Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will George Zimmerman Walk?  
User currently offlineJoePatroni707 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 493 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5554 times:

As the trial starts today, testing Florida's "stand your ground law" George Zimmerman needs to prove that un armed Trayvon Martin, threatened him to the point that deadly force was needed. No witnesses, just Zimmermans word. If he is found not guilty will we see riots like when the police accused of beating Rodney King? Will Zimmerman be found guilty of a lesser charge?

237 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 1, posted (1 year 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5546 times:

Since we have not heard actual factual evidence, and most of us will never hear it,

we will never know if Zimmerman is quilty or not.

Only the jury's decision will give us and indication.

And certainly anything we hear on the news channels will be polished, massaged and tweaked to appeal to segments of the audience of that channel. So what we hear from them will be a lot closer to fiction than fact.

One thing

Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter):
George Zimmerman needs to prove that un armed Trayvon Martin, threatened him to the point that deadly force was needed.

George Zimmerman, or rather Zimmerman's lawyers, do not need to prove a thing. The LAW says Zimmerman is presumed to be innocent unless the Prosecution proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman acted unlawfully when shooting Martin.

Also, an actual threat is not required in most states, only actions which could appear to be a threat to a reasonable person.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (1 year 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5492 times:

Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter):
As the trial starts today, testing Florida's "stand your ground law"

The law is not on trial, Zimmerman is. The stand-your-ground law is quite secure.

Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter):
No witnesses, just Zimmermans word.

Actually, there were numerous witnesses.

Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter):
If he is found not guilty will we see riots like when the police accused of beating Rodney King?

Not on that level. There might be a little brouhaha in some lower-class neighborhoods in Florida (no matter what the verdict is), but most everyone else has settled down.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 1):
Since we have not heard actual factual evidence, and most of us will never hear it,

Seeing as the trial is televised, we'll here exactly what the jury hears.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 1):
George Zimmerman, or rather Zimmerman's lawyers, do not need to prove a thing. The LAW says Zimmerman is presumed to be innocent unless the Prosecution proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman acted unlawfully when shooting Martin.

Actually, I believe this falls under an affirmative defense. Zimmerman has to show that he was not doing anything illegal prior to being attacked, and that he (as a reasonable person) felt he was in danger of death or grievous bodily harm.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5484 times:

Riots could possibly happen but I don't see them happening in Sanford.

With the jury that's been selected, its pretty hard to tell how this could turn out considering they're all women.


User currently offlinekpitrrat From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 188 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 4 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5441 times:

Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter):
George Zimmerman needs to prove that un armed Trayvon Martin, threatened him to the point that deadly force was needed.

Forgive me as I am not from Florida, every state has their own quirks. But, in order to utilize the "stand your ground law" is the burden of proof on the defense to prove that the force was necessary?

Or is the burden on the prosecution to show that Zimmernan was not threatened?

I only ask because the Beyond a Reasonable Doubt facet of pronouncing someone guilty is not easy to overcome, thats what I believe got Anthony off on the murder charge; sad, but its the law. Witness testimony will be extremely important.

Edit: I just saw rfields post. Still I will leave the question up because, as I said, all states are different.

[Edited 2013-06-24 20:36:04]

User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11720 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (1 year 4 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 5379 times:

Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter):
Will Zimmerman be found guilty of a lesser charge?

He will be found innocent. NRA will hire lawyers to make sure of it. They already made sure of it by getting the 911 tapes of Trayvon screaming for help thrown out. Zimmerman was told to stand down. He did not. Yet, he will walk free. And not have to pay Trayvon's family one dime. Mark my words.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2442 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (1 year 4 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 5352 times:

Everybody who just has shot somebody in a dark alley in the middle of the night will point to the Zimmerman trial in order to avoid prison. The jury has to think about the consequences.

There is a little quirk in this whole situation:

a) Zimmerman says his life was in danger. So, he should be lucky to receive a prison sentence instead of losing his own life during that night.

b) Zimmerman says he wasn't in danger. So he should accept hefty prison sentence for murdering Trayvon Martin.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 1):

I believe - but I'm not completely sure - that your reasoning is flawed. I know that innocence is presumed. The prosecution claims that Martin was unlawfully killed (and thinks that a crime has happened), so the prosecutor has to prove Zimmerman's guilt. Here, we talk about the act of the crime.

But Zimmerman's mental processes (deciding whether Martin is a danger to his life or not) can't be a crime - because there is no law that says it would be a crime to assume danger to your life - and so, in the real "crime scene", Zimmerman's mind, the assumption of innocence cannot kick in. Zimmerman has to prove that his life was in danger. That's the pivotal point of the whole trial.

Otherwise, the "stand your ground laws" would entitle everybody to kill somebody else in a dark alley in the middle of the night when no witnesses are around.

The goverment has not only a duty to keep innocents out of the prisons, but it has an equal or an even more important duty: Protecting the lives of innocents. Otherwise, the "stand your ground laws" put the burden of proof on those that are dead and cannot defend themselves in court.


David

[Edited 2013-06-25 01:26:34]


Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 7, posted (1 year 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 5271 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 2):
Seeing as the trial is televised, we'll here exactly what the jury hears.

Yes, however we will hear a lot of information the jury will not hear. Almost everything we hear will be 'analyzed' by the television commentators. What we see and hear from a televised trial is not what the jury sees and hears. It is not the information the jury must use to decide guilty or not guilty.

And the other part of my views - will any of us watch the ENTIRE live coverage? What will those interested in the case miss?

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 6):
Otherwise, the "stand your ground laws" put the burden of proof on those that are dead and cannot defend themselves in court.

That is exactly what the framers of such laws want to occur - at least here in Texas. I do not see anything to say that the intent of the Florida legislature was different.

Quoting kpitrrat (Reply 4):
thats what I believe got Anthony off on the murder charge

The jurors in the Anthony case said the problem with the prosecution case was that the state was unable to prove that the child was murdered. Unable to prove the explicit action, intentional or unintentional, caused the death of the little girl. Nor was the prosecution able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey Anthony was the only person who could have caused her death.

At least in this case, proving that Martin died of a bullet wound will not be difficult or questioned. Nor will proving Zimmerman was the person who fired the gun.


User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2442 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (1 year 4 months 20 hours ago) and read 5225 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 7):
At least in this case, proving that Martin died of a bullet wound will not be difficult or questioned. Nor will proving Zimmerman was the person who fired the gun.

As I've read, Zimmerman was under way in his car when he suspected Martin of wrongdoing and called the police. At this very moment, he could have driven away, seeing the danger. If you felt safe and secure, you wouldn't call the police.

But he decided to leave his car and approach Martin, and a fight ensued. I can't see how the "stand your ground" principle would work in this case. As soon as he perceived the danger, he should have stayed in his car and used his "stand your ground" rights *there*.


David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8329 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (1 year 4 months 19 hours ago) and read 5208 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 3):
its pretty hard to tell how this could turn out considering they're all women.

If all of those women are mothers then there is the leverage of "what if it was your son who was shot to death by this guy/"

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
Yet, he will walk free. And not have to pay Trayvon's family one dime.

OJ walked free from the criminal trial and got hit with an $8 Million judgement from a civil jury, Two different legal systems, with the burden of proof far lower on the civil side,.

As a side note, say OJ's prosecutor on TV the other night (CNN I believe) and she looked pretty good.


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6726 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (1 year 4 months 19 hours ago) and read 5200 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 8):
As I've read, Zimmerman was under way in his car when he suspected Martin of wrongdoing and called the police. At this very moment, he could have driven away, seeing the danger. If you felt safe and secure, you wouldn't call the police.

IIRC it has been argued that he called the police to cover his ass in case a fight ensued (not saying in case he shot somebody). Indeed he certainly didn't listen to what the operator was saying. Don't forget he was on a "watch".



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (1 year 4 months 18 hours ago) and read 5154 times:

Yet another thread where people feel entitled to their own facts.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
They already made sure of it by getting the 911 tapes of Trayvon screaming for help thrown out.

Oh please. There's no way to tell who was screaming based on the 911 tape.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
Zimmerman was told to stand down.

He was not. You must have missed the part where the 911 operator testified, under oath, that they are not allowed to give orders, and that he indeed did not give an order to stand down.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 8):
If you felt safe and secure, you wouldn't call the police.

Um, you call the police when you suspect a crime is being committed, or when there's a car accident on a public road (as required by law).

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 8):

But he decided to leave his car and approach Martin, and a fight ensued. I can't see how the "stand your ground" principle would work in this case.

Because he was walking back towards his car, when Martin approached him.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinecjg225 From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 863 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 4 months 14 hours ago) and read 5103 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
If all of those women are mothers then there is the leverage of "what if it was your son who was shot to death by this guy/"

At the same time, women can also be pretty hardcore on juries.

For example, a lawyer speaking to us in my Federal Court Practice class last semester said that in rape cases he's had jury consultants tell him that a big, macho guy is a horrible juror to have for the prosecution because they, on a jury, want to protect women. A woman, on the other hand, especially one in the 35-55 range, will be cold-blooded about things and use the thinking that the victim was at fault.

Now, that could all be wrong, but I am just throwing that out there as something I was told. *shrug*



Restoring Penn State's transportation heritage...
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 13, posted (1 year 4 months 13 hours ago) and read 5083 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
He will be found innocent. NRA will hire lawyers to make sure of it. They already made sure of it by getting the 911 tapes of Trayvon screaming for help thrown out. Zimmerman was told to stand down. He did not. Yet, he will walk free. And not have to pay Trayvon's family one dime. Mark my words.

Ironically, in fighting "far right bias" you're embodying far left bias. Not every decision you disagree with is because of the evil right's fault. I know you get mad when a judge rules and the right screams that the judge is a liberal activist judge, so why do you do the same in reverse?

You aren't on the jury, none of us are, so we have to tread carefully and not make ignorant statements. If he walks and you don't think he should, attack the stand your ground law. The jury may very well agree that he met those requirements... even if you hate the law, do you want him in jail just because you think the law is BS?

Always keep an eye out for corruption, but don't chase boogey men either. It's perfectly plausible for him to walk and there NOT be any "NRA lobbyist influence dollars" or whatever



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (1 year 4 months 12 hours ago) and read 5063 times:

Quoting JoePatroni707 (Thread starter):
If he is found not guilty will we see riots like when the police accused of beating Rodney King

Maybe. Spoke with some Miami-Dade police officers and the Miami-Dade Police Dept is preparing for possible riots. Talking to them they think there is a fairly good chance Zimmer is acquitted. I agree.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
NRA will hire lawyers to make sure of it.

He has already hired his lawyers. What are you talking about?

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
They already made sure of it by getting the 911 tapes of Trayvon screaming for help thrown out.

You do know the JUDGE is the one who decides what gets in and what gets out. Is the judge part of the NRA scheme?

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
Zimmerman was told to stand down. He did not.

911 operators have zero authority. No one needs to listen to them. So he was not told to "stand down." Where do people get this stuff.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 8):
But he decided to leave his car and approach Martin, and a fight ensued. I can't see how the "stand your ground" principle would work in this case. As soon as he perceived the danger, he should have stayed in his car and used his "stand your ground" rights *there*.

Pretty sure his story is he was going back to his car and Martin attacked him.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
If all of those women are mothers then there is the leverage of "what if it was your son who was shot to death by this guy/"

That might be what the prosecutors had in mind but the defense attorneys also picked this jury sure there are good reasons for both sides. But the prosecution would never say, "what if it was your son who was shot to death by this guy." Easy grounds for a mistrial.

Quoting cjg225 (Reply 12):
A woman, on the other hand, especially one in the 35-55 range, will be cold-blooded about things and use the thinking that the victim was at fault.

I would put that range a bit higher 45+ But I agree, especially when it pertains to young women who were abused sexually.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 6):
Everybody who just has shot somebody in a dark alley in the middle of the night will point to the Zimmerman trial in order to avoid prison. The jury has to think about the consequences.

That could not be anymore wrong. That is the absolute last thing the jury needs to think about and if any juror starts thinking about that they need to tell the judge and recuse themselves from the jury.

If any of the lawyers mentioned something like that. To think about the consequences of other cases it would be an easy mistrial and they would have to start all over again. Jurors should and need to only worry about the one case in front of them and absolutely nothing else. Legal precedent is what the lawyers and judges can worry about later.

Also that is not how the criminal system works. You don't point to other trials to show your case. You can for things such as evidence motions and what not but when it comes to if you have done it or not it is the evidence of your case and nothing else.

I see it 50/50 from what I have heard which I will say is almost nothing, but lets just assume I know all the correct facts I have doubt so I am letting him go. I have a feeling the doubt will be there and he will be acquitted.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1873 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (1 year 4 months 11 hours ago) and read 5047 times:

Zimmerman must be regretting his choice of representation after the opening statements yesterday. I facepalmed pretty hard when Don West decided he wanted to be a stand-up comedian at a murder trial. If you're going to attempt a joke, at least make sure it's funny...

Video of the "joke": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LRSJGFoXEY

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 11):
Yet another thread where people feel entitled to their own facts.
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 11):
Because he was walking back towards his car, when Martin approached him.

You couldn't even go an entire post without doing the exact thing you accuse other people of doing!

Quoting flymia (Reply 14):
911 operators have zero authority. No one needs to listen to them. So he was not told to "stand down." Where do people get this stuff.
Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah
Dispatcher: Ok, we don't need you to do that.


Source: http://www.documentcloud.org/documen...700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html

The operators don't have any authority, and he definitely didn't say the exact words "stand down", but it was certainly communicated to Zimmerman that it's not a good idea to follow the kid, and he in fact ignored that suggestion. Nobody in this thread has said that the 911 operator said the exact words of "stand down", so I'm not sure where you're coming from.

Quoting flymia (Reply 14):
But the prosecution would never say, "what if it was your son who was shot to death by this guy." Easy grounds for a mistrial.

   At the very least the jury would be instructed to disregard the comment and that it be stricken.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 13):
I know you get mad when a judge rules and the right screams that the judge is a liberal activist judge, so why do you do the same in reverse?

  



Flying refined.
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 16, posted (1 year 4 months 11 hours ago) and read 5045 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
He will be found innocent. NRA will hire lawyers to make sure of it

Dude the NRA is not paying for his lawyers. To make that comment just makes you look like a raving left wing lunatic. And frankly is suggest that we can't have a reasonable conversation with you.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
They already made sure of it by getting the 911 tapes of Trayvon screaming for help thrown out.

