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.
The results of the initial investigation were that the local Cops found no reason to arrest Zimmerman and the D.A. found no reason to prosecute. It's highly unlikely that they would have just let Zimmerman walk if there was any credible evidence of murder or wrongdoing-possible, but highly unlikely. Next along comes Jesse Jackson and others of his ilk basically calling it the murder of a perfect Angel. The Liberal National Media then joined in the hue and cry for prosecution-even Obama made comments. Next, the D.A. was removed from the case and a Democratic Judge was assigned. By any standard this constitutes a political and racial prosecution. This would have made nothing other than the local Paper if the shootee had been white.The only evidence that I am familiar with is such that has been in the News;since that is not likely to include it all, I predicate my comments upon that possibility. I do say that all of the evidence that I know of substantiates Zimmerman's position.Yes he should have stayed in his vehicle, but exiting it is in no way a crime. Once the politicians, the race mongers and the media became involved the possibility of justice became remote. I hope that the new Judge's "ambition" doesn't interfere with the dispensation of justice.
Everyone has staked out their positions and now throw out fantastical what-if's that support their positions but are utterly inadmissable in a court of law as they are utter speculation.
Yep, the arguments are ultimately pointless. I enjoy piecing together the puzzle and the intellectual arguments that are occasionally made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
I'm looooong on the record of saying that I feel Zimmerman is in the wrong....but can it be proven? There was enough evidence to try him.....conviction will be another story.
Zimmerman could have made better decisions that night, but I don't know that any of his decisions that night were actually illegal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
I mean for crying out loud we have posters that have locked-in positions and don't even know he has a SYG hearing coming up in April.
Nor do they understand what an SYG hearing is. Media should actually be referring to it as a pretrial immunity hearing and not an SYG hearing, as it's available to anyone claiming statutory self defense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
Heck, my buddy is a veteran lawyer with criminal defense and other litigation experience (including death penalty work etc.) has to be wondering where all these *experts* that haven't seen all the evidence, don't know the laws, don't have legal degrees or any legal experience.....have arrived at thier unmovable opinions on the topic.
I'd argue that most of the evidence is out and O'Mara seems to believe that as well. Granted, the state isn't giving him certain things (e.g., it took them weeks to give him the color picture of Zimmerman's swollen nose.) You're right though, people arguing about this case aren't trial lawyers. Heck, I stated early on that all I'm doing is quoting statutes. Statutes are the letters of the law, but the intent of the law is ferreted out via trials.
Prior immunity hearings will weigh heavily on Zimmerman's, and I suspect O'Mara will at the very least mention this case, as it's incredibly relevant:
Anyway, I'm having fun discussing the case. I hope that if Zimmerman did act illegally that he'll be punished appropriately. If he didn't, then I hope he walks free. Not because I have respect for the guy, but because I believe the system should give the benefit of the doubt to the accused when there's insufficient evidence.
I answered this earlier in the thread, but the answer is yes (apart from the issues of bringing a gun into a bar.) According to Florida Statute 776.041:
Option (a) says you can't fight back (assuming he was the aggressor) unless you reasonably believe you are in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. Option (b) says you must withdraw from the fight, communicate this, and terminate force.
If Zimmerman started the fight, Martin gets to stand his ground and meet force with force. If he mounts Zimmerman and starts banging Zimmerman's head into the concrete (a) arguably becomes applicable. If Zimmerman screams for help and isn't fighting back, (b) arguably becomes applicable.
But yes, if you start a fight, get your butt kicked, withdraw and tell the other party you're done, but he continues to come after you, then you can most certainly use self defense. (Granted I'm not a lawyer and I haven't read any of the case law regarding 776.041.)
So that is it in a nutshell, It has to be proven that zimmerman used some form of restraint and that Trayvon was the aggressor. Now lets add this to the equation. zimmerman has been proven to 1. lie in a court setting. 2. has a history anger management issues. 3. has had previous run ins with the law
4. was not required to take a BAT or any type of drug test the night of the incident.
My personal questions would come from a basic common sense venue.
1. Who in the hell would follow a stranger in the dark/rain unless they had a weapon and had no probelm with using it?
2. If instructed to not to pursue, why do it? At least follow at such a distance as not to be noticed.
3. After either catching up with Trayvon and confronting him being that he has a weapon and Trayvon did not, would'nt the SYG law would be in his favor since it was his life that would have been threatened providing the gun was in plain sight? That being said, could'nt zimmerman once acknowledging that Trayvon was unarmed walked away?
