I’ll be watching with a bowl of popcorn.
You asked the logistics behind seeing the gun. The logistics is that Zimmerman would be squirming and trying to get out from under Martin. He talks about squirming to get off the concrete.
I don’t car if you believe Zimmerman. The court has to prove him wrong. It’s a simple process to demonstrate in court. Do you have proof to the contrary?
there you go. sounds like a plan. I’ll probably do something with some friends. Maybe take in a movie.
No I don’t. SYG is a superset of self-defense, thus if you can show self-defense, you win the SYG hearing. What O’Mara is saying is that he can show self-defense.
SYG only enters the picture when you have a plausible line of retreat. What O’Mara is saying is that Martin knocked Zimmerman down and Zimmerman didn’t have a line of retreat so Zimmerman doesn’t need a SYG defense.
Convenient that we should now believe Zimmerman’s statements. :rolleyes:
As I said, you can enter the SYG hearing with a self-defense argument. If you show the self defense by the “preponderance” standard, you win and the client walks.
He mentions the broken nose and screaming for help to illustrate that this wasn’t a case of GZ shooting TM as soon as TM attacked him, but he screamed for help and tried to get away. Also the broken nose is important because, he will argue, it was great bodily harm, and that it had been inflicted before GZ shot TM.
W6 said that TM was either beating GZ up or holding him down, but that GZ was trying to get up. The prosecution is free to argue otherwise of course- but that is the defense’s contention.
He will undoubtedly make the argument that, should the court find that GZ could have retreated, then the SYG law still would have given the right to defend himself. He’s not eliminating SYG as an option, he is only saying that they won’t be approaching it from that standpoint, and it won’t necessarily be applicable.
By approaching it from traditional self-defense, MOM doesn’t have to prove that Martin provoked the encounter. If the judge decides it becomes a SYG , then he would have to prove that. But it’s easier, at this point, to prove that Zimmerman was unable to retreat than to prove that Martin provoked the encounter.
He was not conceding that SYG didn’t apply.
SYG did two things:
- Eliminated the Duty to Retreat
- Created a pre-trial hearing for immunity from criminal and civil liability that applies to all self-defense situations, but is often confusingly called a “SYG hearing”.
Gun control advocates have largely pretended that the first part will be exceptionally relevant when, in fact, it may very well be irrelevant. That was MOM’s point.
Like many words and phrases, SYG has dual meanings, which makes communication about it difficult. This is partly why the media still does not understand what SYG is and how it actually applies in this case.
Nm…
Of course it’s not the reason he shot him. You aren’t allowed to shoot someone in revenge for a prior attack, even if the attack happened earlier. The broken nose, combined with the continuing attack, prove that it would have been reasonable for Zimmerman to be in fear of serious bodily injury, as he had already received such an injury, and had no reason to suspect he wouldn’t receive further.
Unless the State can prove he could have retreated, even if he started the fight, he was entitled to shoot Martin under basic self-defence law.
He was on his back with another man on top of him, which I note you conveniently fail to mention. It’s not reasonable to assume he could have escaped.
No. not least because that’s not what he said. They aren’t using SYG to clear his name, as standard self defence law will do that. They’re using it to prevent any further legal action, criminal or civil, being taken against Zimmerman based on this incident.
I imagine it will fail, as Zimmerman can’t prove he didn’t start the physical fight. At trial, though, he won’t need to, which is why O’Mara knows he should be found not guilty.
I appreciate a good talking down to as much as the next guy.
I suspect you’re trying to be helpful–which you have been. I am thankful for that. I genuinely appreciate your willingness to participate and answer questions. It’s wonderful decision on your part.
Thank you.
But afaict, we’re on the same page.
I am not trying to prove GZ guilty. I am really not. I am just discussing what I am discussing.
I am definitely not willing to put fort the time nor the effort to comb through the necessary items to go about playing junior prosecutor.
I am more about playing an armchair mystery novel book club enthusiast–a junior one. That’s more about the level of commitment I am willing to make.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
I don’t think GZ has been candid one more than one count.
I don’t think it’s plausible that GZ thought there would be a street sign where there is no intersection.
I think the evidence tells us that GZ’s plan was meeting the cops before and after he crossed the block.
I don’t think GZ was some racist thug who set about to commit a murder or a crime.
I find some of the reasoning presented on t3h int4rweb5 to be squishy e.g.
I don’t think the wounds demonstrate who initiated the physical altercation.
:shrug:
I honestly can’t figure out anyway it matters in my life if GZ is convicted or acquitted.
I am here for the ride, not the destination.
