and sneaking up and attacking Zimmerman from some bushes, also without any explanation. I mean it is possible, I just don't see it as likely, if he could outrun Zimmerman easily, why not keep running? If someone is following you, wouldn't you try to find out why before attacking them and pummelling their face into the ground? Neither account fully adds up, they are both fairly sketchy. I'm not saying that he should be convicted based on this testimony alone, which is why I hoped for a recording of the phone conversation so we would have something solid, but based on the evidence it seems to me that he did something wrong and should be punished. Judging from his texts and his social media profiles, I can definitely see Martin doing something along those lines. But why run and then change his mind? How exactly do you propose that plays out? He's running away, loses Zimmerman takes it as an opportunity to sneak up on the creepy guy who is following him? And if we're going to make those kinds of judgements. Pretty odd behavior for Zimmerman. Did you listen to the 911 calls? All of his behaviour was odd, he sounded disturbed, not to mention he's a racist wannabe cop! (last parts are sarcasm, his behaviour was pretty odd). On July 12 2013 14:32 SilverLeagueElite wrote:On July 12 2013 13:51 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 12:47 FatChicksUnited wrote:On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:
Well from her testimony (which I do agree is shaky) it sounded like Zimmerman initially was the aggressor and tried to grab Trayvon or something 'she heard Trayvon saying, "Get off. Get off,"'. There wouldn't be much physical evidence if he didn't actually actually physically hit him, and under the circumstances it would be understandable that Trayvon felt the need to defend himself since he had done nothing wrong and (as far as we know) received no explanation, though of course at a certain point Trayvon got the upper hand and was no longer defending himself.
By "something wrong prior" I meant that assuming that the above scenario was the case, that he followed Trayvon (not inherently wrong), attempted to subdue him (not extremely wrong, possibly only worthy of an assault charge) and after fearing for his life he killed Trayvon. So if this were the sequence of events, what he did initially may not be worthy of a harsh conviction, the result was the death of a person and I still feel he would be responsible. So according to her testimony, Trayvon left his father's fiancee's backyard, and went out looking for Zimmerman. Then Zimmerman approached him and attempted to physically subdue him, despite having no good reason for doing so, as he only observed Trayvon walking in the rain and not doing anything unlawful (not being sarcastic here). Pretty odd behavior for Zimmerman. And now you, hearing her testimony, believe it over a much more plausible version of events, which is the version put forward by Zimmerman and his defensive team, and you want to send Zimmerman to jail for it? I realize that there's a non-zero chance that Zimmerman did act completely out of line that night, and it's really impossible to know for sure. But on balance, Zimmerman's story seems much likelier, to me at least. On July 12 2013 12:16 Myrddraal wrote:On July 12 2013 11:56 sc2superfan101 wrote:
I want anyone to give me a scenario in which it is at all possible, given the evidence we've now seen, that Zimmerman somehow ran down a physically fit, 17 year old football player, and then started a fight only to get on the losing end (John Good's testimony), and then take back control of the fight (without injuring Trayvon in any way) and shoot him.
Because that sequence of events is 100% required to have occurred for Zimmerman to be guilty of what he's charged, and that, to me, is so unbelievably absurd a scenario that you might as well say that Zimmerman used his secret spiderman powers to do it. I was under the impression that he did most of his pursuing in his car, though correct me if I am wrong. He had to get out of his car to track Trayvon for a while. According to him, he lost Trayvon after a while, and was walking back towards his car when the incident occurred. Keep in mind that this is a good distance from Trayvon's home, where Rachel testified that Trayvon told her he was. I just can't see Trayvon, running scared on a rainy night, suddenly deciding "nah fuck it, I can take this guy" and sneaking up and attacking Zimmerman from some bushes, also without any explanation. I can understand that line of reasoning if it was coming from the jury but we, as third party onlookers have information the jury doesn't - namely the cell phone contents, which shows Trayvon leaning towards a thug life. I don't know, it's one thing to lean towards a thug life, and it's another to attack a grown man who's following you on a rainy night. Maybe you guys are right, maybe he was just stupid, but judging Zimmerman he was equally likely to do something stupid. Is pissed as he's running away from Zimmerman and decides that he wants to get revenge on him. Proceeds to attack him and gets carried away as he's attacking him. I'm not saying that's what happened, but with Trayvon's history, it's a plausible explanation, Would be nice to have Trayvon's side of the story. It could easily be that when GZ was "reaching for his phone" he was actually reaching for his gun which was in almost the exact same location he said he reached for. Had Trayvon perceived An unidentified stranger armed with a gun following him home at night reaching for his weapon his use of force even after John Good would be perfectly justified. So the idea that there are not reasonable interpretations of the evidence that would demonstrate so is blinding yourself to the evidence. Whether it's enough to convict is another story. Just to say there is a perfectly reasonable chance this is all GZ's fault instead of just partly. In which case while his acquittal may be legally just, it may just as well be a miserable failure.