4. If Trayvon was shot while on top of zimmerman why was'nt any blood on him considering he had to shoot upward in order to get him off of him?
5. I mentioned this before, but why did'nt zimmerman get immediate help if his head was being bashed on concrete as hard as he said that it was? He would have at least been dizzy or had a concussion and at worst could have had a hematoma in his head. Either way that is nothing that you should put off until the next day or whenever he decided to see a physician.
1. Who in the hell would follow a stranger in the dark/rain unless they had a weapon and had no probelm with using it?
Don't know, but being confident while armed isn't a crime. It may lead you into situations you would otherwise be cautious of, but that's not a crime. It may make for an interesting civil argument though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime
2. If instructed to not to pursue, why do it? At least follow at such a distance as not to be noticed.
He wasn't instructed. He was told that following Martin wasn't necessary, not that he shouldn't do it. There's a big difference. Also, the police chief said emergency operators aren't sworn officers. Their commands/instructions/suggesions are not legally binding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime
3. After either catching up with Trayvon and confronting him being that he has a weapon and Trayvon did not, would'nt the SYG law would be in his favor since it was his life that would have been threatened providing the gun was in plain sight? That being said, could'nt zimmerman once acknowledging that Trayvon was unarmed walked away?
You're assuming that this is what happened. We don't know if Zimmerman followed Martin, or Martin hid and ambushed him. We do know that Martin never mentioned a gun to his girlfriend, so it's doubtful one was ever seen until the fight was underway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime
4. If Trayvon was shot while on top of zimmerman why was'nt any blood on him considering he had to shoot upward in order to get him off of him?
First, there was at least one blood stain on Zimmerman's jacket that was from Martin (DNA confirmed). Second, Martin's baggy sweatshirt might have caught the blood exiting the wound (just speculating here.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime
5. I mentioned this before, but why did'nt zimmerman get immediate help if his head was being bashed on concrete as hard as he said that it was? He would have at least been dizzy or had a concussion and at worst could have had a hematoma in his head. Either way that is nothing that you should put off until the next day or whenever he decided to see a physician.
The severity of his wounds aren't as relevant as you think. He needs to have reasonably been in fear of great bodily harm or death, not that he actually was. Let's assume everything he said is true: he was punched unprovoked, his nose was broken, Martin had him pinned and then put his hands over his nose and mouth. Wouldn't it be reasonable to conclude Zimmerman might have feared death or great bodily harm? He was in excruciating pain (from the broken nose and head banging), choking (blood trickling down his throat), and had difficulty breathing (nose swollen shut, hand over mouth, blood in throat/airway)?
Last edited by Grunchlk; 02-15-2013 at 05:48 PM..
Reason: Cleanup, conciseness.
He wasn't instructed. He was told that following Martin wasn't necessary, not that he shouldn't do it. There's a big difference. Also, the police chief said emergency operators aren't sworn officers. Their commands/instructions/suggesions are not legally binding.
Ok, it was "suggested" but he still followed. The actual credentials of a dispatcher is not relavent because the caller would not know anyway, btw there are some that are sworn officers. My thing is if you are not going to take the advice of the people (police) that you called why call at all?
You're assuming that this is what happened. We don't know if Zimmerman followed Martin, or Martin hid and ambushed him. We do know that Martin never mentioned a gun to his girlfriend, so it's doubtful one was ever seen until the fight was underway.
No but he did mention that he was being followed by someone that he did not know. His girlfriend told him to run. I understood why he did'nt. If someone is following you why lead them to your house with your younger brother alone there. How about right before they fought zimmerman showed him his gun and walked away, do you think Trayvon would have pursued him?
First, there was at least one blood stain on Zimmerman's jacket that was from Martin (DNA confirmed). Second, Martin's baggy sweatshirt might have caught the blood exiting the wound (just speculating here.)
At least you admitted to it, considering we are both doing the same thing I still think that considering the gun was supposely used at such a short range being that Trayvon was on top of him and he was shot in the chest at point blank range there would have been more blood on him.
