IDBillzFan Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Good lord. So far I've heard repeated and have read repeatedly that Zimmerman was ordered or told by the police or 911 to stay in his truck. That this is about "Stand Your Ground" That Zimmerman stalked Martin. Stalked, not followed. "If only Zimmerman would have obeyed the police order to stand down" Ridiculous how much of this I am hearing and reading from people unhappy with the decision. I want to ask "Did you even pay attention to the trial?" but it's obvious they didn't, and I don't care enough about it to try and convince them. NONE of that proves self defense. More to the point, none of it proves second degree murder...or manslaughter...or even child abuse. I was surprised the state didn't throw in the lesser charge of "kitchen sink." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 The burdon for self defense is much lower than proving 2nd degree murder. If you think he (Zimmerman) may of acted in self defense you have to aquit him. It's that simple. The evidence in this case is so strong that he could have acted in self defense. That's all you need to aquit him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjl2nd Posted July 15, 2013 Author Share Posted July 15, 2013 You are in idiot. They absolutely do. Tryavon being on top means trayvon has the upper hand and its consistnet with the gunshot. A displaced noise and cuts on the back of the head means Trayvon assualted Zimmerman. That's evidence that Trayvon assualted him. The lead detective saying that Trayvons father said that wasn't him screaming on the tape implies it was George Zimmerman. Screaming for help is evidence that George could be fearing for his life at the time. Conclusion. Zimmeran has a right to act in self defense. Here is the !@#$ing problem with this law in Florida (and wherever else it stands): you can basically start a fight with anyone, start losing the fight and then kill the other participant, claim self-defense and get away with murder. Because again, there is no proof Trayvon started any kind of fight no matter how much you guys scream he did. The burdon for self defense is much lower than proving 2nd degree murder. If you think he (Zimmerman) may of acted in self defense you have to aquit him. It's that simple. The evidence in this case is so strong that he could have acted in self defense. That's all you need to aquit him. Felt like manslaughter to me. Seemed to meet the requirements in my eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 (edited) Here is the !@#$ing problem with this law in Florida (and wherever else it stands): you can basically start a fight with anyone, start losing the fight and then kill the other participant, claim self-defense and get away with murder. Because again, there is no proof Trayvon started any kind of fight no matter how much you guys scream he did. However, the evidence is not consistent with Zimmeran starting the fight. There was not a single injury to Trayvon other than the gunshot. You would think he would have gotten atleast one blow in on Trayvon if he threw the first punch. Edited July 15, 2013 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjl2nd Posted July 15, 2013 Author Share Posted July 15, 2013 However, the evidence is not consistent with Zimmeran starting the fight. There was not a single injury to Trayvon other than the gunshot. You would think he would have gotten atleast one blow in on Trayvon if he threw the first punch. Maybe, he could have shoved him, grabbed him, etc. There are plenty of possibilities. Imagine if Trayvon Martin was defending himself?! Naw, couldn't be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 (edited) And now people in my FB timeline are posting the photo below to show massive protesting in San Francisco. Except, y'know, this isn't the Golden Gate Bridge today. It's from a celebration in 1987 celebrating the bridge's 50th anniversary. But hey...it looks good! Edited July 15, 2013 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Here is the !@#$ing problem with this law in Florida (and wherever else it stands): you can basically start a fight with anyone, start losing the fight and then kill the other participant, claim self-defense and get away with murder. Because again, there is no proof Trayvon started any kind of fight no matter how much you guys scream he did. Felt like manslaughter to me. Seemed to meet the requirements in my eyes. Except there is no proof that he started the fight. (It was his word against the DA's and a lot of the DA's witnesses and evidence supported GZ's contention that he didn't start the fight. At least enough for reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors.) And, it seems that you are heading towards bringing the 'stand your ground' law into the matter; it wasn't brought up by the defense, so stand your ground wasn't an issue in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjl2nd Posted July 15, 2013 Author Share Posted July 15, 2013 (edited) You all should take the time to read this quick essay by Tim Wise. I know most of you won't but here is the link: http://www.timwise.o...to-my-daughter/ An excerpt: But apparently that moral and existential truth matters little to this jury or to the white reactionaries so quick to praise their decision. To them, the fact that Martin might well have had reason to fear Zimmerman that night, might have thought he was standing his ground, confronted by someone who himself was “up to no good” is irrelevant. They are saying that black people who fight back against someone they think is creepy and who is following them, and might intend to harm them, are more responsible for their deaths than those who ultimately kill them. What they have said, and make no mistake about it, is that any white person who wants to kill a black person can follow one, confront them, maybe even provoke them; and as soon as that black person perhaps takes a swing at them, or lunges at them, the white pursuer can pull their weapon, fire, and reasonably assume that they will get away with this act. I can start drama, and if you respond to the drama I created, you are to blame, not me. Edited July 15, 2013 by fjl2nd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Here is the !