Agreed. And the flip side to this is that not every imagined doubt is reasonable - so, speculating that Martin could have decided to attack Zimmerman because Martin was embarrassed at running while talking to a girl is not a “reasonable” doubt unless it is supported by some tangible evidence.
Yes, “I had to vote to acquit because the prosecution failed to prove the charge to the standard” does not prevent me from thinking and opining “but it sure looked more likely than nothing else like the guy was the one to blame”.
The idea one of the participants in this thread seems to push, that failure to convict by criminal court standards must mean I cannot hold on to the latter opinion, just doesn’t work for me. Of course I can look at the defendant and say: I have to let you go under the law, even if I still think you are personally slime.
You mean that thing that didn’t happen? I get that in your mind “right by” means “under 0.001 nanometers away from the front door” but that’s just not how the English language works.
While I generally agree with you, a lot of this depends on what “by the area where his daddy fiancée house” or “almost by” the house is.
The altercation and shooting take place a lot closer to the beginning of the “cut through” that Martin ran down than to the house.
I think that Martin stopped running, because he was tired and out of breath and in sight of the building, when Zimmerman caught up to him. Plainly, Martin didn’t keep going once he saw Zimmerman - instead, he stopped and said “why are you following me?” My guess is that he also refused to give his name, or other information, to Zimmerman, who had asked why he was there.
And at that point something triggered a fight. Maybe Martin turned to leave, and Zimmerman reached out to grab him, and that touch was the first contact in a brawl. Or maybe Martin pushed Zimmerman down, or threw a punch, without warning. Or something else entirely. I suspect that Zimmerman told him he had to wait for the cops, Martin told him to go fuck himself, and Zimmerman then grabbed him.
Now, Zimmerman was getting his ass kicked before he shot. Didn’t he have a broken nose? I bet he was freaked out that his head was being banged on the cement. And, based on that moment, I do get why the verdict exists. But, I don’t agree with it, due to Zimmerman’s decision to confront somebody he didn’t know, and in the absence of an exigent situation.
Similarly, there is little I can imagine Arbery doing that could have justified his being shot. Even if he eventually decided to rush his pursuers, I don’t support any legal maxim that would allow them to use deadly force in response to an attack that they began.
Here’s my problem: Around 7:11 pm, Zimmerman tells 911 that Martin has started running. This is consistent with Jeantel’s testimony that Martin started running.
Martin runs until he is tired and out of breath (and thinks he has lost Zimmerman) – so pretty hard and pretty fast.
The first 9-11 all about the fight is at 7:16pm.
Looking at this map, we assume that Martin runs into the cut thorough at top of Twin Trees Lane (left of the “S” in “Shooting”). And the fight takes placed in the red box.
Which is to say that Martin traveled, what, 50 yards, running to the point of fatigue, in 5 minutes?
I don’t pretend to know what happened, but the “running” and “tired” part make more sense to me if he went father (perhaps went “almost by” his father’s house) and doubled-back. We know from Jeantel’s testimony that Martin initiated the verbal confrontation.
That’s fair speculation; he could have been zig zagging between buildings, too, if he was trying to lose somebody. But I think the point to be made is that he never affirmatively said something like “I’m going to find this guy.” The message from the testimony is that he was walking, not running, because he was somewhere near the home.
Of course, if the claim is that Martin somehow “started” the confrontation because he walked up to Zimmerman to ask what he was doing, then it is laughable, since it is easily refuted by the observation that Martin had every right to walk up to a stranger and ask him what he was up to. Per Zimmerman’s own logic, this isn’t cause for becoming defensive.
Ultimately, the tragedy of that case was that there was no video to show who did what to actually begin a fight. It is truly amazing what is recorded these days, and video evidence has plainly enabled some verdicts that would otherwise have been nearly impossible to obtain.
Isn’t there a Zimmerman thread you guys could go to to repeat yourselves ad nauseum?
Well, that was a gallant effort…
Mea Culpa. I’ve tried to relate it back to Arbery, whose case is most distinguishable because he never caused any wounds to his assailants, so they could never credibly claim to be in fear for their life. I also agree that the video is really the key to foreclosing any assertion that Arbery was being hostile or aggressive enough to warrant some form of “self defense”. There was no way to try to claim Arbery ambushed them after they lost track of him, for example.
I’m surpised. Normally Mods start enforcing violating their directions within minutes of violations.
Moderating
Drop. The. Zimmerman. Discussion.
The next one to bring it up will be warned. I would start now, but I am feeling way too crap to go back and document however many warnings.
So, if Arbery were to go buy skittles…
But seriously, if there’s one thing this case underscores it is the importance of video and how it can completely change a case. Arbery’s killers wouldn’t have been charged, let alone convicted, without it.
If something crazy starts happening in your neighborhood, you record that shit. Feeling weirded out or suspicious, use your phone and get it on record!
Phone video is literally changing society - Arbery being yet another example.
deleted, saw mod note
New law! You can carry any kind of gun anywhere you want, but you have to wear a chest camera and it has to be on.
Sentencings for Arbery defendants:
Travis McMichael - Life without the possibility of parole plus 20 years.
Gregory McMichael - Life without the possibility of parole plus 20 years.
William Bryan, Jr. - Life plus 10 years with the possibility of parole.
Excellent reasoning, excellent sentencing, IMO.
Wait, so now we have to pay to keep their carcasses in jail for 20 years after they die??
J/K. Good to see justice done!