jakee 1,490 #601 March 28, 2012 QuoteNot saying that's what happened but it looks like that scenario is the way the defense might go if there is an indictment. On the other hand, if Z threatened M face-to-face, or if M perceived a threat, it could be said that M was exercising his rights to self defense under "stand your ground". Then both might be righteously "standing their ground" with predictable results. Which is, as Bill (And LawRocket) pointed out, the problem with the law. To what degree can you provoke a confrontation and then use deadly force to end it when it doesn't go your way?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyBoyd 0 #602 March 28, 2012 It would be helpful if a FL attorney would chime in here, at least on the law itself. Self-defense is a more complicated legal concept than most folks realize. Most states, including Illinois where I practice, have done away with the duty to retreat. A self-defense claim succeeds or fails based on the reasonableness of the actions taken given the facts. It seems to me that the "stand your ground" laws take self-defense a step further and expressly authorize the use of deadly force. Illinois' self-defense law does not do that. I don't want to get dragged into this debate, though. I'm just trying to help explain the law, if anyone cares. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #603 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteNo, it's very likely he was only arrested because he's Hispanic. Dude, You can't even get his name right despite about 10 prompting otherwise. I believe you have shown yourself to the most racist commentator on this thread. Your capacity to misunderstand is nothing short of breathtaking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,490 #604 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteNo, it's very likely he was only arrested because he's Hispanic. Dude, You can't even get his name right despite about 10 prompting otherwise. I believe you have shown yourself to the most racist commentator on this thread. Your capacity to misunderstand is nothing short of breathtaking. Misunderstand what? What is his name?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #605 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteNo, it's very likely he was only arrested because he's Hispanic. Dude, You can't even get his name right despite about 10 prompting otherwise. I believe you have shown yourself to the most racist commentator on this thread. Your capacity to misunderstand is nothing short of breathtaking. Misunderstand what? What is his name? Yep, absolutely breathtaking. Tell you what dum, dum, get a good nights sleep and then try re-reading it in the morning. Thing will look different to you then. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #606 March 28, 2012 Quote ..... What is his name? His name is George Michael. That's reason enough to lock his butt up right there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #607 March 28, 2012 Andy, I am thankful for your effort to clarify the law. For better or worse it appears that this case will never have complete and unambiguous facts. The burden and standard of proof and who bears it are very important to an understanding of the implications. I did a little reading about the Stand Your Ground jurisprudence in FL and best I can tell it can be described as unsettled. I read the link andy908 posted about self-defense and it appears FL has a relatively low burden for an affirmative defense. I agree a FL attorney could probably do us a world of good."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #608 March 28, 2012 Quote Remember that A) 'winning' does not equal 'aggressor' just as 'before' does not equal 'during' and B) even drunk I can still hand you your ass in a battle of wits. Even if my spelling suffers. Drunk people often believe themselves to be extremely witty, and to other drunk people, this may actually seem true. For the poor sap that volunteered to be the driver, or who doesn't drink generally, the drunks tend to be a bit insufferable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 362 #609 March 28, 2012 QuoteThe arrest for battery on the police officer resulted in two charges; both were dropped.Not exactly. He completed a pre-trial diversion program, which is commonly offered to first-time offenders. (link) Completing a diversion program involves an admission of guilt, but a conviction is not entered on your record. Different from "oops we made a mistake, you are totally innocent of the charge". In fairness, this was in 2005, so some time ago. The issue with the former girlfriend turned into tit-for-tat accusations, and the injunctions were ultimately sealed by the court, so it's hard to know what that all means. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,490 #610 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuote Remember that A) 'winning' does not equal 'aggressor' just as 'before' does not equal 'during' and B) even drunk I can still hand you your ass in a battle of wits. Even if my spelling suffers. Drunk people often believe themselves to be extremely witty, and to other drunk people, this may actually seem true. For the poor sap that volunteered to be the driver, or who doesn't drink generally, the drunks tend to be a bit insufferable. Thanks for the life advice, I'll bear it in mind. As to my question though, What witness? What presumption? Who has answered those questions in the affirmative? Mike has admitted there is no witness to say Martin was the aggressor, Rush doesn't even understand the question, so what are you talking about?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #611 March 28, 2012 there is no witness to say Martin was the aggressor... Quote Zimmerman's a witness... He admits to being there and seeing Martin as the aggressor. What you mean is, there no credible witness to say Martin wasn't the aggressor right? Because if there WAS we wouldn't be having this discussion. ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rick 67 #612 March 28, 2012 QuoteAnd how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges??You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #613 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteAnd how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? He should change his name to Dylan and be done with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rick 67 #614 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteAnd how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? He should change his name to Dylan and be done with it. Good idea. My point is that George's extended family is mixed white and Hispanic. Some in the family call him George and some call him Jorges. Call him whatever you want but he is far from a Pu**y A** Cracker like the shirts say.You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ryoder 1,590 #615 March 28, 2012 Quote Quote Quote And how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? He should change his name to Dylan and be done with it. "There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,027 #616 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteAnd how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? Hey, why don't we just call him DaShawn or Tupac or Jamal and all the race issues would be over and done with.