Trayvon Martin

1282931333467

Comments

  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    For what it is worth the latest picture:

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerm ... d=16177849

    scrary thought that he(zimmerman) might be telling the truth. :shock:


    Godfather.
  • ComeToTXComeToTX Posts: 7,798
    He can be telling the truth and still be guilty. He pursued after being told not to and he was the only one armed.
    This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
  • IndifferenceIndifference Posts: 2,690
    ComeToTX wrote:
    He can be telling the truth and still be guilty. He pursued after being told not to and he was the only one armed.

    I don't follow this logic so must be missing something. If his version of the truth is "self-defense" and it is true what is he guilty of?

    SHOW COUNT: (159) 1990's=3, 2000's=53, 2010/20's=103, US=118, CAN=15, Europe=20 ,New Zealand=2, Australia=2
    Mexico=1, Colombia=1 

    Upcoming:   Aucklandx2, Gold Coast, Melbournex2


  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    I don't follow this logic so must be missing something. If his version of the truth is "self-defense" and it is true what is he guilty of?

    not saying this is what happened but if i confront you on the street ... and you, in fear of your life, attack me - do i have the right to kill you?
  • IndifferenceIndifference Posts: 2,690
    polaris_x wrote:
    I don't follow this logic so must be missing something. If his version of the truth is "self-defense" and it is true what is he guilty of?

    not saying this is what happened but if i confront you on the street ... and you, in fear of your life, attack me - do i have the right to kill you?

    I'm not a FL law or Stand your ground law expert but I think the answer to your question is yes fron wiki:

    A stand-your-ground law states that a person may use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first. In some cases, a person may use deadly force in public areas without a duty to retreat.

    SHOW COUNT: (159) 1990's=3, 2000's=53, 2010/20's=103, US=118, CAN=15, Europe=20 ,New Zealand=2, Australia=2
    Mexico=1, Colombia=1 

    Upcoming:   Aucklandx2, Gold Coast, Melbournex2


  • shadowcastshadowcast Posts: 2,206
    ht_george_zimmerman_head_dm_120419_wmain.jpg

    I wonder what his face looked like.
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    I'm not a FL law or Stand your ground law expert but I think the answer to your question is yes fron wiki:

    A stand-your-ground law states that a person may use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first. In some cases, a person may use deadly force in public areas without a duty to retreat.

    ya ... and this is why the law is problematic ...

    edit: i think if the prosecution can show that zimmerman instigated the altercation then perhaps this law won't save him!? ... i dunno
  • shadowcastshadowcast Posts: 2,206
    Do you think it's possible that this prosecution is being done because of public pressure based on speculation only?

    Looking at the facts that have been coming out it's starting to look like self defense. I know some of you are going to say that he shouldn't have been following him in the 1st place. That's a great point and all but that's not a law. What seems to be the case is if you follow in a menacing way.

    (784.048 Florida Statutes Stalking; definitions; penalties.—
    (1) As used in this section, the term:
    (a) “Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose.
    (b) “Course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of “course of conduct.” Such constitutionally protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests.

    (c) “Credible threat” means a threat made with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety. The threat must be against the life of, or a threat to cause bodily injury to, a person.

    (d) “Cyberstalk” means to engage in a course of conduct to communicate, or to cause to be communicated, words, images, or language by or through the use of electronic mail or electronic communication, directed at a specific person, causing substantial emotional distress to that person and serving no legitimate purpose.

    (2) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
  • shadowcastshadowcast Posts: 2,206
    http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2012/04/13/h ... affidavit/

    Very interesting take by Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School. Scroll all the way down to the video.
  • ComeToTXComeToTX Posts: 7,798
    I start a fight and start getting my ass kicked so I pull a gun and kill you with no penalty. Is this SYG in a nutshell?
    This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,138
    ComeToTX wrote:
    I start a fight and start getting my ass kicked so I pull a gun and kill you with no penalty. Is this SYG in a nutshell?
    It's Florida in a nutshell (with a huge emphasis on the"nut"). ;)
  • BlockheadBlockhead Posts: 1,538
    ComeToTX wrote:
    I start a fight and start getting my ass kicked so I pull a gun and kill you with no penalty. Is this SYG in a nutshell?
    Proof of starting said fight?
  • shadowcastshadowcast Posts: 2,206
    ComeToTX wrote:
    I start a fight and start getting my ass kicked so I pull a gun and kill you with no penalty. Is this SYG in a nutshell?
    Did Zimmerman punch Trayvon 1st? To me that's starting a fight.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    For what it is worth the latest picture:

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerm ... d=16177849

    Not worth too much to me.
    The apology: He was looking at the lawyer, not the family. And that fuckin' website of his just totally cancels out his apology for me. He had to apologize according to his lawyers, so he did.