The tapes got thrown out because the "experts" couldn't figure out what was on them. Or if the quality was even good enough for them to make informed testimony.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 7):
Yes, however we will hear a lot of information the jury will not hear. Almost everything we hear will be 'analyzed' by the television commentators.



Its been that since day one. Remember the media would only show photos of the dead punk back when he was 13-14-15. You know before that puberty growth spurt that everyone hits. The public perception of him would be a lot different if they had used the photos that where found of him smoking pot, flashing gang signs that where on his facebook page.

Quoting flymia (Reply 14):
Talking to them they think there is a fairly good chance Zimmer is acquitted. I agree.

I hope your right, but the prosecutor and the Martin family have been trying to throw this case ever since that night. Emotionally I can't blame them but their case is based on emotion not fact.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (1 year 4 months 11 hours ago) and read 5034 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 15):
Nobody in this thread has said that the 911 operator said the exact words of "stand down"

Might want to go and reread:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
Zimmerman was told to stand down.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1873 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (1 year 4 months 10 hours ago) and read 5030 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 16):
the dead punk

Speaking ill of the dead: a sign of a person who lacks any decency.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 16):
The public perception of him would be a lot different if they had used the photos that where found of him smoking pot, flashing gang signs that where on his facebook page.

Stop watching MSNBC then. I've seen numerous news outlets from both Canada and the US showing a wide range of pictures, from him as a young teen, to his football pictures, to Facebook pictures of him taken only weeks before his death.

Also, wouldn't the public perception also be skewed if they only showed the unsavoury pictures of Martin? Hell, you'll find several dozen pictures of me on Facebook where I'm drunk beyond reason, which of course would make it appear I'm some "punk", but in reality I'm a pretty upstanding citizen. There has to be a fair balance.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 16):
but their case is based on emotion not fact

That's not how this case (or law in general) works. Both sides, the prosecution and the defense, have access to the same "facts". How they interpret and present the facts (read: evidence) are what make a case. The prosecution isn't going up there and basing their arguments on "I'm sad that Trayvon is dead, so this man should go to jail"...no, it's "We have exhibits X, Y, and Z which we believe to suggest that the accused is guilty of murder because [enter justification here] and the evidence supports that".

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 17):
Might want to go and reread:

Your reading comprehension is struggling tonight, Maverick. I clearly said that nobody suggested that the operator said those exact words. If that's what seb was saying, he would have put quotations around it. That's how the English language still works, right?

If I told someone to "shut up", could you not accurately say that I told someone to be quiet? (note the lack of quotation marks)



Flying refined.
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (1 year 4 months 9 hours ago) and read 5003 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 15):
The operators don't have any authority, and he definitely didn't say the exact words "stand down", but it was certainly communicated to Zimmerman that it's not a good idea to follow the kid, and he in fact ignored that suggestion. Nobody in this thread has said that the 911 operator said the exact words of "stand down", so I'm not sure where you're coming from.

I agree but please read the quote I quoted below. The words "stand down" are there.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 5):
Zimmerman was told to stand down. He did not. Yet, he will walk free.
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 18):
Your reading comprehension is struggling tonight, Maverick. I clearly said that nobody suggested that the operator said those exact words. If that's what seb was saying, he would have put quotations around it. That's how the English language still works, right?

After saying "Zimmerman was told to stand down" Seb said, "He did not." IMO from reading that statement from Seb he thinks he should have stood down, as if it was an order he did not follow. Just a difference of opinion in how we comprehended Seb's comments.

Whether that is what Seb meant or not I have heard many times from other people on Anet, the Media and in conversation about Zimmerman not listening to the operator. That is clearly irrelevant in that case.
Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 15):
If you're going to attempt a joke, at least make sure it's funny...

Number one rule when using a joke in court. Can't believe he did that.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlinemke717spotter From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2458 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (1 year 4 months 7 hours ago) and read 4972 times:

Anyone else notice this guy has put on some serious weight since the whole ordeal started?



Will you watch the Cleveland Browns and the Detroit Lions on Sunday? Only if coach Eric Mangini resigned after a loss.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6726 posts, RR: 12
Reply 21, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4890 times:

He probably figured looking fit and buff wouldn't help his case. Or prison just did that to him.

Quoting flymia (Reply 19):
Whether that is what Seb meant or not I have heard many times from other people on Anet, the Media and in conversation about Zimmerman not listening to the operator. That is clearly irrelevant in that case.

What the exact words were is clearly irrelevant, as was said not obeying an operator is not illegal. The conversation is still very relevant to understand what happened, what was the mindset of the accused, etc.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4880 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 21):
Or prison just did that to him.

He has not been in prison. He has been out on bond for the majority of the time before trial.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 21):
He probably figured looking fit and buff wouldn't help his case

It was probably the stress.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 21):
What the exact words were is clearly irrelevant, as was said not obeying an operator is not illegal. The conversation is still very relevant to understand what happened, what was the mindset of the accused, etc.

I agree but I have often heard people how he did not "listen to police" and did not followed "orders" this is simply not the case. There was no police, and no orders.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4851 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 15):

Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah
Dispatcher: Ok, we don't need you to do that.
Zimmerman: Ok

Source: http://www.documentcloud.org/documen...700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html

The operators don't have any authority, and he definitely didn't say the exact words "stand down", but it was certainly communicated to Zimmerman that it's not a good idea to follow the kid, and he in fact ignored that suggestion. Nobody in this thread has said that the 911 operator said the exact words of "stand down", so I'm not sure where you're coming from.

In fairness you left the part out where Zimmerman acknowledges the dispatcher's suggestion, so you can't say for sure whether or not he ignored it unless of course you were there. As far as I know, that hasn't been established unless I missed it somewhere..

[Edited 2013-06-26 09:30:29]

User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1873 posts, RR: 10
Reply 24, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4818 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 19):
The words "stand down" are there.

Not disagreeing with you, just pointing out that many people are taking it too literally and chastising others for not being accurate enough.

Quoting flymia (Reply 19):
Just a difference of opinion in how we comprehended Seb's comments.

Agreed. We'll leave it at that.

Quoting flymia (Reply 22):
It was probably the stress.

Probably right. He may be a stress-eater which cause him to gain so much weight. Or perhaps he hasn't been exercising because he doesn't want to leave his house and face the media or people on the street who have already played judge-and-jury in their mind.

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 23):
In fairness you left the part out where Zimmerman acknowledges the dispatcher's suggestion, so you can't say for sure whether or not he ignored it unless of course you were there.

My apologies...it wasn't intentionally left out.

But since you have raised the point, I think that his response of "Ok" actually works against him. It can (and will) be used by the prosecution to illustrate that it was suggested he not approach or pursue the boy (which I believe he hadn't yet at this point of the call) but he did indeed ignore the 911 operator's suggestion. It's not going to break the case, but it sure isn't in Zimmerman's favour.



Flying refined.
User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4843 times:

Possibly. According to the "star witness" (Trayvon's friend) during her phone interview and deposition, it made it seem like Trayvon was the one who actually approached George aka the "cracker" lol

Trayvon: Why are you following me?
Geroge: What are you talking about?

Does that sound like George is the one who approached Trayvon?

[Edited 2013-06-26 14:51:07]

[Edited 2013-06-26 14:51:33]

User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 26, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4809 times:

A month or so there was a news story that George Zimmerman has put on over 100lb due to the stress he is under from his current situation.

User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11720 posts, RR: 15
Reply 27, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4764 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 16):
Dude the NRA is not paying for his lawyers.

Yet. Florida is a "Stand Your Ground" state. NRA will be sure those laws are upheld. At all costs.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 16):
The tapes got thrown out because the "experts" couldn't figure out what was on them. Or if the quality was even good enough for them to make informed testimony.

Except experts said they were a young guy and not an older man. Say two experts.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012...orge-zimmermans-2-experts-say?lite

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 23):
Zimmerman acknowledges the dispatcher's suggestion

They told him to stand down. Even if he said "yeah, okay" or "yeah, whatever" they still have on tape he was told to stand down. He shot and killed a kid. After he was told to stand down.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 28, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4749 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 27):
Yet. Florida is a "Stand Your Ground" state. NRA will be sure those laws are upheld. At all costs.

Oh give me a break. The SYG law is not on trial here, George Zimmerman is.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 27):
Except experts said they were a young guy and not an older man. Say two experts.

Except other experts said it was either Zimmerman or (more likely) both yelling.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...tin-zimmerman-attorney-mark-o-mara

Quoting seb146 (Reply 27):

They told him to stand down.

Come off it. Even the 911 dispatcher testified that he said no such thing.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 29, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4710 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 27):
Yet. Florida is a "Stand Your Ground" state. NRA will be sure those laws are upheld. At all costs.

You just sound silly right now. Again can you please tell me what the NRA has to do with it? Are they going to bribe the jury and judge? Maybe they will bribe the prosecutors to mess up the case?
Zimmerman is on trial. This case will have zero impact on the future of the law. The law is here to stay. It is safe. So what the NRA has to do with this I don't know. There have been many other cases similar to the Martin case in Florida before and there will be more after. Only difference is this case makes for a good news story so instead of just people in Orlando hearing about it the whole nation knows.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 24):

Read below, you see. what I mean.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 27):
They told him to stand down. Even if he said "yeah, okay" or "yeah, whatever" they still have on tape he was told to stand down. He shot and killed a kid. After he was told to stand down.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21681 posts, RR: 55
Reply 30, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 4693 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 25):
Trayvon: Why are you following me?
Geroge: What are you talking about?

Does that sound like George is the one who approached Trayvon?

Does following count as approaching? You could make the argument that it does.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4683 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 30):
Does following count as approaching? You could make the argument that it does.

-Mir

No because according to the girlfriend, Trayvon turned around and went to where George was to confront him. Or at least according to her conversation with him since she wasn't there.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 27):
They told him to stand down. Even if he said "yeah, okay" or "yeah, whatever" they still have on tape he was told to stand down. He shot and killed a kid. After he was told to stand down.

I'm not sure where you got that from but, read the above. People argue that Trayvon was scared. Scared enough to turn around and confront George instead of going home which he could easily have done.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21681 posts, RR: 55
Reply 32, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4677 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 31):
No because according to the girlfriend, Trayvon turned around and went to where George was to confront him.

But had Zimmerman not followed him, there would have been no reason to turn around. So it could be argued that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 33, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 4675 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 31):
People argue that Trayvon was scared. Scared enough to turn around and confront George instead of going home which he could easily have done.

Why should Martin gone home but not Zimmerman?


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 34, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4682 times:

I hear the girlfriend is putting up a great show. For me is the best is when the defense asked her to read the letter that she sent Martins parents describing what she heard on the phone and couldn't because she said she can't read cursive writing.

I am starting to feel better about zimmermans chances. Saysa hellos a lot about the Florida education system too.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 35, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 4667 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 32):
But had Zimmerman not followed him, there would have been no reason to turn around. So it could be argued that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

Although I've gotten caught up in the "who started it" argument, it really is invalid. See below:

Quoting cmf (Reply 33):
Why should Martin gone home but not Zimmerman?

This is the tricky bit: neither of them, before the first punch was thrown, had a legal obligation to leave the area. Both people (as far as we know) were legally entitled to be where they were.

What it will come down to is who threw the first punch. All the physical evidence points to Martin, but it's possible Zimmerman could have made a grab for him and missed.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4646 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 32):
But had Zimmerman not followed him, there would have been no reason to turn around. So it could be argued that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

-Mir

I can also say had Trayvon went home, there would of been no fight.

Quoting cmf (Reply 33):
Why should Martin gone home but not Zimmerman?

Because he was scared of the person who was following him. Only makes sense to go home when your right there.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21681 posts, RR: 55
Reply 37, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 4645 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 36):
Quoting cmf (Reply 33):
Why should Martin gone home but not Zimmerman?

Because he was scared of the person who was following him. Only makes sense to go home when your right there.

That runs entirely contrary to the principle underlying the "stand your ground" law - you're not obligated to retreat when you feel threatened, you can confront the threat.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 38, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4640 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 27):
Quoting L-188 (Reply 16):
Dude the NRA is not paying for his lawyers.

Yet. Florida is a "Stand Your Ground" state. NRA will be sure those laws are upheld. At all costs.

Can you provide even the smallest shred of evidence for these ridiculous claims? Or can you even explain how the NRA will do this besides simply throwing out vague words like lobbyists/money/influence/magic? And as pointed out, Zimmerman can walk or Zimmerman can get the death penalty and the Stand Your Ground law will NOT change a single bit

And for the record, I am a supporter of self defense but I do see instances where laws are so vague they can be abused. I won't pretend to be on the jury like so many other posters here, so I won't make too strong of judgments, but I believe it's plausible that Zimmerman was in the wrong and would still walk. Think the law needs some cleaning up

I find it interesting that, as usual, the people against guns/self defense assume he's guilty and the people for guns/self defense think he's innocent. Focus on the law, people, you may find that he followed the law even if you hate the law or vice versa, but that is our justice system. If you hate this law, call for it's reform/repeal but don't judge Zimmerman off something other than the law just because you hate it



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 39, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4619 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 35):
What it will come down to is who threw the first punch. All the physical evidence points to Martin, but it's possible Zimmerman could have made a grab for him and missed.

I'm not aware that the first punch matters in stand your ground. How does it come into play? My understanding of stand your ground is quite the opposite. That if you fear for your life then throwing the first punch (or even shooting first) isn't held against you.

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 36):
Because he was scared of the person who was following him. Only makes sense to go home when your right there.

Want sense did it make for Zimmerman to get out of his car and follow Martin on foot?

I agree with you that leaving the area is the smart thing if you feel scared but stand your ground is turning that upside down. It promotes taking the fight right there - stand your ground.


User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2442 posts, RR: 14
Reply 40, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4579 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 39):
Want sense did it make for Zimmerman to get out of his car and follow Martin on foot?

If somebody left his car, and approached me, I would have shot him under this very Stand Your Ground rule. 

So, Zimmerman really had been lucky. If Zimmerman would have been shot dead, how would his parents think about the Stand Your Ground rule?

So SYG is a strange concept because it can only be used after the fact - in court - when one of the two is dead. "Look, I have applied the SYG rules. I'm still a free man." I have the feeling that SYG gives aggressive people a reason to act that way, but it is not a guideline on how to solve a conflict when one happens.


David

[Edited 2013-06-27 15:33:49]


Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4570 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 37):
That runs entirely contrary to the principle underlying the "stand your ground" law - you're not obligated to retreat when you feel threatened, you can confront the threat.

-Mir

So they both felt each other to be a possible threat to one another. Both were in the right according to the law. Case closed? That must be why they were trying to bring race into this.

Quoting cmf (Reply 39):
Want sense did it make for Zimmerman to get out of his car and follow Martin on foot?

I agree with you that leaving the area is the smart thing if you feel scared but stand your ground is turning that upside down. It promotes taking the fight right there - stand your ground.

If I'm not mistaken, I thought I heard them say he did that to update the dispatcher and/or cop were he to ever talk to one. No point in sending a cop out there if you don't know who you're looking for or where he is.


User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4568 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 40):
If somebody left his car, and approached me, I would have shot him under this very Stand Your Ground rule.

So, Zimmerman really had been lucky. If Zimmerman would have been shot dead, how would his parents think about the Stand Your Ground rule?

So SYG is a strange concept because it can only be used after the fact - in court - when one of the two is dead. "Look, I have applied the SYG rules. I'm still a free man." I have the feeling that SYG gives aggressive people a reason to act that way, but it is not a guideline on how to solve a conflict when one happens.


David

[Edited 2013-06-27 15:33:49]

I believe that's already been done unfortunately in other cases.

[Edited 2013-06-27 15:45:12]

User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21681 posts, RR: 55
Reply 43, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4561 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 41):
So they both felt each other to be a possible threat to one another. Both were in the right according to the law. Case closed?

Except that Zimmerman made the first move by deciding to follow Martin. And that move wasn't based on a threat that he perceived to himself (or at least not one that you could rationally justify).

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3103 posts, RR: 3
Reply 44, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4559 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 41):
That must be why they were trying to bring race into this.

Zimmerman identifies himself as hispanic in which he is, all the racial overtones ring hollow.
The re-editing of the 911 tapes by the White house propaganda network is the only reason that there is racial overtones here, they just forgot to do diligence to discover that Zimmerman was hispanic.

I have not paid a serious amount of attention to the trial but I will add that the jury is there and will see things completely differently than the perception of the media perception. There were no physical witnesses to the event which is a good indication that the prosecution probably has a pretty weak case and some circumstantial evidence. It would be hard to establish without reasonable doubt who started the altercation, but I am not on the jury.

Okie


User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 45, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4529 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 44):
discover that Zimmerman was hispanic.
Quoting okie (Reply 44):
Zimmerman identifies himself as hispanic in which he is, all the racial overtones ring hollow.

I think the racism thing is ridiculous also. Honestly if this was a black man killing a black teenager, a black man killing a white teenager, a white man killing a white teenage or a Hispanic man killing a white teenager this story would not come close to coming on CNN.

However does him being Hispanic mean he cant be racist? I never understood this. Oh it was a black guy who punched the Hispanic guy or vice versa. Why does racism only exist between whites and blacks? And almost always on the media it is only allowed to be racist if it is a white man committing a crime on a black person.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1873 posts, RR: 10
Reply 46, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4524 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 41):
That must be why they were trying to bring race into this.

Where has race even been mentioned in this thread?

Quoting okie (Reply 44):
Zimmerman identifies himself as hispanic in which he is, all the racial overtones ring hollow.
The re-editing of the 911 tapes by the White house propaganda network is the only reason that there is racial overtones here, they just forgot to do diligence to discover that Zimmerman was hispanic.

I think you're forgetting that the kid he shot was of a different race than him. Racism isn't a white on black/asian/hispanic/arab thing. It's a race on race thing. Therefore a hispanic killing a black person could still be racially motivated. I'm not saying that's the case here, but your logic doesn't seem to hold up.

Quoting flymia (Reply 45):
However does him being Hispanic mean he cant be racist? I never understood this. Oh it was a black guy who punched the Hispanic guy or vice versa. Why does racism only exist between whites and blacks? And almost always on the media it is only allowed to be racist if it is a white man committing a crime on a black person.

Exactly. Too often the media makes it sound like only white people are capable of racism, when really it works in any and every direction.



Flying refined.
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 47, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4525 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 46):
Where has race even been mentioned in this thread?

I don't know if it has been mentioned in this thread - but it has certainly been an angle Martin's family and supporters have shouted from the first day. Our President brought it up!!!

Certainly they feel anger and frustration at the death of a relative. And want justice.

But the race card was played early and often in the media.

It is an integral part of the case, and certainly the prosecution will try to show Zimmerman was following and more agressive toward Martin because of his race.


User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 48, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 4507 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 47):
It is an integral part of the case, and certainly the prosecution will try to show Zimmerman was following and more agressive toward Martin because of his race.

I would not be sure about that. That would be going for a home run. It could win the case but it could very well go against them. That is a hard decision to make that I am sure the prosecutors took a lot of time to think about.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 47):
But the race card was played early and often in the media.

It certainly was. As I said if race was never brought up we would have never heard about this case. Even here in Miami where Trayvon is from I did not hear a thing about this case until it became a race issue. That was over a month after he was killed.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 47):
Our President brought it up!!!

And he was an idiot for doing that.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 49, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 4492 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 41):
If I'm not mistaken, I thought I heard them say he did that to update the dispatcher and/or cop were he to ever talk to one. No point in sending a cop out there if you don't know who you're looking for or where he is.

Why did he need to get out of his car for that? Why couldn't he have taken pictures and followed from his car? Was this outcome better than losing track of him?


User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 50, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 4477 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 43):
Except that Zimmerman made the first move by deciding to follow Martin. And that move wasn't based on a threat that he perceived to himself (or at least not one that you could rationally justify).

-Mir

Well before I continue, is stand your ground being used in this case? I know its been thrown out there since pretty much the beginning but has it been said by any of the lawyers whether or not they're going that route? I haven't fully followed this case. I guess the two are kind of the same but I'd think stand your ground had more to it.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 46):
Where has race even been mentioned in this thread?

My statement about race had nothing to do with this thread. rfields5421 laid it out for you.

[Edited 2013-06-27 20:20:49]

User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13140 posts, RR: 15
Reply 51, posted (1 year 3 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 4465 times:

I don't believe that Zimmerman will walk, but likely end up being convicted of a lower-tier manslaughter charge by the Jury, if they have the option to do so. What we do know is that Martin's life ceased from the discharge of a bullet from a gun owned by Zimmerman and in possession at that time. Most of everything else is hazy. That is why we have trials.

User currently offlineKBJCpilot From United States of America, joined May 2012, 177 posts, RR: 6
Reply 52, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4372 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 49):
Why did he need to get out of his car for that? Why couldn't he have taken pictures and followed from his car? Was this outcome better than losing track of him?

If you had listened to the dispatchers' testimony on Day One of the trial you would have heard Zimmerman tell the dispatcher that there had been other burglaries in the neighborhood in the recent past and that he wanted to follow the suspicious person to see where he was going. After Zimmerman had lost track of Martin he was headed back to his car when Martin confronted Zimmerman.

As the Neighborhood Watch Captain he was doing what he had been trained to do by the police department's Neighborhood Watch liaison/supervisor and that was to observe and report what he saw. His neighborhood had been burglarized by young men in the past and in his mind he probably thought that he was following a potential burglar. As the NWC he probably knew his neighbors and their families and didn't recognize Martin which aroused his suspicions and made him follow Martin. From reading the differing reports Martin doubled back and asked Zimmerman what he was doing and that's what started this whole mess.

Having worked in law enforcement I can see Zimmerman's POV which was to figure out who this unknown stranger was out walking through the neighborhood at night and in the rain. His neighbors had been the victims of burglaries in the recent past. The police were always slow to respond. And Zimmerman was going to follow this person and see where he went. This person, in Zimmerman's mind, may also be responsible for other burglaries and as the NWC he was using some basic investigation skills and following a suspicious person.

I'll share a personal experience to show how this can happen to anyone. Late one night, a few years ago, I heard a "clink-clink" noise coming from my neighbor's yard. I took my handgun out of it's locked case, grabbed my phone, and went out to investigate. As I came around the corner of my house and peered into my neighbor's yard, I saw a dark shadow crouched down at my neighbor's patio door holding a flashlight in one hand and a shiny object in the other. I approached very quietly and in the shadows and with a firm and sharp command told the person to "freeze" and "drop what's in your hand." The person froze but didn't drop the shiny object. I told him to lie face down on the concrete and don't move. He refused to obey and I told him a 3rd time that the police were on the way and that if her made any sudden movements I would be forced to use force. He slowly placed his arms out to his side and turned around to face me. It was my neighbor's brother-in-law who had a few too many drinks earlier in the evening and decided that it would be fun to sneak over the the house and scare his sister and her husband. The silver object in his hand was a 6" long aluminum pipe which is what he was banging on the side of the house with. Had he turned around too quickly and I saw the round, silver object in his hand coming up toward me I would have shot.

Luckily for me, and for him, he was sober enough to understand my instructions and nothing happened.

Zimmerman may have seen himself in a similar situation. But I'll wait until we hear from the forensic detectives, the crime scene investigators, and maybe from Zimmerman himself before I'll pass final judgement. But from the way the prosecution has presented their case so far the Judge overseeing the case may dismiss the case after the prosecution is finished. So far their witnesses have been better witnesses for the defense.



Samsonite, I was way off!
User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 53, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4318 times:

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 52):

The prosecution really had no other choice but to call them. They were either going to be their witnesses or the defense's witnesses. All of the neighbors testimonies might be off somewhat as they all didn't go out at the same time and they all lived away from each other but in the end, they pretty much back up George's story. As more of the experts start coming in, it will only make it more obvious that this trial shouldn't have even took place.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 54, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4325 times:

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 52):

 Wow! That's a great example of how NOT to handle this situation! You came close to killing someone innocent because of YOU putting yourself in that situation!

Call the cops, don't sneak up on the guy, and you drawing your weapon was way over the line!

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 52):
I'll share a personal experience to show how this can happen to anyone.

Negative, the actions taken were reckless and ill thought out. And I am not some liberal either, I have a CCW.



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineKBJCpilot From United States of America, joined May 2012, 177 posts, RR: 6
Reply 55, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4315 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 54):
That's a great example of how NOT to handle this situation! You came close to killing someone innocent because of YOU putting yourself in that situation!

Call the cops, don't sneak up on the guy, and you drawing your weapon was way over the line!

That's your opinion. Unfortunately I lived in a rural area where law enforcement was 15-30 minutes away. When you live in the rural western US you do what people in urban areas won't. Personally, in the past 20 years I have had to take out my Glock a grand total of 4 times. 3 times were to assist a police officer when they were in a touchy situation and once was at my neighbor's house. In one particular occasion an officer was out on a suspicious vehicle and a wanted person inside when the family of the owner showed up and wanted the officer to leave without the individual. There were 5 of them and he was by himself. They had baseball bats and golf clubs and he had his sidearm and a shotgun in his car. I recognized the deputy from years past and pulled up and asked him if he wanted some help. He looked relieved and he and I took the 6 of them down at gunpoint. We held them there for 20 minutes until his first backup unit arrived from across the county and then I was able to leave. Another time a rookie officer rolled up on a physical domestic and was over his head. The male in the situation was recently out of state prison and knew that his parole would be violated if the officer arrested him. He was prepared to fight and take the officer out.

Having worked in law enforcement and familiar with both our department's use-of-force policies as well as state law I have a pretty good idea of right and wrong. And I was never sued or had an internal review regarding use-of-force. So while I respect your POV you should understand mine. Although I have moved to a large urban area, and law enforcement is 1-2 minutes away, I still carry concealed for my safety and that of my family.

If Martin is found non-guilty I am worried for those who live in the inner cities of America because we will see riots and burning and lots of person on person crime. And people like you and I who carry concealed will be a little more vigilant and aware of our surroundings and those around us until things calm down.



Samsonite, I was way off!
User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2442 posts, RR: 14
Reply 56, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4315 times:

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 52):
Had he turned around too quickly and I saw the round, silver object in his hand coming up toward me I would have shot.

That way, several people are killed every day in the United States of America. The life of your neighbor wasn't in danger, and trying to do a better job than a policeman is... dangerous.

Your actions that day show the weakness of the George Zimmerman case. In both cases, there were two possibilities.

a) The suspicious person is armed and will possibly kill you. Therefore, stay away. Do not approach. Your life might be in danger just because you want to "investigate" something. Observe him from a distance, and have your gun ready.
b) The suspicious person is unarmed and there is a remote chance of you being killed or hurt. Approach him and ask what he's doing.

Either you assume that the suspicious person is dangerous (and then you do not "investigate" something on your own), or you assume that this person is safe to approach, and you don't need a gun to begin with.



David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 57, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4308 times:

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 52):
From reading the differing reports Martin doubled back and asked Zimmerman what he was doing and that's what started this whole mess.

Wrong, it started before that. It started when Zimmerman started following Martin and made it in such a way that Martin decided to double back, if the reports we are getting are true.

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 52):
Had he turned around too quickly and I saw the round, silver object in his hand coming up toward me I would have shot.

What do you think should have happened to you if you had shot him? From the description you provide I think you should be guilty of murder. Vigilantes are no better than criminals.

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 52):
Zimmerman may have seen himself in a similar situation. But I'll wait until we hear from the forensic detectives, the crime scene investigators, and maybe from Zimmerman himself before I'll pass final judgement.

I too like more info and fortunately I'm not in a position where I need to decide what really happened. But what I see is another example of where gun owners provoke a situation. With Zimmerman it became deadly and in your case it fortunately stopped before reaching that point though it came close and you did force an innocent person to follow your command at gunpoint.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 54):

Well said.


User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Azerbaijan, joined Oct 2003, 14078 posts, RR: 62
Reply 58, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4269 times:

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 55):
That's your opinion. Unfortunately I lived in a rural area where law enforcement was 15-30 minutes away. When you live in the rural western US you do what people in urban areas won't. Personally, in the past 20 years I have had to take out my Glock a grand total of 4 times. 3 times were to assist a police officer when they were in a touchy situation and once was at my neighbor's house. In one particular occasion an officer was out on a suspicious vehicle and a wanted person inside when the family of the owner showed up and wanted the officer to leave without the individual. There were 5 of them and he was by himself. They had baseball bats and golf clubs and he had his sidearm and a shotgun in his car. I recognized the deputy from years past and pulled up and asked him if he wanted some help. He looked relieved and he and I took the 6 of them down at gunpoint. We held them there for 20 minutes until his first backup unit arrived from across the county and then I was able to leave. Another time a rookie officer rolled up on a physical domestic and was over his head. The male in the situation was recently out of state prison and knew that his parole would be violated if the officer arrested him. He was prepared to fight and take the officer out.

This is why over here in Europe police officers usually operate in pairs, so that one can back up the other and both can watch each other´s back. I never understood why in the US police officers are being sent out alone.

Jan


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8508 posts, RR: 12
Reply 59, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4268 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 58):
This is why over here in Europe police officers usually operate in pairs, so that one can back up the other and both can watch each other´s back. I never understood why in the US police officers are being sent out alone.

Big, sparsely populated counties out west can't afford to have two officers (sheriff's deputies) patrolling in the same car all the time.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 60, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4256 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 56):
The life of your neighbor wasn't in danger

Oh, how perfect hindsight is.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 56):
and trying to do a better job than a policeman is... dangerous.

LOL, and what do you think the cops would have done?

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 54):


Call the cops, don't sneak up on the guy, and you drawing your weapon was way over the line!

Yep, because the cops would TOTALLY just keep their guns holstered and not sneak up when they see someone with a shiny object in their hand, acting all creepy around a house late at night after getting a call about it.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 61, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 4227 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 60):
Yep, because the cops would TOTALLY just keep their guns holstered and not sneak up when they see someone with a shiny object in their hand, acting all creepy around a house late at night after getting a call about it.

Because he is TOTALLY a uniformed cop  

I don't even know if what he did was legal... he drew on a guy on someone else's property and was not threatened at all, depends on the state I guess but even then.... And I'm probably more aggressive than 90% of the posters on here, but I have enough sense to not go looking for trouble. The guy wasn't shooting up the door, he was just being kinda shady... call the cops, keep an eye out, call the neighbor, and let the trained police handle it. If he starts being overtly aggressive, then take action. This brinkmanship is a reason why we have so many needless shootings in this country

He drew down and even admitted that he almost shot a drunk brother with a pipe. I don't care how "noble" his intentions were, the actions were clumsy and reckless

It's all besides the point, and I won't even try to connect it to this case as it's not really apples:apples, except that perhaps letting everyone having guns is probably not a good idea. Wow, can't believe I said that, I sound like a total liberal now  



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinePellegrine From France, joined Mar 2007, 2468 posts, RR: 8
Reply 62, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4210 times:

When the United States sentences so many to life without parole and death, how can this man possibly walk?

Quoting L-188 (Reply 34):

I hear the girlfriend is putting up a great show. For me is the best is when the defense asked her to read the letter that she sent Martins parents describing what she heard on the phone and couldn't because she said she can't read cursive writing.

I am starting to feel better about zimmermans chances. Saysa hellos a lot about the Florida education system too.

Ignorant. Just like that other thread. It is so wrong and telling of someone who lambastes her for being who she is. It is savage. Everyone in the world is not the most sophisticated and learned person, that does not mean they are less than and should be objects of ridicule.

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 36):
Because he was scared of the person who was following him. Only makes sense to go home when your right there.

I don't generally care about laws in hindsight of situations like this because, being made by humans, they are fallible. When a human being feels threatened the reptilian brain takes over i.e. fight or flight. If people feel someone is chasing them, some will run, and empirically fewer will confront. Either response is valid from a biological point of view.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 38):
I find it interesting that, as usual, the people against guns/self defense assume he's guilty and the people for guns/self defense think he's innocent. Focus on the law, people, you may find that he followed the law even if you hate the law or vice versa, but that is our justice system. If you hate this law, call for it's reform/repeal but don't judge Zimmerman off something other than the law just because you hate it

Personally, I will judge him all I want. The famous phrase, "you don't bring a knife to a gun fight," also applies in reverse. Laws are made by humans, ergo they are fallible and subject to effervescent whimsy.

Quoting Mir (Reply 43):
Except that Zimmerman made the first move by deciding to follow Martin.

                 We have a winner. Zimmerman initiated the threat scenario here. He provided the causation.

I wager most people would not take to being followed in the dark, especially without any other persons around.

Quoting okie (Reply 44):
Zimmerman identifies himself as hispanic in which he is, all the racial overtones ring hollow.

News Flash. There are "white" Hispanics, "black" Hispanics, "caramel" Hispanics, "mocha-latte-java" Hispanics... Look at Brazil, or all of South America. Hispanics can be the whitest of "white" or the blackest of "black". Hispanic isn't a "race", it is a term of ethnic relation.

Quoting flymia (Reply 45):
Why does racism only exist between whites and blacks? And almost always on the media it is only allowed to be racist if it is a white man committing a crime on a black person.

Is it so surprising given the history of this country (US). I never cease to be dumbfounded by "white" persons who do not understand this. It is nothing against them though; I think they never could. Except, with regards to education, they may learn.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 46):
Exactly. Too often the media makes it sound like only white people are capable of racism, when really it works in any and every direction.

In the US, there will always be the overtone of "white" against any racial minority, because of the history of this country. This is valid until around a bit after ~2050-60(?) when "white" persons will cease to be the majority race of the US.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 47):
But the race card was played early and often in the media.

People bringing up the "race card" always brings a chuckle out of me. Last time I checked there were 52 cards in a deck. Jew card, Gay card, Socioeconomic card, Appalachian card, Yuppie card, Establishment card. When did this all get boiled down to cards? This isn't a card game???

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 52):
Luckily for me, and for him, he was sober enough to understand my instructions and nothing happened.

Wow. Maybe if I have neighbors like you I should get a gun and it would really be on.



oh boy!!!
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 63, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 4186 times:

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 62):
It is so wrong and telling of someone who lambastes her for being who she is.

When someone makes up lies to help get someone arrested and charged with murder - they deserve all the lambasting they can get.

When someone 'writes' a letter that they cannot read - that is evidence of their lies.

This is a criminal trial. Witnesses who are proven to make false statements deserve to be exposed and the liars they are.


User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 64, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4178 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 57):
Wrong, it started before that. It started when Zimmerman started following Martin and made it in such a way that Martin decided to double back, if the reports we are getting are true.


It started when Trayvon punched George in the face. Even while George was yelling for help, Trayvon began and continued to smash his head in the concrete. John Good, who lived there, yelled for him to stop at least twice. George heard him so one would assume that Trayvon did as well. John also said in his initial statement he thought it was the guy on the bottom yelling for help. You can believe what you want but so far there is nothing that the witnesses have said that would discredit George except for the obvious statements such as the three shots being fired and what not.


User currently offlineDarkSnowyNight From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1379 posts, RR: 3
Reply 65, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 4157 times:

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 52):
I'll share a personal experience to show how this can happen to anyone

I wouldn't recommend bragging about committing unprovoked felonies online. Just Saying...

Quoting KBJCpilot (Reply 55):
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 54):
That's a great example of how NOT to handle this situation! You came close to killing someone innocent because of YOU putting yourself in that situation!

Call the cops, don't sneak up on the guy, and you drawing your weapon was way over the line!

That's your opinion.

No, it's a fact. You need to be in prison.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 61):
I don't even know if what he did was legal...
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 61):
depends on the state I guess but even then....

KBJC's actions were legal in no state at all. He went looking for trouble.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 61):
I sound like a total liberal now

A. I doubt anyone will assume that of you.

B. It's not a swear word. We're known for being smarter and wealthier, so it can't be all bad.

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 64):
It started when Trayvon punched George in the face.

No, it started when zimmerman began harassing a citizen he had no right to. Either he can spend the rest of his life thinking about that behind bars, or he can spend the rest of his life waiting for the inevitable day when someone decides to "stand their ground" on him. Up to the jury.



Posting without Knowledge is simply Tolerated Vandalism... We are the Vandals.
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 66, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 4145 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 61):
Because he is TOTALLY a uniformed cop

You attacked his method of confronting the criminal, when the cops would have done the exact same thing.

His status as a police officer is irrelevant.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 61):

I don't even know if what he did was legal

It is, I guarantee it.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 61):

He drew down and even admitted that he almost shot a drunk brother with a pipe.

He drew down and almost shot someone holding a large piece of pipe who was creeping on his neighbor. Who it turned out to be is irrelevant.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 62):
Ignorant. Just like that other thread. It is so wrong and telling of someone who lambastes her for being who she is. It is savage. Everyone in the world is not the most sophisticated and learned person, that does not mean they are less than and should be objects of ridicule.

Um, did you miss the part where SHE wrote the letter?

How many letters have you written that you can't read?

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 62):
We have a winner. Zimmerman initiated the threat scenario here. He provided the causation.

I wager most people would not take to being followed in the dark, especially without any other persons around.

Wait, so let me get this straight:

Martin was justified in confronting his "stalker" (instead of calling the cops and waiting), but KBJC is not?

Quite the logic you got there.

Quoting DarkSnowyNight (Reply 65):
I wouldn't recommend bragging about committing unprovoked felonies online.

  

Whatever, dude.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineroswell41 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 790 posts, RR: 1
Reply 67, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4138 times:

Following someone who is sneaking through your neighborhood at night through backyards is not a crime. Punching said person MMA style is a crime. Zimmerman was a citizen who cared about the well being of his neighborhood. Unfortunately, Martin's 17 year old ego thought he would teach someone a lesson. That kind of thinking got him killed.

User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 68, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4134 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 66):
You attacked his method of confronting the criminal, when the cops would have done the exact same thing.

His status as a police officer is irrelevant.
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 66):
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 61):

I don't even know if what he did was legal

It is, I guarantee it.

There are plenty of things police officers can do that average Joes can't. I'm having a tough time accepting this... can't claim castle doctrine since it wasn't his home, I don't really think he can claim that he felt threatened since he went into that situation (vs the other way around,) and plus, I don't see it as very smart.

If the guy was storming the house I could see drawing the guy down, but no one was in any kind of immediate danger... until the poster came out drawing a weapon vigilante style. Please, tell me how it's legal... I'm not 100% as you seem to be. If it is legal, I think that definitely shouldn't be. Just because you have a gun doesn't mean you have to use it... should be the first thing taught in any weapons class.



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineFlaps From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 1286 posts, RR: 4
Reply 69, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4118 times:

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 67):
Following someone who is sneaking through your neighborhood at night through backyards is not a crime. Punching said person MMA style is a crime. Zimmerman was a citizen who cared about the well being of his neighborhood. Unfortunately, Martin's 17 year old ego thought he would teach someone a lesson. That kind of thinking got him killed.

And that in a nutshell sums up the entire case.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 70, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4111 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 68):
If the guy was storming the house I could see drawing the guy down

How could it be determined he wasn't planning on "storming the house"? Guy creeping in the shadows, yep, nothing out of the ordinary there  
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 68):
but no one was in any kind of immediate danger

In cases like these, perception is reality. It doesn't matter what actually was going on, what matters is what a reasonable person believes is going on. Even you admit that someone carrying a pipe, in the dark, being sneaky on someone's house is grounds for at least calling the police.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 68):
until the poster came out drawing a weapon vigilante style

Spare us the hyperbole.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 68):
Please, tell me how it's legal

No, you tell me how it's illegal. Please cite the law that prohibits using a weapon in defense of yourself or others, when you are reasonably sure that their life could be in danger.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 68):
I'm not 100% as you seem to be.

Well, that would be because I know what I'm talking about.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 68):
If it is legal, I think that definitely shouldn't be

Excellent. Let me know how that works when you or someone you care about it dead because nobody is allowed to come to their aid (except for cops that are minutes away).

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 68):
Just because you have a gun doesn't mean you have to use it... should be the first thing taught in any weapons class.

Actually, the first thing taught is to treat a gun as if it's always loaded. But I guess actual safety can take a backseat to political ideology.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 71, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 4100 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 70):

Oh please, I'm well aware of protecting others when you think their lives are in danger. I know it's all on perception, perception of a reasonable person (not quite sure if that is the exact phrase, but it's measured not on what an individual thinks, it's an average, reasonable person.) I don't think this was a reasonable course of action at all

A guy lightly banging on the side of the house no doubt is shady, which is why I said call the cops, grab your gun, and monitor from a distance, but to go out right away and draw your gun on the guy, yes, is vigilante style over-the-top looking for trouble kind of justice. If you live in that much paranoia, you are likely to pull your gun in totally unnecessary times, like pulling a gun on a drunk brother in law. This is the same way people shoot shadowy figures in their house that have "no right in being there" and it turns out to be their kid sneaking out. It may be less macho to call the cops and gather your family in the same room, gun aimed at the door, but prevents irreversible actions like shooting someone you aren't 100% sure are dangerous or not

We aren't going to agree anytime soon, and it isn't fully on topic, so I'll leave it at that. I'll let you have the last word (hopefully you'll spare the unnecessary sarcasm this time) and then we can continue on PMs if you wish. Still not certain it was legal (and I do know about self defense laws fairly well, they aren't as cut and dry as you're making them out to be) but I definitely don't think it was smart



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21681 posts, RR: 55
Reply 72, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 4098 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 66):
Martin was justified in confronting his "stalker" (instead of calling the cops and waiting), but KBJC is not?

Critical difference: KBJC was not being stalked. His neighbors were. At no time could he have reasonably claimed to consider himself in danger.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 73, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4085 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 72):
At no time could he have reasonably claimed to consider himself in danger.

To be fair, some (if not most or all states) extend it to "considering if others are in danger," which is Maverick623's point. I'm arguing that the event was indeed shady but I don't think a reasonable person could conclude that his neighbor's life was in danger. I think much more had to happened before he was legally allowed to draw his weapon



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 74, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4065 times:

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 62):
Is it so surprising given the history of this country (US). I never cease to be dumbfounded by "white" persons who do not understand this. It is nothing against them though; I think they never could. Except, with regards to education, they may learn.

The two U.S. cities I have lived in White Americans are the minority. So maybe that is why I feel that this White vs Miniroties thing is way over played. Which it is. And again if Zimmerman was black, Asian, easily recognized as Hispanic or if Trayvon was anything but black this would not have been a national new story. That's my point.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 75, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4049 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 64):
It started when Trayvon punched George in the face.

No, at that time it was far down the road already. We know from Zimmerman that he initiated the events, when he decided to follow Martin who was just walking at a place Zimmerman found suspicious.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 70):
Excellent. Let me know how that works when you or someone you care about it dead because nobody is allowed to come to their aid

Let me know how that works when you or someone you care about lies dead because someone misunderstood what you were doing.


