Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[Dancing David]

I didn't realize disagreeing with you was 'attitude'.

I didn't realize it was normal to bold strawmen in a discussion and make a response to things that another poster never said, perhaps you aren't as strident in your posts as you see,. take it down a notch.

You did not disagree with me, you engaged in a non sequiter , which could have been clarified by asking what I did mean.




As stated at least three other times in this ongoing saga, there is only one reason I know of that I would bring up the neighborhood patrol issue, if I was the prosecution. And it has only to do with meeting the rash/reckless part of murder 2 ( IANAL nor is that a legal statement)

And it has nothing to do with your response to my post:
-if GZ was knowledgeable of NW guidelines
-if those guidelines say that a person should not follow or interact with a suspected person
-if those guidelines say that the person should only make a phone call

then:

-if GZ knowingly
--left the car
--folowed TM
--did more than make a phone call

that would establish that GZ did not do as a reasonable/prudent person would do.

No where in this thread have a I stated otherwise about the NW material and why i believe it is being presented. There is no grounds for any discussion of the legality of the NW material other wise. It is not a legal document, it is not more than a possible guideline of reasonable behavior in response to suspicious behavior. As stated Crimesearch it has no actual legal ramifications for any standard of care.

So from my POV is does not matter if GZ was on patrol or not, although that might help sway a jury. All that matters is this

IF
[(a reasonable person) KNOWING ( NW guidelines)] AND (in presence of suspicious activity)
KNOWINGLY (takes actions contrary to NW guidelines)
THEN





Now I grant you that my statements on this were likely at least six weeks ago and that discussion where I was corrected by Crimesearch is long past. Given the amount of urine under the thread in that time, I do understand you may not recall that.


(that person might be stated to be reckless/unreasonable/imprudent)

 

[Cylinder]

George wrongfully assumed Martin was on drugs.

Just as an example, I can't make that assumption because I haven't seen Martin's toxicology report. To date, all we have is the test for THC/THC-COOH that seems to have been done by the ME for some reason. They may be doing a forensic study.

 

[Cylinder]

And it has only to do with meeting the rash/reckless part...

Just FYI, second degree murder requires depraved mind - defined as ill will, spite or evil intent.

Florida 782.04(2)

The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

Culpable negligence is an element of manslaughter.

Florida 782.07(1)

The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

Since Zimmerman is charged with both (through the lesser-included offense) it's probably useful to quote them here.

 

[tsig]

lol, I like the way you did that . That could apply to the zombie face eater. We know he is dead. We know he was unarmed. We know the police officer purposely shot him causing his death.

<snip>
.

Martin was trying to eat Z's face?

 

[This is The End]

Only if it fits their political narrarative. Remember - Martin is justified beating someone on his mere suspicion.

Aside from Z's story there is ZERO solid evidence of who attacked who first.

A great number of your posts are based on the fact that you are convinced that M attacked Z first.

Why is that?

 

[This is The End]

No, he should get a free pass because he was attacked and beaten and shot TM in self-defense.

I'm going to ask you the same question.

Aside from Z's story, there is ZERO solid evidence of who attacked who first.

A great number of your posts are based on the fact that you are convinced that M attacked Z first.

Why is that?

 

[tsig]

I hilited the stuff TM could not possibly know.

Now I will add
George angrily demanded "WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE?"
after Trayvon angrily barked "WHY ARE YOU FOLLOWING ME"

I see that fiction writing course is paying off.

Next time bring an argument instead of adjectives.

 

[Unabogie]

Just as an example, I can't make that assumption because I haven't seen Martin's toxicology report. To date, all we have is the test for THC/THC-COOH that seems to have been done by the ME for some reason. They may be doing a forensic study.

So in the absence of any evidence whatsoever, you're holding out for some mythical tox report that will be different from the one they already released which showed that Trayvon had a tiny amount of THC in his system, an amount which precluded him being high that night.

And following this kind of logic, we also can't say that George wrongfully assumed him to be a criminal either, because the documents also don't report that Trayvon was on a crime spree of rape, murder, and mayhem.

Nifty trick.

 

[tsig]

I hilited the stuff TM could not possibly know.

Now I will add
George angrily demanded "WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE?"
after Trayvon angrily barked "WHY ARE YOU FOLLOWING ME"

Or if he had just stayed in the truck. Or if TM hadn't been suspended from school. Or.....



So now the story is he yelled it while running ?



Randi called, he has some money if you explain how you knew those things...



I really don't understand how you claim to know all that.

Same way you know about the angry barking.

 

[Unabogie]

Same way you know about the angry barking.

Well, let's be fair. DeeDee says George barked but Trayvon "asked". That can't be true, since it works to George's disadvantage, so we must adopt the evidence in the light most favorable to the accused murderer and child rapist.

Voila, Trayvon BARKED too!

 

[Moss]

Well, let's be fair. DeeDee says George barked but Trayvon "asked". That can't be true, since it works to George's disadvantage, so we must adopt the evidence in the light most favorable to the accused murderer and child rapist.

Voila, Trayvon BARKED too!

Important part highlighted.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Same way you know about the angry barking.

I think that was the entire point, he was being sarcastic .

