mnealtx 0 #1226 April 12, 2012 Quote>Since when is it ok to punch someone in the nose and knock them to the >ground and sit on their chest because they are out of their vehicle >observing you? Per Florida law, if you think they threaten your life or may seriously harm you. Nope. QuoteDoes a guy with a gun who's coming after you count? Oh, goody, another made-up scenario that has nothing to do with the case, since Zimmerman wasn't chasing Martin down the street, gun in hand. QuoteSounds like a jury will decide. Hopefully they don't use *your* version of events.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #1227 April 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWell there we go then Some one who knows exactly what happened that day So No more debate is needed Thanks for the insight (no need to waste any more time here) I made no claim to know what went on, but I am saying that even if what Zimmerman claims is true on the basic level (that he followed the kid and was was then hit), the actions of assaulting him would be completely justified. And that chances are most people would do the same thing, either run or try to defend themselves. Zimmans story is that Trayvon came to him as he returned to his truck I wonder what Martin's story is. Oh, he's dead, shot by GZ. I guess he is unable to "cooperate". Which is exactly why the process is supposed to be free of the kind of crap you throw out in threads like this"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 800 #1228 April 12, 2012 Maybe this time we can take a lesson and move forward with it. STOP PROSECUTING LAWS IN THE MEDIA LIES. There, now back to the justice system. Wait. The process is slow. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #1229 April 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote..."Let me emphasize that we do not prosecute by public pressure or by petition," said Corey of Zimmerman's arrest, which has received enormous public and media attention over the last several weeks. "We prosecute based on the facts of any given case as well as the laws of the state of Florida." Martin's parents spoke after the announcement and his mother, Sybrina Fulton said, "We simply wanted an arrest; we wanted nothing more, nothing less. We just wanted an arrest, and we got it and I say thank you, thank you Lord, thank you Jesus."... She also said that she was seeking justice for, Trayvon and his family Sounds like she had her mind made up cause, in the end, Zimmerman may have been victim who just responded in self defense What about justice for Zimmerman? The jury is supposed to decide Not her STW, I heard a couple of lawyers talking about this last night as I was hauling stuff for my brother in law These lawyers say the tape of her saying this will most likely come out before and during court proceedings SYG can still apply when he gets up in front of the judge before trial. We'll see then if the lawyers can convince the judge to toss the case. Self-defense is still in play. SYG never was. Zimmerman was on his back, on the ground - there was nowhere to retreat to regardless of a duty to retreat or not.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #1230 April 12, 2012 QuoteMaybe this time we can take a lesson and move forward with it. STOP PROSECUTING LAWS IN THE MEDIA LIES. There, now back to the justice system. Wait. The process is slow. It will be ok for now If he is convicted of something it will remain ok If the case is tossed or he is found not guilty it will start all over again"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #1231 April 12, 2012 QuoteOh, goody, another made-up scenario that has nothing to do with the case, since Zimmerman wasn't chasing Martin down the street, gun in hand. Says who? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #1232 April 12, 2012 QuoteThere was no self-defense, no matter what one may say went down. Whether he hit Zimmerman or not is irrelevant. Not so. Zimmerman had the right to defend himself against Martin's use of force. QuoteI highly suspect that if you're unarmed walking down a road and some guy starts following you with a gun, you will either A) Try to run, or B) Let him get close enough and then look to defend yourself using force. Now you just have to prove that Martin knew Zimmerman was armed for your scenario to make sense. QuoteThe option of A and B differs between people, but when someone has a gun, running is likely to be less effective if you're already within range. If you think they're wanting to rob you and you think you can disarm them, many people would opt for option B. Or if you don't know they're armed, you might just decide to 'teach this guy a lesson'. QuoteI find it slightly humorous how the people who are trying to argue self-defense don't seem to think that it's self-defense when someone hits an armed person when they approach you in a street at night. I find it humorous how the people that keep talking about the gun somehow attribute Martin with the x-ray vision to see it concealed in Zimmerman's waistband. QuoteI can assure you that in that situation most will be thinking the armed stranger approaching you is putting you under threat. Unproven that Martin knew Zimmerman was armed.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #1233 April 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteThere was no self-defense, no matter what one may say went down. Whether he hit Zimmerman or not is irrelevant. I highly suspect that if you're unarmed walking down a road and some guy starts following you with a gun, you will either A) Try to run, or B) Let him get close enough and then look to defend yourself using force. The option of A and B differs between people, but when someone has a gun, running is likely to be less effective if you're already within range. If you think they're wanting to rob you and you think you can disarm them, many people would opt for option B. I find it slightly humorous how the people who are trying to argue self-defense don't seem to think that it's self-defense when someone hits an armed person when they approach you in a street at night. I can assure you that in that situation most will be thinking the armed