You're right, maybe we should change the legal system to convict on farfetched possibilities like that without evidence.
Think of it like this. Who is more likely to start the fight: a man who really can't fight with no known racial prejudices who is looking to prevent a burglary by making sure the cops arrest a suspicious individual, or a kid who is known to be upset about the issue ("creepy ass cracker"), who has been suspended from school for fighting before, and who might be under the influence of drugs that are known to cause paranoia?
It may certainly have happened some other way, but motive seems to favor Zimmerman.
|
Here's what we know:
1. Trayvon told Rachel that "creepy ass cracker" was following him for no reason. At some point she told him to run, and he said "Nah, I'm almost home". (This does not equate to I'm in my fucking backyard...)
2. Zimmerman was parked in his car (at its final parking place) when Trayvon "started running" and Zimmerman lost sight of him as Trayvon went down the "dog walk".
3. Zimmerman got out of his car after this and started heading across the top of the "T" part of the sidewalk.
4. Some "unexplained" time passed. I am unclear on exactly how much time and how they figured it, as it seems they are using Rachel's conversation with Trayvon in conjunction with the 911 calls, but they don't necessarily follow the same baseline. We know the 911 calls will all match up, but the Rachel / Trayvon call was different.
5. There was a confrontation, keys, flashlights, phones, miscellaneous other shit ended up strewn about the scene and George shot Trayvon.
Here's what I think happened:
1. Trayvon noticed Zimmerman following him, relayed his displeasure about it to Rachel, circled Zimmerman's car at one point to check him out, walked across the top of the "T".
2. Trayvon knew George was in the car watching him, so just before he went of Zimmerman's sight, he started to run, as if to bait Zimmerman to get out to follow him so Trayvon could ambush him. Trayvon wanted to beat this "creepy ass cracker's" ass because Trayvon was being profiled simply because he was black, and he likes that about as much as Rachel likes to testify.
3. Trayvon likely stopped running after he got out of Zimmerman's sight and found a nice place to hide in the pitch black, so he could ambush George as he came looking for him. Trayvon likely told Rachel what he was about to do, as this explains why she thought it was "just a fight" and didn't call anyone when texts and phone calls to Trayvon's phone went unanswered. Trayvon probably was waiting for George to come down the "T" where it was nice and dark for a better ambush, but George probably went directly across to check for an address. On George's way back to his car, Trayvon noticed George wasn't coming down the "T" as he had hoped for, so after George had passed, Trayvon came out to confront George.
4. The best I can think of to explain any "unexplained" gaps of time is George may have come down the "T" to see if he could find Trayvon, but not far enough down the "T" for Trayvon to successfully ambush him. It also might be that Rachel's timeline is fucked up because she either heard the entire incident through the phone, or Trayvon disconnected the call beforehand. Rachel's reaction to this is just too fishy to be as she explains it.
5. The confrontation probably went similar to how George described it, as far as dialog. It's entirely possible the confrontation didn't originate at the "T", but down closer to where they were seen by John Good. I have a feeling George just fudged that little distance to remove the "following" aspect of having gone down the "T". In either case, it seems it was a planned ambush by Trayvon and he got shot for it.
Pretty sure that's consistent with all evidence and also matches with the "left to right" movement heard by the one witness in the beginning of the trial, although I think she's full of shit because who remembers people walking outside when there is no reason to remember ?
|
On July 12 2013 15:41 Kaitlin wrote:
Here's what we know:
1. Trayvon told Rachel that "creepy ass cracker" was following him for no reason. At some point she told him to run, and he said "Nah, I'm almost home". (This does not equate to I'm in my fucking backyard...)
2. Zimmerman was parked in his car (at its final parking place) when Trayvon "started running" and Zimmerman lost sight of him as Trayvon went down the "dog walk".
3. Zimmerman got out of his car after this and started heading across the top of the "T" part of the sidewalk.
4. Some "unexplained" time passed. I am unclear on exactly how much time and how they figured it, as it seems they are using Rachel's conversation with Trayvon in conjunction with the 911 calls, but they don't necessarily follow the same baseline. We know the 911 calls will all match up, but the Rachel / Trayvon call was different.
5. There was a confrontation, keys, flashlights, phones, miscellaneous other shit ended up strewn about the scene and George shot Trayvon.
Here's what I think happened:
1. Trayvon noticed Zimmerman following him, relayed his displeasure about it to Rachel, circled Zimmerman's car at one point to check him out, walked across the top of the "T".
