Zimmerman trial

[docyabut2]

Edited June 22, 2013 by docyabut2

[+susieice]

If the above map is right, Zimmerman's car was nowhere near where the confrontation took place. Trayvon may have been taking a shortcut home, which in the rain would make sense. Looks to me like Z cut him off on his way.

[docyabut2]

If the above map is right, Zimmerman's car was nowhere near where the confrontation took place. Trayvon may have been taking a shortcut home, which in the rain would make sense. Looks to me like Z cut him off on his way.

Don`nt really know if that is correct, its just one person`s opinion on the net.,we have to wait for the trial, or HLN to give a better description of the paths they took or what.

[Yamato]

The only protests will be if he is found not guilty. But, the fix is in. You'll get your pound of flesh.

You'll your? Telling me what my position is on this? It's innocent until proven guilty, as always.

[No Censorship]

Yes, he is because he created the situation that put both of their lives in danger. Although, I am not sure I believe that story at all as it seems unlikely.

If that's what happened, George didn't force Trayvon to bash his head into the sidewalk. Judging by his wounds, it likely happened.

[No Censorship]

If you caused that person to fear for their life, if you created the situation, if you are looking for trouble and find it in the manner in which Zimmerman did you are criminally liable. That is in essence vigilante justice and is against the law in every state.

That's a lot of "ifs". If your scenario is correct, and that's a big if, I hope that it all comes out in court.

[Tata Rompe Pecho]

It really depends on what happened. If there really was a fight that led Zimmerman to believe his life was in danger then it could not be second degree murder because there was no malicious intent to kill. I believe though that in either case Zimmerman acted with reckless disregard for the consequences of his completely unnecessary and dangerous actions on that night or how they could cost him or others their lives. That is criminal when it leads to a death.

Wrong. In the State of Florida, Second degree murder does not involve intent at all.

If trayvon was bashing his head into the sidewalk, I would think zimmerman was trying to stop that ie trying do some sort of push up to keep is face off the sidewalk. Zimmerman got the worse in the fist fight, he had a broken nose.

Wrong. According to autopsy reports, there were no signs of Zimmerman attempting to defend himself at all. There was just a single gunshot wound to the chest.

Zimmerman did not start the fist fight. Travon was at his door and turned around to confront zimmerman. His girlfriend tried to get him to go inside, instead he turned around to confront zimmerman. Which means that travon was the one looking for trouble. What travon should have down was go inside and called 91 . Report a strange person was following him.

But, don't worry the jurry will find him guilty. So that the protests don't return.

Wrong. Zimmerman left his car and pursued Martin. While out of his car, in pursuit of or returning from pursuing Martin, there was a confrontation of which he reached for his pocket. Making a very clear threat against Martin's life. Martin had every right to stand his ground and fight back against his aggressor which was at the time making a threat against his life.

Did you guys not even read my last post where I clearly linked this stuff? In the State of Florida, you cannot pursue someone and create a situation to then say you are defending yourself from that situation.

From what I have seen thisd a type f apartment complex. Meaning the sidewalks and grass is comuniul property, anyone liv ing there can go anywhere they want.

If you turn back and tell te guy, your going to have trouble. It is your fault not his if you get hurt. That is the problem inthis case, 'we only have one side of the story. He had wounds consistant with his story.

Wrong. While anybody can go anywhere, you cannot follow someone around, and make a threat against their life. If they do react to your threat, it is not their fault, but yours. You put them in a situation of which they had to defend themselves, and so you are the agressor and agressors don't have a right to self-defense in Florida.

Edited June 23, 2013 by xFelix

[docyabut2]

Here`s Zimmerman`s account according to Wikipedia, but I`d wait for the trial to be sure of anything.

Zimmerman said he left his truck to find a street sign so he would be able to tell the police dispatcher where he was. He told investigators that he was not following Martin but was "just going in the same direction he was" to find an address, but admitted that he had also left his truck to try to see in which direction Martin had gone. The altercation began, he said, when Martin suddenly appeared while Zimmerman was walking back to his vehicle. He described Martin at different points in the interviews as appearing "out of nowhere," "from the darkness," and as "jump[ing] out of the bushes." Zimmerman said that Martin asked, "You got a ******* problem, homie?" Zimmerman replied no, and then Martin said that he did now, and punched him. As they struggled on the ground, Zimmerman on his back with Martin on top of him, Zimmerman yelled for help "probably 50 times." ( Martin told him to "Shut the **** up," as he hit him in the face and pounded his head on a concrete sidewalk. When Zimmerman tried to move off the concrete, Martin saw his gun and said "You're going to die tonight ***********er!" Martin grabbed for the gun, but Zimmerman grabbed it first. He said after firing his weapon at Martin, he wasn't sure at first that he had hit him, so he got on top of him in order to subdue him

[danielost]

Wrong. In the State of Florida, Second degree murder does not involve intent at all.