stranger approaching you is putting you under threat. Horse shit. You can't prove that Trayvon knew that Zimmerman was armed and was defending himself any more than I can prove that Trayvon had no idea that Zimmerman was armed at he turned to attack him because he was pissed off that the he was confronted. There is a reason it is called concealed carry. I will be the first to admit I can't prove that Zimmerman didn't have his gun drawn. So the ball is in your court, show me the evidence that proves that his gun was drawn which led to Trayvon attacking him. I will wait patiently. As you said, none of us know whether Zimmerman's gun was drawn, but I'll say it doesn't matter. If someone is chasing me, at night, I'll assume they mean me ill and will treat them as a threat regardless of what weapons they may or may not be showing. Blues, Dave So even after you get away from them, you're going to go back and 'fight' instead of continuing your 'flight'? Not only does that completely go against your prior statement upthread, it just might get you in the same position as Martin.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #1234 April 12, 2012 Quote Or if you don't know they're armed, you might just decide to 'teach this guy a lesson'. Oh, goody, another made-up scenario that has nothing to do with the case Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #1235 April 12, 2012 QuoteOne thing that confuses me, and in all the replies in this thread I don't think I've seen it, is why shoot to kill? I realise the torso (where I believe M was shot) is the biggest target and while you're busy having your head hit on the pavement (if we're to believe the witnesses and Z) you might not take time to aim, but surely at that close range it'd be just as easy to go for an arm or leg shot which would have incapacitated M and avoided this controversy - assuming Z's story is correct and he didn't just kill the guy so that there was only one side of the story left to tell? If you're not aiming, how can you be sure you're going to hit that *much* smaller arm/leg target, especially when it's moving much more and much faster than the torso? Use of a firearm is deadly force regardless of where the bullet hits. You don't get bonus points in the eyes of the court for shooting the attacker in the arm/leg.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #1236 April 12, 2012 QuoteSo even after you get away from them, you're going to go back and 'fight' instead of continuing your 'flight'? Not only does that completely go against your prior statement upthread, it just might get you in the same position as Martin. Oh goodie, another made up story..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #1237 April 12, 2012 QuoteQuote***QuoteOne thing that confuses me, and in all the replies in this thread I don't think I've seen it, is why shoot to kill? I realise the torso (where I believe M was shot) is the biggest target and while you're busy having your head hit on the pavement (if we're to believe the witnesses and Z) you might not take time to aim, but surely at that close range it'd be just as easy to go for an arm or leg shot which would have incapacitated M and avoided this controversy - assuming Z's story is correct and he didn't just kill the guy so that there was only one side of the story left to tell? Once the decision is made to shoot, you need to shoot to kill. Are you saying that if you shoot the person in the shoulder and he stops, that you should then shoot him in the head? Welcome to your "pre-meditated murder" conviction. QuoteSometimes shooting people in non vital areas just agitates them and they then take you weapon and don't show you the same common courtesy you tried to show them. How about some cites showing how often that happens, chief?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #1238 April 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteOh, goody, another made-up scenario that has nothing to do with the case, since Zimmerman wasn't chasing Martin down the street, gun in hand. Says who? Blues, Dave Who says he was, besides Bill? And *IF* he was, why the HELL would Martin come BACK and confront him instead of breaking the sound barrier getting the FUCK out of Dodge? If Zimmerman had gun in hand, how did Martin get the opportunity to beat on him for almost a minute, instead of Zimmerman shooting him right at the start of the fight? Serious logic fails in that scenario.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #1239 April 12, 2012 QuoteQuote Or if you don't know they're armed, you might just decide to 'teach this guy a lesson'. Oh, goody, another made-up scenario that has nothing to do with the case Actually, that was an initial statement from the girlfriend. Nice try.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 800 #1240 April 12, 2012 Agreed. If I were to cross paths with someone in a similar situation and I knew he had a gun. He wouldn't be able to find me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #1241 April 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteSo even after you get away from them, you're going to go back and 'fight' instead of continuing your 'flight'? Not only does that completely go against your prior statement upthread, it just might get you in the same position as Martin. Oh goodie, another made up story..... Oh goodie, another lame attempt to troll - you might want to go re-read the exchange upthread between Dave and I about fight/flight once you get your foot out of your mouth.