2. Trayvon knew George was in the car watching him, so just before he went of Zimmerman's sight, he started to run, as if to bait Zimmerman to get out to follow him so Trayvon could ambush him. Trayvon wanted to beat this "creepy ass cracker's" ass because Trayvon was being profiled simply because he was black, and he likes that about as much as Rachel likes to testify.
3. Trayvon likely stopped running after he got out of Zimmerman's sight and found a nice place to hide in the pitch black, so he could ambush George as he came looking for him. Trayvon likely told Rachel what he was about to do, as this explains why she thought it was "just a fight" and didn't call anyone when texts and phone calls to Trayvon's phone went unanswered. Trayvon probably was waiting for George to come down the "T" where it was nice and dark for a better ambush, but George probably went directly across to check for an address. On George's way back to his car, Trayvon noticed George wasn't coming down the "T" as he had hoped for, so after George had passed, Trayvon came out to confront George.
4. The best I can think of to explain any "unexplained" gaps of time is George may have come down the "T" to see if he could find Trayvon, but not far enough down the "T" for Trayvon to successfully ambush him. It also might be that Rachel's timeline is fucked up because she either heard the entire incident through the phone, or Trayvon disconnected the call beforehand. Rachel's reaction to this is just too fishy to be as she explains it.
5. The confrontation probably went similar to how George described it, as far as dialog. It's entirely possible the confrontation didn't originate at the "T", but down closer to where they were seen by John Good. I have a feeling George just fudged that little distance to remove the "following" aspect of having gone down the "T". In either case, it seems it was a planned ambush by Trayvon and he got shot for it.
Pretty sure that's consistent with all evidence and also matches with the "left to right" movement heard by the one witness in the beginning of the trial, although I think she's full of shit because who remembers people walking outside when there is no reason to remember ?
I imagine Trayvon moving out of Zimmerman's sight. But instead of running, opting to hide to confirm that Zimmerman is indeed trying to follow him. Zimmerman does, and as he passes Trayvon makes the impulsive decision to 'man up' and pick a fight.
I'm not convinced that Trayvon necessarily ambushed him. We only have Zimmerman's account to rely on. I imagine at least 30 seconds of bullshit posturing and 'you wanna go?'-style miscommunication.
|
On July 12 2013 16:08 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:41 Kaitlin wrote:
Here's what we know:
1. Trayvon told Rachel that "creepy ass cracker" was following him for no reason. At some point she told him to run, and he said "Nah, I'm almost home". (This does not equate to I'm in my fucking backyard...)
2. Zimmerman was parked in his car (at its final parking place) when Trayvon "started running" and Zimmerman lost sight of him as Trayvon went down the "dog walk".
3. Zimmerman got out of his car after this and started heading across the top of the "T" part of the sidewalk.
4. Some "unexplained" time passed. I am unclear on exactly how much time and how they figured it, as it seems they are using Rachel's conversation with Trayvon in conjunction with the 911 calls, but they don't necessarily follow the same baseline. We know the 911 calls will all match up, but the Rachel / Trayvon call was different.
5. There was a confrontation, keys, flashlights, phones, miscellaneous other shit ended up strewn about the scene and George shot Trayvon.
Here's what I think happened:
1. Trayvon noticed Zimmerman following him, relayed his displeasure about it to Rachel, circled Zimmerman's car at one point to check him out, walked across the top of the "T".
2. Trayvon knew George was in the car watching him, so just before he went of Zimmerman's sight, he started to run, as if to bait Zimmerman to get out to follow him so Trayvon could ambush him. Trayvon wanted to beat this "creepy ass cracker's" ass because Trayvon was being profiled simply because he was black, and he likes that about as much as Rachel likes to testify.
3. Trayvon likely stopped running after he got out of Zimmerman's sight and found a nice place to hide in the pitch black, so he could ambush George as he came looking for him. Trayvon likely told Rachel what he was about to do, as this explains why she thought it was "just a fight" and didn't call anyone when texts and phone calls to Trayvon's phone went unanswered. Trayvon probably was waiting for George to come down the "T" where it was nice and dark for a better ambush, but George probably went directly across to check for an address. On George's way back to his car, Trayvon noticed George wasn't coming down the "T" as he had hoped for, so after George had passed, Trayvon came out to confront George.
4. The best I can think of to explain any "unexplained" gaps of time is George may have come down the "T" to see if he could find Trayvon, but not far enough down the "T" for Trayvon to successfully ambush him. It also might be that Rachel's timeline is fucked up because she either heard the entire incident through the phone, or Trayvon disconnected the call beforehand. Rachel's reaction to this is just too fishy to be as she explains it.
