Only addressing half my statement.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

I'm glad you said "support," since that's all it is. People "supporting" a theory that is not evidenced nor witnessed. Even Martin's girlfriend could not say whether it was Zimmerman who confronted Martin or if Martin decided to confront Zimmerman. All she claims is that she heard a voice asking something to the effect of "what are you doing here?" followed by a scuffle.


Zimmerman notices an individual acting in a manner he finds suspicious. He calls 911 while attempting to keep Martin in view. When Martin takes off, Zimmerman exits his car and proceeds to follow him on foot, trying to keep him in sight so that he can better communicate Martin's whereabouts to the 911 operator. When the 911 operator tells Zimmerman "we don't need you to do that," he follows for a few moments more before returning to his vehicle.

Martin approaches Zimmerman from behind. Zimmerman turns to him, there is a verbal exchange of some sort (there are two differing accounts of this exchange; Zimmerman's, and Martin's girlfriend - in neither case is Zimmerman described as being aggressive). Martin attacks Zimmerman, bowling him to the ground before mounting him and pummeling him with fists and slamming Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk. Martin realizes Zimmerman has a gun, and reaches for it. There is a scramble for the weapon; Zimmerman draws first and fires. Martin dies.

Everything I'm relating here is in evidence. There are no credible accounts, including that of Martin's girlfriend, that disputes anything I've related here. Anything not stated here is likely just conjecture, unsupported by evidence or witness testimony. And if you think all of this leads to a murder conviction, you're insane.

_________________

Slight correction: Zimmerman did not call 911, he called the police non-emergency number directly. It wasn't a 911 operator he was speaking to, it was a (civilian) dispatcher.

_________________

We could only hope...

We don't know that. There's no evidence that this was the case.

We don't know this either, as there is no evidence of it. Just conflicting reports from Zimmerman and various eyewitnesses.

Again, we don't know this. No evidence of it, just Zimmerman's account.

No, it's Zimmerman's account. Occasionally backed up by and occasionally in opposition to, eyewitness accounts.

I agree, it's unlikely that it will result in a murder conviction. I do think it's possible that Zimmerman gets a manslaughter conviction though.

Wrong. Timelines presented by the call to the police support Zimmerman's account.


Wrong. The medical reports, photographs from the scene and from the police, as well as testimony from the witness with the clearest view of the altercation all support this. The injuries to Zimmerman were consistent with being struck repeatedly in the face while on his back. The only witness that was certain of the position of the two men places Martin on top of Zimmerman, even if he can't recall whether Martin was actually striking Zimmerman. Again, that doesn't matter: we have Zimmerman's injuries as proof of that.


Which has not wavered once since the incident. While, yes, this isn't proof, there's no evidence disputing this that we know of. Without evidence to the contrary, his account is the only thing to go by.


I find manslaughter unlikely as well. There's no proof that Zimmerman isn't telling the truth about leaving off pursuit of Martin, of Martin approaching him from behind, or of Martin instigating the attack. Nor is there proof that Martin didn't reach for Zimmerman's weapon.

As well, there is no proof that Zimmerman was racist or race-motivated. Quite the contrary, all accounts of Zimmerman were of him being sympathetic to other minorities. He mentored black teens. He protested the beating of a homeless black man at the hands of the police chief's son. He helped his black neighbors, and those interviewed had positive things to say about him.

Anyone who believes Zimmerman killed Martin for any other reason than self-defense is deluded. They aren't basing their opinion on the facts. They are speculating and theorizing and, frankly, ignoring the facts in most cases. Just because you want him to be guilty doesn't mean he is.

_________________

No timeline provides evidence that Zimmerman was approached from behind. The timeline doesn't dispute Zimmerman's claim that this is the case, but it doesn't provide evidence that it is true either.

We've seen the injuries, but again, we've seen no evidence that it took place as you described. Those injuries could have easily happened in many other scenerios. Eyewitness testimonies were all over the place regarding what actually happened, and many of them are apparently changing, so I hardly think that that is strong evidence supporting your theory. As far as Martin being on top, even if this is true, that doesn't indicate the aggressor. There are any number of circumstances that would account for the person who started out defending themselves ending up on top of the aggressor.

