Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[Lamuella]

Your statement above is absolute. You evidently are 100% certain that GZ should be prosecuted. We have not yet seen perhaps the majority of the most important evidence, yet still you are sure that he and anyone in a similar circumstance should be prosecuted.

Are you aware that "prosecuted" and "convicted" are not the same thing?

 

[LTC8K6]

And as crimresearch has stated over and over, you can not shoot someone just because they punch you.

So now that all the overly simple statements have been made again...

While the other poster may have simplified it to "just a punch", I clearly did not.

Few people in this thread, including me, believe this was "just a punch".

That's been true from day one, and certainly true for me throughout this thread and others.

Why would I suddenly start treating it that way?

 

[Dan O.]

There is no duty to retreat from such an attack.

I can't punch you simply because I'm afraid of you because you are following me.

George lost his right to stand his ground by being the initial aggressor. If he had stayed in his truck he would have had a case but he choose to chase down Trayvon. I'm not buying George's claim that Trayvom attacked him from behind. His injuries simply do not support such a scenario. It's much more likely that George was facing Trayvon. Trayvon however could have turned and tried to run. If George had grabbed Trayvon to keep him from getting away, Trayvon would then have every right to deck George.

 

[crimresearch]

Deadly force? An unarmed teenager who may have punched GZ because GZ was following TM and TM was rightly frightened of the guy? I'll say it, GZ had no right to shoot, he could have easily fled.

Of course you'll say it.

Some of us give more credence to the laws of physics than you do, though.

 

[Multivac]

This death of a Scottish man, drunk and lost who was banging on a door looking for assistance shocked the UK

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scot-is-shot-dead-when-mistaken-for-prowler-1405505.html

as it seems such an excessive reaction by the householder to shoot first and ask questions later.

The amazing part to me is that article said it is unlikely that the home owner, who shot an unarmed man through a door, will be charged with anything.

Wtf? On what planet is this a sensible decision?

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Your statement above is absolute. You evidently are 100% certain that GZ should be prosecuted. We have not yet seen perhaps the majority of the most important evidence, yet still you are sure that he and anyone in a similar circumstance should be prosecuted.

Are you aware that "prosecuted" and "convicted" are not the same thing?

Why don't you go ahead and highlight what you think was in the post you quoted that indicates any confusion on that subject.

 

[Rare Truth]

Originally Posted by LTC8K6
There is no duty to retreat from such an attack.

I can't punch you simply because I'm afraid of you because you are following me.

If you are in fear someone may intend violence upon you, you can.

"Under Florida Law (784.011) assault is defined by word or act to do violence, coupled by an apparent ability to do so and committing some threatening act which present an intent to do violence. In other words, the aggressor in an assault situation need not physically strike another person to be guilty of assault."

784.011 - Assault. - 2011 Florida Statutes - The Florida Senate

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

George lost his right to stand his ground by being the initial aggressor. If he had stayed in his truck he would have had a case but he choose to chase down Trayvon. I'm not buying George's claim that Trayvom attacked him from behind. His injuries simply do not support such a scenario.

Please explain what "approach from behind" versus "approach from the front" injuries look like after a fist fight. I'd be very curious to know.

 

[Dan O.]

The amazing part to me is that article said it is unlikely that the home owner, who shot an unarmed man through a door, will be charged with anything.

Wtf? On what planet is this a sensible decision?

That case is a little over 20 ears old. But still the same US of A where the right to have guns and shoot foreigners and strangers trumps the right to life.

 

[Rare Truth]

Very soon we'll be privy to six phone calls made in Jail, and from what's being said, it doesn't look good for the Tugboat family.

SANFORD, Fla. - Six phone calls are among the evidence expected to be released Monday in the case against George Zimmerman.


Prosecutors say the conversations, which were made between Zimmermand and his wife, show the couple tried to hide a six-figure defense fund from the court.

The conversations led to the state moving to revoke Zimmerman's bond. They also prompted a perjury charge against Zimmerman's wife, Shellie, after she testified at a bond hearing that the pair had no significant funds for a defense.

According to investigators, the Zimmermans talked about moving tens of thousands of dollars that had been donated to a personal website.

Zimmerman's attorney, Mark O'Mara, says the perjury charge is frustrating because it prohibits Shellie Zimmerman from taking the stand at her husband's bond hearing.

​

Read more: http://www.wesh.com/news/central-fl.../15138856/-/h5ky5x/-/index.html#ixzz1y9WNCumh
​

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Really Dan ? You have been in this thread long enough to do better ...

George lost his right to stand his ground by being the initial aggressor.If he had stayed in his truck he would have had a case but he choose to chase down Trayvon. I'm not buying George's claim that Trayvom attacked him from behind.

The 'claim' we have is this:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...secutor-angela-corey-source-police-department

Zimmerman later told investigators he could not find Trayvon, so he turned and was walking back toward his SUV. A short time later, Trayvon approached him from the rear, and the two exchanged words, he told authorities.