User currently offlineFlaps From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 1286 posts, RR: 4
Reply 76, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4048 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 74):
And again if Zimmerman was black, Asian, easily recognized as Hispanic or if Trayvon was anything but black this would not have been a national new story.

It wouldn't have even been a major local story.


User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 77, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4049 times:

Quoting DarkSnowyNight (Reply 65):
No, it started when zimmerman began harassing a citizen he had no right to. Either he can spend the rest of his life thinking about that behind bars, or he can spend the rest of his life waiting for the inevitable day when someone decides to "stand their ground" on him. Up to the jury.
Quoting cmf (Reply 75):

No, at that time it was far down the road already. We know from Zimmerman that he initiated the events, when he decided to follow Martin who was just walking at a place Zimmerman found suspicious.

George getting out of his truck = following Trayvon? He didn't even know where he was at. After he was able to find a street sign to update the dispatcher, he began to turn back towards his truck. Trayvon was the one who jumped out from behind, exchanged words with George, then punched and knocked him down. If anything, Trayvon was the one following George. He apparently had a visual of him the entire time.

There is no way they are going to put an innocent man behind bars for the rest of his life. Unless Trayvon was affiliated with some kind of gang, I don't see any kind of 'street justice' happening here either.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 78, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4033 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 75):
Let me know how that works when you or someone you care about lies dead because someone misunderstood what you were doing.

Rest assured, I'm not going to be creeping around a dark house in the middle of the night... because I know that someone might (rightly) suspect me of being up to no good.

Quoting cmf (Reply 75):
We know from Zimmerman that he initiated the events, when he decided to follow Martin who was just walking at a place Zimmerman found suspicious.

Which he is perfectly entitled to do.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 79, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4029 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 77):
George getting out of his truck = following Trayvon?

That is no what has been reported.

7:11:33 — Zimmerman tells the police dispatcher that Trayvon Martin is running.
7:11:59 — In reply to the dispatcher's question, "Are you following him?" Zimmerman says, "Yes." Dispatcher states, "OK, we don't need you to do that." Zimmerman replies, "OK."

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 77):
Trayvon was the one who jumped out from behind, exchanged words with George, then punched and knocked him down. If anything, Trayvon was the one following George. He apparently had a visual of him the entire time.

You mean he just randomly jumped Zimmerman without reason. How do you know Zimmerman's version is all true? or were you there? You must have been when you can state Martin had visual on Zimmerman all the time.

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 77):
There is no way they are going to put an innocent man behind bars for the rest of his life.

I certainly hope they will not. I also hope they will not let a guilty man go free. You have certainly not provided evidence that Zimmerman is innocent. I'm waiting for the trial to provide the most likely version of what actually happened.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 78):
Rest assured, I'm not going to be creeping around a dark house in the middle of the night... because I know that someone might (rightly) suspect me of being up to no good.

Nor will you come home early, mistakenly drive up a driveway, or any other of the many, many ways people have killed innocent...

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 78):
Which he is perfectly entitled to do.

Yes, Martin was perfectly entitled to walk there. He should not have been harassed in a way that made him feel the need to run and then circle back to stand his ground.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 80, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 4001 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 79):
You have certainly not provided evidence that Zimmerman is innocent

Just because you don't like the evidence doesn't mean it's not evidence.

Quoting cmf (Reply 79):
I'm waiting for the trial to provide the most likely version of what actually happened.

If you're looking for new evidence, you're not gonna find it.

From the 911 call, we can ascertain that Zimmerman was walking back to his car to wait for the cops. Sometime after that, Martin approached Zimmerman, and a loud argument ensued (loud enough to be heard by the neighbors). Shortly after that, people heard cries for help, called 911, and a few seconds later Zimmerman shot Martin. Every single credible witness has placed Trayvon on top of Zimmerman, pummeling away.

Now, of course, just because Trayvon was winning the fight doesn't mean he was the aggressor. It's plausible (even possible) that Zimmerman tried to grab him or something. However, that can't be proven one way or the other.

Quoting cmf (Reply 79):
Nor will you come home early, mistakenly drive up a driveway, or any other of the many, many ways people have killed innocent...

When has that ever happened?



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 81, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3961 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 80):
Just because you don't like the evidence doesn't mean it's not evidence.

Pot, kettle, black.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 80):
From the 911 call, we can ascertain that Zimmerman was walking back to his car to wait for the cops.

I.e. we know Zimmerman had started aggression by following Martin.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 80):
It's plausible (even possible) that Zimmerman tried to grab him or something. However, that can't be proven one way or the other.

Question is if it matters since it isn't the start of the attack.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 80):
When has that ever happened?

How can an insistent proponent of carrying guns for protection like you be ignorant about how they are misused far too often? Avoiding things you don't like?
http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/story...aughter-shot-mistaken-for-intruder
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-2867791.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/05...ile-sneaking-home-after-night-out/
http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local...girl-shot-14-Jacobo-102290224.html
http://www.reuters.com/video/2013/03...istaken-identity?videoId=241743671
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/ny...egion/14nassau.html?pagewanted=all
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/polic...stumed-pa-girl-mistaken-skunk-shot
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57...rections-to-wrong-house-shot-dead/
http://bossip.com/781125/jesus-take-...hen-they-search-wrong-house-43081/
http://archives.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=231283
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/201...victim-man-shot-critical-condition
Hope I didn't include any of them multiple times.


User currently offlineroswell41 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 790 posts, RR: 1
Reply 82, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3939 times:

Zimmerman following does not start any act. That's like saying Trayvon getting skittles from 7-11 started the chain of events. Both are legal and legitimate acts. All that matters is who laid the first blow. All accounts point to Martin.

User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 83, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3935 times:

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 82):
Zimmerman following does not start any act.

Of course it does. It is an aggressive move.


User currently offlineroswell41 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 790 posts, RR: 1
Reply 84, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3932 times:

Call Zimmerman's following whatever you want, but in the eyes of the law the aggressor is the one who laid hands on the other first. Name calling or dirty looks are not violent acts. Martin escalated the encounter by injecting physical violence into it and paid the ultimate and appropriate price for it. He could have continued home or waited to speak to the police but instead thought "I'll show this guy". We know the rest of the story. All eyewitness accounts state that Martin was on top of Zimmerman pummelling him, Martins corpse had bloodied knuckles and Zimmerman was beaten up in his face and head. Martin had one gunshot wound through his chest entering from the front.

User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 85, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3824 times:

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 84):
but in the eyes of the law the aggressor is the one who laid hands on the other first.

Looking forward to see you support this claim. Specifically considering the "stand your ground" laws where fear is pretty much all that is need for you to have the right to "defend" yourself.

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 84):
Martin escalated the encounter by injecting physical violence into it and paid the ultimate and appropriate price for it.

We don't know Martin did that but IF he did then yes, in that case he escaled what Zimmerman started when he followed Martin and got the ball rolling.

Per Jeantel we have the build up to be:
“I was on the phone when Trayvon decided to go to the corner store. It started to rain so he decided to walk through another complex because it was raining too hard. He started walking, then noticed someone was following him. Then he decided to find a shortcut ‘cause the man wouldn’t follow him. Then he said the man didn’t follow him again. Then he looked back and saw the man again. The man started getting closer, then Trayvon turned around and said, ‘Why are you following me?’ Then I heard him fall, then the phone hung up.”
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...-given-to-trayvon-martins-mom?lite

Of course, this is just one witness version.

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 84):
He could have continued home or waited to speak to the police

As could Zimmerman. Again, why the burden on Martin but not on Zimmerman? Especially since we know it was Zimmerman who initiated the events.

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 84):
All eyewitness accounts state that Martin was on top of Zimmerman

Not close. One witness testified Zimmerman was on top and at least one didn't state, rather believed Martin was top. Additionally the mother of the 13 year old witness claim her kid was coerced to state the guy in red shirt (Zimmerman) was on the bottom.

The "believed" witness also stated he did not see the person on top banging the others head on the concrete.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 86, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 3808 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 85):

Of course, this is just one witness version.

She did not hear Trayvon fall... she likely heard his earbud fall out.

And I do find it disturbing that you would trust the word of someone who has a dog in this battle, as opposed to two people who don't.

Quoting cmf (Reply 85):
One witness testified Zimmerman was on top

And yet described exactly what Martin was wearing.

Quoting cmf (Reply 85):
and at least one didn't state, rather believed Martin was top.

Oh please. Like he knew either person beforehand.

Quoting cmf (Reply 85):


The "believed" witness also stated he did not see the person on top banging the others head on the concrete.

But he did state that the person on top was pummeling away MMA style.



Sorry, but now you're just grasping at straws.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 87, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3787 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 86):
And I do find it disturbing that you would trust the word of someone who has a dog in this battle, as opposed to two people who don't.

I find it disturbing you discount a witness just because you don't like what she said.

She is the only witness who was there from before Zimmerman saw Martin up to the point where they made contact and is the only witness of that part. Of course per her but external evidence support the timeline.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 86):
And yet described exactly what Martin was wearing.

Without any idea if it was like that all the time.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 86):
Oh please. Like he knew either person beforehand.

Your emotional statements apart, how is that relevant for who was on top?

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 86):
But he did state that the person on top was pummeling away MMA style.

He first thought it was dogs fighting. He then said they rolled closer and he identified it was two persons. Rolled is interesting as it indicates changes as to who was on top.

It is also interesting that he states he was too far away to see any details yet he identified who was who using skin color and not the color of their clothes.

But let's look at the MMA part.

O’Mara (Zimmerman's lawyer): “What you saw was the person on top in an MMA-style straddle position, correct? That was further described, was it not, as being ‘ground and pound.’ What is ‘ground and pound’ as you define it?”

Good: “The person on top being able to punch the person on the bottom, but the person on the bottom also has a chance to get out or punch the person on top. It’s back and forth,”

Add to that what Good said earlier to the prosecutor: “'Cause it looked like there were strikes being thrown, or punches being thrown, but as I clarified, due to the lighting, it could have also been, you know, holding down. But there were arm movement[s] going downward,”

So, at least as I have seen reported, he wasn't "pummeling away MMA style". He was straddling MMA style and the punches were "arm movement[s] going downward" and that it was back and forth between both persons.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 86):
Sorry, but now you're just grasping at straws.

I frequently see you add this kind of "argument" from you but I have to say that I find it to be what you use when you do not have real arguments.

You build your version of what happened by picking and choosing from what Zimmerman and the witnesses you like said. Then you ignore everything happening up to the point where "independent" witnesses saw punches.

I have no opinion as to who is right or wrong in this case, I'm leaving that for the court to decide. I have opinions as to what people state here. I find the discounting of what happened all the way up to when witnesses saw who was on top very disturbing. Even more so when those who do that then invoke self defense to justify Zimmerman killing Martin. We all know (or should) that Florida is "stand your ground." We know from Zimmerman's statements everything started with that he didn't like how Martin was walking and that he (Zimmerman) followed Martin. None of you have been able to make an argument for why that aggressive action should be discounted in a "stand your ground" state.

So you can make the claim that I am grasping at straws but I find it to be more applicable to you. Let's see if you will address any of these issues  


User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 88, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3697 times:

When the defense attorneys are using open ended non-leading questions when cross examing the police officers you know the case is extremely weak for the prosecution. If I was a prosecutor in this case with what I have seen and know about the case no way I could go to trial. The more this case goes on the more it looks like charges where brought for political reasons, "racial justice" reasons.

Just my opinion and obviously I don't know much but when in the world do we see a police officer say good things about the defendant?



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 89, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3681 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 1):
George Zimmerman, or rather Zimmerman's lawyers, do not need to prove a thing. The LAW says Zimmerman is presumed to be innocent unless the Prosecution proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman acted unlawfully when shooting Martin.

Bingo. And on that basis, I have little doubt that Zimmerman will walk. Zimmerman does not have to prove his innocence. The burden of proof is on the Prosecution, and there is "reasonable doubt" written all over their case from every angle.

Personally, I think Martin did in fact double back, confront Zimmerman and initiated the fight (why would anyone carrying a gun start a fistfight?)

I also have little doubt that the racemongers around the country will provoke a violent reaction if they can, like after the Rodney King events.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineroswell41 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 790 posts, RR: 1
Reply 90, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3654 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 85):
Looking forward to see you support this claim. Specifically considering the "stand your ground" laws where fear is pretty much all that is need for you to have the right to "defend" yourself.

There is nothing for me to explain. This is age old common law regarding self defense. Regarding "stand your ground" laws, you are completely incorrect. Fear is not enough. Your assailant must demonstrate ability to harm you, have the opportunity and show manifest intent through their words and deeds. Stand your ground only allows you to forgo retreat if you are in a place you are lawfully allowed to be. The other criteria must still be satisfied. I hope this suffices as support to my claim.

Quoting cmf (Reply 85):
We don't know Martin did that but IF he did then yes, in that case he escaled what Zimmerman started when he followed Martin and got the ball rolling.

Look, we can all tell you don't believe the Zimmerman story. Let's be clear, Zimmerman did nothing wrong by following and observing Martin's actions. These were lawful actions. They did not warrant a physical assault. The only person who escalated anything was the person who turned the encounter physical, which all evidence points to Martin. Martin was the criminal in this encounter. What you are saying is akin to blaming the victim.

Quoting cmf (Reply 85):
As could Zimmerman. Again, why the burden on Martin but not on Zimmerman? Especially since we know it was Zimmerman who initiated the events.

Because Zimmerman wasn't doing anything illegal. If Martin behaved like a normal person he wouldn't have attacked Zimmerman who was merely observing his behavior. Again, the decision to turn the encounter physical is all that matters in this case. All signs point to Martin taking that step. If indeed true, Zimmerman will rightfully walk out of that courthouse.


User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 91, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 3649 times:

I wish the media would stop showing all those photos of Trayvon when he was a little kid. That's NOT who attacked George Zimmerman. A more appropriate photo would be that of a large thug smoking pot.

And the star witness had plenty of attitude should we say? She was more detrimental to the prosecutions case than anything else. She came across a a female thugette.

I read somewhere that the police in major cities are on alert for demonstrations at the end of this trial.