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #1242 April 12, 2012 QuoteOne thing that confuses me, and in all the replies in this thread I don't think I've seen it, is why shoot to kill? I realise the torso (where I believe M was shot) is the biggest target and while you're busy having your head hit on the pavement (if we're to believe the witnesses and Z) you might not take time to aim, but surely at that close range it'd be just as easy to go for an arm or leg shot which would have incapacitated M and avoided this controversy - assuming Z's story is correct and he didn't just kill the guy so that there was only one side of the story left to tell? Shoot to wound is a fantasy concept that only exists in Hollywood movies. Even at incredibly short range (5-10'), cops miss a lot. Real people aren't like paper targets - they move, they may even be firing at or punching you. And as noted, shooting someone in a limb doesn't stop them. Hell, you could shoot someone twice in the torso and they may still be coming at you. Guns aren't like phasers that kill (vaporize) the person instantly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #1243 April 12, 2012 (Just replying to last post in thread) The attorney should definitely plead Stand Your Ground. This is essentially a free bite at the apple, as it is a pre-trial motion and a hearing before the judge. If the judge buys the story than Z goes free without a trial (and, as I read the law, the state has to pay for any expense he has already incurred to defend himself). There is no downside, as if he loses at the pre-trial hearing he just pleads self-defense at the trial which is what he would have done anyway."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #1244 April 12, 2012 QuoteQuote>Since when is it ok to punch someone in the nose and knock them to the >ground and sit on their chest because they are out of their vehicle >observing you? Per Florida law, if you think they threaten your life or may seriously harm you. Nope. QuoteDoes a guy with a gun who's coming after you count? Oh, goody, another made-up scenario that has nothing to do with the case, since Zimmerman wasn't chasing Martin down the street, gun in hand. QuoteSounds like a jury will decide. Hopefully they don't use *your* version of events. They won't hear Martin's version either. Z shot him dead.... 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
livendive 8 #1245 April 12, 2012 QuoteQuote As you said, none of us know whether Zimmerman's gun was drawn, but I'll say it doesn't matter. If someone is chasing me, at night, I'll assume they mean me ill and will treat them as a threat regardless of what weapons they may or may not be showing. Blues, Dave So even after you get away from them, you're going to go back and 'fight' instead of continuing your 'flight'? Not only does that completely go against your prior statement upthread, it just might get you in the same position as Martin. I didnt say that. You can consider me in the "unconvinced" camp that it played out like that between Martin and Zimmerman. The most likely scenario to my sense of probability is that Zimmerman was still in the act of chasing Martin, or had resigned the chase so recently as to be reasonably considered still a threat. Unlike you, I'll readily admit that my theory could be wrong, and I'm glad a jury will have the opportunity to weigh the evidence. You, on the other hand, seem to grant automatic infallibility to someone who says the magic words "self defense", accepting anything and everything they say as beyond reproach, so long as their opponent is dead. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #1246 April 12, 2012 Quote(Just replying to last post in thread) The attorney should definitely plead Stand Your Ground. This is essentially a free bite at the apple, as it is a pre-trial motion and a hearing before the judge. If the judge buys the story than Z goes free without a trial (and, as I read the law, the state has to pay for any expense he has already incurred to defend himself). There is no downside, as if he loses at the pre-trial hearing he just pleads self-defense at the trial which is what he would have done anyway. How is that more applicable than the self-defense? SYG only removes a duty to retreat - Zimmerman was on the ground with nowhere to retreat to in any case, so SYG doesn't even come into play in that regard.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 800 #1247 April 12, 2012 We clearly d not yet know if a jury will ever see this case. Look for him to get bail, may not be able to make it, but it's sounding like he will get a bail. Then, on the heels of that will be a filing to drop all charges based on self defense. Here is the next media opportunity. I'm gonna listen to WVON from Chicago on the interwebs. They have the best news on this case. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #1248 April 12, 2012 QuoteZimmerman was on the ground with nowhere to retreat to in any case, Unproven, Possible, but not proven. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #1249 April 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote As you said, none of us know whether Zimmerman's gun was drawn, but I'll say it doesn't matter. If someone is chasing me, at night, I'll assume they mean me ill and will treat them as a threat regardless of what weapons they may or may not be showing. Blues, Dave So even after you get away from them, you're going to go back and 'fight' instead of continuing your 'flight'? Not only does that completely go against your prior statement upthread, it just might get you in the same position as Martin. I didnt say that. If someone is chasing you, aren't you already running? QuoteYou can consider me in the "unconvinced" camp that it played out like that between Martin and Zimmerman. The most likely scenario to my sense of probability is that Zimmerman was still in the act of chasing Martin, or had resigned the chase so recently as to be reasonably considered still a threat. Still in the act of chasing Martin? Is *that* why he told the dispatcher "I don't know where this kid is"? QuoteUnlike you, I'll readily admit that my theory could be wrong, and I'm glad a jury will have the opportunity to weigh the evidence. You, on the other hand, seem to grant automatic infallibility to someone who says the magic words "self defense", accepting anything and everything they say as beyond reproach, so long as their opponent is dead. Wrong. I discount rhys-level leaps to scenarios that require suicidal stupidity or superman x-ray vision on Martin's part. Maybe you should try it sometime.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #1250 April 12, 2012 They won't hear Martin's version either. Z shot him dead. And this fact doesnt give you the right to make things up"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