    As for the photo... I never disbelieved that there was a struggle. It's the stalking with a gun part and ignoring police about backing off before hand that makes me believe he's guilty of manslaughter (not second degree murder). It makes sense to me that Trayvon reacted to being stalked home by this guy, not knowing why he was being followed, hence a possible struggle between the two (I imagine something along the lines of: Trayvon: "Hey, why the fuck are you following me man?! Wtf?! (trying to be intimidating)" Zimmerman has a gun and aims it at him. Trayvon reacts by maybe pushing him or something, or jumping on him or whatever, Zimmerman lands on the back of his head - since Trayvon had no weapons, those head wounds must be from his head hitting the ground). That is just what I've imagined happened from what facts I've heard.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • shadowcastshadowcast Posts: 2,206
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    For what it is worth the latest picture:

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerm ... d=16177849

    Not worth too much to me.
    The apology: He was looking at the lawyer, not the family. And that fuckin' website of his just totally cancels out his apology for me. He had to apologize according to his lawyers, so he did.

    As for the photo... I never disbelieved that there was a struggle. It's the stalking with a gun part and ignoring police about backing off before hand that makes me believe he's guilty of manslaughter (not second degree murder). It makes sense to me that Trayvon reacted to being stalked home by this guy, not knowing why he was being followed, hence a possible struggle between the two (I imagine something along the lines of: Trayvon: "Hey, why the fuck are you following me man?! Wtf?! (trying to be intimidating)" Zimmerman has a gun and aims it at him. Trayvon reacts by maybe pushing him or something, or jumping on him or whatever, Zimmerman lands on the back of his head - since Trayvon had no weapons, those head wounds must be from his head hitting the ground). That is just what I've imagined happened from what facts I've heard.
    If Zimmerman aimed that gun at him there would not have been a struggle.
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    shadowcast wrote:
    If Zimmerman aimed that gun at him there would not have been a struggle.

    if you think he's gonna shoot - there might be
  • i want to see a photo of the head injury/cut after the blood has been wiped away. or i want to see the scar. the head and scalp is very vascular and it does not take much of a cut at all to cause a lot of bleeding. also the scar can tell a lot about the nature of the injury, such as what kind of wound it was, like an abrasion, puncture, laceration, etc... the type of cut will tell you the mechanism of injury and etiology. and if the injuries are consistent with defensive movements then that might impact the case.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • polaris_x wrote:
    shadowcast wrote:
    If Zimmerman aimed that gun at him there would not have been a struggle.

    if you think he's gonna shoot - there might be
    yes, any self defense class will tell you how to take a gun away from someone. that was one of the first things we learned. it is quite the opposite of dealing with someone with a knife. when someone has a knife you run away and you live...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • shadowcastshadowcast Posts: 2,206
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lDfxzvx ... e=youtu.be

    Wyclef never misses an opprotunity.
  • BlockheadBlockhead Posts: 1,538
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    For what it is worth the latest picture:

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerm ... d=16177849

    Not worth too much to me.
    The apology: He was looking at the lawyer, not the family. And that fuckin' website of his just totally cancels out his apology for me. He had to apologize according to his lawyers, so he did.

    As for the photo... I never disbelieved that there was a struggle. It's the stalking with a gun part and ignoring police about backing off before hand that makes me believe he's guilty of manslaughter (not second degree murder). It makes sense to me that Trayvon reacted to being stalked home by this guy, not knowing why he was being followed, hence a possible struggle between the two (I imagine something along the lines of: Trayvon: "Hey, why the fuck are you following me man?! Wtf?! (trying to be intimidating)" Zimmerman has a gun and aims it at him. Trayvon reacts by maybe pushing him or something, or jumping on him or whatever, Zimmerman lands on the back of his head - since Trayvon had no weapons, those head wounds must be from his head hitting the ground). That is just what I've imagined happened from what facts I've heard.
    Following =/= Stalking/Harrassment...
    Just because someone is walking behind you does not give you the permission to attack them...
    The point at which someone is following/annoying and becomes a physical threat are two different things...

