Florida Teen Shot

[billvon 2,991]

>He also applied for a restraining against her as well, so it was mutual.

Yes. It demonstrates both have a history of violence.

>You say it was not "dropped" at all . . . .

No, I said it was not dropped immediately.

Read first, then answer.

>TM on the other hand, was currently involved in drugs, currently on drugs, currently
>suspended from school, currently talking about illegal gun purchasing, and recently
>involved in fights. Weigh that how you want, but a little common sense suggests who
>really had the pertinent history.

So you think:

smoking pot is worse than physically assaulting your fiancee
being suspended is worse than being arrested
talking about buying a gun is worse than hitting a cop

Interesting.

[kelpdiver 2]

mistercwood

I don't get how quite a few people keep going with the "he was trying to beat GZ to death" bit. I got mugged about 6 years ago. Three guys, one of them had a telescopic baton. My injuries were worse than GZs. It was a very unpleasant experience. But at no point did I think they were actually trying to kill me. I really have a hard time with what appears to be a cultural acceptance that it's perfectly ok to end a fist fight with a gunshot.

How old are you? If you want to presume that people beating you will actually decide "he's had enough," that's your prerogative, but it's short sided.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodgers%E2%80%93Giants_rivalry#Bryan_Stow_beating

"On March 31, 2011, a 42-year-old Giants fan, Bryan Stow, of Santa Cruz, California, was critically injured when he was attacked by two Dodgers fans in the Dodger Stadium parking lot after the Dodgers and Giants opened the 2011 season. The suspects subsequently fled the scene in a vehicle driven by a woman.[27] Stow, a paramedic and father of two, sustained severe injuries to his skull and brain and was placed into a medically induced coma after the incident.[30] An early suspect, a 31-year-old man was arrested in May 2011 in connection with the crime.[31] The man was never formally charged and was declared innocent in July 2011 when Louie Sanchez and Marvin Norwood were arrested and charged in the crime.[32] Lawyers for Stow say his medical care is expected to cost more than $50 million.[33] On September 27, 2011, relatives reported that Stow showed signs of improvement and even went outside for the first time in six months. Stow began an intensive therapy program in the Rehabilitation Trauma Center at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center on October 11, 2011.[34] Doctors have told his family that he will never fully recover.[35]"

A guy with a baton can end your life at will, or at least put you in the same sort of shape as this unfortunate baseball fan.

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>You clearly have an issue with the verdict

No, actually I don't. My big issue was to see it go to trial where it could be decided by the justice system. It was - which is how it should be.

You clearly do not understand how the system is supposed to work

Even left leaning lawyers are saying GZ has a civil rights case agains the state

I hope he files it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

billvon

>He also applied for a restraining against her as well, so it was mutual.

Yes. It demonstrates both have a history of violence.

Separating couples routinely file these. It does not support a claim of a history of violence. Just that each has hired legal counsel and is going through the playbook.

[linebckr83 3]

You don't normally turns words around like that. Interesting.

Please show where you read that the restraining order was because of assault. When brought up in trial, I don't believe the word assault was ever used.

Illegal arms dealing is worse than hitting a cop. You gun-o-phobes surely understand that.
Being suspended because of drugs and violence is worse than being arrested and freed 8 years ago.
Taking multiple illegal drugs, and IMO producing another illegal one, is worse than a mutual restraining order that was dropped years ago.

So yeah, when you word it that way, I guess you were right.

"Are you coming to the party?
Oh I'm coming, but I won't be there!"
Flying Hellfish #828
Dudist #52

[rushmc 23]

GeorgiaDon

******

.....When two people are in a place they are allowed to be, and not violating any laws, is there some super-secret rule that says who can "stand their ground" and who should back down and go home?

Don

Exactly the question I raised way back towards the beginning of this thread when SYG was being discussed. I think the defense pretty much abandoned the SYG aspect of self-defense early on.Sure, the defense didn't invoke SYG, although the juror who has been talking to Anderson Cooper has brought it up, so it apparently influenced her thinking at least.

What intrigues me is that the same people who have been so vocal in support of SYG through this and other discussions now say Martin should have just gone home. I'm curious in a general sort of way, not just in regard to this particular case: how can you say that people who feel threatened have no duty to retreat, yet say if Martin felt threatened, he should have just gone home. Why should one person have backed down but not the other? What rule governs that? Is the guy with the concealed gun always in the right, by default? It would seem so.

Again, it's too bad in this particular case that neither participant backed down.