I'm allowing for evidence that we haven't heard about yet, as well as for an emotional jury. There's also the possibility of witnesses changing their statements yet again.

With *just* the evidence that has been covered by the news, an overly emotional jury is the only way he'll actually be convicted of any death related crime.

Saying this is just as bad as those people who are claiming racial hatred. The facts aren't all in, and we don't actually know what took place. It's all conjecture based off obviously unreliable eyewitness accounts, and the testimony of the person being charged.

No it's not.

I guess I should rephrase. "In evidence" could mean "someone said it so it is on record." That doesn't exactly make it hard evidence that can or will be used in the case.

How many times are you going to say something and then deny or chide it when it's repeated back to you?

When "Yeah, I was outside and saw that dude and pursued him and then shot him dead." is "insufficient evidence" then anyone can just shoot anyone else and say they felt threatened. This is pretty much why the Stand Your Ground nonsense is under so much fire EXACTLY because of this fact.

And if Zimmerman can just walk away completely scott free, it's a pretty good precedent for anyone that feels they need to kill someone else. Hell, they can even play it out the same way, walk up to someone with a gun and OMG HE GRABBED FOR IT *BOOM*, haha no one saw it clearly, I win.

Extra bonus points because the guy with the gun is the only one left alive to make a statement into evidence, so guys like Tyral can say, "The only evidence says he's innocent!"

So yes, that bothers me.

Add-on!

I know that what I just said is tough to reconcile with the concept of legitimate self-defense. It bothers me a little to think about it, too. Though, to be fair, I don't think many legitimate self-defense cases involve one guy with a gun defending himself against someone that's unarmed, that they chose to pursue, and that's not invading his home or some other similar circumstance.

Don't start your legitimate self-defense case by pursuing your attacker as he runs away.

You know what? Tough shit. You're ignoring the evidence in favor of what you "think" or "hope" happened. You, and Tranthas, and half the other people on this thread act like there is no proof whatsoever that Zimmerman is telling the truth. You not only expect him to be lying, you WANT him to be lying. It's like this ridiculous, pathological need.

You can be angry with him for profiling Martin. You can be angry with him for initially following Martin, and make no effort to understand why he did it. But when you start ignoring everything that's been reported on the case, then you just look like vindictive assholes who want someone punished.

_________________

Yes, again, that evidence that boils down to, "The statement from the accused."



Sorta like your need for every witness statement that doesn't support Zimmerman to be biased?



Yeah. I know. It's awful how we expect someone to be accountable for shooting down an unarmed person.

As a side note, I bet the gun lobbies are gonna be absolutely THRILLED when Zimmerman walks and they can use this as proof of how more guns on the street actually make us safer.

Flip back through the logic book, back before Straw Man (I know! I have it earmarked too), and find Ad Hominem. Then stop doing it. My reasons for believing Zimmerman belongs in jail are simple; vigilantism is bad, a kid is dead because Z couldn't leave it to the cops, and I think he should be held responsible for it. If you can't argue the point without trying to portray all your opponents as sinister conspirators trying to frame Zimmerman, the perspective in need of objective re-evaluation isn't ours.

So he was put back into jail due to lieing about how much donations he received, isnt that going to hurt his case... a lot?

_________________
"Creating Havoc and Pie Since 2001!"
My Website: http://www.anthonyhays.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cakvala

No

It might hurt him in the court of public opinion.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

How? public opinion wants him to get the chair already.

Thank you for illustrating my point perfectly.

_________________

And if you can't argue your point in terms of actual evidence, then of course I'm going to point that out. And if you ignore the evidence in favor of whatever opinion you've already crafted, it isn't ad hominem to point out bias. You're biased. And you don't care whether Zimmerman's story is true, you just want him punished.

_________________

http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/06/zi ... r-critics/

The prosecutor seems to be completely nuts

Hang on. Are you seriously contending that by refuting your statements, I'm ignoring the evidence? That a post with no links in it should be discarded because it's just a response, and presents nothing from Associated Press? That a reaction to the evidence somehow counts as ignoring the evidence?? And you have the balls to call me biased?

re·fute/riˈfyo͞ot/
Verb:

Prove (a statement or theory) to be wrong or false; disprove.
Prove that (someone) is wrong.