Wrong. According to autopsy reports, there were no signs of Zimmerman attempting to defend himself at all. There was just a single gunshot wound to the chest.

Wrong. Zimmerman left his car and pursued Martin. While out of his car, in pursuit of or returning from pursuing Martin, there was a confrontation of which he reached for his pocket. Making a very clear threat against Martin's life. Martin had every right to stand his ground and fight back against his aggressor which was at the time making a threat against his life.

Did you guys not even read my last post where I clearly linked this stuff? In the State of Florida, you cannot pursue someone and create a situation to then say you are defending yourself from that situation.

Wrong. While anybody can go anywhere, you cannot follow someone around, and make a threat against their life. If they do react to your threat, it is not their fault, but yours. You put them in a situation of which they had to defend themselves, and so you are the agressor and agressors don't have a right to self-defense in Florida.

You just said what the problem is. Zimmerman did not hit travon(according to you). Which means travon was the one throwing punches and smashing zimmerman's face into the ground. You cannot start throwing punches just because someone is following you, you have to think they are going to attack you. Zimmerman said travon asked him if he was looking for trouble, afterzimmerman said no travon attacked him. The above sample was a clear case of murder.

[Regi]

Judging by his wounds, it likely happened.

I'd like to learn more about those two injuries, and what other evidence might show. I think it's interesting that in the re-enactment, Zimmerman added ("added" because he didn't include it in his written statement) that during the struggle, he thought Martin had "something" in his hand. He said he thought that when Martin had a hold of his head.

I think an important point is that in his written statement, it wasn't the 'head bashing' which prompted Zimmerman to shoot Martin...it was that Martin "assured" Zimmerman that he "was going to die tonight." In other words, and according to his own statement, Zimmerman's concern/thought/belief wasn't that he could/would die from the "head bashing".

(Re: Zimmerman's statements, I want to stress that I'm highlighting what HE has said happened, not what I personally think or believe happened.)

Edited June 23, 2013 by regi

[Regi]

If the above map is right, Zimmerman's car was nowhere near where the confrontation took place. Trayvon may have been taking a shortcut home, which in the rain would make sense. Looks to me like Z cut him off on his way.

Susieice, if you correlate the police call- the descriptions of activity together with the timing- with the re-enactment (the re-enactment was- in my opinion- a complete joke, but that's another discussion for perhaps another time) it appears that Zimmerman 'at last' parked nearest to the sidewalk which connects Twin Trees with Retreat View.

It appears that when Martin continued onto Twin Trees and was therefore out of Zimmerman's sight, Zimmerman then left the clubhouse and essentially followed 'along side' Martin. (I don't know if Zimmerman was actually parked at the point at which Martin began to run, but- no question- the behavior Zimmerman demonstrated up until then is what prompted Martin to run. Clearly that vehicle was following him for some unknown reason.)

Edited June 23, 2013 by regi

[Regi]

Did you guys not even read my last post where I clearly linked this stuff?

[Tata Rompe Pecho]

You just said what the problem is. Zimmerman did not hit travon(according to you). Which means travon was the one throwing punches and smashing zimmerman's face into the ground. You cannot start throwing punches just because someone is following you, you have to think they are going to attack you. Zimmerman said travon asked him if he was looking for trouble, afterzimmerman said no travon attacked him. The above sample was a clear case of murder.

For christ sake is my previous post invisible to you? Reaching for your pockets in an argument is a threat against the other party's life. Zimmerman admits that Martin never got violent until Zimmerman reached for his pockets. Martin was defending himself from a death threat.

Even the justification Zimmerman uses for reaching for his pockets is completely ridiculous. Who follows someone they believe to be dangerous, confronts them, and then while in the middle of a confrontation, decides to call the cops? Nobody. Nobody has ever said "I think you're dangerous so I followed you, and I know we're now arguing about me following you, but hold that thought let me call the cops on you".

What do you think Zimmerman was really reaching for? <--- Doesn't even matter, he was reaching... That's enough to constitute a threat!

[danielost]

If it was cold from the rain my hands would have been in my pockets. As for reaching for your phone to call the police, I would have. Zimmerman had a habit of calling the police over anything. Which was always a false alarm. As this one was until the kid decided to confront him. Remember the girlfriend told travon to just go in side.

[Tata Rompe Pecho]

If it was cold from the rain my hands would have been in my pockets. As for reaching for your phone to call the police, I would have. Zimmerman had a habit of calling the police over anything. Which was always a false alarm. As this one was until the kid decided to confront him. Remember the girlfriend told travon to just go in side.

There you have it, if it were cold... in Florida... The southern most state in the United States.......

Walking around a complex, and verbally confronting someone for following you is not against the law. Calling the cops on false alarms is against the law. Regardless if his girlfriend, his parents, or even God himself had told him to go inside.. He had no legal obligation to do so. He could easily have never ran, he could have completely stood there from the very beginning and told Zimmerman to fck off. Because he ran initially doesn't mean he surrenders his right to stop and tell Zimmerman to fck off and stop following him.