@#$ing problem with this law in Florida (and wherever else it stands): you can basically start a fight with anyone, start losing the fight and then kill the other participant, claim self-defense and get away with murder. Because again, there is no proof Trayvon started any kind of fight no matter how much you guys scream he did. Felt like manslaughter to me. Seemed to meet the requirements in my eyes. Probably because you feel first and think second like most idiots who write off anything that they don't understand or runs contrary to what they would like to believe as racism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Maybe, he could have shoved him, grabbed him, etc. There are plenty of possibilities. Imagine if Trayvon Martin was defending himself?! Naw, couldn't be. Unfortunately for those wishing to have seen GZ get convicted, all GZ needed to get acquitted was 1 of those 'plenty of possibilities' to be plausible. The state had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the alternatives all weren't plausible. They did not do that in the minds of the jurors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Maybe, he could have shoved him, grabbed him, etc. There are plenty of possibilities. Imagine if Trayvon Martin was defending himself?! Naw, couldn't be. That's how the prosecution dealth with the evidence or lack there of in the case. Maybe this, maybe that. On the prosecutor side you can't try a case like that. There was simply no evidence that supported this. You can't prove 2nd degree murders on "maybe's". On the other hand the defense had cold hard proof that lead to his aquittal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 You all should take the time to read this quick essay by Tim Wise. I know most of you won't but here is the link: http://www.timwise.o...to-my-daughter/ An excerpt: What they have said, and make no mistake about it, is that any white person who wants to kill a black person can follow one, confront them, maybe even provoke them; and as soon as that black person perhaps takes a swing at them, or lunges at them, the white pursuer can pull their weapon, fire, and reasonably assume that they will get away with this act. I can start drama, and if you respond to the drama I created, you are to blame, not me. False, but I don't expect you to understand why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjl2nd Posted July 15, 2013 Author Share Posted July 15, 2013 Probably because you feel first and think second like most idiots who write off anything that they don't understand or runs contrary to what they would like to believe as racism. George Zimmerman is a racist. Period. Read the link I provided above, maybe you'll learn something. That's how the prosecution dealth with the evidence or lack there of in the case. Maybe this, maybe that. On the prosecutor side you can't try a case like that. There was simply no evidence that supported this. You can't prove 2nd degree murders on "maybe's". On the other hand the defense had cold hard proof that lead to his aquittal. But why do white people have to glorify George Zimmerman and the court system?! Seriously, a 17 year old being killed is nothing to gloat about! It's sickening but sadly, not surprising... Probably because you feel first and think second like most idiots who write off anything that they don't understand or runs contrary to what they would like to believe as racism. I actually knew this response was coming the second I used the word "felt". It was manslaughter in my eyes. I thought the criteria was met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 Here is the !@#$ing problem with this law in Florida (and wherever else it stands): you can basically start a fight with anyone, start losing the fight and then kill the other participant, claim self-defense and get away with murder. Because again, there is no proof Trayvon started any kind of fight no matter how much you guys scream he did. As far as I know they would rather keep a guilty man out of prison than send an innocent person to jail therefore, no the burden of proof is on the prosecution. I think that's pretty much on par everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 You all should take the time to read this quick essay by Tim Wise. I know most of you won't but here is the link: http://www.timwise.o...to-my-daughter/ An excerpt: Though what you bolded is what the race-baiters want you to believe, that is not what this case was about. Though there are some (many?) that wish to believe that GZ 'stalked' TM, the evidence doesn't support that. The evidence actually suggests that TM could easily have gotten into the house he was heading towards without confronting GZ at all. Both men made several bad choices that night; and now 1 of them is dead. That is tragic. That GZ now essentially has a fatwa out against him is also tragic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 George Zimmerman is a racist. Period. Read the link I provided above, maybe you'll learn something. Based on what evidence? The fabricated MSNBC and CNN videos? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sig1Hunter Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 You all should take the time to read this quick essay by Tim Wise. I know most of you won't but here is the link: http://www.timwise.o...to-my-daughter/ An excerpt: There are laws governing when you can "take a swing at someone". It is not legal to take a swing at someone because they are following you. It is not legal to take a swing at someone because you think that they look "creepy". What is the correct thing to do when you see someone that is acting suspicious or creepy? Call the police. GZ did, TM didn't. He had a phone. It is apparent by GZ's actions that he did not want to take the law into his own hands, and instead wanted to get the authorities involved. TM had the opposite reaction, according to the evidence. You can't "stand your ground" because of someone else's lawful actions. I can walk or drive through my neighborhood and follow behind anyone I damn well choose. I can even say things to them. Heck, I can get out of my car if it strikes my fancy. Ya dig? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 George Zimmerman is a racist. Period. Read the link I provided above, maybe you'll learn something. But why do white people have to glorify George Zimmerman and the court system?! Seriously, a 17 year old being killed is nothing to gloat about! It's sickening but sadly, not surprising... And you're a coward and a racist and furthermore , you're an idiot ™. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 George Zimmerman is a racist. Period. Read the link I provided above, maybe you'll learn something. Was he a racist when he provided free tutoring to black youth in Sanford? Was he a racist when he twice voted for Barack Obama? Precisely when did he become a racist??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted July 15, 2013 Share Posted July 15, 2013 However, the evidence is not consistent with Zimmeran starting the fight. There was not a single injury to Trayvon other than the gunshot. You would think he would have gotten atleast one blow in on Trayvon if he threw the first punch. Bingo. They'll be no response to that from the heartbroken Trayvonites. Apparently they think the act of following someone entitles the person being followed to committ felony assault without any fear or risk of repercussion. You keep hearing whining about Martin not being allowed to 'stand HIS ground'. So if you want to play that game than fine --- Martin exercised his right and DID stand his ground. And then Zimmerman exercised his right and stood his ground back. The only thing more embarrasing than the fact this case was prosecuted at all is watching certain people grasping at straws in an attempt to discredit or ignore the court's decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts