Merged Continuation Part 2: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[Mumbles]

Meh., the idea that it was Obama's statements inflamed people, rather than those of Chief Lee, is absurd.

 

[gabeygoat]

Kind of missing the point.

Disagreeing isn't not understanding.

thank you

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

The CNN story quotes the shooter as saying that this was the 3rd time he was in an argument with Zim. Zim waved a gun at him, so he quickly took out his gun and shot Zim.

So just like in the Trayvon Martin case, Zimmerman was attacked.

 

[lionking]

He was simply following a suspicious vehicle, what is so wrong with that?

Yeah, just as he followed a "suspicious" kid. That worked out well.

 

[johnny karate]

Plenty of other people, including the jury, disagree.

Well, maybe some of the jury.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/25/justice/zimmerman-juror-b29-interview/

No one denies Zimmerman was acquitted, but you might just want to leave it at that instead of presuming to tell us what the jury believed or felt.

 

[theprestige]

That said, I would not be surprised at all if someone killed Zimmerman in self defense. I'm curious, would anyone else be?

I would be. To date, we have not seen a single substantive claim that Zimmerman has ever put someone in such fear of their life that they would be justified in killing him in self defense.

The only such claim that has been truly tested, the Martin shooting, resulted in the conclusion that it was Zimmerman who was threatened and Zimmerman who was justified in defending himself.

Other claims against Zimmerman have either not risen to the level of justifying killing in self defense, or have been withdrawn without being tested, or both.

So I would be moderately surprised if the outcome you describe were to occur.

However, given the recurrence of people claiming a violent beef with Zimmerman, I would be less surprised if someone were to kill him and claim self defense.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I would be. To date, we have not seen a single substantive claim that Zimmerman has ever put someone in such fear of their life that they would be justified in killing him in self defense.

The only such claim that has been truly tested, the Martin shooting, resulted in the conclusion that it was Zimmerman who was threatened and Zimmerman who was justified in defending himself.

Other claims against Zimmerman have either not risen to the level of justifying killing in self defense, or have been withdrawn without being tested, or both.

That is why you never let someone who threatens you get away, you track them down no matter what! You don't just drive home, you get out of the car and confront them, it is the american way!

 

[RandFan]

I would be. To date, we have not seen a single substantive claim that Zimmerman has ever put someone in such fear of their life that they would be justified in killing him in self defense.

The only such claim that has been truly tested, the Martin shooting, resulted in the conclusion that it was Zimmerman who was threatened and Zimmerman who was justified in defending himself.

Other claims against Zimmerman have either not risen to the level of justifying killing in self defense, or have been withdrawn without being tested, or both.

So I would be moderately surprised if the outcome you describe were to occur.

However, given the recurrence of people claiming a violent beef with Zimmerman, I would be less surprised if someone were to kill him and claim self defense.

Thanks.

Why do you suppose loved ones would have had such a beef with Zimmerman that they would call the police? I know you know better than to think you would allege a conspiracy, right? If it were simply strangers I would think you might have a point worth considering.

George Zimmerman Won't Be Charged in Second domestic abuse case

Do you honestly believe that the dropped charges had no basis in fact? Are you suggesting that domestic abuse cases where the charges are dropped are always due to lying on the part of the alleged victim?

What do you think is going on?

 

[RandFan]

BTW:

I think the best reason to hold Zimmerman in contempt is that he has shown little if any care whatsoever to Martin or his family. He says it was god's will so there is no need to care.

George Zimmerman Says Killing Trayvon Martin Was God's plan

In a video released on Monday by the law firm Ayo and Iken, which represents Zimmerman, the 31-year-old said he has a clear conscience and does not believe things could have turned out differently that day in Sanford, Florida.

“I believe God has his plans, and for me to second-guess them would be hypocritical, almost blasphemous,” he said in the video.

Killing Martin was "god's" plan. Oh well, he rescued some people so why should we think Zimmerman indifferent to the suffering of Martin's family?

 

[johnny karate]

The only such claim that has been truly tested, the Martin shooting, resulted in the conclusion that it was Zimmerman who was threatened and Zimmerman who was justified in defending himself.

Incorrect.

The only conclusion reached was that the prosecution failed to present suffiicent evidence to prove Zimmerman committed murder.

That you reached a conclusion about what happened does not render it factual.

However, given the recurrence of people claiming a violent beef with Zimmerman, I would be less surprised if someone were to kill him and claim self defense.