Another thing, I'm really quite disappointed to see so many people say "he should have gone home", do you even think of the thousands of cases of stalking that lead to death every year? Here he is being followed around by some stranger, but sure let's lead him straight home so that he can know where to go in the future should he wish to further harass the teen right?

Even then, you cannot argue with the law or the facts. Zimmerman got out of his car, and went out of his way to follow the teen he had already described as "possibly on drugs" and "reaching for his wasitband", without having the legal authority to do so. Zimmerman created a dangerous situation and then defended himself from it.

Well, Florida Common Law says you cannot do that, you cannot create a dangerous situation and then defend yourself from your very own dangerous situation that you created.

Edited June 24, 2013 by xFelix

[No Censorship]

I'd like to learn more about those two injuries, and what other evidence might show. I think it's interesting that in the re-enactment, Zimmerman added ("added" because he didn't include it in his written statement) that during the struggle, he thought Martin had "something" in his hand. He said he thought that when Martin had a hold of his head.

I think an important point is that in his written statement, it wasn't the 'head bashing' which prompted Zimmerman to shoot Martin...it was that Martin "assured" Zimmerman that he "was going to die tonight." In other words, and according to his own statement, Zimmerman's concern/thought/belief wasn't that he could/would die from the "head bashing".

(Re: Zimmerman's statements, I want to stress that I'm highlighting what HE has said happened, not what I personally think or believe happened.)

In both cases (if true), his life was threatened. He had a right to defend himself. It was six of one and half a dozen of the other. I wasn't there, so my comments were speculation just like the rest of the posters in this thread.

[Regi]

In both cases (if true), his life was threatened. He had a right to defend himself. It was six of one and half a dozen of the other. I wasn't there, so my comments were speculation just like the rest of the posters in this thread.

It's not my approach to get into the "if's". I discuss facts that are already established, and one doesn't have 'been there' to know what those facts are.

[No Censorship]

It's not my approach to get into the "if's". I discuss facts that are already established, and one doesn't have 'been there' to know what those facts are.

Facts are one thing. Opinions, based on those facts, are another. For instance, you might witness a car crash between a young man in a Mustang and an old woman in a station wagon. It's a fact that there's a car crash, but we can only guess the causes. I'm not saying that *you're* doing this. It's just human nature. Some people will quickly assume that the young man is the type who drives in a reckless and speedy manner. Other people will assume that the old woman is not fit to drive, especially such a big car.

[Regi]

I'm not saying that *you're* doing this.

Then please don't quote me.

[+susieice]

Watching opening statements but have to leave for work. The prosecution will use Zimmerman's words against him. Will follow the trial as closely as I can. I see they did allow Trayvon's parents to stay in the courtroom.

[Regi]

Very impressive opening from the state; concise, comprehensive, profound.

Too much to address specifically, but especially compelling last remark.

John Guy for the prosecution: "...we are confident that at the end of this trial you will know in your head, in your heart, in your stomach...that George Zimmerman did not shoot Trayvon Martin because he had to; he shot him for the worst of all reasons... because he wanted to."

[Bavarian Raven]

More like because he had to because he felt his life was in danger :/

[danielost]

Watching opening statements but have to leave for work. The prosecution will use Zimmerman's words against him. Will follow the trial as closely as I can. I see they did allow Trayvon's parents to stay in the courtroom.

I don't think allowed it. I think they had to if thery could be. Something about faceing your accusers. I know the state brought the charges but.

[+and-then]

There you have it, if it were cold... in Florida... The southern most state in the United States.......

Walking around a complex, and verbally confronting someone for following you is not against the law. Calling the cops on false alarms is against the law. Regardless if his girlfriend, his parents, or even God himself had told him to go inside.. He had no legal obligation to do so. He could easily have never ran, he could have completely stood there from the very beginning and told Zimmerman to fck off. Because he ran initially doesn't mean he surrenders his right to stop and tell Zimmerman to fck off and stop following him.

Another thing, I'm really quite disappointed to see so many people say "he should have gone home", do you even think of the thousands of cases of stalking that lead to death every year? Here he is being followed around by some stranger, but sure let's lead him straight home so that he can know where to go in the future should he wish to further harass the teen right?

Even then, you cannot argue with the law or the facts. Zimmerman got out of his car, and went out of his way to follow the teen he had already described as "possibly on drugs" and "reaching for his wasitband", without having the legal authority to do so. Zimmerman created a dangerous situation and then defended himself from it.

Well, Florida Common Law says you cannot do that, you cannot create a dangerous situation and then defend yourself from your very own dangerous situation that you created.

Then by the apparent logic of that law, I could inadvertently walk into a gang banging neighborhood, do or say something that caused one of them to attack and if I defended myself at all I'd be guilty. I think Z will be convicted just to keep the peace. And it's a shame.

[Glorfindel]

I wonder if the half Mexican - half Jewish Zimmerman will join the Aryan Brotherhood in prison.