Wanna show me where you've proved me wrong? I don't need to present evidence, I'm not a fucking attorney. But at least I'm basing my opinion off of published information and not wishful thinking. You've not bothered to look up shit about the incident. Don't come back at me like you've somehow proven me wrong when you've been too lazy to read into it yourself.

_________________

I wonder if the situation was identical, but Martin had shot Zimmerman, if he would also be claiming self-defense and getting such zealous defense from people for it.

probably not because black on black or black on other non white crime is very downplayed compared to the reverse, neither should be under or over inflated, but sadly it is in alot of instances

Well, I don't even mean from a racial standpoint.

It seems that people like Tyral are perfectly happy with the scenario of, "There was a physical confrontation. A gun was nearby. The gun was a threat to both parties (regardless of who was carrying it). Whoever got control of the gun first was justified in shooting the other individual to neutralize the threat."

So I just figure that if Martin got the gun and shot Zimmerman, they'd all be lining up behind Martin to defend him.

Okay, we could use "respond to" if you don't like the determinism of "refute", but what would be the point? I mean:
Then we're done here. Right? There's no further reason to talk.

And now the wife has been arrested for perjury, regarding money from the "donation fund" being omitted from their financials during the bond hearing.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

I read that, really? i mean REALLY? I guess they were thinking they could keep the money after he gets the non-guilty vote.

_________________
"Creating Havoc and Pie Since 2001!"
My Website: http://www.anthonyhays.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cakvala

There's also the passport he had surrendered in his bail hearing, knowing that he had another one elsewhere and neglected to turn over.

Guys, he's not a liar, everything he say is true. He can't be lying, he's the one who's alive come on!

If he say something who are we to judge him!

If you're not on the 12 jurors of his peers, or the actual judge assigned to the case, you don't really get to judge now do you.

What? Anyone can judge anyone they want...

After watching this trial and the closing arguments, and if you look at it from a strictly non emotional pov, that had to be one of the weakest prosecution cases I've ever seen in such a high profile case, I mean when 3 of the prosecutions own witnesses basically testify that their's reasonable doubt, including the ME, the main detective and victims own Father, and yes I know he's testimony was different from his org statement, but just the overall picture the State presented helped the defense more than it did its own case.

I dont see how they get a conviction even on manslaughter, and the 3rd degree murder by child abuse showed how desperate the prosecution is/was.

The best I think Trayvon's parents can hope for is that the juror doesnt come back and say he acted in self defense, so that they can pursue a civil case, because in florida, if Zimmerman is found to have acted in self defense he becomes immune to civil litigation.

*ahem*

Fucking told you so.

_________________

This judgment enable you to kill whoever you want. Follow them, initiate a confrontation, get in a fight, pull out a hidden gun, kill him, claim he was reaching for the gun. As long as you are not black it will work.

Except that "initiate a confrontation" isn't what happened. Or at the very least, there's no evidence to suggest that Zimmerman did so. In fact, the evidence suggests that Martin was at his father's house and elected not to go in, instead doubling back and confronting Zimmerman.

_________________

You are fucking stupid if you believe that for one second.

My toughts exactly but better expressed:

Black female in Florida sentences to 20 years in prison for firing warning shots at her husband.

Should have just killed him and claimed self defense.

http://www.wctv.tv/news/headlines/Flori ... 59571.html

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

Stalking someone with a gun drawn isn't initiating a confrontation? What an amazing world you live in.

_________________

World of Warcraft: Kallaystra, Gweila, Steakumn, Tarathia [ Feathermoon/Horde ]

Wasn't part of the point; that he didn't have his gun drawn? It was still put away when the confrontation started?

_________________
"People sometimes say that ideas cannot be stamped out by force. The Albigensian Crusade proves them wrong. Ideas can be stamped out by the elimination of everyone who holds the ideas." - Quote :"Middle Ages" by Morris Bishop.