User currently offlineJJJ From Spain, joined May 2006, 1862 posts, RR: 1
Reply 92, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3639 times:

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 90):
Because Zimmerman wasn't doing anything illegal. If Martin behaved like a normal person he wouldn't have attacked Zimmerman who was merely observing his behavior. Again, the decision to turn the encounter physical is all that matters in this case. All signs point to Martin taking that step. If indeed true, Zimmerman will rightfully walk out of that courthouse.

It's not that clear, as long as Martin noticed Zimmerman was following him he broke into a run. The fact that Zimmerman decided to chase him makes is a clear point of escalation. Zimmerman was by then aware that Martin had seen him and that he was running away from him, his actions from there onwards are an act of aggression (probably defined under stalking), so Martin, if alive, could very well claim self-defense from Z.

Especially when he was packing. It's against all common sense and all firearm safety guidelines to get into a confrontational situation when you're armed.


User currently offlinecmf From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 93, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3627 times:

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 90):
There is nothing for me to explain

Note your lack of actual support for your claim. Then look at this and your claim is disproved.

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 90):
Let's be clear, Zimmerman did nothing wrong by following and observing Martin's actions.

Look, it is clear you think it is OK to be a vigilante and follow anyone you think look suspicious but that doesn't make it right. You can sidestep all you want but it doesn't change that it is the first aggressive act.

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 90):
which all evidence points to Martin

All the evidence? You have what Zimmerman told. The person who more than anyone want the version to be a certain way. What else?

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 90):
Because Zimmerman wasn't doing anything illegal.

Why do you discount is that Martin wasn't doing anything illegal? He was walking home. Then Zimmerman decided to be a creep and follow him. Zimmerman should have minded his own business instead of being a vigilante. Something Zimmerman had been told at the training he and the rest of the neighborhood watch received just a few months earlier.

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 90):
Again, the decision to turn the encounter physical is all that matters in this case.

No it isn't. Creating the situation is the cause.

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 90):
All signs point to Martin taking that step

No they don't. There is an absolute lack of evidence as to who turned it physical. There is only the story of a person who has every interest of it to be that way.

We have signs that Martin stopped walking home because he felt Zimmerman closed in on him, confirmed by both Jeantel and Zimmerman. There is absolutely no evidence who threw the first punch you think is so critical. Only that Martin stopped to confront his follower. If you think Zimmerman have the right to follow Martin then certainly Martin have the right to address him, which is all we know he did.

Quoting JJJ (Reply 92):
It's not that clear, as long as Martin noticed Zimmerman was following him he broke into a run. The fact that Zimmerman decided to chase him makes is a clear point of escalation. Zimmerman was by then aware that Martin had seen him and that he was running away from him, his actions from there onwards are an act of aggression (probably defined under stalking), so Martin, if alive, could very well claim self-defense from Z.

Especially when he was packing. It's against all common sense and all firearm safety guidelines to get into a confrontational situation when you're armed.

  

Plus against the instructions of the neighborhood watch.


User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 94, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3606 times:

Quoting type-rated (Reply 91):
I read somewhere that the police in major cities are on alert for demonstrations at the end of this trial.

They most certainly are. It is a serious possibility and the longer this trial goes the more likely it looks like Zimmerman is acquitted but who knows what a jury will do.

Quoting cmf (Reply 93):
Look, it is clear you think it is OK to be a vigilante and follow anyone you think look suspicious but that doesn't make it right. You can sidestep all you want but it doesn't change that it is the first aggressive act.
Quoting cmf (Reply 93):
No it isn't. Creating the situation is the cause.

The first aggressive act is not what you or other people want it to be it is what the law says it is. And the law says Zimmerman following Martin is not an aggressive act.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineroswell41 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 790 posts, RR: 1
Reply 95, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3593 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 93):
We have signs that Martin stopped walking home because he felt Zimmerman closed in on him, confirmed by both Jeantel and Zimmerman. There is absolutely no evidence who threw the first punch you think is so critical. Only that Martin stopped to confront his follower. If you think Zimmerman have the right to follow Martin then certainly Martin have the right to address him, which is all we know he did.

Does 'addressing' him mean bashing his head into concrete? I'm not going to restate my previous comments. You choose not to acknowledge the law of self defense. Your inference that following someone constitutes an aggressive act is completely wrong. I'll leave it at that. You have your mind made up.

Quoting cmf (Reply 93):
Note your lack of actual support for your claim. Then look at this and your claim is disproved.

That article is exactly what I explained regarding stand your ground legislation.

Quoting cmf (Reply 93):
Look, it is clear you think it is OK to be a vigilante and follow anyone you think look suspicious but that doesn't make it right. You can sidestep all you want but it doesn't change that it is the first aggressive act.

Its not OK to be a vigilante, but it is OK to defend yourself against a 17 year old thug smashing your head into concrete. I'll restate again, in the eyes of the law following a person is not aggression no matter how many times you say it. Your inference is irrelevant in the eyes of the law of the USA. Please understand this, it is important to the Zimmerman case. What you are saying is akin to a rape victim 'deserving' it because she wore revealing clothing. Its absurd!


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11720 posts, RR: 15
Reply 96, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3577 times:

Quoting roswell41 (Reply 95):
in the eyes of the law following a person is not aggression

What about following a person after authorities tell you not to? Not just following, but running after when you have a gun and he does not?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 97, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3576 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 93):
Quoting roswell41 (Reply 90):
Again, the decision to turn the encounter physical is all that matters in this case.

No it isn't. Creating the situation is the cause.

Then let's blame their parents for having children. If they had not, none of this would have happened.

Why do you keep insisting on this nonsense that Zimmerman is at fault simply because he started following Martin? That has no legal basis whatsoever.

Meanwhile, the prosecution's case continues to melt away. Lead investigator Chris Serino (who has since been demoted to night patrolman) was on the stand Monday, and he explained how Zimmerman's testimony, behavior and evidence supported the self-defense theory, and how he was pressured to file murder charges anyway. And remember - this is the prosecution's witness.

Oh, and I amend my earlier prediction. The current trial will end up with a verdict of Not Guilty. But then the DOJ and Holder will want a crack at him too and will charge Zimmerman in Federal court for something - they'll make up something.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 96):
What about following a person after authorities tell you not to? Not just following, but running after when you have a gun and he does not?

Still not illegal. And he started running because he had lost track of Martin - which ties with testimony that Martin successfully evaded the person following him by ducking between buildings or whatever.

But to cmf and others who believe that whether to follow or walk away decides a crime, this represents a problem. Martin spotted a tail and successfully evaded it. The contact - up to this point initiated by Zimmerman - is now over. At that point Martin had a choice - terminate contact and go home, or turn the tables on his pursuer, circle around and sneak up on him. Given the machismo culture Martin was a part of, I think he chose the latter. This becomes a second contact, where Martin is now the agressor. Unfortunately for him, he chose to challenge, and then physically assault someone who had a gun. He should have gone home when he had the chance.

[Edited 2013-07-02 08:45:04]


Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 98, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3555 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 96):
What about following a person after authorities tell you not to?

No authority told him anything. A 911 operator is NOT an authority so please stop saying this over and over again.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 24):
Agreed. We'll leave it at that.

^ You see what I mean.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 97):
Why do you keep insisting on this nonsense that Zimmerman is at fault simply because he started following Martin? That has no legal basis whatsoever.

Most people don't care about the legal aspect. They just care about the emotional media side of the case. The law means little to many in cases like this. Similar to OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony. I am on the jury for either of those and I am acquitting also.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 97):
Meanwhile, the prosecution's case continues to melt away. Lead investigator Chris Serino (who has since been demoted to night patrolman) was on the stand Monday, and he explained how Zimmerman's testimony, behavior and evidence supported the self-defense theory, and how he was pressured to file murder charges anyway. And remember - this is the prosecution's witness.

     
Right now the police are basically on the side of Zimmerman. Usually it is the police who will want to move forward and pressure the prosecutors to go to trial with a case. This time is seems like political motivation was more in hand and the police were not pushing for trial. If you can't have the police be a good witness for the prosecution the case should have never gone forward.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 97):
But then the DOJ and Holder will want a crack at him too and will charge Zimmerman in Federal court for something

Well murder is not a federal statute. No idea what they could charge him with.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 97):
they'll make up something.

Would love to see them try. Man would that be pathetic and a complete embarrassment of the justice system.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineDucatiRacer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 247 posts, RR: 0
Reply 99, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3547 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 93):
There is an absolute lack of evidence as to who turned it physical.



You realize that you are essentially pleading the defense's case here. A criminal defendant cannot be found guilty unless the jury finds that the evidence proves said guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This case has reasonable doubt writ large all over it. If the prosecution cannot come up with anything more convincing than the things being said here by the anti-Zimmerman contingent, George is going to walk.


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 100, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3549 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 98):
Well murder is not a federal statute. No idea what they could charge him with.

The will charge him with a hate crime. They will accuse him of being motivated by Martin being black. No question in my mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew...rd,_Jr._Hate_Crimes_Prevention_Act



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 101, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3529 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 100):
The will charge him with a hate crime. They will accuse him of being motivated by Martin being black. No question in my mind.

And what a waste of time and money that will be. They could get lucky and find a jury to convict of that but I don't see a Circuit Court holding up that conviction.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1873 posts, RR: 10
Reply 102, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3539 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 88):
The more this case goes on the more it looks like charges where brought for political reasons, "racial justice" reasons.

I can definitely see the political motivation of the state levying the charge they did, no question there...but I'm not convinced on this "racial justice" thing. Do you really think the State of Florida would bring controversial charges against a man because they think they owe the black community a thing? I would think not.

Quoting type-rated (Reply 91):
A more appropriate photo would be that of a large thug smoking pot.

I'm starting to get sick of this "holier than thou" attitude from Zimmerman supporters. I defy you to tell everyone here that smoking pot makes someone a "thug". If so, then I guess a majority of people in the 18-24 age bracket are "thugs", because people that have never tried marijuana are certainly the small minority.

Also, how do you think 5'11'' and 158 pounds is "large"?

If you feel that Zimmerman is innocent, then so be it, but do so without making stuff up about the deceased to try and strengthen your position. It's really petty.

Quoting type-rated (Reply 91):
She was more detrimental to the prosecutions case than anything else.

Well if they didn't call her to the stand, the defense surely would have. The prosecution was in a spot and they tried to make the best of it, which obviously didn't entirely work out as planned.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 100):
The will charge him with a hate crime. They will accuse him of being motivated by Martin being black. No question in my mind.

I'm willing to take that bet. I'll go on record as saying that I believe this will never touch a federal court. The DOJ won't have anymore evidence than what the State is working with (regardless of the charges) and they know it.

Quoting flymia (Reply 98):
You see what I mean.

Well I was agreeing that we have a different interpretation, but I do see the point you were making.



Flying refined.
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 103, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3505 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 102):
Do you really think the State of Florida would bring controversial charges against a man because they think they owe the black community a thing? I would think not.

No, that's not really what I meant. They don't have anything to owe. What I mean is that the reason this even a national story is because of the race issue and this being a national story put a lot of pressure of Florida.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 104, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3500 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 102):
defy you to tell everyone here that smoking pot makes someone a "thug". If so, then I guess a majority of people in the 18-24 age bracket are "thugs", because people that have never tried marijuana are certainly the small minority.

I didn't mean:

Smoking Pot = Thug

I meant Pot Smoking AND thug due to his past arrest records.

I realize that most people who smoke pot aren't thugs, in fact usually the opposite.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 105, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3496 times:

Quoting cmf (Reply 87):
I frequently see you add this kind of "argument" from you but I have to say that I find it to be what you use when you do not have real arguments.

Saying you're grasping at straws is, in fact, a real argument, because it's what you're doing.

There should be no debate as to who was on top in the fight. You don't even need the witness testimony (which you poo-poo because apparently there's no way that someone rapidly moving their arms downward is either punching someone or banging their head).... the physical evidence speaks for itself. Zimmerman had injuries consistent with his head hitting the concrete and being punched, and Martin had injuries consistent with punching someone and being shot from below.

Quoting cmf (Reply 93):
Look, it is clear you think it is OK to be a vigilante and follow anyone you think look suspicious but that doesn't make it right. You can sidestep all you want but it doesn't change that it is the first aggressive act.

Look, it is clear you think it's not OK to keep tabs on a suspicious person (while on the phone with a police dispatcher). But that doesn't make it wrong. You can sidestep all you want, but legally it is not an aggressive act.

Quoting cmf (Reply 93):
Why do you discount is that Martin wasn't doing anything illegal?

Why do you discount that Zimmerman also wasn't doing anything illegal?

Quoting cmf (Reply 93):
Creating the situation is the cause.

:facepalm:

The only time creating a situation matters is when you are doing something illegal. Zimmerman was not doing anything illegal.

Otherwise, one could argue that Martin created the situation by getting Skittles, and thus is at fault (which is just plain ridiculous).

Quoting cmf (Reply 93):
There is an absolute lack of evidence as to who turned it physical.

  

So, in the absence of any evidence as to who committed a crime, you should agree that the case be dismissed.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1873 posts, RR: 10
Reply 106, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3493 times:

Quoting type-rated (Reply 104):
I didn't mean:

Smoking Pot = Thug

I meant Pot Smoking AND thug due to his past arrest records.

I realize that most people who smoke pot aren't thugs, in fact usually the opposite.

Still not sure how marijuana and graffiti makes him a thug. Thug is a term typically reserved for those who commit violent crimes. It might be nitpick-y of me to point out, but it's really grinding my gears how some people here (and most in the media, on both sides of the debate) are twisting words to suit their opinion as if it were some sort of supreme fact.

Quoting flymia (Reply 103):
What I mean is that the reason this even a national story is because of the race issue and this being a national story put a lot of pressure of Florida.

I think it might be a bit of a stretch. I see gun-control and SYG laws being bigger issues than the races of the accused and the victim. I'm not saying that race isn't an issue in the grand scheme of things, obviously many people are (unfortunately) talking about it, but I think from the state's point of view, race wasn't the motivating factor...at least I would hope not.



Flying refined.
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 107, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3472 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 106):
I see gun-control and SYG laws being bigger issues than the races of the accused and the victim

SYG was certainly a big part of it too. But I just don't think it was not going to get the same media attention if it was not a black teenager who was shot. Black on Black, Black on White, White White etc.. This would not even make the news in Miami. There are plenty of SYG cases in Florida. I know of a few local ones which have not gotten close to CNN or even out of the South Florida area which IMO are even more controversial than this one.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 106):
but I think from the state's point of view, race wasn't the motivating factor...at least I would hope not.