The severity of his wounds aren't as relevant as you think. He needs to have reasonably been in fear of great bodily harm or death, not that he actually was. Let's assume everything he said is true: he was punched unprovoked, his nose was broken, Martin had him pinned and then put his hands over his nose and mouth. Wouldn't it be reasonable to conclude Zimmerman might have feared death or great bodily harm? He was in excruciating pain (from the broken nose and head banging), choking (blood trickling down his throat), and had difficulty breathing (nose swollen shut, hand over mouth, blood in throat/airway)?[/quote]
No I was looking at it because of the severity of his "wounds" that they could have been self inflicted or very minor, remember his distractors were putting alot emphasis on them. Why would Trayvon cover zimmerman's mouth? It was'nt like he was trying to mug or rape him? Oh, and about his nose, they said that it "appeared" to be broken which in itself also would have caused alot more initial bleeding.
Strawman. I never said Martin was trying to kill Zimmerman, nor did I imply it. I'm saying Zimmerman could reasonably fear he would have been killed or have suffered great bodily harm. [
Zimmerman said Martin was trying to kill him. This case does not revolve around things you have said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunchlk
Strawman. No on ever claimed that Martin was trying to rob anyone. Zimmerman claims Martin was standing in someone's lawn, less than 10ft away from their windows, looking towards the building.
Someone's lawn? Have you seen a map of where this took place? Zimmerman also killed Martin in someone's lawn. Zimmerman himself was within 10 feet of windows (where there are no street signs or street numbers) when he was supposedly looking for street signs and street numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunchlk
So, noting the direction someone is heading and communicating that to police is equivalent to being a sniper on a roof committing 1st degree murder? That's insane.
No, it's consistent with Zimmerman incorrectly thinking that Martin was guilty of something and trying to escape. Just like when he said "he's carrying something (?)" "it looks like he's on drugs or something", "f-ing punks", and "these a-holes always get away".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunchlk
You fail to grasp SYG. You must first demonstrate that Zimmerman attacked Martin (not just appeared scary.) No one saw the start of the fight so you can't. We can't conclusively confirm Martin started the fight either, but then Zimmerman isn't claiming SYG. The burden is on you to prove Zimmerman attacked Martin.
So Zimmerman doesn't need ANY proof that Martin started a fight for no reason. Awesome. Yet I need MORE proof then admission of GZ that he followed Martin behind a bunch of apartments and shot him dead? Sorry, even the the person who wrote the law agrees with me. (Link in my next post)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grunchlk
Speaking of proof, where are all those links you said you were going to get me? I've actually got some evidence that will help your argument, but seeing as how I've been linking and quoting everything for you, I'd like you to live up to your promises before I help you along.
Links to the same laws that I link are making my case, not your's. Believing that Zimmerman was actually getting his head bashed in and was screaming for help and begging for his life is pretty foolish at this point. Not one bit of that has been established. Take away those and the SYG was custom written for Trayvon Martin....I know, I know, except that Martin had no reason to kill anyone that night and more importantly, didn't.
More problems for the Zimmerman defense, with links, coming up next....
So, you're claiming that Zimmerman was on top of Martin, and that Martin was passive, when Zimmerman shot him. If you that's the case then I fully agree Zimmerman should be convicted of 2nd degree murder. Unfortunately, I have yet to see any evidence of that scenario. Luckily, you're going to provide me this evidence that I am, as of yet, unable to find.
Speaking of strawmen.... I most certainly never said anything remotely close to this. I've maintained that the two were in a fight. The question is, who provoked it? Martin's girlfriend and Zimmerman's 911 call more than suggest that Zimmerman did. The guy facing 25 years in prison says the high schooler did. A legal conclusion will have to come via the result of Zimmerman's murder trial.
Last edited by Kestrel88; 02-15-2013 at 11:41 PM..
Here are several pieces of evidence and other facts that will incur considerable damage to the defense's case and/or forum posters' cases. It's long but for some reason I'm the only one around here required to provide sources. Please note that I already know that many of these statements will be directly challenged by other witness testimonies. They can be found within the very links I'm providing. The point of listing them here is to remind everyone that Zimmerman's ever-changing account of what happened that night is far from set in stone. Enjoy:
Witnesses
Mary Cutcher was in her kitchen making coffee that night with her roommate, Selma Mora Lamilla. The window was open, she said.