Trayvon threw the first punch, he told police. It knocked Zimmerman to the ground, and the teenager then got on top of Zimmerman and began beating his head against a sidewalk, police have said in recounting Zimmerman's version of events.

His injuries simply do not support such a scenario. It's much more likely that George was facing Trayvon.

Well then, it's good that no one except you made such a claim, right ?

Trayvon however could have turned and tried to run. If George had grabbed Trayvon to keep him from getting away, Trayvon would then have every right to deck George.

Great. Do you have any evidence GZ grabbed TM ? No ? That's sort of the problem in a nutshell, eh ?

 

[Rare Truth]

Little trivia about the Sanford PD:

"Sanford police have seen a revolving door in the chief's office — Myers is the city's fifth chief in less than two years."

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com...Martin-case?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|GPG-News

 

[Rare Truth]

Jeff Weiner ‏@JeffWeinerOS Shelllie, talking to #GeorgeZimmerman apparently about transfers: “I’ve already done it twice today, into each.” Mentions fees.

 

[Rare Truth]

Frances Robles ‏@RoblesHerald
In calls from jail, #Zimmerman and his wife talked about the outpouring of $ and support,. They were going to be able to live "a great life"

 

[Rare Truth]

Here they are guys 'n gals:

http://soundcloud.com/producermatthew/sets/george-zimmerman-jail-house-1

Have at it!

 

[Lamuella]

Why don't you go ahead and highlight what you think was in the post you quoted that indicates any confusion on that subject.

it's the part where you said "We have not yet seen perhaps the majority of the most important evidence, yet still you are sure that he and anyone in a similar circumstance should be prosecuted."

also the point earlier where someone said "I should hope that anyone else (whatever ethinicity) would be prosecuted if the circumstances were the same as GZ was in." and you said "Me too. Especially if the story GZ says is true and TM attacked him, beat him, and was reaching for his gun. In that case we need to make sure no one regardless of ethnicity can defend themselves, and that all do the proper thing, and let the other person kill them."

Prosecuting someone is bringing them to trial. Prosecuting someone is deciding that there is enough evidence to suggest there is a case to answer in a court of law. GZ's statement that Martin beat him and was reaching for his gun is his defense. He will use this during his trial to try and establish that he is not guilty. His statement is not a reason for not bringing him to trial. There is still a case to answer even if the answer is "not guilty".

People saying that they would hope anyone in Zimmerman's circumstances would be prosecuted are not saying that anyone in Zimmerman's circumstances is guilty. What they are saying is that in a case with these circumstances there needs to be a trial.

You say that "We have not yet seen perhaps the majority of the most important evidence". Of course we haven't. We're not part of the case, and the trial hasn't begun yet. It could well be that Zimmerman is not guilty. It could well be that Zimmerman is guilty. All we do know is that the circumstances of Trayvon Martin's shooting were conducive with the possibility of a crime being committed. The only circumstance where we should be saying "Zimmerman should not be prosecuted" is if there is clearly no case to answer. I do not consider that to be the case.

 

[Dan O.]

Really Dan ? You have been in this thread long enough to do better ...



The 'claim' we have is this:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...secutor-angela-corey-source-police-department

Why do you accept that claim over all others?

Do you have any evidence GZ grabbed TM ? No ? That's sort of the problem in a nutshell, eh ?

Remember the witness that we heard intviewed by the prosecutor who was on the phone with Trayvom up to the start of the altercation? There is also still a possibility of confirmation from the forensics.


Do you have any evidence that he didn't?

The problem that I see s that there is a confession to the commission of the homicide. George can be found not guilty if he can successfully claim self defense. But unfortunately for George, he has little If any evidence to support his claim.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

it's the part where you said "We have not yet seen perhaps the majority of the most important evidence, yet still you are sure that he and anyone in a similar circumstance should be prosecuted."

You still haven't quoted anything that remotely backs up your suggestion that I'm confused about the difference between being prosecuted and convicted . We the public don't have all of the information that the prosecution has, based on the limited info we have seen I can't say I'm sure that he should (or shouldn't) be prosecuted. Now if this were a more straightforward case without gray areas, say he walked into a post office and started shooting people, than I'd be comfortable saying he should be prosecuted without having seen all the evidence.

 

[Lamuella]

I would point out that you're doing some selective quoting there and missing out the second part of what I quoted, but I'm not going to bother. You'd reply with something obtuse and snarky and roll your eyes again and neither of us would get any smarter as a result.

I see ample reason to bring this to trial, and apparently so do the police, but I really can't be bothered discussing it on this forum any more.

 

[Nessie]

I think that there should be pretty much an automatic prosecution where a claim of self defence results in a death. To avoid prosecution there should be overwhelming evidence that deadly force was the only option.