I hope not also.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineSFBdude From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 108, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3391 times:

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative...-explode-during-trial-2695448.html


This type of stuff can't be protected under freedom of speech can it? ...


User currently offlineBoeing717200 From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 872 posts, RR: 0
Reply 109, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3377 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 108):

If they do what they say when Zimmerman walks, then they're pretty much toast.


User currently offlineWestJet747 From Canada, joined Aug 2011, 1873 posts, RR: 10
Reply 110, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3364 times:

Quoting SFBdude (Reply 108):
This type of stuff can't be protected under freedom of speech can it? ...

Depends. There's precedent set by the Supreme Court that says "threats may not be punished if a reasonable person would understand them as obvious hyperbole" (Watts v United States). The court will have to decide if tweets by angry black people who can't even put together an intelligible sentence are deemed to be a serious threat or not. Given the mob nature of all these tweets, they would probably lean towards hyperbole. I'm not an expert though, just my   

Quoting flymia (Reply 107):
SYG was certainly a big part of it too. But I just don't think it was not going to get the same media attention if it was not a black teenager who was shot. Black on Black, Black on White, White White etc.. This would not even make the news in Miami. There are plenty of SYG cases in Florida. I know of a few local ones which have not gotten close to CNN or even out of the South Florida area which IMO are even more controversial than this one.

I can't say I read or watch too much Florida news, so I'll take your word for it. True that same race crimes rarely get the same level of attention (dependent of course on how sensational the crime is), whether the crime itself was racially motivated or not. I think that goes for just about anywhere in North America.



Flying refined.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11720 posts, RR: 15
Reply 111, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3357 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 97):
Martin spotted a tail and successfully evaded it.

Because he didn't know who was following him. I can guarantee a man in civilian clothes who does not identify themselves as police is seen as a threat that anyone would avoid on a dark, rainy night. Try it next time. Any dark, rainy night just follow some random person around, don't say anything, and see what happens. I dare you.

Quoting flymia (Reply 98):
A 911 operator is NOT an authority so please stop saying this over and over again.

"We don't need you to do that. The police are on their way..." is the same thing as "go ahead and take him down." I see...

Quoting type-rated (Reply 104):
I meant Pot Smoking AND thug due to his past arrest records.

And is record is....?

Can we talk about the "brutal" beating Zimmerman got? Not much of anything according to ALL medics. Plus, nothing consistent with having his head beaten into the concrete like he said happened.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 112, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3351 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 112):
Because he didn't know who was following him. I can guarantee a man in civilian clothes who does not identify themselves as police is seen as a threat that anyone would avoid on a dark, rainy night. Try it next time. Any dark, rainy night just follow some random person around, don't say anything, and see what happens. I dare you.

Irrelevant. Once you have broken contact, would you circle back to see who it was, or do you run home? What would make you chose the former rather than the latter?



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 113, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3347 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 112):
Quoting flymia (Reply 98):
A 911 operator is NOT an authority so please stop saying this over and over again.

"We don't need you to do that. The police are on their way..." is the same thing as "go ahead and take him down." I see...

Ummm... what?       Reread what he said! I'm not saying Zimmerman is innocent but at least get what posters are saying



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 114, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3342 times:

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 106):
Thug is a term typically reserved for those who commit violent crimes. It might be nitpick-y of me to point out, but it's really grinding my gears how some people here (and most in the media, on both sides of the debate) are twisting words to suit their opinion as if it were some sort of supreme fact.

Maybe where you come from. Here it could be anyone that has mugged someone for a valuable, someone involved in gang activity. It could be a true thug means you havent had it good your whole life, and you intend to change that, and get out of the ghetto if thats where you are, you do whats right, you dont take shit from anyone, and stand up for your friends and dont let them take shit from anyone!

I imagine that if Trayvon had lived within 5 years he'd have a Baby Mama or two or have been in jail for one thing or another.
You could just see it all in his stance in his adult photos.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11720 posts, RR: 15
Reply 115, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3344 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 113):
Once you have broken contact, would you circle back to see who it was, or do you run home?

Apparently, if you have a gun, you circle back to see who it was. If you are an unarmed teen, you wait in the shadows until the threat is gone. Until the threat shows up again.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 114):
Reread what he said! I'm not saying Zimmerman is innocent but at least get what posters are saying

Right. But, listen to the 911 operator telling Zimmerman he does not need to follow Martin.

Quoting type-rated (Reply 115):
I imagine that if Trayvon had lived within 5 years he'd have a Baby Mama or two or have been in jail for one thing or another.
You could just see it all in his stance in his adult photos.

So, because you see Trayvon one way and think he may have ended up one way, that is EXACTLY how is life would have gone? I see....



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 116, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3337 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 116):
Apparently, if you have a gun, you circle back to see who it was. If you are an unarmed teen, you wait in the shadows until the threat is gone. Until the threat shows up again.

Or, if you are an unarmed teen but have a big attitude, you circle back to see who it was anyway.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 116):
Right. But, listen to the 911 operator telling Zimmerman he does not need to follow Martin.

And he did stop following. According to his testimony he instead he headed over to Retreat View Circle to get a street name, and was headed back to his truck when he met Martin, who had doubled back.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 116):
So, because you see Trayvon one way and think he may have ended up one way, that is EXACTLY how is life would have gone?

Let's just say a very high degree of probability.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineJJJ From Spain, joined May 2006, 1862 posts, RR: 1
Reply 117, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3331 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 105):
Why do you discount that Zimmerman also wasn't doing anything illegal?

Stalking a minor is. After telling things like "they always get away" and "f***** c****" I dubt the jury will believe he approached Martin in a very friendly manner.... and you can't self-defend from self-defense.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7931 posts, RR: 52
Reply 118, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3328 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 116):
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 114):
Reread what he said! I'm not saying Zimmerman is innocent but at least get what posters are saying

Right. But, listen to the 911 operator telling Zimmerman he does not need to follow Martin.

I don't really have a dog in this fight, and I will admit I don't know enough to talk of the subject with any semi-authority, but the whole point is 911 operators are NOT authority figures. I'm not 100% sure on that, but I am inclined to agree. They aren't police and have no authority, they are only trained in dealing with callers

What troubles me is (no one in particular, just in general) are people that have motives and judge Zimmerman innocent or guilty based on their ideologies. Just because you are pro-self defense doesn't mean Zimmerman was in the right, and even if you hate the Stand Your Ground law you have to put that hatred aside and judge Zimmerman on the law itself, whether you love or hate the law. This discussion has unsurprisingly split between the usual ideological lines, which is fine if people were being objective, but people seem to be ignoring what the law actually says and just judging him on their gut feelings, or going into ad homiem attacks and saying Martin was a pot head (I never smoked it, but I know a lot of people who have that certainly aren't "thugs")



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 119, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3317 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 116):
So, because you see Trayvon one way and think he may have ended up one way, that is EXACTLY how is life would have gone? I see....

No I was only talking about probabilities. Since we will never know now, his life could have ended up in any one of hundreds of millons of possible outcomes. If you are so narrow minded as to even think that I was saying he IS going to end up a certain way, well that's your problem.


User currently offlineDTW2HYD From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 2094 posts, RR: 0
Reply 120, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3270 times:

He will walk, because he has Mark O'Mara.

User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 121, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3216 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 112):
"We don't need you to do that. The police are on their way..." is the same thing as "go ahead and take him down." I see...

That is not the point. I am not saying the 911 operator did not tell him to stop following him. The operator did tell him that.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 116):
Right. But, listen to the 911 operator telling Zimmerman he does not need to follow Martin.

My point is that is all the guy was a OPERATOR. If I called you and said you can't have a doughnut for breakfast and then you have a doughnut for breakfast according to your logic I can sue you because you did not listen to my instructions. The operator has the same authority I have over the phone which is none.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 119):
I don't really have a dog in this fight, and I will admit I don't know enough to talk of the subject with any semi-authority, but the whole point is 911 operators are NOT authority figures. I'm not 100% sure on that, but I am inclined to agree. They aren't police and have no authority, they are only trained in dealing with callers

Exactly.

Anyway the State had a good day yesterday and of course now CNN is talking about how maybe this is the turning point for the State. I still think there is just too much doubt in the case to convict. Obviously I am not in the court room, my opinion is just from what I have seen and know about the case. But who knows a jury can really shock people sometimes. Still more time left and plenty of time for the defense to screw something up too.

Quoting type-rated (Reply 115):
I imagine that if Trayvon had lived within 5 years he'd have a Baby Mama or two or have been in jail for one thing or another.
You could just see it all in his stance in his adult photos.

Of course that is a possibility, that is a possibility for any of us. However, given his race, the neighborhood he lived in, the High School he went to, his drug use and other factors there is a larger probability that would have happened to Martin than most people. Those are just statistics. Where those statistics are, they are somewhere. I mentor at risk youth in Miami and I just know. Unfortunately his family will never find out if he would have been the norm or an exception.

[Edited 2013-07-03 08:40:50]


"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11720 posts, RR: 15
Reply 122, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3204 times:

Quoting type-rated (Reply 120):
I was only talking about probabilities
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 117):
Let's just say a very high degree of probability.

What is being said is: He was black and smoked pot, therefore, prison and several children are absolute. Zimmerman had a gun. Therefore, he is a mass murderer. Paula Deen breathes, therefore she is a serial killer. John Bolton has a mustache therefore, he is a pedophile.

One thing does not equal another in any case.

About the 911 operator: When a civilian calls 911 and the operator says "the authorities are on their way" does that give the caller license to keep doing what the authorities are trained to do? Five car accident, major injuries, authorities are still 2 minutes away, but I will pry people out because, even though the operator said "the authorities are on their way" that gives me the right to start pulling people out of cars regardless of injuries?



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 123, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3199 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 123):
About the 911 operator: When a civilian calls 911 and the operator says "the authorities are on their way" does that give the caller license to keep doing what the authorities are trained to do?

Yes, yes it does. There is no "license" I can do what I want as long as it is not breaking the law. That is the question. Is what Zimmerman did a crime or not. What the 911 operator had to say means nothing. Maybe, just maybe they could use it to show some type of motive but legally it means nothing.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 123):
Five car accident, major injuries, authorities are still 2 minutes away, but I will pry people out because, even though the operator said "the authorities are on their way" that gives me the right to start pulling people out of cars regardless of injuries?

No it does not. There would be no reason to this whether they were 30mins away or 30secs away. Unless of course the cars were on fire, people were bleeding to death etc.. That's the point. It depends on the circumstances and not what the operator says.

If you are home and hiding in a corner with a gun because someone is in your house and the 911 operator says just wait there don't move police are 2 minutes away and the intruder is about to hurt someone else you are going to stay there and wait because the operator told you to? Of course not. You do what you need to do. That question of the case is what did Zimmerman do. Not did Zimmerman listen to the 911 operator.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 123):
What is being said is: He was black and smoked pot, therefore, prison and several children are absolute. Zimmerman had a gun. Therefore, he is a mass murderer. Paula Deen breathes, therefore she is a serial killer. John Bolton has a mustache therefore, he is a pedophile.

All those are possible. But when you look at statistics there was a pretty good probability Martin would have found himself in more trouble later on in his life. A certainty? No of course not. But again this has nothing to do with the case. Why its brought up I don't know.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 124, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3202 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 123):

What is being said is: He was black and smoked pot, therefore, prison and several children are absolute.

1) The only one here throwing absolutes around is you.

2) Black is irrelevant. Pot, a little more relevant, but not much. His criminal history (even at his young age), his obsession with Bling (like gold teeth caps), his chosen nickname ("No_Limit_Nigga"), his alleged drug dealing, his alleged hitting a bus driver a few days before his death, his school suspensions, things like this give a picture of someone probably headed down a very bad track.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 125, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3179 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 112):

"We don't need you to do that. The police are on their way..." is the same thing as "go ahead and take him down." I see...

It means what it means.

Christ, even the dispatcher testified that he gave no legal orders, only suggestions which are not legally binding and have little legal consequence to the caller.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 112):

Can we talk about the "brutal" beating Zimmerman got? Not much of anything according to ALL medics. Plus, nothing consistent with having his head beaten into the concrete like he said happened.

Right... his broken nose and the cuts and bruising on the back of his head just magically appeared.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 123):

About the 911 operator: When a civilian calls 911 and the operator says "the authorities are on their way" does that give the caller license to keep doing what the authorities are trained to do?

Yep, it does. Or rather, it doesn't take away the caller's freedom to help in the best way he or she sees fit.

This is the United States of America. You have the explicit freedom to do whatever you want, provided that it doesn't violate anybody else's freedoms, a specific law prohibits it, or a law enforcement officer (acting in the public good) orders you not to. You seem to believe people need permission to so much as breathe... it's asinine.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 126, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3186 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 126):
Right... his broken nose and the cuts and bruising on the back of his head just magically appeared.

I find it hilarious how some people, even in the courtroom, are shrugging off his obvious injuries, and saying that he should have (I guess) brushed them off as no big deal.



I assure you that if you are on the receiving end of these injuries, and the perp is continuing to attempt further injury, you are not going to say to yourself "It's OK, no big deal".



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2442 posts, RR: 14
Reply 127, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3189 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 126):
Christ, even the dispatcher testified that he gave no legal orders, only suggestions which are not legally binding and have little legal consequence to the caller.

Not legally binding? Maybe. But you're overlooking the real point:

These people still are professionals who, given the information you tell them, actually *know* better than you. If you happen to come across a severely bleeding person and you do not know what to do, they will give you instructions. If you're taken hostage and you manage to inform the police, they will again give instructions.

What other people tell you may or may not be legally binding. But: Not heeding the advice of a professional can be a criminal offense if it leads to damaged property, bodily injuries or deaths.


David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 128, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3179 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 128):
These people still are professionals who, given the information you tell them, actually *know* better than you.

WOW! Someone on the other end of a phone line knows better than you what's going on?

As far as being professionals, 911 operators are generally paid little more than minimum wage. Commercial trucking dispatchers earn more on average than 911 operators. They are not trained policemen, or medics. They operate off of scripts as best they can. Give them a situation that they are unfamiliar with or do not have a script for, they are just as much in the dark as you are, with the exception that they can call for help very easily.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinedallasnewark From Estonia, joined Nov 2005, 495 posts, RR: 1
Reply 129, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3166 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 128):
These people still are professionals who, given the information you tell them, actually *know* better than you. If you happen to come across a severely bleeding person and you do not know what to do, they will give you instructions. If you're taken hostage and you manage to inform the police, they will again give instructions.