But again, this is the lawyer using his interpretation of the alleged events to come up with Zimmerman’s motive, rather than going off what Zimmerman himself said. It’s almost as if O’Mara is glossing over the more immediate and brutal aspects of Zimmerman’s allegation and honing in on the one injury that is at least tenuously corroborated by Zimmerman’s medical report and yet so upstream from the actual shooting that its irrelevant.
All the State has to do is convince the jury that its highly implausible a 200-lb, former bouncer would have been completely incapacitated by a 158-lbs teenager who lacked a history of violence. This is hardly impossible.
Yes it is. Zimmerman outweighed Martin by 40 lbs. It’s unreasonable to assume he would have couldn’t have escaped.
Your logic is messed up. If he’s not granted SYG immunity, he can still be sued. Since this isn’t a SYG defense (as O’Mara has stated), then SYG immunity doesn’t apply, and therefore he won’t be immune from civil litigation.
It makes no sense for O’Mara to declare this a non-SYG case but then go through the motions of having an SYG hearing.
No they weren’t. Almost every witness noted numerous times how dark it was and how it was too dark to really see details of what was going on.
GZ’s gun was black, in a black holster, and it was in an innerwaist band holster that was behind GZ near his right rear pocket. There’s not a snowball’s chance in hell someone could see it. And that’s even before we get into the ridiculous contortions that GZ would have to go through to a) use his right arm to pin Martin’s left arm, while b) simultaneously, with the same right arm, draw his gun and shoot Martin, while still pinning Martin’s arm.
If George found it this easy to pin Martin’s arm, draw his weapon from underneath him and shoot a perfect bull’s-eye into Martin’s heart, all while Martin apparently sat there like a log waiting to get shot…WTF was George doing up until that point? Both arms were free, and he outweighs Martin by a significant amount.
Maybe it will work better when you say it - when I did, the response was along the lines of “apart from the evidence, we have nothing but Zimmerman’s say-so”.
Regards,
Shodan
Yes. We don’t have to accept anything Zimmerman says. Except of course that he was a looking for a street sign in someone’s back yard.
He’s focussing on what can actual be proved, not what is simply alleged. Like you should be doing, instead of alleging more nonsense. It is proven that Martin seriously injured Zimmerman, and continued his attack. We can validly infer from that that he could reasonably have felt in fear of further serious injury, and if he did feel such fear, he was entitled to shoot him. The further details of the fight do not matter, as enough is proven that he was entitled to self defence.
Wrong. They have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.
Wrong. The reasonable assumption is that, if he could have escaped without shooting him, he would have escaped in the couple of minutes while he was taking a beating, prior to shooting Martin. Another detail you conveniently ignore. Zimmerman did not shoot him at the earliest opportunity, he did it when he felt he had no other choice.
He is having the SYG hearing to attempt to get that immunity, not because it is necessary to clear Zimmerman’s name. He is saying SYG won’t be used at the trial, if it happens, so losing the SYG hearing won’t affect the trial.
In short, you are factually wrong about pretty much everything in your post. You have the facts of the case wrong, and you are drawing inferences from those invented “facts” that can’t be supported even by them, let alone the actual facts. You don’t understand what evidence is, what inference is, or what the Florida self defence law actually says. You’ve demonstrated this ignorance repeatedly for months now, despite the efforts of me and many people better than me to educate you, so I can only conclude that you love your ignorance, and would rather see an innocent man jailed than admit you were wrong. That’s pretty disgusting, to be honest.
Seeing detail is a lot easier, like a holster, when you’re up close. Unless you’re a sumo wrestlert, obesity is rarely an advantage. Zimmerman didn’t even know he hit Martin, which is why he tackled Martin after the shooting, so his perfect bullseye, more than likely a desperate shot, is doubtful. There’s not much you can do when somedone is on top pummelling you, just take the beating.
Martin was 5 feet, 11 inches tall and weighed 158 pounds at the time of his death.
Zimmerman’s height is shown as 5’8" and his weight as 185 pounds on his Seminole County Sheriff’s Office Inmate Booking Information.
185lbs - 158lbs = 27lbs
Why would we throw out Zimmerman’s accounts when they’re some of the prime sources of evidence against him?
ETA: I suspect this why O’Mara is backing off the SYG hearing.
By “bull’s-eye”, are you suggesting that it was GZ’s “intention” to shoot TM in the heart?
I’m under the impression that GZ’s intention was to stop his being beaten and shot TM. The bullet happened to strike the heart because that’s where the barrel happened to be pointed when the gun was fired.
Is 27lbs considered a “significant” amount in a street fight? Especially one that includes a “sucker punch” that broke a nose and knock the other person to the ground?