If the law says that what Zimmerman did was legal then the law needs to change. I’m far more worried about creepy trigger-happy lunatics than I am about skittles-buying teenagers, even if they are black.
I have only had one phys class in Uni. Can you explain how it can be determined where TM was that he doubled back from?
From where I sit, it seems entirely possible that he just got out of sight and stayed put until Z and he met up.
But like I said, I am not really up on my physics.
That is, at the very least, a reasonable opinion. What is not is the opinion that Zimmerman should be punished because one disagrees with the law that allows him to do what he did. Note that I’m not suggesting that you have that opinion, but it’s an opinion I’ve seen in these threads from several people.
That said, what specifically do you think Zimmerman did that should be illegal? He can hardly be described as trigger happy from what we know of this case - he was on the receiving end of a continuing beating before he shot Martin. How long should he have been expected to endure that before shooting him?
Why would you expect someone with a “very weak moral makeup” (or “none at all”) to adhere to a set of rules?
Obviously, what I said was not a personal attack, merely a satirical way of demonstrating how silly and off-topic this conversation is.
I’m a “2012er” (a dastardly insult) and even I know that this kind of stuff belongs in the pit.
He instigated a fight, lost, and shot a kid to death. I bet even Zimmerman supporters would find something wrong in that if the kid were white.
For fun I used to take boxing lessons. I would get worse beatings on a daily basis doing something for fun than Zimmerman got in that “fight”, and I never shot anyone over it.
Here’s what I think happened; trigger happy lunatic instigated a fight and caught a couple of punches over it. Angry, he pulls out his gun and shoots the kid to death, despite the only real injuries being to his pride. When the cops come he plays the “I was afairred for my life” card.
Racist right-wing nutjobs rush out to support him. The same nutjobs would literally be calling for a lynching if he were black and the kid white.
I’m 99.99% sure my take on things is right.
Your mastery of physics is fine- and you may be right. TM may have been laying in ambush- or he may have doubled back to launch his attack. Either way, he clearly had plenty of time to go home, but didn’t.
There’s no reason to think he instigated the fight, and plenty to think he didn’t. Mostly that the only injuries to Martin are a cut on his fist, and the gunshot wound.
If that is what happened, it would be illegal. However, it’s not what the evidence suggests actually happened. Whilst we can probably never know for certain who started the fight, it looks like Zimmerman did nothing that would allow Martin to continue to attack him the way he did. A broken nose and cuts to the head are real injuries, and an attack that started like that, and continued with Martin trying to inflict more head trauma could certainly put Zimmerman in reasonable fear of serious injury.
Maybe. Even stopped clocks are right twice a day. I’d rather judge based on the facts than the personalities of anyone involved.
You will need to explain why you believe something so clearly at odds with the evidence that’s been released to the public, then.
There’s no credible evidence of a fight- just a beat down- and no credible evidence that Zimmerman “instigated” it.
Every day, you would finish your lessons with blood covering 45% of your head? Sounds like a pretty tough curriculum.
That he shot the kid and claimed self-defense are the only facts in your theory supported by evidence.
I will be voting for Obama again, support reasonable gun control, reasonable versions of affirmative action, and reasonable forms of reparations for black people… so I must not be too right-wing or too racist.
I am a reasonable leftist, with an emphasis on reasonable. Unlike the left-wing nutjobs that rushed out to condemn Zimmerman. The same nutjobs would literally not care one bit if if Zimmerman were black, or if Trayvon Martin were white.
What you lack in evidence you make up for with confidence. I admire that.
There is no credible evidence that Martin doubled back to attack Zimmerman, but that doesn’t stop you from sticking to your “inference” as if it was settled fact.
I am 99.9% certain Zimmerman tried to restrain Martin, and got no more than what was coming to him.
Where?
CMC fnord!
So, you think a vicious beating is an appropriate response to attempting to restrain someone, but shooting someone who is viciously beating you isn’t? Martin would have been entitled to punch Zimmerman to free himself, sure, but not to continue the attack.
I don’t believe Zimmerman threw the first punch; I think he got aggressive and threating and frightened Martin, so Martin threw the first punch. There’s no question in my mind that Martin was frightened of the creepy guy following him around. If Martin was alive to tell his story (and if he were white), he wouldn’t have even been arrested; punching someone who is coming up to you in a threatening manner is self-defense.
In my opinion, there’s no question but that Zimmerman instigated the fight through his actions. None.