Don

Who is saying he SHOULD have gone home?
Not me
I am saying he had a choice
And the one he made did not go well for him
Obviously not the singe choice. As per usual, there is a chain of events that when fully linked together, spawned an outcome

Had any one of those choices (by either of them) been made differently, that chain, the one that ened up with TM dead, would have been broken and we most likely would not be here today

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jclalor 12]

Quote

In his system he also had Temazepam (hypnotic) which is a type of Benzo, and Adderall. Not what I would call "relaxing" drugs

I administer Benzodiazepines on a daily basis. they are in fact calming agents. Temazipam is used to treat insomnia and anxiety. The classic Benzo's are Valium, Ativan and Xanax. We administer them all the time for seizures,

They are by definition "relaxing drugs" you have no idea what your talking about.

[rushmc 23]

linebckr83

You don't normally turns words around like that. Interesting.

Please show where you read that the restraining order was because of assault. When brought up in trial, I don't believe the word assault was ever used.

Illegal arms dealing is worse than hitting a cop. You gun-o-phobes surely understand that.
Being suspended because of drugs and violence is worse than being arrested and freed 8 years ago.
Taking multiple illegal drugs, and IMO producing another illegal one, is worse than a mutual restraining order that was dropped years ago.

So yeah, when you word it that way, I guess you were right.

He has been doing this for years

He has just exanded the list of the those to whom he does it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[OHCHUTE 0]

billvon

>He also applied for a restraining against her as well, so it was mutual.

Yes. It demonstrates both have a history of violence.

>You say it was not "dropped" at all . . . .

No, I said it was not dropped immediately.

Read first, then answer.

>TM on the other hand, was currently involved in drugs, currently on drugs, currently
>suspended from school, currently talking about illegal gun purchasing, and recently
>involved in fights. Weigh that how you want, but a little common sense suggests who
>really had the pertinent history.

So you think:

smoking pot is worse than physically assaulting your fiancee
being suspended is worse than being arrested
talking about buying a gun is worse than hitting a cop

Interesting.

So you pushed a kid on the playground in 4th grade you have a history of violence?

Why are so many people trying to make TM the nice little man who was unarmed taking a casual stroll through a neighborhood, when he was on top another man attempting to bash his brains out.

Bla Bla Bla.

TM was a murderer and would have killed Z had not the gun gone off.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

***He has been doing this for years

He has just exanded the list of the those to whom he does it

Do you have a citation?

He was just 17 years old, and he's been doing this for years? that's funny.

[linebckr83 3]

Rush was referring to Billvon when he said "he".

I'm aware that Xanax and Valium are prescribed for the purpose of relaxing. But I've seen some people do some really chaotic and weird shit on those drugs. So call them relaxing all you want, I suppose you have to, but the fact is not everyone reacts the same. Pot included. Surely you know that.

"Are you coming to the party?
Oh I'm coming, but I won't be there!"
Flying Hellfish #828
Dudist #52

[skypuppy 1]

GeorgiaDon

******

.....When two people are in a place they are allowed to be, and not violating any laws, is there some super-secret rule that says who can "stand their ground" and who should back down and go home?

Don

Exactly the question I raised way back towards the beginning of this thread when SYG was being discussed. I think the defense pretty much abandoned the SYG aspect of self-defense early on.Sure, the defense didn't invoke SYG, although the juror who has been talking to Anderson Cooper has brought it up, so it apparently influenced her thinking at least.

What intrigues me is that the same people who have been so vocal in support of SYG through this and other discussions now say Martin should have just gone home. I'm curious in a general sort of way, not just in regard to this particular case: how can you say that people who feel threatened have no duty to retreat, yet say if Martin felt threatened, he should have just gone home. Why should one person have backed down but not the other? What rule governs that? Is the guy with the concealed gun always in the right, by default? It would seem so.

Again, it's too bad in this particular case that neither participant backed down.

Don

TM had no reason to feel threatened and therefore no reason to SYG. GZ followed him at a distance, talking on the phone. That is not threatening. Hell, he was far enuf ahead that GZ lost sight of him.

THEN TM doubled back and started wailing on GZ. That is assault, and GZ is allowed to defend himself.

Doubling back and confronting someone who had actually lost sight of you is not STANDING YOUR GROUND. It is provoking a confrontation.

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[skypuppy 1]

billvon

>You clearly have an issue with the verdict

No, actually I don't. My big issue was to see it go to trial where it could be decided by the justice system. It was - which is how it should be.

Actually, it should have gone to a grand jury where they would have decided there wasn't enuf evidence to warrant a charge, let alone get a conviction...for anything...

