I repeat: I would rather be alive in prison than a dead non-felon. ROFL it’s not like I can’t read body language or watch eye movement, etc… And I am likely to try to escape if an avenue presents itself. However, if I were near my home, like Trayvon was, I might feel that it would be s bad idea to lead a potential miscreant to my family. THAT’S the real issue here, IMHO. Trayvon tried to escape, and was faced with the choice of leading a potential miscreant to his family’s home. Did Trayvon do the smart thing, given how Zimmerman presented himself during their conversation? I don’t know, but I severely doubt I’d be willing to talk to someone creeping after me near my home at night.
What in the fucking hell are you talking about?
You’re talking about a situation where no-one has threatened you, much less attacked you. Not only are you not talking about a situation where you risk death, you are talking about a situation where there’s no reason for the jury to have sympathy for you.
Someone following you on private property to ask what you’re doing there can’t reasonably be construed as a threat by anyone.
Now, if your claim is that you could lie to the court and get away with it, by claiming you were in fact threatened, well, quite possibly. But that wouldn’t give you the moral high ground you are aimless stumbling around but failing dismally to gain.
Given the outcome no, he definitely did not do the smart thing. Unless you are claiming that, after Zimmerman left his car, there was no possible outcome that left Martin alive, which is absurd.
If the prosecution is able to tie the statements you just posted here to you, I don’t think your well-spoken testimony on the stand will help you overly much.
Are you kidding? In one day, George Zimmerman learns that he won’t face a civil rights charge for murdering an unarmed black teen AND the killer of Chris Kyle, the most awesomest awesome guy in the history of awesome, was found guilty. If that doesn’t make the right wingers’ blood flow from one head to the other, I don’t know what would. I mean Chris Kyle, the most patriotic patriot ever, the guy who was not only a good shot but thoroughly enjoyed killing people. The guy who boasted of killing rioters in New Orleans, even though he didn’t. Now his death is avenged. Of course, Republicans would have had a perfect day if he had gotten death. Or if there was a court ruling that said precincts in urban areas could be open only from 3am to 4am on election day. But this was close to the perfect Republican day.
Could you point me to the trial which found that Zimmerman murdered an unarmed black teen? I must have missed that.
Otherwise, you seem to be upset that some people will be pleased that justice has been done in two cases. Why, exactly?
I would rather you be alive in prison also but you fail to take imminent danger into account. Or maybe I should say, your intended, pre-determined, account of what happened when you murder someone for following you. Or for walking in the same direction as you.
If you believe TM was near his home and then proceed back to the “T” to confront GZ (legal), or to beat GZ (illegal), simply because TM believed GZ was following him, which one of them do you believe created “imminent danger”? GZ for walking around his neighborhood, or TM who left the relative safety of his residence to beat someone for following him?
imminent -
adjective /ˈɪm·ə·nənt/
› (esp. of something unpleasant) likely to happen very soon:
A rain storm was imminent.
danger -
noun [C/U] /ˈdeɪn·dʒər/
› the possibility of harm or death, or of something unpleasant happening:
[C] I quickly understood the dangers of rock climbing.
I felt my life was in danger.
legal definition of “imminent danger”
*What is IMMINENT DANGER?
In relation to homicide in self-defense, this term means immediate danger, such as must be Instantly met, such as cannot be guarded against It calling for the assistance of others or the protection of the law. U. S. v. Outerbridge,27 Fed. Cas. 390; State v. West, 45 La. Ann. 14, 12 South. 7; State v. Smith, 43Or. 109, 71 Pac. 973. Or, as otherwise defined, such an appearance of threatened and impending injury as would put a reasonable and prudent man to his instant defense.State v. Fontenot, 50 La. Ann. 537, 23 South. 034. 09 Am. St. Rep. 455; Shorter v.People, 2 N. Y. 201, 51 Am. Dec. 280.*
George Zimmerman was following Trayvon, and attempted to foil Trayvon’s efforts to elude him. At night. Near Trayvon’s home. Sounds like a prowler, and that, to me, is pretty much imminent threat. But the heck with the law. I’d rather be wrong and alive, than dead and legal.
You are missing the option of “legal and alive”, which is what would happen if you (or Martin) simply walked home.
You seem to be arguing that Zimmerman was wrong to shoot Martin for attacking him, but that Martin would have been right to shoot Zimmerman for doing nothing threatening… How does that work, exactly? Following someone to ask them what they’re doing on private property is not a threat. It’s not a threat in public either, but it’s arguably less acceptable, but that’s not relevant here.
See, I’m not arguing the wisdom of Trayvon’s behavior. My guess is that Zimmerman’s body language did not communicate harmful intent, so I imagine Trayvon was just being a teenage hothead. That said, Zimmerman acted outside the scope of his authority (which was jack squat) in getting out of his car and pursuing Trayvon. In addition, he acted so far outside the scope of common sense that I expect him to win the Darwin Award sometime before his death by natural causes. In short, he’s an idiot. People that stupid aren’t usually long for the world.
What was so stupid? He appears to have been completely unaware of the normal range of reactions to being pursued on foot by a large man at night. THAT is…Darwin Award-level dumb. Literally. If Trayvon had gotten the gun away from him, it would be Trayvon on trial, and Zimmerman dead. Only a total moron volunteers to make someone else fear for their life for NO REASON.
You don’t need authority to follow someone on private property to ask them what they’re doing there. Or in public, for that matter. It is something that you’re allowed to do, and doesn’t constitute a threat. You can quite rightly say it’s a stupid or risky thing to do, but that doesn’t make it illegal.
There was no reason for Martin to fear for his life until after he punched Zimmerman, as far as the actual evidence shows.
If that’s your definition, legal definition, of imminent threat, then I strongly advise that you hire a criminal defense attorney before you start killing people. Maybe they can keep you out of prison?
I thought Der Trihs had been suspended? :rolleyes:
Relief pitcher.
And the douche has been shot in the face:
/nelson “Ha ha!”
That poor man, so darned unlucky to be experiencing all of these unfortunate events.
Shoulda stood his ground.
Not shot in the face - according to the article you posted.
Can I assume that your /nelson “Ha ha!” implies that you believe Zimmerman should be murdered? Or that he should just be severely injured?
To me, it looks like the lynch mob is still trying to murder Zimmerman.