5. The confrontation probably went similar to how George described it, as far as dialog. It's entirely possible the confrontation didn't originate at the "T", but down closer to where they were seen by John Good. I have a feeling George just fudged that little distance to remove the "following" aspect of having gone down the "T". In either case, it seems it was a planned ambush by Trayvon and he got shot for it.
Pretty sure that's consistent with all evidence and also matches with the "left to right" movement heard by the one witness in the beginning of the trial, although I think she's full of shit because who remembers people walking outside when there is no reason to remember ? I imagine Trayvon moving out of Zimmerman's sight. But instead of running, opting to hide to confirm that Zimmerman is indeed trying to follow him. Zimmerman does, and as he passes Trayvon makes the impulsive decision to 'man up' and pick a fight. I'm not convinced that Trayvon necessarily ambushed him. We only have Zimmerman's account to rely on. I imagine at least 30 seconds of bullshit posturing and 'you wanna go?'-style miscommunication.
Yeah, as George described it, I wouldn't consider it an "ambush" as even George said Trayvon initiated the verbal dialogue. He may have planned to get an ambush, but it doesn't seem to have worked out that way. I don't think there was much "you wanna go" dialogue because I just don't think George would have "manned up", also there's no evidence of that from either George or Rachel.
|
On July 12 2013 16:17 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 16:08 Defacer wrote:On July 12 2013 15:41 Kaitlin wrote:
Here's what we know:
1. Trayvon told Rachel that "creepy ass cracker" was following him for no reason. At some point she told him to run, and he said "Nah, I'm almost home". (This does not equate to I'm in my fucking backyard...)
2. Zimmerman was parked in his car (at its final parking place) when Trayvon "started running" and Zimmerman lost sight of him as Trayvon went down the "dog walk".
3. Zimmerman got out of his car after this and started heading across the top of the "T" part of the sidewalk.
4. Some "unexplained" time passed. I am unclear on exactly how much time and how they figured it, as it seems they are using Rachel's conversation with Trayvon in conjunction with the 911 calls, but they don't necessarily follow the same baseline. We know the 911 calls will all match up, but the Rachel / Trayvon call was different.
5. There was a confrontation, keys, flashlights, phones, miscellaneous other shit ended up strewn about the scene and George shot Trayvon.
Here's what I think happened:
1. Trayvon noticed Zimmerman following him, relayed his displeasure about it to Rachel, circled Zimmerman's car at one point to check him out, walked across the top of the "T".
2. Trayvon knew George was in the car watching him, so just before he went of Zimmerman's sight, he started to run, as if to bait Zimmerman to get out to follow him so Trayvon could ambush him. Trayvon wanted to beat this "creepy ass cracker's" ass because Trayvon was being profiled simply because he was black, and he likes that about as much as Rachel likes to testify.
3. Trayvon likely stopped running after he got out of Zimmerman's sight and found a nice place to hide in the pitch black, so he could ambush George as he came looking for him. Trayvon likely told Rachel what he was about to do, as this explains why she thought it was "just a fight" and didn't call anyone when texts and phone calls to Trayvon's phone went unanswered. Trayvon probably was waiting for George to come down the "T" where it was nice and dark for a better ambush, but George probably went directly across to check for an address. On George's way back to his car, Trayvon noticed George wasn't coming down the "T" as he had hoped for, so after George had passed, Trayvon came out to confront George.
4. The best I can think of to explain any "unexplained" gaps of time is George may have come down the "T" to see if he could find Trayvon, but not far enough down the "T" for Trayvon to successfully ambush him. It also might be that Rachel's timeline is fucked up because she either heard the entire incident through the phone, or Trayvon disconnected the call beforehand. Rachel's reaction to this is just too fishy to be as she explains it.
5. The confrontation probably went similar to how George described it, as far as dialog. It's entirely possible the confrontation didn't originate at the "T", but down closer to where they were seen by John Good. I have a feeling George just fudged that little distance to remove the "following" aspect of having gone down the "T". In either case, it seems it was a planned ambush by Trayvon and he got shot for it.
Pretty sure that's consistent with all evidence and also matches with the "left to right" movement heard by the one witness in the beginning of the trial, although I think she's full of shit because who remembers people walking outside when there is no reason to remember ? I imagine Trayvon moving out of Zimmerman's sight. But instead of running, opting to hide to confirm that Zimmerman is indeed trying to follow him. Zimmerman does, and as he passes Trayvon makes the impulsive decision to 'man up' and pick a fight. I'm not convinced that Trayvon necessarily ambushed him. We only have Zimmerman's account to rely on. I imagine at least 30 seconds of bullshit posturing and 'you wanna go?'-style miscommunication. Yeah, as George described it, I wouldn't consider it an "ambush" as even George said Trayvon initiated the verbal dialogue. He may have planned to get an ambush, but it doesn't seem to have worked out that way. I don't think there was much "you wanna go" dialogue because I just don't think George would have "manned up", also there's no evidence of that from either George or Rachel.
