Martin/Zimmerman: humble opinions and speculation thread

[monstro]

@Bricker

Citizen’s arrest.

From the Wikipedia article on Citizen’s arrest:

Each state, with the exception of North Carolina, permits citizen arrests if the commission of a felony is witnessed by the arresting citizen, or when a citizen is asked to assist in the apprehension of a suspect by police. The application of state laws varies widely with respect to misdemeanors, breaches of the peace, and felonies not witnessed by the arresting party. For example, Arizona law allows a citizen’s arrest if the arrestor has personally witnessed the offense occurring.[37]

American citizens do not carry the authority or enjoy the legal protections held by police officers, and are held to the principle of strict liability before the courts of civil and criminal law including, but not limited to, any infringement of another’s rights.[38]

Bolding mine.

Surely you aren’t offering this as a defense for Zimmerman’s actions. Since I don’t think you are quite so dumb, I can only guess that this is another attempt by you to obscure the facts with lawyerly bullshit.

[you_with_the_face]

@Bricker

Citizen’s arrest.

Let see what wikipedia says about that:

Each state, with the exception of North Carolina,** permits citizen arrests if the commission of a felony is witnessed by the arresting citizen, or when a citizen is asked to assist in the apprehension of a suspect by police. **The application of state laws varies widely with respect to misdemeanors, breaches of the peace, and felonies not witnessed by the arresting party. For example, Arizona law allows a citizen’s arrest if the arrestor has personally witnessed the offense occurring.[37]

Does a punch count as a felony, counselor? We already know the cops told Zimmerman his services weren’t need that night, so that takes care of the last bit.

[you_with_the_face]

Jinx monstro. Wonder twin powers activated.

[monstro]

@hmarvin

This line of reasoning would appear to invalidate DeeDee’s account of things, in which Zimmerman was never heard uttering a threat, and it was Martin that spoke first.

I didn’t say it happened any way.

But it doesn’t matter what or who started it. Martin could have started the whole thing. Or Zimmerman could have.

(Deedee said a lot of things that you guys have eagerly discounted. Ya’ll need to make up your collective mind about whether her statement is reliable evidence or not. )

[Bricker]

@monstro

From the Wikipedia article on Citizen’s arrest:

Bolding mine.

Surely you aren’t offering this as a defense for Zimmerman’s actions. Since I don’t think you are quite so dumb, I can only guess that this is another attempt by you to obscure the facts with lawyerly bullshit.

Martin punches Zimmerman in the nose. Zimmerman certainly witnesses it. That gives Zimmerman probable cause to believe Martin violated FSA § 784.041, felony battery.

[Bricker]

@you_with_the_face

Let see what wikipedia says about that:

Does a punch count as a felony, counselor? We already know the cops told Zimmerman his services weren’t need that night, so that takes care of the last bit.

Yes.

Remember the standard here is probable cause. Zimmerman needs probable cause to believe that the punch violated FSA § 784.041, which provides:

A person commits felony battery if he or she:
(a) Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; and
(b) Causes great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement.

As previously cited, a broken nose qualifies as “great bodily harm” under Florida law.

Even if you dispute the nose was broken, Zimmerman needs only probable cause to believe his nose was broken.

[you_with_the_face]

@Bricker

Yes.

Remember the standard here is probable cause. Zimmerman needs probable cause to believe that the punch violated FSA § 784.041, which provides:

Martin would be alive and would promptly explain why he punched Zimmerman. The creepy guy had followed him first by truck, then by foot, and had refused to explain his actions to him. So he punched him because he was in reasonable fear of him. The creepy guy then pulled out his gun and fired at him, hitting the kid in his arm. Then the creepy guy tackled him and held him down until the cops arrived.

If there is justice in this world, there is no way Zimmerman’s conduct would be considered legal. You’ve reached new debating lows to even suggest it.

[you_with_the_face]

I find it hilarious that Bricker sees nothing wrong with Zimmerman responding to a punch with gunfire, by the way. Apparently Martin punching Zimmerman in the nose is felonious battery, but Zimmerman plugging a bullet into his body ain’t a thing at all, and in fact, still allows him to persist in restraining him.

[monstro]

@Bricker

Martin punches Zimmerman in the nose. Zimmerman certainly witnesses it. That gives Zimmerman probable cause to believe Martin violated FSA § 784.041, felony battery.

This is one of the dagdummiest things anyone has ever said on this message board, Bricker.

A creep is chasing me in the darkness.