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[rushmc 23]

skypuppy

***>You clearly have an issue with the verdict

No, actually I don't. My big issue was to see it go to trial where it could be decided by the justice system. It was - which is how it should be.

Actually, it should have gone to a grand jury where they would have decided there wasn't enuf evidence to warrant a charge, let alone get a conviction...for anything...

that is why they gave the case to the grinning bitch and bypassed the grand jury

They HAD to have a show trial at the very least

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 800]

That is incorrect.

The decision to take it to trial is and should be the decision of a grand jury. AFTER review by the State Attorney, AFTER a solid legal investigation by the police.

[airtwardo 7]

billvon

>You clearly have an issue with the verdict

No, actually I don't. My big issue was to see it go to trial where it could be decided by the justice system. It was - which is how it should be.

MY issue is..why THIS case?

No matter which side of the fence you are on with this, objective analyzation points to an extremely weak and 'iffy' case for the prosecution.

The media slanted things, the courts played loose...the verdict was unexpected by many - and still the hate mongers boil on.

Why THIS case?

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[mistercwood 287]

kelpdiver

***I don't get how quite a few people keep going with the "he was trying to beat GZ to death" bit. I got mugged about 6 years ago. Three guys, one of them had a telescopic baton. My injuries were worse than GZs. It was a very unpleasant experience. But at no point did I think they were actually trying to kill me. I really have a hard time with what appears to be a cultural acceptance that it's perfectly ok to end a fist fight with a gunshot.

How old are you? If you want to presume that people beating you will actually decide "he's had enough," that's your prerogative, but it's short sided.

A guy with a baton can end your life at will, or at least put you in the same sort of shape as this unfortunate baseball fan.

Early 30's. They wanted money, plain and simple. Life isn't as cheap here - while I agree that baton could have left me in much worse shape than I was, the objective was to cause enough pain to get compliance. I'm good at avoiding conflict, this time I didn't get a choice. Both GZ and TM had a choice. Both of them, IMO, are paying for choosing wrong.

You are playing chicken with a planet - you can't dodge and planets don't blink. Act accordingly.

[RonD1120 62]

Subject: Articles: New Evidence Shows Trayvon's Life Unraveling



Here's the real Trayvon, Angela Corrie's "precious little victim". Cell phone evidence withheld by the prosecution and not disclosed by the prosecution until after the trial. So now all the "low information voters" most of whom are on the dole, want "justice 4 Trayvon", the poor little black kid who didn't have a chance.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/new_evidence_shows_trayvons_life_unraveling.html

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[linebckr83 3]

Well I'll be damned. Anyone want to make a wager on when these texts show up on the news? I'll take never.

"Are you coming to the party?
Oh I'm coming, but I won't be there!"
Flying Hellfish #828
Dudist #52

[ryoder 1,590]

RonD1120

Subject: Articles: New Evidence Shows Trayvon's Life Unraveling



Here's the real Trayvon, Angela Corrie's "precious little victim". Cell phone evidence withheld by the prosecution and not disclosed by the prosecution until after the trial. So now all the "low information voters" most of whom are on the dole, want "justice 4 Trayvon", the poor little black kid who didn't have a chance.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/new_evidence_shows_trayvons_life_unraveling.html

I earlier posted a video from the trial of a "proffer" procedure in which the cell phone evidence was revealed in court, but with the jury absent. The judge ruled against allowing the jury to hear this evidence.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[DanG 1]

Quote

Well I'll be damned. Anyone want to make a wager on when these texts show up on the news? I'll take never.

Considering the texts are already in the news I'll take that bet. Let's make it a cool $1million.

- Dan G

[linebckr83 3]

Let me rephrase: televised news. That's where a huge majority of people get their news, and a big reason why this has escalated like it has. I have yet to see any of the 3 big channels describe the texts like in this article, but 1 certain channel atleast mentions that they exist.

"Are you coming to the party?
Oh I'm coming, but I won't be there!"
Flying Hellfish #828
Dudist #52

[rushmc 23]

linebckr83

Let me rephrase: televised news. That's where a huge majority of people get their news get told what to think, and a big reason why this has escalated like it has. I have yet to see any of the 3 big channels describe the texts like in this article, but 1 certain channel atleast mentions that they exist.

FIFY

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jgoose71 0]

normiss

That is incorrect.

The decision to take it to trial is and should be the decision of a grand jury. AFTER review by the State Attorney, AFTER a solid legal investigation by the police.

+1

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[normiss 800]

I find it interesting the dirt is being released just as his parents go on a Trayvon tour, telling us the jury should know the real Trayvon.
I'm not sure they do want the world to know the real Trayvon Martin.