|
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 16 2013 08:38 Housemd wrote:
In the end, did the prosecution ever even have a case? They simply arrested Zimmerman due to public pressure and ruined his life.
This isn't a case of one lawyer being better than the other, its simply a case of one side having shit evidence. Am I right?
Well I mean, you kinda have to arrest or at least investigate when someone gets shot after an altercation. Whether that means the prosecution had a case is another matter, but obviously they weren't gonna just be like ignore the case completely, especially since Z stated that a fight took place...
I'm pretty sure Trayvon's family's lives are pretty fucking awful and they'll never be able to go anywhere without this shit following them either, so I don't think the legal system was uniquely punishing Z.
|
On July 16 2013 09:04 ImmunityLight wrote:
They should really turn their focus on guns instead of race. But I respect the history and culture of America.
Obama's message is trying to make that shift in focus.
|
So my question is: What was Trayvon Martin supposed to do in that scenario?
Stranger is pursuing you and ends up fighting you. Do you fight back and get executed, then get blamed for fighting back? Or do you not fight back and just hope that whoever this crazy person is doesn't kill you anyways? I don't see how this is the fault of Trayvon in any manner whatsoever. Zimmerman was completely at fault for beginning the altercation in the first place - it was wrongly started, and ended up with him taking someone's life. How does he not get punished for this?
|
|
|
On July 16 2013 09:16 Superiorwolf wrote:
So my question is: What was Trayvon Martin supposed to do in that scenario?
Stranger is pursuing you and ends up fighting you. Do you fight back and get executed, then get blamed for fighting back? Or do you not fight back and just hope that whoever this crazy person is doesn't kill you anyways? I don't see how this is the fault of Trayvon in any manner whatsoever. Zimmerman was completely at fault for beginning the altercation in the first place - it was wrongly started, and ended up with him taking someone's life. How does he not get punished for this?
You are assuming Trayvon fought back and Zimmermann was the one to physically assault him. There's zero evidence that it happened like that.
|
On July 16 2013 09:16 Superiorwolf wrote:
So my question is: What was Trayvon Martin supposed to do in that scenario?
Stranger is pursuing you and ends up fighting you. Do you fight back and get executed, then get blamed for fighting back? Or do you not fight back and just hope that whoever this crazy person is doesn't kill you anyways? I don't see how this is the fault of Trayvon in any manner whatsoever. Zimmerman was completely at fault for beginning the altercation in the first place - it was wrongly started, and ended up with him taking someone's life. How does he not get punished for this?
he could have just gone home. there was like a, what, 4:00 minute time frame in which he could have walked to his home, back to the store, back to his home, back to the store and then home again. i guess he walks really, really, really slow though.
|
On July 16 2013 09:17 SKC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2013 09:16 Superiorwolf wrote:
So my question is: What was Trayvon Martin supposed to do in that scenario?
Stranger is pursuing you and ends up fighting you. Do you fight back and get executed, then get blamed for fighting back? Or do you not fight back and just hope that whoever this crazy person is doesn't kill you anyways? I don't see how this is the fault of Trayvon in any manner whatsoever. Zimmerman was completely at fault for beginning the altercation in the first place - it was wrongly started, and ended up with him taking someone's life. How does he not get punished for this? You are assuming Trayvon fought back and Zimmermann was the one to physically assault him. There's zero evidence that it happened like that.
Well, we don't know who started the fight. But what we do know for a fact is that Zimmerman is the one who chose to pursue Trayvon even when advised not to - this is the key action that led up to the fight.
|
On July 16 2013 09:19 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2013 09:16 Superiorwolf wrote:
So my question is: What was Trayvon Martin supposed to do in that scenario?
Stranger is pursuing you and ends up fighting you. Do you fight back and get executed, then get blamed for fighting back? Or do you not fight back and just hope that whoever this crazy person is doesn't kill you anyways? I don't see how this is the fault of Trayvon in any manner whatsoever. Zimmerman was completely at fault for beginning the altercation in the first place - it was wrongly started, and ended up with him taking someone's life. How does he not get punished for this? he could have just gone home. there was like a, what, 4:00 minute time frame in which he could have walked to his home, back to the store, back to his home, back to the store and then home again. i guess he walks really, really, really slow though.