    It also sounds like you have a hard time of conceiving facts... WHy would zimmerman just pull the gun out and try and kill him when he just got done calling the cops and reporting what he was doing???
  • JonnyPistachioJonnyPistachio Posts: 10,219
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    For what it is worth the latest picture:

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerm ... d=16177849

    Not worth too much to me.
    The apology: He was looking at the lawyer, not the family. And that fuckin' website of his just totally cancels out his apology for me. He had to apologize according to his lawyers, so he did.

    As for the photo... I never disbelieved that there was a struggle. It's the stalking with a gun part and ignoring police about backing off before hand that makes me believe he's guilty of manslaughter (not second degree murder). It makes sense to me that Trayvon reacted to being stalked home by this guy, not knowing why he was being followed, hence a possible struggle between the two (I imagine something along the lines of: Trayvon: "Hey, why the fuck are you following me man?! Wtf?! (trying to be intimidating)" Zimmerman has a gun and aims it at him. Trayvon reacts by maybe pushing him or something, or jumping on him or whatever, Zimmerman lands on the back of his head - since Trayvon had no weapons, those head wounds must be from his head hitting the ground). That is just what I've imagined happened from what facts I've heard.

    I have to admit, I am surprised at the photograph of his injury to the back of his head. I wondered why a shot like this had not come out before. You would think releasing a photo like that would ease some of the criticism on Zimmerman and maybe helped with his personal safety. However, shortly after this pic was taken, he is seen walking into the police station without and bandages or any type of first aid. Blood from the head doesnt prove substantial injury. I'm still not convinced that this injury warranted killing somebody. But then again, there must be pictures of his face after the fight -- and unless his eyes are black and blue and his nose was broken and bloody, I still cant see killing someone over it.

    Then again, if zimmermans injuries are that substantial, Treyvon, himself, might have been within the guidlines of the stand your ground laws if he though Zimmerman was potentially going to hand out some "great bodily harm," as zimmerman proved he could do. Is there a difference? Well, besides that Treyvon isnt here to tell us?
    Pick up my debut novel here on amazon: Jonny Bails Floatin (in paperback) (also available on Kindle for $2.99)
  • BlockheadBlockhead Posts: 1,538
    i want to see a photo of the head injury/cut after the blood has been wiped away. or i want to see the scar. the head and scalp is very vascular and it does not take much of a cut at all to cause a lot of bleeding. also the scar can tell a lot about the nature of the injury, such as what kind of wound it was, like an abrasion, puncture, laceration, etc... the type of cut will tell you the mechanism of injury and etiology. and if the injuries are consistent with defensive movements then that might impact the case.
    LOL...
    Get ready I am going to post a bunch of pictures of scars and scabs, I would like for you to list how each one happed, what instrument was used, what time of day it happened, ect...
  • BlockheadBlockhead Posts: 1,538

    I have to admit, I am surprised at the photograph of his injury to the back of his head. I wondered why a shot like this had not come out before. You would think releasing a photo like that would ease some of the criticism on Zimmerman and maybe helped with his personal safety. However, shortly after this pic was taken, he is seen walking into the police station without and bandages or any type of first aid. Blood from the head doesnt prove substantial injury. I'm still not convinced that this injury warranted killing somebody. But then again, there must be pictures of his face after the fight -- and unless his eyes are black and blue and his nose was broken and bloody, I still cant see killing someone over it.

    Then again, if zimmermans injuries are that substantial, Treyvon, himself, might have been within the guidlines of the stand your ground laws if he though Zimmerman was potentially going to hand out some "great bodily harm," as zimmerman proved he could do. Is there a difference? Well, besides that Treyvon isnt here to tell us?
    What was the exact time frame?
    It doesn't matter how bad the injury or if Martin was trying to murder him or not. What matters is if Zimmerman's fear of serious injury or death was reasonable.
  • JonnyPistachioJonnyPistachio Posts: 10,219
    The question still remains, does the prosecution have a case with evidence that we havent seen? I would hope so. If they're just doing this to appease the public, i will be appalled (then again, it IS Florida)

    I'm assuming they have some kind of evidence revolving around the fact that Zimemrman said he was near the clubhouse when he was on the phone with 911 -- then after he said he'd stop pursuing him -- Treyvon was found shot to death much further away from Zimmermans vehicle and last known position.