 

[TheL8Elvis]

... after Zimmerman was chasing him.

At least according to the narrative you're citing.

Or do you only want to use the parts of DeeDee's testimony that suit your needs and discard the rest?

I don't recall DeeDee using the word chase any more than you recall her using the word confront.

Here is the only part I recall about chasing:

BDLR: On the phone. Did Trayvon ever expand on that? Did he ever say something else about that , now he’s out like that…like, uh…whether the guy had gotten out of the car? Did he ever describe, “Yeah, the guy, now he’s out of the car, he’s chasing me.” I know you said the guy, he said the guy was following him. But did he ever say the guy got out of the car?

Dee Dee: You want that too?

I left the part about following in, so I don't think it's accurate to accuse me of cherrypicking.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I see that fiction writing course is paying off.

Next time bring an argument instead of adjectives.

As soon as you make an argument, I'll address it. Until then, all I have seen from you is drive by snark.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

..accused murderer and child rapist.

Yep, now he's a "child rapist". Do you mean he raped a child, or that he was a rapist as a child? Maybe both? BTW earlier you were saying that probably meant he was sexually abused himself. If you really believe that, it means you must feel sympathy for him, right . Poor guy probably never had a chance.

I have a feeling this thread is heading towards getting shut down soon. When there's nothing new things seem to get bogged down. I think we need a pause button until the next new development.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Well, let's be fair. DeeDee says George barked but Trayvon "asked". That can't be true, since it works to George's disadvantage, so we must adopt the evidence in the light most favorable to the accused murderer and child rapist.

Voila, Trayvon BARKED too!

BDLR: …and then you hear Trayvon saying something…
Dee Dee: Yeah.
BDLR: And what do you hear Trayvon saying?
Dee Dee: “Why you followin’ me for?”
BDLR: “Why you following me for?”
Dee Dee: Yeah.
BDLR: And then what happened?
Dee Dee: I hear this, ya know, man… it wa’ like a ol’ man…
BDLR: OK.
Dee Dee: say, ‘What you doing aroun’ here?’

...

Dee Dee: It just shut off.
BDLR: OK, did you hear any kind of screamings like ‘Help me’ or anything like that?
Dee Dee: No.

...
BDLR: OK, so the last thing you heard was some kind of noise, like something hitting somebody?
Dee Dee: Yeah.
BDLR: OK, and uh…when you heard that noise…something hitting somebody…you didn’t…did you hear the man say anything, or did you hear Trayvon say anything?
Dee Dee: I can hear a little bit…

Wait, what ? She just said it shut off and she didn't hear anything ! Now she can hear a little 'get off' ?


BDLR: You thought it was a man.
Dee Dee: It is a man, ’cause it had a deep voice.
BDLR: OK. And could you tell the man whether his voice was real loud… screaming at Trayvon, or was it just a normal conversation like you and I are having? When you said Trayvon said, ‘What are you following me’..or something, whatever…and the guy replied something, ‘What are you doing here?’ Was it a normal conversation, or could you tell the man was like loud?
Dee Dee: Kinda angry.
BDLR: Angry?
Dee Dee: Yeah.
BDLR: Why do you say kind of angry?
Dee Dee: ‘Cause he said it like so deep…


Wow ... talk about interpreting things in the most favorable light ?

 

[This is The End]

Wow ... talk about interpreting things in the most favorable light ?

Even if you prove the girlfriend is a liar, that doesn't mean that Z is magically innocent.

 

[BenBurch]

BTW, just a meta-discussion here; This is why citizen watchers should never be alone.

 

[johnny karate]

I don't recall DeeDee using the word chase any more than you recall her using the word confront.

Here is the only part I recall about chasing:

BDLR: On the phone. Did Trayvon ever expand on that? Did he ever say something else about that , now he’s out like that…like, uh…whether the guy had gotten out of the car? Did he ever describe, “Yeah, the guy, now he’s out of the car, he’s chasing me.” I know you said the guy, he said the guy was following him. But did he ever say the guy got out of the car?

Dee Dee: You want that too?

I left the part about following in, so I don't think it's accurate to accuse me of cherrypicking.

She quite clearly describes chasing just prior to the part where she says Martin asked Zimmerman why he was following him. Trayvon is running away and out of breath. Zimmerman is following and getting closer.

I don't know how much of that is true, or if any of it is. But that's beside the point.

If you are going to cite DeeDee's testimony you either accept it in its totality, or don't cite it at all.

You and Cylinder seem to want to cherrypick the parts you like, and dismiss the rest.

That doesn't come across as particularly honest.

 

[Unabogie]

Yep, now he's a "child rapist". Do you mean he raped a child, or that he was a rapist as a child? Maybe both? BTW earlier you were saying that probably meant he was sexually abused himself. If you really believe that, it means you must feel sympathy for him, right . Poor guy probably never had a chance.

I have a feeling this thread is heading towards getting shut down soon. When there's nothing new things seem to get bogged down. I think we need a pause button until the next new development.

I mean, he's accused of raping a minor, from the time he was a child until he was a legal adult.

I would feel sympathy for him, but his molesting his cousin was probably just god's plan.