So all black boys are advised not to walk slow anymore, otherwise we can shoot them for being suspicious?
Obviously that's taking it to the extreme but walking slow should not be a valid reason to pursue someone with a gun to make sure they aren't doing anything wrong . . .
|
On July 16 2013 09:16 Superiorwolf wrote:
So my question is: What was Trayvon Martin supposed to do in that scenario?
Stranger is pursuing you and ends up fighting you. Do you fight back and get executed, then get blamed for fighting back? Or do you not fight back and just hope that whoever this crazy person is doesn't kill you anyways? I don't see how this is the fault of Trayvon in any manner whatsoever. Zimmerman was completely at fault for beginning the altercation in the first place - it was wrongly started, and ended up with him taking someone's life. How does he not get punished for this?
Trayvon had no injuries other than the bullet wound and cuts on his fist; George Zimmerman had a broken nose and multiple lacerations on the back of his head. George Zimmerman said he was not pursuing Trayvon, and an eyewitness testified that he saw George Zimmerman getting pummeled on bottom, and yelled for Trayvon to stop but Trayvon still continued.
|
Not really. No. If his life was threatened by Trayvon, he acted to his best ability to defend himself with the tools available. Its always too eazy to look in hindsight, "oh if I were there i would have" but you werent there, getting you head pounded in.
|
On July 16 2013 09:23 Superiorwolf wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2013 09:19 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 16 2013 09:16 Superiorwolf wrote:
So my question is: What was Trayvon Martin supposed to do in that scenario?
Stranger is pursuing you and ends up fighting you. Do you fight back and get executed, then get blamed for fighting back? Or do you not fight back and just hope that whoever this crazy person is doesn't kill you anyways? I don't see how this is the fault of Trayvon in any manner whatsoever. Zimmerman was completely at fault for beginning the altercation in the first place - it was wrongly started, and ended up with him taking someone's life. How does he not get punished for this? he could have just gone home. there was like a, what, 4:00 minute time frame in which he could have walked to his home, back to the store, back to his home, back to the store and then home again. i guess he walks really, really, really slow though. So all black boys are advised not to walk slow anymore, otherwise we can shoot them for being suspicious?
you asked what he should have done in that scenario. i just told you. a "creepy ass cracker" is following you and making you edgy, then go home. dont walk the 500 minute mile to your home.
by the way, did you watch the trial?
|
On July 16 2013 09:22 Superiorwolf wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2013 09:17 SKC wrote:On July 16 2013 09:16 Superiorwolf wrote:
So my question is: What was Trayvon Martin supposed to do in that scenario?
Stranger is pursuing you and ends up fighting you. Do you fight back and get executed, then get blamed for fighting back? Or do you not fight back and just hope that whoever this crazy person is doesn't kill you anyways? I don't see how this is the fault of Trayvon in any manner whatsoever. Zimmerman was completely at fault for beginning the altercation in the first place - it was wrongly started, and ended up with him taking someone's life. How does he not get punished for this? You are assuming Trayvon fought back and Zimmermann was the one to physically assault him. There's zero evidence that it happened like that. Well, we don't know who started the fight. But what we do know for a fact is that Zimmerman is the one who chose to pursue Trayvon even when suggested not to - this is the key action that led up to the fight.
Well, we don't know if Zimmermann was following Martin the whole time after the 911 call. He says otherwise. I would say actually starting a fight is the key action for starting a fight.
|
I think there needs to be a review on gun and self defense laws. Certainly not a race issue.
Zimmerman never would have had the courage to encounter Travyon if he didn't have a gun.
Also quoting a friend "you can see someone acting suspiciously, go up to him and confront him verbally at night in the dark, and if he panicks and comes at you you legally have the right to shoot them dead". That's pretty messed up.