Nevertheless, the confrontation would have never started if Zimmerman hadn't gotten out of his car. The fact that he didn't have the gun "out" when it started shouldn't matter. That would be like me starting shit with some random dude walking in the mall because I didn't like his New England Patriots jersey. Then when it escalated, and I started to get my ass kicked, I pulled out a gun and shot him in the face. The whole confrontation could have easily been avoided if the guy wasn't such a tough guy wannabe.

we can argue this till were all blue in the face, bottom line is he was found not guilty in a court of law, the bar for a DoJ civil rights offense is 1000 times higher than the 2nd degree or manslaughter charges he faced in state court so 99% that wont happen, Zimmerman will request a Stand Your Ground hearing as soon as the wrongful death civil case is filed if any, and as most law scholars have stated, its a near 99% certainty that he would be granted Stand Your Ground immunity under florida law.

the issues of ALL racial profiling, black,hispanic,even white, are very important, but this case is not the poster child to set that platform on IMO.

98% of all young black men age 17 who are killed are killed by another young black man age 17, nationwide, THAT issue is just as important.

and when the Rev Jackson says things like, that jury that rendered that verdict was not a jury of Trayvon Martin's peers, well under the law, its actually a jury of the defendant's peers.

What Zim did was wrong, stupid, and reckless, but it wasn't illegal. That's the end of the story.

_________________

The Young Turks? Really Fin?

I'd have a tough time finding a more uneducated, thoughtless, biased opinion anywhere on the internet.

I'm all for political activism in new media, but The Young Turks are fucking terrible, and I agree with them on most things.

_________________

Did you even bother to listen to the points he brings up in the video? Because he thinks exactly like me. I'm not saying i think like he does all the time... I said instead of trying to explain here's a video that does it for me.




I don't, theres one in this thread right here. He's called Tyral with "The proof is Martin ambushed him... The killer said so".

This.

Everything about this sucks, and I hate that it's the case, but... yeah, what Randy said. (Not because Randy said it, but because it's so goddamn tragic that this is really the truth.)

That's the real problem here. There are just too many "Tough Guy" laws on the books in some states now that just encourage insecure macho men to hurt people as long as there's a "Tough Guy" reason to do it.

Laws like "Stand Your Ground" or the even more absurd "Nighttime Property" laws in Texas that say you can kill someone if you see them doing something even as simple as graffiti, even if they start fleeing when you see them.

Or, you know, self-defense in the VAST majority of instances where it occurs.

If you have to kill someone to defend yourself from a situation you started it's still your fault.

Too bad they didn't go for negligent homicide, they could have probably gotten that. They had to go balls to the wall and go for full fledged murder, which was over charged and the evidence didn't support.

_________________
Marauder Harabakc Goat

In Florida you cannot be sued civilly for a crime you've been acquitted of. They cannot sue him, stand your ground has not been a part of this case and will continue to not be so, despite everyone's attempts to make it about that.

_________________
Marauder Harabakc Goat

Which is why provocation is actually included in Texas's Stand Your Ground law in that it's not standing your ground when you provoke the situation. I know, a somewhat reasonable law in Texas. Show me your shocked face.

We just want to make it easier to put colored people on death row.

_________________

Stupid blacks.

Looking back on stuff like this, it's pretty funny because after the trial it's pretty obvious that things like the "ambush" (Remember Zimmerman's first version of the story?) and "pummeling" and "slamming head into the sidewalk" never happened. Nor did the whole, "Grabbing for the gun" because with how Zimmerman himself said he carried his weapon, Martin could have never seen or reached for it.

Even a couple defense witnesses said that Zimmerman's "wounds" were consistent with someone that had been punched once, maybe twice. Hell, if you cleaned the blood off his face on the photos, you wouldn't even know he was injured at all.

There was no ambush, or beating, or struggle for the weapon. I'm sure pretty much everyone knows this by now, after everything came out (and Zimmerman had his five different versions). All we had was a dude with a gun stalking a teenager at night, said teenager most likely thinking he was in danger, resulting in a confrontation with a paranoid, insecure, guy who had a gun and decided he was going to show that little "asshole" and "punk" who was boss.

Did Zimmerman set out to kill Martin? No, I don't think so. I don't think he's an evil person that leaves his house every day hoping he can murder someone. But I do think he's a danger to the people in any place he resides because he's clearly willing to walk around with a weapon and instigate confrontations with unarmed people, and enough of a pussy to pull that weapon as soon as he's scared.