No. I’ve seen the injuries; Zimmerman looks like he got hit by a couple of pitter-pat punches. Like I said, the only real injury was to his ego. And we’ll never know, but I bet Martin had already stopped hitting him when he got shot. I just don’t find it at all credible that Zimmerman was in fear for his life. I’ve literally seen worse beatings in grade school fights, and I’ve seen those same people pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and go home.
You don’t understand; I *was *judging the personalities of the defenders. When I say the majority of the Zimmerman defenders are racists, that’s not me analyzing the facts of the case, that’s me analyzing the motivations of (most of) the defenders. You will never convince me in a million years that there’s not a huge race component in the majority of the Zimmerman defenders. I just don’t find it at all credible that they fixated on this case for other reasons.
Head wounds, even minor ones, look bad. A tiny cut will bleed a lot. Yes, I have bled worse than that from accidental elbows. No I didn’t shoot anyone.
I won’t comment on how believable I find this claim.
I’m also not going to comment on how believable I find this claim.
I’ve been alive long enough to know how people behave.
Could you share what evidence you’re basing that on? Bear in mind that following Martin and talking to him was perfectly legal, and does not count as instigating the fight.
One doesn’t get a broken nose from a “pitter-pat punch”. Martin was seen on top of Zimmerman during the fight, so he clearly carried on after he’d knocked Zimmerman to the ground.
What we’ll never know, but you’ll bet on, is irrelevant. What matters is what we can know, and that will come out at the trial. Where I would bet Zimmerman will be acquitted.
That’s rather close to accusing me of racism. To say that someone is racist for saying Zimmerman deserves a fair trial, and to be found not guilty when the evidence fails to prove anything, is fucking disgusting. As is accusing someone of murder based on a gut feeling, in complete denial of the evidence.
There is no evidence any vicious beating occurred.
I already told you. Following someone around, after dark, in the rain, getting out of your car to follow them more closely…I’m a big guy, but if someone did that to me I would get scared, my heart rate would speed up, I would get ready to fight. If I had a gun I might take it out. If they came toward me in a threatening manner and I had my back to a wall I might try to get the first punch off.
Characterizing Zimmerman’s behavior as just “talking” is just weasely bullshit, excuse my French.
Martin did exactly what I would have done at 17 if I’d been in that same situation; hit the threating guy a good one, follow him to the ground, give him a couple more to take the fight out of him.
So was OJ.
Look at you, playing the victim card. Read the posts in this very thread; can you tell me with a straight face that all the Zimmerman defenders are just clamoring for a fair trial? Some of them are (e.g., Bricker), but lots of them aren’t.
Answer this question honestly (I will judge you based on your answer); do you think there’s no race element powering the wide support for Zimmerman? Do you think some of our more recent posters are defending Zimmerman just becasue they believe he deserves a fair trial? Do you think the same people defending Zimmerman now would be defending him if he were black were black and the kid white?
Apart from Zimmerman’s statement, his injuries, and several witnesses, no, none at all.
Zimmerman’s injuries were not consistent with a “vicious beating”.
There is not a single witness that will testify they saw Martin punching GZ, or slamming his head into the concrete. Not a single witness will testify to hearing TM’s little bad-ass speeches.
Zimmerman’s statements have more holes than a local Dunkin’ Donuts.
S
Other than the witness that testified, shortly after witnessing the event, that Martin was on top of Zimmerman raining punches down on him MMA style/“ground and pound” and who told the investigator that “if you’ve ever had your head hit on concrete, it hurts!”.
Media pressure and selective questions from FDLE/prosecutors caused him to moderate his comments some, but W6’s original statements are on record and O’Mara will ask him what made him make those statements. Further, he will ask him what W6 believes happened.
(Besides that, it’s obvious that Martin punched Zimmerman- even the prosecution has been forced to acknowledge that. It doesn’t matter if anyone heard TM’s little speeches).
The best the prosecution can hope for, with the evidence they have now, is to prevent the defense from convincing the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman acted in self-defense.
What’s their case? Speciously poke at apparent contradictions in Zimmerman’s account, speciously poke at his character. The problem for the prosecution is that the bulk of the evidence is on his side when it comes to both his account and his character both. The best they can do is raise some doubts about them.
What they can’t do is convince 6 people, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman murdered Trayvon Martin. The prosecution cannot prove their case with this evidence. This is why anyone that is convinced of Zimmerman’s guilt at this point has, at least in my mind, some fundamental bias against Zimmerman or for Trayvon unrelated to the actual evidence.