How much force would George have had to use in order to make it no longer legal self-defense?
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 12 2013 16:20 kmillz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 16:17 Kaitlin wrote:On July 12 2013 16:08 Defacer wrote:On July 12 2013 15:41 Kaitlin wrote:
Here's what we know:
1. Trayvon told Rachel that "creepy ass cracker" was following him for no reason. At some point she told him to run, and he said "Nah, I'm almost home". (This does not equate to I'm in my fucking backyard...)
2. Zimmerman was parked in his car (at its final parking place) when Trayvon "started running" and Zimmerman lost sight of him as Trayvon went down the "dog walk".
3. Zimmerman got out of his car after this and started heading across the top of the "T" part of the sidewalk.
4. Some "unexplained" time passed. I am unclear on exactly how much time and how they figured it, as it seems they are using Rachel's conversation with Trayvon in conjunction with the 911 calls, but they don't necessarily follow the same baseline. We know the 911 calls will all match up, but the Rachel / Trayvon call was different.
5. There was a confrontation, keys, flashlights, phones, miscellaneous other shit ended up strewn about the scene and George shot Trayvon.
Here's what I think happened:
1. Trayvon noticed Zimmerman following him, relayed his displeasure about it to Rachel, circled Zimmerman's car at one point to check him out, walked across the top of the "T".
2. Trayvon knew George was in the car watching him, so just before he went of Zimmerman's sight, he started to run, as if to bait Zimmerman to get out to follow him so Trayvon could ambush him. Trayvon wanted to beat this "creepy ass cracker's" ass because Trayvon was being profiled simply because he was black, and he likes that about as much as Rachel likes to testify.
3. Trayvon likely stopped running after he got out of Zimmerman's sight and found a nice place to hide in the pitch black, so he could ambush George as he came looking for him. Trayvon likely told Rachel what he was about to do, as this explains why she thought it was "just a fight" and didn't call anyone when texts and phone calls to Trayvon's phone went unanswered. Trayvon probably was waiting for George to come down the "T" where it was nice and dark for a better ambush, but George probably went directly across to check for an address. On George's way back to his car, Trayvon noticed George wasn't coming down the "T" as he had hoped for, so after George had passed, Trayvon came out to confront George.
4. The best I can think of to explain any "unexplained" gaps of time is George may have come down the "T" to see if he could find Trayvon, but not far enough down the "T" for Trayvon to successfully ambush him. It also might be that Rachel's timeline is fucked up because she either heard the entire incident through the phone, or Trayvon disconnected the call beforehand. Rachel's reaction to this is just too fishy to be as she explains it.
5. The confrontation probably went similar to how George described it, as far as dialog. It's entirely possible the confrontation didn't originate at the "T", but down closer to where they were seen by John Good. I have a feeling George just fudged that little distance to remove the "following" aspect of having gone down the "T". In either case, it seems it was a planned ambush by Trayvon and he got shot for it.
Pretty sure that's consistent with all evidence and also matches with the "left to right" movement heard by the one witness in the beginning of the trial, although I think she's full of shit because who remembers people walking outside when there is no reason to remember ? I imagine Trayvon moving out of Zimmerman's sight. But instead of running, opting to hide to confirm that Zimmerman is indeed trying to follow him. Zimmerman does, and as he passes Trayvon makes the impulsive decision to 'man up' and pick a fight. I'm not convinced that Trayvon necessarily ambushed him. We only have Zimmerman's account to rely on. I imagine at least 30 seconds of bullshit posturing and 'you wanna go?'-style miscommunication. Yeah, as George described it, I wouldn't consider it an "ambush" as even George said Trayvon initiated the verbal dialogue. He may have planned to get an ambush, but it doesn't seem to have worked out that way. I don't think there was much "you wanna go" dialogue because I just don't think George would have "manned up", also there's no evidence of that from either George or Rachel. How much force would George have had to use in order to make it no longer legal self-defense?
Anything past what's required to save his life.
If he shot twice, that might get him convicted. If he missed and Trayvon ran away, shooting again would get him convicted.
|
On July 12 2013 16:22 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 16:20 kmillz wrote:On July 12 2013 16:17 Kaitlin wrote:On July 12 2013 16:08 Defacer wrote:On July 12 2013 15:41 Kaitlin wrote:
Here's what we know:
1. Trayvon told Rachel that "creepy ass cracker" was following him for no reason. At some point she told him to run, and he said "Nah, I'm almost home". (This does not equate to I'm in my fucking backyard...)
2. Zimmerman was parked in his car (at its final parking place) when Trayvon "started running" and Zimmerman lost sight of him as Trayvon went down the "dog walk".