    There must be more witnesses too (assuming), that might have initially been afraid to talk.
    we'll see...I wonder how long it will take the trial to get going and get a jury -- not easy..
    Pick up my debut novel here on amazon: Jonny Bails Floatin (in paperback) (also available on Kindle for $2.99)
  • shadowcastshadowcast Posts: 2,206
    edited April 2012
    polaris_x wrote:
    shadowcast wrote:
    If Zimmerman aimed that gun at him there would not have been a struggle.

    if you think he's gonna shoot - there might be
    No he propbably would have shot him with no struggle. If he did pull the gun and aim it at him and Trayvon tackled him then I would say there would have been multiple shots fired.
    Post edited by shadowcast on
  • JonnyPistachioJonnyPistachio Posts: 10,219
    Blockhead wrote:

    I have to admit, I am surprised at the photograph of his injury to the back of his head. I wondered why a shot like this had not come out before. You would think releasing a photo like that would ease some of the criticism on Zimmerman and maybe helped with his personal safety. However, shortly after this pic was taken, he is seen walking into the police station without and bandages or any type of first aid. Blood from the head doesnt prove substantial injury. I'm still not convinced that this injury warranted killing somebody. But then again, there must be pictures of his face after the fight -- and unless his eyes are black and blue and his nose was broken and bloody, I still cant see killing someone over it.

    Then again, if zimmermans injuries are that substantial, Treyvon, himself, might have been within the guidlines of the stand your ground laws if he though Zimmerman was potentially going to hand out some "great bodily harm," as zimmerman proved he could do. Is there a difference? Well, besides that Treyvon isnt here to tell us?
    What was the exact time frame?
    It doesn't matter how bad the injury or if Martin was trying to murder him or not. What matters is if Zimmerman's fear of serious injury or death was reasonable.

    I guess it couldve been an hour or up to 2-3 hours later. it was still the same night -- and there was nothing on his head to prevent further bloodflow at the police station. I agree with your statement. That's the underlying point...If Zimmerman can prove that he thinks a bump on the back of his head is considered a serious injury, he had every right to kill someone -- Crappy wording in the law.
    Blockhead wrote:
    Get ready I am going to post a bunch of pictures of scars and scabs, I would like for you to list how each one happed, what instrument was used, what time of day it happened, ect...

    They have experts for this. And Gimme is correct, that much blood can come from a tiny scrape or a gaping wound. Heads bleed a lot.
    Pick up my debut novel here on amazon: Jonny Bails Floatin (in paperback) (also available on Kindle for $2.99)
  • BlockheadBlockhead Posts: 1,538
    Blockhead wrote:

    I have to admit, I am surprised at the photograph of his injury to the back of his head. I wondered why a shot like this had not come out before. You would think releasing a photo like that would ease some of the criticism on Zimmerman and maybe helped with his personal safety. However, shortly after this pic was taken, he is seen walking into the police station without and bandages or any type of first aid. Blood from the head doesnt prove substantial injury. I'm still not convinced that this injury warranted killing somebody. But then again, there must be pictures of his face after the fight -- and unless his eyes are black and blue and his nose was broken and bloody, I still cant see killing someone over it.

    Then again, if zimmermans injuries are that substantial, Treyvon, himself, might have been within the guidlines of the stand your ground laws if he though Zimmerman was potentially going to hand out some "great bodily harm," as zimmerman proved he could do. Is there a difference? Well, besides that Treyvon isnt here to tell us?
    What was the exact time frame?
    It doesn't matter how bad the injury or if Martin was trying to murder him or not. What matters is if Zimmerman's fear of serious injury or death was reasonable.

    I guess it couldve been an hour or up to 2-3 hours later. it was still the same night -- and there was nothing on his head to prevent further bloodflow at the police station. I agree with your statement. That's the underlying point...If Zimmerman can prove that he thinks a bump on the back of his head is considered a serious injury, he had every right to kill someone -- Crappy wording in the law.
    Blockhead wrote:
    Get ready I am going to post a bunch of pictures of scars and scabs, I would like for you to list how each one happed, what instrument was used, what time of day it happened, ect...