"Violent beef". Interesting choice of words as it makes it seem like it's somehow a two-way street, when in fact in every claim, it's Zimmerman who is the aggressor. And mostly against women. But I guess Zimmerman is just the kind of guy who gets into "violent beefs" with women.

 

[Upchurch]

The only such claim that has been truly tested, the Martin shooting, resulted in the conclusion that it was Zimmerman who was threatened and Zimmerman who was justified in defending himself.

Incorrect.

The only conclusion reached was that the prosecution failed to present suffiicent evidence to prove Zimmerman committed murder.

I've been waiting for people on this board to support their claims that Martin assaulted Zimmerman first (or even for claims of the reverse). Evidence has never materialized.

In their zeal, people tend to forget that.

 

[Rare Truth]

I've been waiting for people on this board to support their claims that Martin assaulted Zimmerman first (or even for claims of the reverse). Evidence has never materialized.

In their zeal, people tend to forget that.

True. The only witness left alive to tell the story was Zimmerman.

 

[theprestige]

I've been waiting for people on this board to support their claims that Martin assaulted Zimmerman first (or even for claims of the reverse). Evidence has never materialized.

In their zeal, people tend to forget that.

If you say so. I think my inference is reasonable enough.














I also think RandFan's inference is also reasonable, though I don't give it nearly the weighting he appears to.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

I've been waiting for people on this board to support their claims that Martin assaulted Zimmerman first (or even for claims of the reverse). Evidence has never materialized.

In their zeal, people tend to forget that.

Since we don't have a video of the physical altercation beginning, we can never know to a complete certainty who attacked who first.

Nonetheless, there have been some very compelling data points which indicate it was Trayvon who attacked Zimmerman not only first, but exclusively:

1.) Who had injuries and who did not.

2.) Zimmerman's account which he offered immediately, which police found credible, which a jury found credible, which two voice stress analysis tests detected no deception during, and which fit well with the totality of physical and witness testimony. An account he was prepared to go back to the scene the following morning and relate in detail, on video, with multiple detectives accompanying him (a highly unusual thing to do, and not the expected actions of someone engaging in deception they'd quickly come up with on the fly and would have no reason to think would hold up under that kind of scrutiny.)

3.) Rachel Jeantel telling Huffington Post after the verdict that she thought Trayvon "swung first" and that she did not believe Zimmerman had his gun out. She also told Piers Morgan on CNN around that same time that what had happened to Zimmerman was "rear whoopin'" which he received because he was "actin' like police, or security" which seems to indicate what I always suspected, which is that Trayvon got irritated, not scared, and attacked Zimmerman for keeping an eye on him, not out of self-defense.

4.) The screams all sounded like they came from one person, and that that person was involved in a completely lopsided, unidirectional assault rather than a back and forth, give and take fight.

5.) Witness 11 and other witnesses at the top of the "T" intersection area said they heard a brief exchange between two people, one of whom sounded meek and the other sounding angry and confrontational and that this rapidly transitioned into a physical altercation which then rapidly moved southward down the path, terminating at the area the screaming and gunshot were about to come from. This all fits Zimmerman's account of events perfectly as well as a narrative of a one sided assault/chase.

6.) Zimmerman had just summoned the police to the area and had even expressed impatience when he said "just get an officer over here" at the point where Trayvon circled his truck. So you've got someone who knows law enforcement are coming and would therefore have a very strong incentive to avoid doing any illegal actions like an assault.

Is any of this definitive? No. Is it wordy and rambling? Yep.

Even so, I think there are some compelling reasons to lean toward thinking Trayvon attacked first.

 

[Upchurch]

Since we don't have a video of the physical altercation beginning, we can never know to a complete certainty who attacked who first.

I said 'assault', not 'attacked'. Grabbing someone counts as assault and could justify self-defence.

 

[This is The End]

Plenty of other people, including the jury, disagree.

You aren't very familiar with that case are you? Two of the six jury members said they made a horrible decision.

The facts are quite clear that Trayvon was justified in defending himself under Florida law. Those facts are also undisputed because they come from Zimmerman himself.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Edited by Agatha: 

Excised portion more relevant to other thread

You aren't very familiar with that case are you? Two of the six jury members said they made a horrible decision.
The facts are quite clear that Trayvon was justified in defending himself under Florida law. Those facts are also undisputed because they come from Zimmerman himself.

One of those two was a stone cold idiot who was all over the place in terms of what she seemed to think about the case. She was talking on one hand about how the case never should have been brought. Then she talks about him getting away with murder... when she voted not guilty on all charges...