I stop, whirl around, and see him assaulting me. In self-defense, I punch him.

He CANNOT shoot me and then restrain me under a citizen’s arrest.

For the most obvious reason, the creep was the one who committed the first act of crime.

If Zimmerman wants to make the case that Martin provoked the fight, then he needs to tell his lawyer to make the case under Stand Your Ground. But he’s not doing this, even though his defenders keep doing it for him on the interwebs.

The question is why.

You could actually provide some useful insight here, but you’re choosing not to.

The question is why.

[Terr]

@monstro

If Zimmerman wants to make the case that Martin provoked the fight, then he needs to tell his lawyer to make the case under Stand Your Ground. But he’s not doing this

Yes, he is.

[doorhinge]

@you_with_the_face

Martin would be alive and would promptly explain why he punched Zimmerman. The creepy guy had followed him first by truck, then by foot, and had refused to explain his actions to him. So he punched him because he was in reasonable fear of him. The creepy guy then pulled out his gun and fired at him, hitting the kid in his arm. Then the creepy guy tackled him and held him down until the cops arrived.

If there is justice in this world, there is no way Zimmerman’s conduct would be considered legal. You’ve reached new debating lows to even suggest it.

@you_with_the_face

I find it hilarious that Bricker sees nothing wrong with Zimmerman responding to a punch with gunfire, by the way. Apparently Martin punching Zimmerman in the nose is felonious battery, but Zimmerman plugging a bullet into his body ain’t a thing at all, and in fact, still allows him to persist in restraining him.

TM would be alive today if he had not jumped on top of GZ, pinned him to the ground, and beat his head on the ground. GZ didn’t believe his life was in imminent danger because of a single punch. He was being repeatedly beaten. He had cried out for help from his neighbors and no one came to his aid. GZ was on his own and the State of Florida permits Florida residents to carry a firearm for self-defense.

TM decided to beat the wrong person and died for making that decision.

[doorhinge]

@monstro

…For the most obvious reason, the creep was the one who committed the first act of crime.

If Zimmerman wants to make the case that Martin provoked the fight, then he needs to tell his lawyer to make the case under Stand Your Ground. But he’s not doing this, even though his defenders keep doing it for him on the interwebs.

The question is why.

O’Mara mentioned at the very beginning that this was a case of self-defense. GZ was defending himself from being beaten by TM. That’s self-defense. FLA also allows GZ to attempt a SYG hearing, if he so chooses.

[monstro]

@Terr

Yes, he is.

From HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost.

The attorney for the former neighborhood watch volunteer who shot and killed Florida teenager Trayvon Martin said Monday he believes that the facts that will be argued in the case fall more under traditional self-defense.

Mark O’Mara, who is defending George Zimmerman against a second-degree murder charge in the fatal February shooting, said looking at the case through traditional self-defense circumstances is appropriate because the facts suggest his client couldn’t retreat from a beating he was receiving from Martin.

Zimmerman’s attorneys said last week that they would use Florida’s “stand your ground” law, which allows people to use deadly force – rather than retreat – if they believe their lives are in danger.

“The facts don’t seem to support a `stand your ground’ defense,” O’Mara said.

Still, he said Monday that the defense team will try to get the case dismissed during a `stand your ground’ hearing.

“My concern with even calling it a `stand your ground’ hearing is we need to be more realistic,” O’Mara said. “I’ve said from Day 1 we need to wait until all the evidence comes out.”

O’Mara said he thinks people have a perception about the law that isn’t accurate.

“People look at `stand your ground’ and immediately think somebody’s standing there with deadly force – be it a gun or a weapon – and having the opportunity to back up but not having the need to under the statute,” he said. "I think the evidence in this case suggests that my client was reacting to having his nose broken and reacted to that by screaming out for help.

“He wasn’t in position where I think there was any suggestion where he could retreat, which he is allowed to do under the statute.”

Bolding mine.

Please find evidence that O’Mara is going to play up the “Martin started it!” defense as opposed to “Zimmerman was painted into a corner and had one choice!”

It looks to me that the former gives way more latitude to the defendant than the latter. If I were Zimmerman, I’d be feeling salty right about now. What did he have to lose?

I repeat: Why is O’Mara switching strategies like this?

A non-snarky WAG from someone is appreciated.

[you_with_the_face]

@Terr

Yes, he is.

“The facts don’t seem to support a ‘stand your ground’ defense,” O’Mara said. Still, he said Monday that the defense team will try to get the case dismissed during a ‘stand your ground’ hearing. “My concern with even calling it a ‘stand your ground’ hearing is we need to be more realistic,” O’Mara said. “I’ve said from Day 1 we need to wait until all the evidence comes out.”

