George Zimmerman shot

quadraginta said:
I thought we had all been shown why "following" is not "following".

It's just "following" ...

... or something.
Click to expand...

Well if the story is actually true (and there should be witnesses I'd assume), Apperson was "following" by driving right up behind and flashing his lights. Sounds a little more aggressive than just following, no?
 
This is The End said:
Wow. A comparison to the case that we are not allowed to discuss outside of its thread would be very appropriate here. But I have a feeling it is not allowed.
Click to expand...

Amazing isn't it?

12AX7 said:
Yeah, you definitely don't want to follow someone when they attempt to flee from you. Who knows what can happen?

:rolleyes:

I mean, suppose for a moment Zimmerman made a u-turn to flee in an attempt to avoid the confrontation, Apperson followed and they somehow got off to the side of the road, out of sight of any witnesses, and engaged in a fist fight. Zimmerman punches Apperson (the initial aggressor here) suddenly Apprerson is "in fear for his life" and then shoots Zimmerman.

He'd walk!

Right?
Click to expand...

Nothing to see here.
 
12AX7 said:
Amazing isn't it?



Nothing to see here.
Click to expand...

I am sure that had GZ dragged Apperson from his car and started to bash his head against the pavement, then the police would have considered the shooting self defence, as would most rational people. Sadly for you, that didn't happen as much as you would have loved for it to have.
 
This is The End said:
Wow. A comparison to the case that we are not allowed to discuss outside of its thread would be very appropriate here. But I have a feeling it is not allowed.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't you be allowed to make such a comparison? The other thread is off moderation, so there shouldn't be any issue with circumvention.
 
sunmaster14 said:
Why wouldn't you be allowed to make such a comparison? The other thread is off moderation, so there shouldn't be any issue with circumvention.
Click to expand...


What's odd is that I can't even answer that because it would be seen as discussing forum management issues outside of FMF.
 
PhantomWolf said:
I disagree, consider if GZ's gun was located in his glove box. Currently we don't yet know where it was, but I am suspecting that for the police to declare that the shooting was unprovoked, that it was somewhere that wasn't immediately accessible.
Click to expand...


That would only be a reasonable suspicion if there was not enough time for Zimmerman to put the weapon back. It doesn't seem like the glove box, using your example, is a place so inaccessible that he couldn't return a weapon to it between the time the shooting occurred and the time the police arrived and took a look around.

So if it was in the glove box, and GZ was killed, then the claim that he was waving a gun would be rather easily falsified, simply because the odds of a person being lethally wounded, then putting the gun they were "waving about" into the glove box is tending towards nil.
Click to expand...


But only if he was killed. Since he lived, it's not impossible that he brandished the gun and returned it to its storage location.

That said... Zimmerman probably isn't the sort of person who would not shoot back in a situation like this. From what I've read about the incident, I'm actually inclined to tentatively conclude that Apperson is entirely in the wrong here.
 
Last edited:
casebro said:
IIRC, from amny pages back, didn't GZ make a U-turn to avoid confrontation, but Apperson followed? Is that SYG? Sounds like Apperson was the belligerent, for reasons only the voices in his head know?
Click to expand...

12AX7 said:
Yeah, you definitely don't want to follow someone when they attempt to flee from you. Who knows what can happen?

:rolleyes:

I mean, suppose for a moment Zimmerman made a u-turn to flee in an attempt to avoid the confrontation, Apperson followed and they somehow got off to the side of the road, out of sight of any witnesses, and engaged in a fist fight. Zimmerman punches Apperson (the initial aggressor here) suddenly Apprerson is "in fear for his life" and then shoots Zimmerman.

He'd walk!

Right?
Click to expand...


That's the fun part of all this.

Apperson seems to have done what GZ did to TM; and I'm sure GZ feels victimized.
 
And GZ's u-turn might mean the GZ is finally avoiding confrontation.
 
Last edited:
casebro said:
And GZ's u-turn might mean the GZ is finally avoiding confrontation.
Click to expand...

Or maybe Zimmerman was planning to lie in wait for Apperson and attack him.

And maybe Apperson just went in the same direction as Zimmerman to keep an eye on him or find an address.
 
Cl1mh4224rd said:
That would only be a reasonable suspicion if there was not enough time for Zimmerman to put the weapon back. It doesn't seem like the glove box, using your example, is a place so inaccessible that he couldn't return a weapon to it between the time the shooting occurred and the time the police arrived and took a look around.




But only if he was killed. Since he lived, it's not impossible that he brandished the gun and returned it to its storage location.

That said... Zimmerman probably isn't the sort of person who would not shoot back in a situation like this. From what I've read about the incident, I'm actually inclined to tentatively conclude that Apperson is entirely in the wrong here.
Click to expand...


I think Apperson has a mighty tough hill to climb with this case.

Shooting a gun out of your moving vehicle into another in an attempt to kill someone can only be justified under very narrow parameters (I'm not a lawyer). What an incredibly foolish and dangerous thing to do. You'd better have a damn good reason.

Apperson fired the first and only shot. The only way I see this being justified is if George was, at that moment, pointing a gun at Apperson. This will probably be impossible to prove. Apperson had time to pull out his gun, take aim and fire.

If someone pointed a gun at me while driving down the road, my reaction would probably be to do some wild maneuver with my vehicle to escape. Doing a u-turn over the center divide, slamming on the brakes, or flooring the accelerator. Ducking down.

Even if I had a gun in my lap, I could only imagine using it if I had no means of escape, say trapped between vehicles at a red light. Even then, to be the first person to fire their weapon would be extremely difficult to explain without solid evidence backing my actions.

But, speculation of my own actions aside, if someone takes a shot at you from their car and you did not fire first, you are probably not going to proven to be the guilty party, even if you are George Zimmerman. I can't envision a scenario in which Apperson's actions are justified, much less provable in court, sans video evidence.
 
johnny karate said:
Charges upgraded to attempted murder.
Click to expand...

Who could have possibly seen that coming?

sunmaster14 said:
I'm going by the facts which have been reported. To wit, a bullet hole centered around head height in the passenger window of GZ's car, and was close enough to his face to cause injuries from flying glass, and Apperson's statement to an officer afterwards that he hoped he "got him this time." Seems like the police are undercharging Apperson for now, but perhaps "intent" is very hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt in such a brief encounter like this.
Click to expand...

Oh.
 
acementhead said:
Looks as though the most famous G Zimmerman hater is going to try the insanity defence in his prosecution for attempted murder.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-matthew-apperson-urinates-20150715-story.html

Strange that none of the resident GZ haters posted this update on proceedings? No I guess not.
Click to expand...


Did you link to the right article? The one you cited doesn't seem to mention anything about an "insanity defense".

His history of aberrant behavior is not particularly any sort of revelation at this point. Yet another example is not exactly a major news item.

Maybe in Orlando.
 
acementhead said:
Looks as though the most famous G Zimmerman hater is going to try the insanity defence in his prosecution for attempted murder.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-matthew-apperson-urinates-20150715-story.html

Strange that none of the resident GZ haters posted this update on proceedings? No I guess not.
Click to expand...
Well that sure proves something. I was not even aware of the story. It's not running on CNN as I can see and it's a bit early for me to check Breitbart and Drudge but I'll check them now.
 
quadraginta said:
Did you link to the right article? The one you cited doesn't seem to mention anything about an "insanity defense".
Click to expand...

I think that was intended as a joke, to suggest that peeing on the neighbor's door was a way to establish evidence of insanity to be used at trial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom