You’d be wrong, then, as he had no such right.
If Zimmerman laid hands on him he absolutely did.
The Supreme Court upheld the 6 member jury, but not a 5 member. It doesn’t seem fair to me that a 1st degree murder charge gets the benefit of 6 additional members, but not 2nd degree murder. As though you can slack a bit on certainty if your “only” charging someone with 2nd degree murder, kidnapping, etc. Zimmerman may wish he had been charged with 1st degree murder instead.
He didn’t say that, though - he said Martin had a right to defend himself from being followed. Which he did not.
If Zimmerman grabbed Martin to restrain him, which is plausible, Martin would have the right to defend himself, but not to continue attacking Zimmerman.
I get the feeling that DeeDee is NOT going to do well under cross-examination.
Several minutes had passed from the time Zimmerman had lost track of Martin and Martin reappeared behind him. It seems that Martin was then following Zimmerman. Martin could have been home in that amount of time instead of confronting Zimmerman.
I find it interesting to look back at how far Trayvengers have moved from the original narrative that was sold to the public.
The idea that a little, angelic black boy was skipping down the street one day with his bag of skittles when a large racist white man decided he was going to kill him. The large racist white man terrified the little boy, and the little black boy ran away to his home as fast as his little legs could carry him. But, alas, the large racist white man was just too darned fast. He overtook him and executed the little boy as he screamed for help. It has been reported that dried tears were found on the little boy’s cheeks.
Several months later, and their initial story has, by and large, been obliterated. The timelines, witness accounts, forensics, injuries, etc. have taken their toll as, time and time again, they have been forced to replace their previous narrative with one that will accommodate the latest inconvenient truth.
You claim that Trayvon didn’t beat up Zimmerman but, if he did, then he did so because Zimmerman is creepy and followed him in a “threatening” manner.
The problem is that there is no credible evidence that Zimmerman did anything that would have conferred upon Trayvon the right to batter Zimmerman at will, or that would have forfeited Zimmerman’s right to defend himself from a sustained physical attack.
The problem is that the prosecution does not have an actual murder 2 case against Mr. Zimmerman. Turns out they had it right the first time. No charges should have been brought.
I heard that first as well. But I think what he is saying is ‘you’ll see me by my truck’. Would be a lot better with some cleaned up audio.
No I don’t claim that at all. I don’t know what happened that night, any more than does anyone else on this board.
But I ask you a very simple question - if somebody first followed you in their truck, and then got out of the truck and followed you to a back lane - wouldn’t you find that creepy and threatening? And isn’t there plenty of evidence, that whether he intended it that way or not - the (quite reasonable IMHO) impression given to Trayvon was that George was following him?
I know that I would find it weird and off putting.
Many of the pro George folk are saying that he had every right to see what Trayvon was doing, and follow him. And of course he did. by the same token - Trayvon had every right to wander around the neighbourhood looking as suspicious as he wanted.
From the stories that have come out so far, and from what has been verified - it seems to me that George was the protagonist in the whole thing. It strikes me as far more likely that the meeting between the two was an accident (i.e - Trayvon didn’t lay in wait) than he was waiting to ambush George.
Your mileage obviously varies - so I guess that the “truth” - or hopefully something close to it, will come out at trial.
Correct on both counts. What’s your point?
I think that depends very much on what you think the “truth” is. Most of the evidence available has been released and as far as I can see it does nothing to reveal the “truth”. What it does is make it impossible for the state to convict Zimmerman. Not unless Corey has not released something utterly inculpatory.
What you take away from it depends on what you think of gun control.
My point? Who was carrying a gun and who ended up dead? To me, that’s what it boils down to.
Who was beating up on whom and who ended up dead? To me, that’s what it boils down to.
Who started the fight is not known, and who was “beating up on” who is not known. Zimmerman’s injuries sure don’t look much like an arse whooping to me. And neither does Martin show much evidence of either administering or receiving a beating.
Meanwhile, who was carrying a gun and who’s dead is not disputed.
We don’t know.
This, we know.
yes we do. The evidence is clear on this. Unless you have a grassy knoll 2nd person who attacked Zimmerman then it was Martin.
No less an authority than the State of Florida OK’d Zimmerman’s carrying of a firearm. I doubt the prosecution is going to undermine it’s own case by arguing that the State of Florida is wrong. That would definately confuse the jury.
We don’t know? Well, there’s no way to convict Zimmerman. However, we do
know Martin was beating up Zimmerman, for whatever reason, and we know Zimmerman received significant injuries - severe enough to put him in fear of serious harm if not actually death. We also know he had no means of getting away from Martin, so it doesn’t actually matter who started it.
Correct. I’m not sure how people can use Zimmerman’s successful use of his gun to defend himself as an argument against carrying guns, though.
M could have been home in that amount of time.
But there doesn’t appear to me to be enough information to conclude that M must have been following Z.
Given that the information available has increased exponentially, it’d kind of weird if someone’s opinion didn’t change.
imho
It just seems natural to adjust one opinion based on new information.
:shrug:
I think that some people who see this split into camps to have a peculiar way of looking at things. I don’t get the whole team thing that some people seem to naturally fall into. And there are a number of people who have decided that we’re all on teams.
w/e
:shrug: I hear the z sounds from the word keys. Not really much farther to go with this as there’s no higher authority to appeal to.
This seems to be as much of a judgment call as anything else. I don’t understand why this is the go to point instead of TM’s declaration of intent to GZ and his attempt to gain the means to carry out that intent.
Imho, that seems to scream textbook example of a self-defense scenario.
Why did you choose the injuries, which may or may not resonate with someone as worth killing someone over, instead of the textbook clear example of when self-defense justifies a homicide?