No Stand-Your-Ground Defense For George Zimmerman - The Atlantic

What evidence could he possibly be talking about, that needed to “come out”. And what does he mean by we need to be more realistic? That sounds like something you say when you’re trying to lower expectations of a victory. From day 1, Zimmerman’s statement had him on the ground with Martin beating him. What new evidence has come out that all of sudden shows Zimmerman was unable to retreat?

The lawyer is saying more than he’s seeming to say, and fortunately for him, Zimmerman’s supporters lack the discernment to see that. It’s like they completely forgot their self-righteous insistence back in the day that because this was a SYG case, Zimmerman shouldn’t even be arrested. Reading this thread is like reading 1984.

[Magiver]

@you_with_the_face

Martin would be alive and would promptly explain why he punched Zimmerman. The creepy guy had followed him first by truck, then by foot, and had refused to explain his actions to him.

Martin would be alive today if he went home instead of confronting Zimmerman and beating him. Zimmerman said nothing to indicate he posed a threat and Martin didn’t give him much if any chance at a conversation.

Martin’s actions lead to his death.

[monstro]

@doorhinge

O’Mara mentioned at the very beginning that this was a case of self-defense. GZ was defending himself from being beaten by TM. That’s self-defense. FLA also allows GZ to attempt a SYG hearing, if he so chooses.

If he’s going to wave the traditional self-defense flag, he’s also got to deal with the fact that he didn’t respond to schoolyard punching with proportional violence.

I don’t know how the prosecution might argue this point. But his official statement, the reenactment video, and the physical evidence fail to indicate that Zimmerman did anything to defend himself against Martin’s blows except for shooting him. If I understand traditional self-defense correctly, simply being punched is not sufficient cause for believing your life to be in danger. A threat to your life, however, would be.

So I’m left wondering why O’Mara would focus on the supposed broken nose, but not on the alleged death threat or gun-scrabble. This is another sign that he is a HORRIBLE lawyer, at least in the court of the press conference.

[you_with_the_face]

@monstro

It looks to me that the former gives way more latitude to the defendant than the latter. If I were Zimmerman, I’d be feeling salty right about now. What did he have to lose?

I repeat: Why is O’Mara switching strategies like this?

A non-snarky WAG from someone is appreciated.

To your first point, I don’t think Zimmerman has the ability to read between the lines and see what O’Mara is communicating. I mean, look at Terr and Steophan. If they can’t get it, then Zimmerman can’t either.

To your second question, I think the only thing that makes sense is that O’Mara is begging for a plea deal. His statement to the press is his way of telling the prosecution “ok, you got me” on the whole aggressor thing. Lets make a deal. But I don’t think Corey is open to that.

The Frederick Leatherman blog has had an interesting discussion on this topic. It appears that I’m not alone in my interpretation of the good counselor’s remarks. Zimmerman: Did the Defense Change Strategy? | Frederick Leatherman Law Blog

[Magiver]

@monstro

It seems to me the Defenders want to have it both ways.

If a guy attacks me, I’m going to try to defend myself. If he gets distracted while in the process of killing me, I’m going to use that opportunity to give him a big shove and then escape (likely screaming my fool head off). I’m not going to push him off and then climb the motherfucker. That only makes sense if I want Beatdown Part II. Or if I think I have an advantage that he lacks. Like a loaded gun.

Odd that you think this. Martin could have run away screaming his fool head off after he knocked Zimmerman down. Seems to me you want it both ways.

[you_with_the_face]

@monstro

So I’m left wondering why O’Mara would focus on the supposed broken nose, but not on the alleged death threat or gun-scrabble. This is another sign that he is a HORRIBLE lawyer, at least in the court of the press conference.

The irony is that the only people capable of seeing that are the people who think Zimmerman is guilty.

[hmarvin]

@Magiver

Martin would be alive today if he went home instead of confronting Zimmerman and beating him. Zimmerman said nothing to indicate he posed a threat and Martin didn’t give him much if any chance at a conversation.

Martin’s actions lead to his death.

If that clanging sound heard on the 911 tape was Zimmerman tapping his flashlight on the dog potty, right in front of where the confrontation happened, obviously while still on the phone, MINUTES before the confrontation happened, he couldn’t have been following anyone, he was standing there tapping his flashlight. Where was Martin? Who knows? Maybe he went home and returned.