"We heard a whining. Not like a crying, boohoo, but like a whining, someone in distress, and then the gunshot," she said.
They looked out the window but saw nothing. It was dark.
They ran out the sliding glass door, and within seconds, they saw Zimmerman.
"Zimmerman was standing over the body with -- basically straddling the body with his hands on Trayvon's back," Cutcher said. "And it didn't seem to me that he was trying to help him in any way. I didn't hear any struggle prior to the gunshot.
"And I feel like it was Trayvon Martin that was crying out, because the minute that the gunshot went off, the whining stopped."
W12: "I know after seeing the TV of what's happening, comparing their sizes, I think Zimmerman was definitely on top because of his size," she said.
W:13 The neighborhood watch volunteer's tone, according to the witness, was "'not like 'I can't believe I just shot someone!'—it was more like, 'Just tell my wife I shot somebody …,' like it was nothing."
W15 reports that he saw “a man laying on the ground that needed help that was screaming.” He said he was going to help, but his dog got off the leash. He said he heard a loud sound and then the screaming stopped.
W:2 In the first two interviews, this witness says she saw two guys running as she was looking out the kitchen window, but doesn’t know who was in front or behind. They were about 10 feet apart. She saw a fist fight, but doesn’t know who was hitting who.
W9:says that she knows George Zimmerman, and he would start something that could lead to a confrontation. She claims that he is a very confrontational person. She doesn’t talk to him because of things he has done in the past, and she knows all of his family. She urges the police to check into his background and try to get people to come forward and admit the type of
person George Zimmerman is.
“They're wrestling right in the back of my porch ... There’s a black guy down and it looks like he’s been shot and he’s dead.” (male witness)
Mary Cutcher, a resident near the scene who called 911, said Mr. Zimmerman did not appear to be hurt or wounded. “He was never wiping his face or cleaning,” she said. (This story would change later according to police)
Seven 911 calls were made by residents near the scene offering varying accounts. In one of the 911 calls, screams can be heard in the background before the sound of a gunshot. Several witnesses who heard the encounter agree that it was Trayvon.
An unnamed witness speaking on CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360" said the entirety of the scuffle he saw between the two took place on grass.
In reference to the size difference between 28-year-old Zimmerman and Martin, the witness described the fight as being between a "larger man" and a "boy." While the witness said he was not able to see who was on top of the other as the two scuffled, he said "there wasn't a lot of movement" immediately before he heard a gunshot.
Zimmerman "didn't appear hurt" as he walked away, he added, and he didn't see any blood on him.
Forensic tests made public Wednesday show that George Zimmerman's was the only DNA that could be identified on the grip of the gun used to fatally shoot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.
The results rule out Martin's DNA from being on the gun's grip. Zimmerman's DNA also was identified on the gun's holster, but no determination could be made as to whether Martin's DNA was on the gun's holster, according to the report from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.
The question of whose DNA is on the gun and holster could play a role in Zimmerman's defense.
A new trove of evidence released by the Florida state attorney prosecuting George Zimmerman for second-degree murder in the killing of Trayvon Martin reveals the extent to which law enforcement doubted Zimmerman's early claims of self-defense.
"His actions are inconsistent with those of a person who has stated he was in fear of another subject," an investigator wrote in an early report on the Feb. 26 shooting. "Investigative findings show that George Michael Zimmerman had at least two opportunities to speak with Trayvon Benjamin Martin in order to defuse the circumstances," and Zimmerman twice "failed to identify himself as a concerned resident or a neighborhood watch member."
The report also said that Martin's and Zimmerman's respective physical dimensions did not place Zimmerman at a disadvantage worthy of lethal force.
"Investigative findings show the physical injuries displayed by [Zimmerman] are marginally consistent with a life-threatening violent episode described by him, during which neither a deadly weapon nor deadly force was deployed by Trayvon Martin," the report said.
At an emergency homeowner’s association meeting on March 1, “one man was escorted out because he openly expressed his frustration because he had previously contacted the Sanford Police Department about Zimmerman approaching him and even coming to his home,” the resident wrote in an email to HuffPost. “It was also made known that there had been several complaints about George Zimmerman and his tactics" in his neighborhood watch captain role.
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.
I still think that considering the gun was supposely used at such a short range being that Trayvon was on top of him and he was shot in the chest at point blank range there would have been more blood on him.