3. Zimmerman got out of his car after this and started heading across the top of the "T" part of the sidewalk.
4. Some "unexplained" time passed. I am unclear on exactly how much time and how they figured it, as it seems they are using Rachel's conversation with Trayvon in conjunction with the 911 calls, but they don't necessarily follow the same baseline. We know the 911 calls will all match up, but the Rachel / Trayvon call was different.
5. There was a confrontation, keys, flashlights, phones, miscellaneous other shit ended up strewn about the scene and George shot Trayvon.
Here's what I think happened:
1. Trayvon noticed Zimmerman following him, relayed his displeasure about it to Rachel, circled Zimmerman's car at one point to check him out, walked across the top of the "T".
2. Trayvon knew George was in the car watching him, so just before he went of Zimmerman's sight, he started to run, as if to bait Zimmerman to get out to follow him so Trayvon could ambush him. Trayvon wanted to beat this "creepy ass cracker's" ass because Trayvon was being profiled simply because he was black, and he likes that about as much as Rachel likes to testify.
3. Trayvon likely stopped running after he got out of Zimmerman's sight and found a nice place to hide in the pitch black, so he could ambush George as he came looking for him. Trayvon likely told Rachel what he was about to do, as this explains why she thought it was "just a fight" and didn't call anyone when texts and phone calls to Trayvon's phone went unanswered. Trayvon probably was waiting for George to come down the "T" where it was nice and dark for a better ambush, but George probably went directly across to check for an address. On George's way back to his car, Trayvon noticed George wasn't coming down the "T" as he had hoped for, so after George had passed, Trayvon came out to confront George.
4. The best I can think of to explain any "unexplained" gaps of time is George may have come down the "T" to see if he could find Trayvon, but not far enough down the "T" for Trayvon to successfully ambush him. It also might be that Rachel's timeline is fucked up because she either heard the entire incident through the phone, or Trayvon disconnected the call beforehand. Rachel's reaction to this is just too fishy to be as she explains it.
5. The confrontation probably went similar to how George described it, as far as dialog. It's entirely possible the confrontation didn't originate at the "T", but down closer to where they were seen by John Good. I have a feeling George just fudged that little distance to remove the "following" aspect of having gone down the "T". In either case, it seems it was a planned ambush by Trayvon and he got shot for it.
Pretty sure that's consistent with all evidence and also matches with the "left to right" movement heard by the one witness in the beginning of the trial, although I think she's full of shit because who remembers people walking outside when there is no reason to remember ? I imagine Trayvon moving out of Zimmerman's sight. But instead of running, opting to hide to confirm that Zimmerman is indeed trying to follow him. Zimmerman does, and as he passes Trayvon makes the impulsive decision to 'man up' and pick a fight. I'm not convinced that Trayvon necessarily ambushed him. We only have Zimmerman's account to rely on. I imagine at least 30 seconds of bullshit posturing and 'you wanna go?'-style miscommunication. Yeah, as George described it, I wouldn't consider it an "ambush" as even George said Trayvon initiated the verbal dialogue. He may have planned to get an ambush, but it doesn't seem to have worked out that way. I don't think there was much "you wanna go" dialogue because I just don't think George would have "manned up", also there's no evidence of that from either George or Rachel. How much force would George have had to use in order to make it no longer legal self-defense? Anything past what's required to save his life. If he shot twice, that might get him convicted.
I meant the minimum force used before he shot the gun that would have negated any plausible self-defense (ex. if he was punching Trayvon. I know there is no evidence of this, just as an example)
|
On July 12 2013 16:25 kmillz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 16:22 LegalLord wrote:On July 12 2013 16:20 kmillz wrote:On July 12 2013 16:17 Kaitlin wrote:On July 12 2013 16:08 Defacer wrote:On July 12 2013 15:41 Kaitlin wrote:
Here's what we know:
1. Trayvon told Rachel that "creepy ass cracker" was following him for no reason. At some point she told him to run, and he said "Nah, I'm almost home". (This does not equate to I'm in my fucking backyard...)
2. Zimmerman was parked in his car (at its final parking place) when Trayvon "started running" and Zimmerman lost sight of him as Trayvon went down the "dog walk".
3. Zimmerman got out of his car after this and started heading across the top of the "T" part of the sidewalk.
4. Some "unexplained" time passed. I am unclear on exactly how much time and how they figured it, as it seems they are using Rachel's conversation with Trayvon in conjunction with the 911 calls, but they don't necessarily follow the same baseline. We know the 911 calls will all match up, but the Rachel / Trayvon call was different.
5. There was a confrontation, keys, flashlights, phones, miscellaneous other shit ended up strewn about the scene and George shot Trayvon.
