Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But many people (including many on this board) are either ignorant or in denial about the reality of violence, and how quickly a beat down can turn deadly.
Yes, a fist fight can be deadly sometimes even with the first punch. But a fist fight regardless of your being on the losing end is not prima facia cause for the use of deadly force. No matter how you weigh the height and weight measurements of either Zimmerman or Martin, they were physically pretty well matched opponents. Second Zimmerman does not display any of the markings of a man who was in the middle of a brutal beating. And finally that portion of the statute which folks seem to want to ignore doesn't provide Zimmerman justification even if he didn't throw the first punch!
For the umpteenth time:
Chapter 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.
Let me point out 776.041 sec 2 again.
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
The statute does say 2. Initially uses force, it says provoke!
The State's position in regards to 776.041 sec 2 is rather straight forward establishing their contention that Zimmerman provoked the fight by his utterances and actions. He wasn't merely inquiring Martins presences, he had already tried and convicted him of some imaginary nefarious act and found himself also in the role of executioner.
Now I will be the first one to state that this isn't a slam dunk case for the prosecutor but that is more than enough for me, not that my opinion means a whole lot in the grand scheme of things.
Yes, a fist fight can be deadly sometimes even with the first punch. But a fist fight regardless of your being on the losing end is not prima facia cause for the use of deadly force. No matter how you weigh the height and weight measurements of either Zimmerman or Martin, they were physically pretty well matched opponents. Second Zimmerman does not display any of the markings of a man who was in the middle of a brutal beating. And finally that portion of the statute which folks seem to want to ignore doesn't provide Zimmerman justification even if he didn't throw the first punch!
For the umpteenth time:
Chapter 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.
Let me point out 776.041 sec 2 again.
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
The statute does say 2. Initially uses force, it says provoke!
The State's position in regards to 776.041 sec 2 is rather straight forward establishing their contention that Zimmerman provoked the fight by his utterances and actions. He wasn't merely inquiring Martins presences, he had already tried and convicted him of some imaginary nefarious act and found himself also in the role of executioner.
Now I will be the first one to state that this isn't a slam dunk case for the prosecutor but that is more than enough for me, not that my opinion means a whole lot in the grand scheme of things.
I would say the proescutor has a great starting hand, while GZ at best starts with a pair of nines. His erratic behavior last weekend, Hannity call while convincing his lawyers he was too luny to bother with, might mean saying he has 2 9s is giving him too much credit.
Sanford police failed to collect key evidence in the case: the clothing of George Zimmerman, the gunman who killed Trayvon.
Not true, police said. They took his clothing as well as Trayvon's and packaged it for crime-lab analysis. A spokeswoman for Special Prosecutor Angela Corey would not disclose Tuesday where the clothing is now, but she wrote in an email that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement "is assisting with the processing of physical evidence."
Typically, evidence from Seminole County crime scenes is analyzed at the FDLE lab in Orlando.
Thanks for the link, it is refreshing to have an intelligent discussion about the political motives behind this story. Best of luck to Zimmerman as the facts just don't support the level of hate he is suffering through.
Dershowitz has about as much credibility as Nancy Grace. And like his alter ego Gloria Alred has never seen a microphone worthy of passing up.
Any attorney who stands up to a mike and attempts to make predictions about arguments not yet argued before a judge is only a step ahead of the average laymen.
I would say the proescutor has a great starting hand, while GZ at best starts with a pair of nines. His erratic behavior last weekend, Hannity call while convincing his lawyers he was too luny to bother with, might mean saying he has 2 9s is giving him too much credit.
Well, I don't know who has the upper hand in this case and I would hesitate to guess what a judge and more importantly what a jury would do, but the incessant, ignorance, misreading, misstatements of the Florida statutes is driving me crazy.
The critical issue based upon the cited section of Title XLVI Chapter 776 is whether Zimmerman can establish that he had a reasonable belief that he was in imminent danger. As every lawmaker involved in the crafting of Florida's so-called "stand your ground" statute has said from day one, the statute does not apply in this case.
I conceal carry on a regular basis. It is a glock 26, a 9mm subcompact. I keep the gun in a holster on my waist, inside the waistband and with my shirt over it. I regularly walk around in Target/Nordstrums/Nieman Marcus/Gas Stations/Pet stores with no problem. It's very easy with an inside the waste band holster like Zimmerman had to conceal these weapons. I have never once been "made" in years of concealed carry. My girlfriend, friends, and family do not know I'm carrying unless they ask.
As to why he would do this, I don't know. I heard somewhere he had been robbed once or maybe more than that. He lived in a sketchy area it sounds like. Generally, when you concealed carry, you don't pick and choose the times you will carry. One of the most common places a person gets robbed is an area like a Target parking lot.
I have thought (since the facts have come out) that Zimmerman is innocent. I do have to admit that as someone with a concealed handgun permit, I think it was extremely foolish of him from a personal perspective to get involved. My instructor, who was a cop, emphasized to always avoid rather than trying to play hero, and how even the most justified shootings are often prosecuted for political reasons.