This makes no sense whatsoever. A 911 operator is not a figure of authority and his/her advice can't be taken as a wholly grail.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 128):
What other people tell you may or may not be legally binding. But: Not heeding the advice of a professional can be a criminal offense if it leads to damaged property, bodily injuries or deaths.

Not heeding to advice of a 911 Operator can lead to a criminal offense? Really? I wonder what gave you that idea



B732/3/4/5/6/7/8/9, B742/4, B752/3,B762/3/4, B772/3, A306, A318/9/20/21, A332/3, A343/6, MD80/83/88, L1011, TU104/134, F
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 130, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3162 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 123):
even though the operator said "the authorities are on their way" that gives me the right to start pulling people out of cars regardless of injuries?

Actually according to your logic throughout this thread - that REQUIRES you to step back and not provide ANY first aid support.

Including trying to stop uncontrolled bleeding, assist someone who has an obstructed airway, etc.

According to your statements - bystanders should NEVER help injured people in any way after a 911 operator says the authorities are on the way.


User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 131, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3160 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 128):
These people still are professionals who, given the information you tell them, actually *know* better than you

Sometimes they may have training in such matters BUT they can only respond to what you are telling them. They are not there with you to see what is going on. So anything they tell you MAY or MAY NOT be the right thing to do.


User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 132, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3116 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 127):
Not heeding the advice of a professional can be a criminal offense if it leads to damaged property, bodily injuries or deaths.

Of course it can be a criminal offense! Obviously when you do something that leads to damaged property, bodily injuries or deaths no matter what advice was given or not given it can be a crime. Really what kind of statement is that. Heeding advice of a professional? There needs to be a law in place that says you are required to listen to that advice. Such as federal law requiring passengers to follow crew member instructions. Or state and federal laws requiring people to follow police officer instructions. But an operator on a phone? Sorry. At least not in Florida. Most of them are pretty good at their job and do help people a lot, but there is no reason one needs to legally follow their instructions and that is all that matters. The law.

If I destroy someone's car whether a 911 operator told me to do it, not do it or nothing it is still a crime.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 133, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3075 times:

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 127):
Not legally binding? Maybe.

Not maybe; it is NOT legally binding. Period.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 127):
But: Not heeding the advice of a professional can be a criminal offense if it leads to damaged property, bodily injuries or deaths.

911 dispatchers do not fall under your category of "professionals". They are not authority figures or police officers. They are the relay between the caller and the responder. They are capable of giving limited advice, but are not allowed to give orders, and their instructions are not legally binding.


I do see that you are from Switzerland, and I do know that the laws there are different about who can tell you what... but you are wrong on US and Florida law.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11720 posts, RR: 15
Reply 134, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3055 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 130):
Actually according to your logic throughout this thread - that REQUIRES you to step back and not provide ANY first aid support.

If you don't know the proper way to administer first aid. Just as: if your life it not threatened, you simply see someone you don't know, according to some logic in this thread, that gives one the right to murder.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 126):
I find it hilarious how some people, even in the courtroom, are shrugging off his obvious injuries, and saying that he should have (I guess) brushed them off as no big deal.

Under sworn testimony of a medical professional, yes. Yes, exactly.

I find it hilarious that some people are shrugging off an ARMED MAN following someone is playing the victim. Zimmerman had a gun and is saying he is the victim. That he had no choice but murder. Even against all evidence. Like the struggle between the two that produced a few minor scrapes and Martin's body facing one way then another then another and he had six arms to do what he did and that there was no concrete where Zimmerman said there was.

Just because the kid who was murdered is a black pot smoker. That's what this boils down to. "I didn't know him and I heard there were a rash of burglaries. He was black, so he must have been one of them." But, it is the south, so it should not be a surprise.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 135, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3040 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 134):
Just because the kid who was murdered is a black pot smoker. That's what this boils down to

No, it boils down to he was somebody who had an arrest record as well as punching people when he felt like it. He had a past. And common sense tells you that people like that are more prone to do it again rather than people who have never done anything like that.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11720 posts, RR: 15
Reply 136, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2996 times:

Quoting type-rated (Reply 135):
somebody who had an arrest record

For graffiti and pot smoking.

And there is Zimmerman who has a resisting arrest, battery on an officer and a restraining order against an ex-wife.

But, blame the black pot smoker.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 137, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2985 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 134):
Just because the kid who was murdered is a black pot smoker. That's what this boils down to. "I didn't know him and I heard there were a rash of burglaries. He was black, so he must have been one of them." But, it is the south, so it should not be a surprise.

If you think what this case is about, man I am glad you aren't on the jury or any jury ever, hopefully. And the South? Really man? It's Orlando. A Hispanic man shot a black teenager. This isn't the good old "south" you are thinking of. 30% Black, 20% Hispanic in Sanford.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 138, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2960 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 136):
But, blame the black pot smoker.

No, blame the black thug.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11720 posts, RR: 15
Reply 139, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2930 times:

Quoting type-rated (Reply 138):
blame the black thug.

Who was unarmed and felt he was in danger. He was "Standing His Ground" but he is the aggressor. The man with anger issues and a gun is the victim.

Every black man who identifies himself as a thug that I know will not leave the house without his piece. If Trayvon were truly a thug, he would have murdered Zimmerman in a second. Since he was unarmed and was NOT the aggressor, Trayvon is the bad guy. That's what I am hearing.

Quoting flymia (Reply 137):
If you think what this case is about

Listening to the pundits, it is. What this really is a case of is... read the above comment.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 140, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2913 times:

You know there is a "perception" that the prosecution has to deal with. Look inside a typical penetentary. What kind of prisoners do you mostly see? That's the perception staring you in the face.

User currently offlineken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8329 posts, RR: 9
Reply 141, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2897 times:

Quoting cjg225 (Reply 12):
At the same time, women can also be pretty hardcore on juries.

Oh, I know that. My wife is the last person a Defense lawyer would want on a jury.

She makes me look like a liberal and I'd like to see the Singapore system of handing out lashes brought here for a lot of crimes.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 70):
Please cite the law that prohibits using a weapon in defense of yourself or others, when you are reasonably sure that their life could be in danger.

Please stop working so hard to find some way to defend Zimmerman. He was told to stay in the car, but this wanna be cop (who never will be) went with his gun, an over-prized sense of Junior Lawman and a full load of reckless abandonment and he went out and shot a guy.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 126):
I assure you that if you are on the receiving end of these injuries,

I'd say they aren't that bad. Head cuts traditionally bleed a lot more than other areas and the injuries are a lot less serious than the blood indicates. And there wasn't that much blood on the back of his head. I've had worse when I stubbed my toe (many times) riding a bike barefoot when I was in elementary school.

And. let's be honest, he didn't get those "injuries" by staying in the car like he was told to do. He thought he was a Big Man With A Gun and it turned out that he was a little man who turned out to be nothing but a killer in the end,

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 127):
These people still are professionals who, given the information you tell them, actually *know* better than you

It's called training. Some 911 operators have been on the job for years.

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 127):
Not heeding the advice of a professional can be a criminal offense if it leads to damaged property, bodily injuries or deaths.

Well, Zimmerman totally ignoring what the 911 operator told him to do did end up in the death of a young guy going to get some Skittles for his younger brother.

Let's hope that Zimmerman gets sufficient prison time to help all those other "Big Men With A Gun Neighborhood Patrol" idiots that they had better stay in the car.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 128):
They operate off of scripts as best they can. Give them a situation that they are unfamiliar with or do not have a script for, they are just as much in the dark as you are, with the exception that they can call for help very easily.

And the scripts were developed by people who are professionals - not hot shot yo-yos like Zimmerman. Considering that there are inputs from all relevant areas, like police departments, fire departments, medical communities, etc. I believe that those "scripts" and the training staff receive leads to a pretty effective system. Putting down those operators in hopes of making Zimmerman look somewhat better than pathetic doesn't work for me. And you comment about their pay level simply indicates that they need to be paid at least over the poverty line.

Quoting dallasnewark (Reply 129):
This makes no sense whatsoever. A 911 operator is not a figure of authority and his/her advice can't be taken as a wholly grail.

These people work in an environment that has been developed by a wide range of professionals and ignoring their advice can lead to more harm than good. A dead kid with a wanna-be cop who ignored the 911 operator is a pretty simple example of that.

Quoting type-rated (Reply 135):
somebody who had an arrest record

Did Zimmerman know that? Nope. All he had was a black kid walking through his neighborhood taking candy to his little brother. Black kid in the South - guess that is why Zimmerman called him "the suspect".

Quoting type-rated (Reply 135):
He had a past.

Zimmerman didn't know that - all he saw was a black guy.

Quoting type-rated (Reply 135):
And common sense tells you that people like that are more prone to do it again rather than people who have never done anything like that.

Actually, common sense tells you to STAY IN THE CAR LIKE YOU WERE TOLD. But Zimmerman thought he was a Big Man With A Gun. "People like that" are the ones that cause problems - like getting a kid killed.


User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 142, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2874 times:

Quoting ken777 (Reply 141):

You are right. Zimmerman should have stayed in his car. However, looking at this legally and not emotionally, the operator telling him to stay means ZERO. Nothing, not an little ounce of significance. So can we please stop talking about the operator already. It is irrelevant.

Unless we want to continue and have this Nancy Grace type discussion. Then go ahead.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 143, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2858 times:

Quoting ken777 (Reply 141):
Please stop working so hard to find some way to defend Zimmerman.

Please learn to read posts correctly. I was referring to a different incident that, unfortunately, nearly took this thread off track.

Also, please stop making up crap in your quest to find some way to demonize Zimmerman.

Quoting ken777 (Reply 141):
He was told to stay in the car, but this wanna be cop (who never will be) went with his gun, an over-prized sense of Junior Lawman and a full load of reckless abandonment and he went out and shot a guy.
Quoting ken777 (Reply 141):
Well, Zimmerman totally ignoring what the 911 operator told him to do

He did no such thing. The 911 operator told him that he didn't need to follow the guy he was following, and Zimmerman said "okay" and was walking back to meet the cops.

At no time did the 911 dispatcher tell him to "stay in the car", and certainly didn't tell him anything before he was already out of his car tailing Martin.

Also, he did not "go out and shoot a guy". He was following someone he found suspicious, while on the phone with the police, and was jumped shortly afterwords.

Quoting ken777 (Reply 141):
I believe that those "scripts" and the training staff receive leads to a pretty effective system.

It is pretty effective. That doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman was never told to "stay in the car" or that he is supposed to follow orders from someone who doesn't know exactly what's going on.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineusflyer msp From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2137 posts, RR: 0
Reply 144, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2861 times:

I think Zimmerman is guilty as sin.

However, based upon what I have seen, I also think the prosecution overcharged him and he is probably going to walk. Then he will have to go into hiding for the rest of his life like Casey Anthony or seek asylum in Peru but I won't feel sorry for him.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11720 posts, RR: 15
Reply 145, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2837 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 143):
please stop making up crap in your quest to find some way to demonize Zimmerman.

He was a neighborhood watch person who was told by the bylaws of the neighborhood watch that he CAN NOT carry a weapon of ANY KIND.

Quoting type-rated (Reply 140):
Look inside a typical penetentary. What kind of prisoners do you mostly see?

Black pot smokers who carry a gun because they can only afford to live in squalor. Yes, yes... there are actual criminals. But, the justice system would be less crowded if we just let the pot smokers go free.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13649 posts, RR: 62
Reply 146, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2830 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Ok, so once Zimmerman walks....what communities are most likely to experience rioting and/or loss of life as a result?

Place your bets....   



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 147, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2817 times:

You know the marching, rioting and city burning hasn't happened for quite some time. This kind of thing may have happened years(60's-80's) ago but I think a lot of people have gotten over that type of activity and may be history. We may see a lot of people grouping together to express their outrage, but that's about it.

User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13140 posts, RR: 15
Reply 148, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks ago) and read 2796 times:

I find when a TV news program talks about this case, I change the channel to another news or non-news program. I wish live TV cameras in the courtroom were not allowed. This is supposed to be a trial by the jurors, not by the public. I do read articles on the web on this case. I was especially turned off by the coverage as well as the terrible and race/class biased commentary of the young woman who testified as to the phone call of Martin before the confrontation of Martin and Zimmerman.
This was a terrible mix of circumstances and Martin is dead. We are having a trial of Zimmerman as to his use of the gun. This is at a time of a lot of emotions as to gun possession and use in the USA and of long-simmering conflicts between police and young black males. If the court's decision is to acquit or not find Zimmerman guilty of serious charges, I hope those that object to it don't go rioting, that would be the worst outcome. I also hope if Zimmerman is found guilty, that gun owners don't take it as a vindication of their view.


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8866 posts, RR: 24
Reply 149, posted (1 year 3 months 3 weeks ago) and read 2793 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 145):
Black pot smokers who carry a gun because they can only afford to live in squalor. Yes, yes... there are actual criminals. But, the justice system would be less crowded if we just let the pot smokers go free.

That's a myth. For possession, the vast majority are fined or sentenced to community service or simply supervision. Those that go to prison were involved in the distribution and sale of pot. Ditto for other drugs like meth or crack - if you are just a user, you are very unlikely to be sent to jail - but if you were selling, that's a different story.

http://www.debate.org/opinions/myth-...-is-rolling-stone-magazine-correct



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5673 posts, RR: 6
Reply 150, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2736 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 145):
He was a neighborhood watch person who was told by the bylaws of the neighborhood watch that he CAN NOT carry a weapon of ANY KIND.

I get it. You don't like the guy because he carried a gun and was a probably over-concerned about protecting his neighborhood.

That has little bearing on the fact that the reasons you give for finding him guilty of murder are hogwash. You are trying someone based on who they are, not what they did.

At MOST, assuming new information comes to light that Zimmerman did act (legally) too aggressively in pursuing Martin, he would be guilty of voluntary manslaughter. Murder requires either a desire to cause death, or a death that happens during a commission, and as a result of, a felony.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8329 posts, RR: 9
Reply 151, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2736 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 142):
Nothing, not an little ounce of significance.

It has a ton of significance for Martin and his family.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 146):

Ok, so once Zimmerman walks....

Every black guy with a gun in a "neighborhood watch program" will know his face. That should be sufficient to keep the killer in hiding for the rest of his life.