Here's what I think happened:
1. Trayvon noticed Zimmerman following him, relayed his displeasure about it to Rachel, circled Zimmerman's car at one point to check him out, walked across the top of the "T".
2. Trayvon knew George was in the car watching him, so just before he went of Zimmerman's sight, he started to run, as if to bait Zimmerman to get out to follow him so Trayvon could ambush him. Trayvon wanted to beat this "creepy ass cracker's" ass because Trayvon was being profiled simply because he was black, and he likes that about as much as Rachel likes to testify.
3. Trayvon likely stopped running after he got out of Zimmerman's sight and found a nice place to hide in the pitch black, so he could ambush George as he came looking for him. Trayvon likely told Rachel what he was about to do, as this explains why she thought it was "just a fight" and didn't call anyone when texts and phone calls to Trayvon's phone went unanswered. Trayvon probably was waiting for George to come down the "T" where it was nice and dark for a better ambush, but George probably went directly across to check for an address. On George's way back to his car, Trayvon noticed George wasn't coming down the "T" as he had hoped for, so after George had passed, Trayvon came out to confront George.
4. The best I can think of to explain any "unexplained" gaps of time is George may have come down the "T" to see if he could find Trayvon, but not far enough down the "T" for Trayvon to successfully ambush him. It also might be that Rachel's timeline is fucked up because she either heard the entire incident through the phone, or Trayvon disconnected the call beforehand. Rachel's reaction to this is just too fishy to be as she explains it.
5. The confrontation probably went similar to how George described it, as far as dialog. It's entirely possible the confrontation didn't originate at the "T", but down closer to where they were seen by John Good. I have a feeling George just fudged that little distance to remove the "following" aspect of having gone down the "T". In either case, it seems it was a planned ambush by Trayvon and he got shot for it.
Pretty sure that's consistent with all evidence and also matches with the "left to right" movement heard by the one witness in the beginning of the trial, although I think she's full of shit because who remembers people walking outside when there is no reason to remember ? I imagine Trayvon moving out of Zimmerman's sight. But instead of running, opting to hide to confirm that Zimmerman is indeed trying to follow him. Zimmerman does, and as he passes Trayvon makes the impulsive decision to 'man up' and pick a fight. I'm not convinced that Trayvon necessarily ambushed him. We only have Zimmerman's account to rely on. I imagine at least 30 seconds of bullshit posturing and 'you wanna go?'-style miscommunication. Yeah, as George described it, I wouldn't consider it an "ambush" as even George said Trayvon initiated the verbal dialogue. He may have planned to get an ambush, but it doesn't seem to have worked out that way. I don't think there was much "you wanna go" dialogue because I just don't think George would have "manned up", also there's no evidence of that from either George or Rachel. How much force would George have had to use in order to make it no longer legal self-defense? Anything past what's required to save his life. If he shot twice, that might get him convicted. I meant the minimum force used before he shot the gun that would have negated any plausible self-defense (ex. if he was punching Trayvon. I know there is no evidence of this, just as an example)
Previous force used by George doesn't affect the ability to use the gun to defend himself. It's all based on his perception of the level of incoming damage. If he's punching, grabbing, eye gouging, biting, etc, it doesn't matter. As long as the attack continues and his perception meets the threshold, then the shooting is justified.
edit: Of course, punches and other "offensive" strikes could work against an argument of self-defense, but his prior use of force doesn't impact what is justified.
|
|
|
But in the 40+ seconds of crying for help and fighting, why not a single scratch was found on Trayvor? My theory was that GZ was being beat up so bad and he didn't have any "warrior spirit stuff" that he just froze and got beat until he remember about the gun.
And this line also explains why he did really grab for the phone, not the gun initially. Or else he would have tried all of the 40+ seconds to grab the gun and having a purpose I don't think he would scream help while actually trying to do something offensive, eg grabbing the gun.
And Trayvor didn't knew about the gun from start, or else I'm sure he would have grabbed it for sure during the 40+ seconds of beating him up.
As to self defense I think what matters are the last 40 seconds of the fight and John Good testimony. It really doesn't matter who started it, what matters is previous to the shot TM was on top beating GZ badly without him getting even a scratch AND refusing to stop and let him go as John Good asked him to do.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
So the verdict has to be unanimous one way or another. That settles that.