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites normiss 801 #617 March 28, 2012 Referring to a beaner as a cracker is offensive to us crackers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Rick 67 #618 March 28, 2012 Not Mexican farther south You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #619 March 28, 2012 Quote Good idea. My point is that George's extended family is mixed white and Hispanic. Some in the family call him George and some call him Jorges. Do they in fact call him Jorge (no s), or are you merely presuming that they would use a Spanish variant of the name? If I know a Juan, I don't call him John. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jakee 1,490 #620 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteAnd how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? Is it his name? No. Is George his name? Yes.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airtwardo 7 #621 March 28, 2012 Quote Quote Quote And how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? He should change his name to Dylan and be done with it. Blood on the tracks IS a crime... ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Coreece 190 #622 March 28, 2012 It's like we really are becoming an actual idiocracy... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFQ7T8iiNEo&feature=g-logo&context=G2d2560aFOAAAAAAAAAAYour secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,465 #623 March 28, 2012 QuoteFollowing != stalking. Right, nor did I assert that Zimmerman was stalking martin. That is your red herring. QuoteNo evidence that *Zimmerman* initiated the confrontation. I don't know if Zimmerman initiated the confrontation or if Marting initiated the confrontation. Again your red herring. Quotewhat do you have besides the statements of Sharpton/Jackson/family? Any evidence? Your red herring. So tired of you constantly moving the goal posts in a conversation/debate/argument. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #624 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuotewhat do you have besides the statements of Sharpton/Jackson/family? Any evidence? Your red herring. So tired of you constantly moving the goal posts in a conversation/debate/argument. Using the same criteria YOU did in your question != moving the goalposts.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites muff528 3 #625 March 28, 2012 Quote ..... Blood on the tracks IS a crime... IS NOT! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next Page 25 of 132 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Rick 67 #612 March 28, 2012 QuoteAnd how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges??You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #613 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteAnd how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? He should change his name to Dylan and be done with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rick 67 #614 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteAnd how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? He should change his name to Dylan and be done with it. Good idea. My point is that George's extended family is mixed white and Hispanic. Some in the family call him George and some call him Jorges. Call him whatever you want but he is far from a Pu**y A** Cracker like the shirts say.You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #615 March 28, 2012 Quote Quote Quote And how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? He should change his name to Dylan and be done with it. "There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #616 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteAnd how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? Hey, why don't we just call him DaShawn or Tupac or Jamal and all the race issues would be over and done with.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 801 #617 March 28, 2012 Referring to a beaner as a cracker is offensive to us crackers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rick 67 #618 March 28, 2012 Not Mexican farther south You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #619 March 28, 2012 Quote Good idea. My point is that George's extended family is mixed white and Hispanic. Some in the family call him George and some call him Jorges. Do they in fact call him Jorge (no s), or are you merely presuming that they would use a Spanish variant of the name? If I know a Juan, I don't call him John. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,490 #620 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteAnd how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? Is it his name? No. Is George his name? Yes.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #621 March 28, 2012 Quote Quote Quote And how come falsely calling Zimmerman 'Jorges' is ok but correctly calling him 'George' is playing the race card? How is it false to call him Jorges?? He should change his name to Dylan and be done with it. Blood on the tracks IS a crime... ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #622 March 28, 2012 It's like we really are becoming an actual idiocracy... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFQ7T8iiNEo&feature=g-logo&context=G2d2560aFOAAAAAAAAAAYour secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #623 March 28, 2012 QuoteFollowing != stalking. Right, nor did I assert that Zimmerman was stalking martin. That is your red herring. QuoteNo evidence that *Zimmerman* initiated the confrontation. I don't know if Zimmerman initiated the confrontation or if Marting initiated the confrontation. Again your red herring. Quotewhat do you have besides the statements of Sharpton/Jackson/family? Any evidence? Your red herring. So tired of you constantly moving the goal posts in a conversation/debate/argument. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #624 March 28, 2012 QuoteQuotewhat do you have besides the statements of Sharpton/Jackson/family? Any evidence? Your red herring. So tired of you constantly moving the goal posts in a conversation/debate/argument. Using the same criteria YOU did in your question != moving the goalposts.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
muff528 3 #625 March 28, 2012 Quote ..... Blood on the tracks IS a crime... IS NOT! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