    They have experts for this. And Gimme is correct, that much blood can come from a tiny scrape or a gaping wound. Heads bleed a lot.
    He has an injury from an attack, severity of an injury does not and should not matter...
  • shadowcastshadowcast Posts: 2,206
    i want to see a photo of the head injury/cut after the blood has been wiped away. or i want to see the scar. the head and scalp is very vascular and it does not take much of a cut at all to cause a lot of bleeding. also the scar can tell a lot about the nature of the injury, such as what kind of wound it was, like an abrasion, puncture, laceration, etc... the type of cut will tell you the mechanism of injury and etiology. and if the injuries are consistent with defensive movements then that might impact the case.
    So let's just all agree that Zimmerman was getting his head slammed.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    For what it is worth the latest picture:

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerm ... d=16177849

    Not worth too much to me.
    The apology: He was looking at the lawyer, not the family. And that fuckin' website of his just totally cancels out his apology for me. He had to apologize according to his lawyers, so he did.

    As for the photo... I never disbelieved that there was a struggle. It's the stalking with a gun part and ignoring police about backing off before hand that makes me believe he's guilty of manslaughter (not second degree murder). It makes sense to me that Trayvon reacted to being stalked home by this guy, not knowing why he was being followed, hence a possible struggle between the two (I imagine something along the lines of: Trayvon: "Hey, why the fuck are you following me man?! Wtf?! (trying to be intimidating)" Zimmerman has a gun and aims it at him. Trayvon reacts by maybe pushing him or something, or jumping on him or whatever, Zimmerman lands on the back of his head - since Trayvon had no weapons, those head wounds must be from his head hitting the ground). That is just what I've imagined happened from what facts I've heard.

    I have to admit, I am surprised at the photograph of his injury to the back of his head. I wondered why a shot like this had not come out before. You would think releasing a photo like that would ease some of the criticism on Zimmerman and maybe helped with his personal safety. However, shortly after this pic was taken, he is seen walking into the police station without and bandages or any type of first aid. Blood from the head doesnt prove substantial injury. I'm still not convinced that this injury warranted killing somebody. But then again, there must be pictures of his face after the fight -- and unless his eyes are black and blue and his nose was broken and bloody, I still cant see killing someone over it.

    Then again, if zimmermans injuries are that substantial, Treyvon, himself, might have been within the guidlines of the stand your ground laws if he though Zimmerman was potentially going to hand out some "great bodily harm," as zimmerman proved he could do. Is there a difference? Well, besides that Treyvon isnt here to tell us?
    Exactly! From what facts are known so far, it sounds like Trayvon was the one protecting himself, not the other way around.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Posts: 49,958
    Blockhead wrote:
    PJ_Soul wrote:
    For what it is worth the latest picture:

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerm ... d=16177849

    Not worth too much to me.
    The apology: He was looking at the lawyer, not the family. And that fuckin' website of his just totally cancels out his apology for me. He had to apologize according to his lawyers, so he did.

    As for the photo... I never disbelieved that there was a struggle. It's the stalking with a gun part and ignoring police about backing off before hand that makes me believe he's guilty of manslaughter (not second degree murder). It makes sense to me that Trayvon reacted to being stalked home by this guy, not knowing why he was being followed, hence a possible struggle between the two (I imagine something along the lines of: Trayvon: "Hey, why the fuck are you following me man?! Wtf?! (trying to be intimidating)" Zimmerman has a gun and aims it at him. Trayvon reacts by maybe pushing him or something, or jumping on him or whatever, Zimmerman lands on the back of his head - since Trayvon had no weapons, those head wounds must be from his head hitting the ground). That is just what I've imagined happened from what facts I've heard.
    Following =/= Stalking/Harrassment...
    Just because someone is walking behind you does not give you the permission to attack them...
    The point at which someone is following/annoying and becomes a physical threat are two different things...

    It also sounds like you have a hard time of conceiving facts... WHy would zimmerman just pull the gun out and try and kill him when he just got done calling the cops and reporting what he was doing???
    Really? If Trayvon felt his safety was threatened by Zimmerman because he was following him (WITH A GUN), which seems reasonable, especially since Zimmerman surely was animated and acting in an intimidating and kind of predatory way given his motives in following him, then according to Florida law, Trayvon has the right to attack Zimmerman! Aaaannnd this is why the stand your ground law is so stupid! Trayvon stands his ground and gets killed. And why would Zimmerman pull out his gun? I think because he was having a Dirty Harry moment, honestly.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Sign In or Register to comment.