In Lisa Bloom's book, it's made quite clear that Maddy had no earthly idea what was going on in that courtroom. There was a linguistic barrier and an IQ barrier for her in that environment. She was spacing off and bored most of the time. Any opinions she did form, as scattershot as they were, seem to have been based entirely on emotions, ignorance, racial sympathies, and desire to get the target off her back after the trial concluded and she found out just how nuts people were and how displeased they were with her verdict.

I'm not too familiar with the other juror you mention. I'll just say that you shouldn't discount the impact of the craziness surrounding this trial to make people second guess themselves after the fact. Or want people to think they have done so, to get the heat off them.

The fact remains they came to a unanimous decision verdict which let Zimmerman off the hook entirely. They had a lesser charge of manslaughter they could've hit him with, and they didn't. Maddy talked a good game about how she was going to be the one to hang the jury, but she didn't.

Most lawyers and legal experts who weighed in through the media agreed with the verdict. Even many who clearly emotionally wanted another outcome begrudgingly conceded it was the only legally valid verdict.

And as for your contention that Florida law clearly established Trayvon's right to mercilessly beat a screaming man to death because he'd reached into his pocket after keeping an eye on him for a brief time, well... suffice to say that I haven't seen a lot of credible sources agreeing with you on that.

Andrew Branca of Legal Insurrection has a crazy level of awareness about self-defense law, and he certainly didn't agree with that interpretation. I didn't see any prominent lawyers agree with that interpretation, or really say anything approaching it beyond a throwaway "well maybe Trayvon had a right to defend himself" here and there. It was not something pushed with much fervor or given much consideration, from what I saw.

I don't think the prosecutors even pushed that angle much during the case.

 

[12AX7]

OK.

Apparently there's been some new developments and now we have a witness that actually witnessed the confrontation begin and actually saw Martin attack Zimmerman first!

So, bold posters, who is this witness?

 

[Skeptic Tank]

OK.

Apparently there's been some new developments and now we have a witness that actually witnessed the confrontation begin and actually saw Martin attack Zimmerman first!

So, bold posters, who is this witness?

Well George Zimmerman himself saw Trayvon attack him first.

Then later Rachel Jeantel said she agreed that Trayvon "swung first."

Then you had John Good see a completely dominant Trayvon in a completely one sided assault, on top of Zimmerman as Zimmerman screamed in terror for help.

You've got the fact that Zimmerman ends the call with the dispatcher completely oblivious as to Trayvon's location, and having expressed fear of direct interaction with Trayvon at least twice during said call.

You've got the ear witnesses who back up Zimmerman on his claim that he was still at the "T" junction area when confronted and attacked by Trayvon. They heard sounds consistent with that starting there and moving south exactly as they'd need to do to match Zimmerman's account.

You've got the fact that he passed two voice stress tests with this account showing no signs of deception (though I don't know how great those are as compared to traditional lie detector tests, but it seems they can at least tell us that he had no obvious outward bodily signs of stress while relating his account on these two occasions which says more than nothing, I'd say)

And of course he also passed the test of a police detective or two who are trained to sniff out lies of exactly this sort hearing his story and ultimately believing he was being truthful and willing to testify in court to that.

You've got the fact that a jury apparently found his version of events credible enough to render a verdict fully exonerating him despite having a lesser charge to hit him with if they'd wanted. This is perhaps doubly impressive due to the intense pressure surrounding this case.

You may want to cling to some tiny hope or belief that Zimmerman tried to grab Trayvon's arm and tell him to stay put, or swung and missed at him, or tried to hold him at gunpoint or something... but keep in mind that Jeantel said she didn't believe Zimmerman had his gun out. She also described what Trayvon had done to Zimmerman as "whoopazz" which Zimmerman had earned because he was "someone actin' like they police, or security."

Sounds like she probably understood Trayvon had done a retributive beatdown inspired by irritation, rather than a desperate self-defense fight for his life.

But if what you're asking is "did anyone other than Zimmerman and Trayvon himself see Trayvon throw the first punch?" then sure, the answer to that is no.

If you want to ignore all these things pointing in the direction of Trayvon attacking first, unprovoked (by any civilized standard of provocation) then that's your right to do so.

 

[12AX7]

snipped

Who is the witness (other than Z's claim) that actually witnessed the confrontation begin and actually saw Martin attack Zimmerman first?

Name the individual.

This isn't hard.