There was not enough evidence presented to convict Zimmerman for 2DM, period.
|
On July 16 2013 09:28 ImmunityLight wrote:
I think there needs to be a review on gun and self defense laws. Certainly not a race issue.
Zimmerman never would have had the courage to encounter Travyon if he didn't have a gun.
Also quoting a friend "you can see someone acting suspiciously, go up to him and confront him verbally at night in the dark, and if he panicks and comes at you you legally have the right to shoot them dead".
There was not enough evidence presented to convict Zimmerman for 2DM, period.
What exactly do you think is wrong with self defense laws?
Your example is also wrong. If he merely "comes at you" after being provoked, I doubt any jury would find you not guilty. If he attempts to kill you for a mere insult, the situation changes.
|
I don't know I'm no law major. I just suggest people turn their focus on that instead of race is all.
|
On July 16 2013 09:28 ImmunityLight wrote:
I think there needs to be a review on gun and self defense laws. Certainly not a race issue.
Zimmerman never would have had the courage to encounter Travyon if he didn't have a gun.
Also quoting a friend "you can see someone acting suspiciously, go up to him and confront him verbally at night in the dark, and if he panicks and comes at you you legally have the right to shoot them dead". That's pretty messed up.
There was not enough evidence presented to convict Zimmerman for 2DM, period.
what is wrong with the self defense laws? i predict there will be absolutely no change in the laws. not one bit. i doubt anyone will even look at them. i do hope that some day people who dont know about the law will actually read and try to understand them though.
and, no, that scenario your friend cited is not self defense absent considerable additional facts.
|
Guys relax, I said review, never indicated anything is wrong with them. The circumstances is obviously not the same neither is it very clear to us. I'm just saying if there is anything to look at, it would be 1(gun law) and 2, the SD law.
|
On July 16 2013 09:25 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2013 09:23 Superiorwolf wrote:On July 16 2013 09:19 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 16 2013 09:16 Superiorwolf wrote:
So my question is: What was Trayvon Martin supposed to do in that scenario?
Stranger is pursuing you and ends up fighting you. Do you fight back and get executed, then get blamed for fighting back? Or do you not fight back and just hope that whoever this crazy person is doesn't kill you anyways? I don't see how this is the fault of Trayvon in any manner whatsoever. Zimmerman was completely at fault for beginning the altercation in the first place - it was wrongly started, and ended up with him taking someone's life. How does he not get punished for this? he could have just gone home. there was like a, what, 4:00 minute time frame in which he could have walked to his home, back to the store, back to his home, back to the store and then home again. i guess he walks really, really, really slow though. So all black boys are advised not to walk slow anymore, otherwise we can shoot them for being suspicious? you asked what he should have done in that scenario. i just told you. a "creepy ass cracker" is following you and making you edgy, then go home. dont walk the 500 minute mile to your home. by the way, did you watch the trial?
Pretty sure you know the answer to that, and he won't care, his intuition is telling him something!!
|
On July 16 2013 09:28 ImmunityLight wrote:
I think there needs to be a review on gun and self defense laws. Certainly not a race issue.
Zimmerman never would have had the courage to encounter Travyon if he didn't have a gun.
Also quoting a friend "you can see someone acting suspiciously, go up to him and confront him verbally at night in the dark, and if he panicks and comes at you you legally have the right to shoot them dead". That's pretty messed up.
There was not enough evidence presented to convict Zimmerman for 2DM, period.
Zimmerman said he wasn't attempting to confront Trayvon. Your scenario is not at all what happened either; Trayvon had Zimmerman on the ground and was pounding him and didn't stop when a neighbor told him to. Zimmerman didn't just blast Trayvon when Trayvon was running toward him.
Edit: It wasn't just murder 2 either, they found him not guilty of manslaughter as well.
|
There are many versions of what happened, we don't know and we will never know. The important part is that there is not enough information/evidence that could charge Zimmerman for 2DM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