My instinct is to keep my nose out of other people's business. Even when confronted with a sketchy person my instinct is to use words, and run if necessary (I'm 95% I can outrun most thugs, Zimmerman might not be so blessed). A gun is an absolute last resort, and when carrying one it's smart to avoid even the remotest possibility of conflict. Someone looks like they're up to no good? Keep going, call cops. Someone says something mean? Smile and nod and keep going. Someone insults your girlfriend? Swallow it and move on. That to me is how serious it is to carry a deadly weapon. You should be above all of the petty nonsense. Maybe Zimmerman felt he was some supercop because he had a gun, and was invincible from harm from a young tough-guy like Trayvon. Obviously a foolish assumption. The correct instinct is the opposite, in my view. Carrying a gun should make you even more aware of danger, more eager to avoid any trouble.
All this is common sense, not law. You are not legally required to "mind your own business." And if someone is sitting on top of you hitting you, I firmly believe you are justified in using deadly force (assuming you didn't provoke the physical altercation). my instructor used an example in our class. He told us about the first concealed carry case that went to trial in Texas, which involved a guy beating another guy in a Wal Mart parking lot. He was acquitted. But many people (including many on this board) are either ignorant or in denial about the reality of violence, and how quickly a beat down can turn deadly.
Good post. My family member was abducted and killed by three blacks but there was no national outcry for her or her family. I wish she had been carrying a gun that night to defend herself against thugs as she was an intelligent college student with much to contribute to society. Now, the three are sitting in Ohio State Pen, as the taxpayers support them, and she is gone forever.
Yes, let me roll my eyes. Since the black neighborhood is more likely to be impoverished the white kid is in more danger.
Of what? Specifically of what?
Most impoverished people don't just go around fighting strangers for no reason. I don't know if you've ever been in a black neighborhood, but most stick to themselves or if there are fights, fight amongst themselves. If you tell me you've lived in an impoverished neighborhood or have visited many and aren't getting your info from what you see on the news, maybe I'll give your OPINION more clout, but for now, not so much.
We know Trayvon left running as Zimmerman was on the phone with 911.
Zimmerman asked for police to come, so I doubt he was looking to shoot someone.
Later Trayvon had to come back from somewhere because he was later on top of Zimmerman, had broke his nose and both banged and cut his head up.
Don't know the words spoken to Zimmerman by Trayvon, but the way it was going could a passed out Zimmerman trust Trayvon not to kill him?
There was one shot, not many by Zimmerman as Trayvon was on top of him giving the beating.
Zimmerman on his back had nowhere to retreat to.
This is all political IMO.
City doesn't want riots.
Obama, the mayor and the prosecutor all want to benefit from a trial.
Legally in the real world without politics and cameras I think this would NEVER go to court.
The amount of spatter may be very small, and barely noticable to the naked eye, especially via a low quality video. I shot a deer with a .30-06 a few years back. It was standing on a slope, uphill. The shot took it high in the side and quartered down across both lungs. I was on my hands and knees where he was shot for 1/2 hour, there was not a drop of blood on the ground. When I finally found him, there was no blood on the ground, and only a minimal amount on the body, maybe a teaspoon, and some 80 yards later. There was no exit wound, the bullet was under the skin on the far side. Yet when I dressed the animal, the chest cavity was full of blood. And this was with a firearm with several times the muzzle energy of a 9mm handgun.
I bring that up only to point out that the real world isn't necessarily like CSI. A bullet wound, especially when there is no exit wound, doesn't necessarily squirt blood like a fire hose. I hope that the PD kept the shirt as evidence (or that Z did), and that the forensics investigation will reveal the truth. There should be plenty of evidence on Martin's body to provide some scientific evidence to support or refute Zimmerman's claims. Lack of powder burns or residue would indicate that he was shot from some distance, for example. And the angle of the wound would give some idea of their relationship.
The blood pattern would clearly indicate whether Martin was supine, prone, or upright when he was shot.
This blood pattern would also be evident internally of Martin and documented during autopsy.
Most impoverished people don't just go around fighting strangers for no reason. I don't know if you've ever been in a black neighborhood, but most stick to themselves or if there are fights, fight amongst themselves. If you tell me you've lived in an impoverished neighborhood or have visited many and aren't getting your info from what you see on the news, maybe I'll give your OPINION more clout, but for now, not so much.
I've lived in Brooklyn and your statement is totally false.
As a child, you ride your bike to a park with black kids and they chase you and try and take your bike after trying to kill you.
Other kids just play around, the black kids by far are totally violent from my experience in Brooklyn as a kid.
I have lovely Black neighbors now and they relate to me all the massive racism against whites that is spoken among blacks in their old neighborhoods.
I know there are lots of good black kids and families, but there are a lot of violent people among blacks as well and IMO at a higher percentage compared to the rest of society (as is reflected by who is in prison).
Now I work and live in a really nice area. Has a drive called Rodeo in it all our beggars are black as well. Three on a block it seems.
There are lots of problems happening and IMO it goes back to after the Great Society and welfare.
Before that you had mostly black Republicans and 85% two parent black households. Now you see they have what? Out if controlled kids, welfare and prison. It's not good for anybody.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Since the black neighborhood is more likely to be impoverished the white kid is in more danger.