Otherwise, nothing especially interesting to note. Seems pretty standard.
|
I'm so incensed about this judge. She confronts the witness about whether or not he wants to testify (wtf) before the defense rested. Defense objects and she just rattles on, doesn't let him explain the objection. Who the hell attacks the witness for a decisions his counsel should have in conference with him before the defense rests his case. Judge is just way out there. I understand if the defense rests and she wants to make sure Zimmerman knew he could take the stand to defend himself if he chooses, but all that is just way out there. She's giving judges a bad name with the way she conducts herself.
|
On July 12 2013 17:50 Danglars wrote:
I'm so incensed about this judge. She confronts the witness about whether or not he wants to testify (wtf) before the defense rested. Defense objects and she just rattles on, doesn't let him explain the objection. Who the hell attacks the witness for a decisions his counsel should have in conference with him before the defense rests his case. Judge is just way out there. I understand if the defense rests and she wants to make sure Zimmerman knew he could take the stand to defend himself if he chooses, but all that is just way out there. She's giving judges a bad name with the way she conducts herself.
It was the accused that she asked, not the witness. Apparently it's a common practice in some jurisdictions for the judge to make sure that the accused knows that he has the right to testify on his own behalf, and that he has made the informed decision to not exercise that right. It was a formality that wasn't done in front of the jury and shouldn't have any affect on the trial's outcome.
|
On July 12 2013 15:41 Kaitlin wrote:
Here's what we know:
1. Trayvon told Rachel that "creepy ass cracker" was following him for no reason. At some point she told him to run, and he said "Nah, I'm almost home". (This does not equate to I'm in my fucking backyard...)
2. Zimmerman was parked in his car (at its final parking place) when Trayvon "started running" and Zimmerman lost sight of him as Trayvon went down the "dog walk".
3. Zimmerman got out of his car after this and started heading across the top of the "T" part of the sidewalk.
4. Some "unexplained" time passed. I am unclear on exactly how much time and how they figured it, as it seems they are using Rachel's conversation with Trayvon in conjunction with the 911 calls, but they don't necessarily follow the same baseline. We know the 911 calls will all match up, but the Rachel / Trayvon call was different.
5. There was a confrontation, keys, flashlights, phones, miscellaneous other shit ended up strewn about the scene and George shot Trayvon.
Here's what I think happened:
1. Trayvon noticed Zimmerman following him, relayed his displeasure about it to Rachel, circled Zimmerman's car at one point to check him out, walked across the top of the "T".
2. Trayvon knew George was in the car watching him, so just before he went of Zimmerman's sight, he started to run, as if to bait Zimmerman to get out to follow him so Trayvon could ambush him. Trayvon wanted to beat this "creepy ass cracker's" ass because Trayvon was being profiled simply because he was black, and he likes that about as much as Rachel likes to testify.
3. Trayvon likely stopped running after he got out of Zimmerman's sight and found a nice place to hide in the pitch black, so he could ambush George as he came looking for him. Trayvon likely told Rachel what he was about to do, as this explains why she thought it was "just a fight" and didn't call anyone when texts and phone calls to Trayvon's phone went unanswered. Trayvon probably was waiting for George to come down the "T" where it was nice and dark for a better ambush, but George probably went directly across to check for an address. On George's way back to his car, Trayvon noticed George wasn't coming down the "T" as he had hoped for, so after George had passed, Trayvon came out to confront George.
4. The best I can think of to explain any "unexplained" gaps of time is George may have come down the "T" to see if he could find Trayvon, but not far enough down the "T" for Trayvon to successfully ambush him. It also might be that Rachel's timeline is fucked up because she either heard the entire incident through the phone, or Trayvon disconnected the call beforehand. Rachel's reaction to this is just too fishy to be as she explains it.
5. The confrontation probably went similar to how George described it, as far as dialog. It's entirely possible the confrontation didn't originate at the "T", but down closer to where they were seen by John Good. I have a feeling George just fudged that little distance to remove the "following" aspect of having gone down the "T". In either case, it seems it was a planned ambush by Trayvon and he got shot for it.
Pretty sure that's consistent with all evidence and also matches with the "left to right" movement heard by the one witness in the beginning of the trial, although I think she's full of shit because who remembers people walking outside when there is no reason to remember ?
I find this whole "ambush" line of reasoning very suspect given your "what we know" points. I am not saying your story didn't happen, Im simply saying that it conflicts with every experience I have ever had with kids like Tayvon and guys like Zimmerman.
Unless this conflicts with some piece of evidence I have not heard the Occam's Razor scenario given the facts is, in my mind, as follows. Tayvon is walking home and notices he is being followed. The first instinct is to be scared since the nature of the follower is uncertain so he flees and hides. Zimmerman pulls over and begins pursuit on foot. At this point Tayvon knows it is just this one guy and he gets angry, comes out and starts barking just like all stupid kids do. With Tayvon in his face, likely saying he is gonna beat his ass, Zimmerman pushes Tayvon away and violence ensues. During the course of a normal fistfight the presence of a gun is revealed and the situation explodes.
Now, my account is just as speculative but it has the added bonus of being an extraordinarily typical interaction between people. BTW, none of this means he is guilty of murder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
