This is more of a Bricker question. When O’Mara gets the discovery evidence.
[ul]
[li]If the state doesn’t have enough evidence, can O’Mara ask for a summary dismissal? [/li][li]Would it make more sense to ask for a Self-defense hearing, so he can get civil immunity?[/li][li]If Zimmerman gets civil immunity can Crumb still sue Twin Lakes?[/li][/ul]
No, you should be asking yourself why you accept as truth that Martin punch Zimmerman when the only person claiming that is on trial for murder.
Because it fits the facts better than any other theory. That fact that Zimmerman is accused of a crime doesn’t automatically make him a liar, any more than Martin acting suspiciously automatically makes him a burglar.
So, if Martin didn’t punch Zimmerman in the face, why did he have a bloody nose when the police arrived?
ETA I’ve actually answered your question now. Why don’t you try answering some, rather than playing stupid gotcha!! games?
And you think answering, “I think you are a burglar and I’m keeping an eye on you until the police get here.”, would have soothed Martin?
Maybe if Zimmerman had answered Martin’s question, he wouldn’t have had to worry about getting his nose allegedly punched.
Two can play this silly game of supposition.
In your world, do people not get bloody noses for reasons other than an unprovoked punch to the face?
This will be one of the pieces of evidence entered at trial. If GZ called police 45 times with suspicious persons reports, and 43 of them were black, it demonstrates a pattern of profiling blacks as suspicious, even if there he reported two whites.
I don’t blame him for punching Zimmerman in the face after Zimmerman called him an asshole and grabbed by the arm telling him he wasn’t going anywhere.
I mean, while were making up circumstances that please us … I’m going with that one.
I find it hilarious that you can’t think of less abrasive response than this for Zimmerman. There was no reason at all for him to say anything about the cops or his idea that he was a burglar.
Try this on for size:
Martin: “Why are you following me?”
Zimmerman: “Dude, sorry if I freaked you out back there. I’m with the neighborhood watch and I don’t recognize you, is all. Just trying to make sure you’re cool. What are you doing here?”
Ya think things might have turned out differently if Zimmerman had said something like this instead answering Martin’s question with a confrontational one of his own?
And DeeDee has an edetic memory where she can recall a conversation she overheard 5 weeks before verbatim and not invert the order of statements even if recounting it correctly would have reflected badly on her late boyfriend?
Maybe, but if my second statement is correct in the quoted post, which you did not carry forward, he may have had information that gave him a predisposition to the second.
and this is illegal? And would Terrs post contribute to this conclusion?
Ah yes, because when one is on trial, theyre automatically guilty. Im sorry I missed this nuance.
If he grabbed him, yes. If he called him an asshole, no.
The thing is, I’m not making up circumstances that please me. I’m basing it on witness statements and physical evidence. If anyone has a plausible explanaton of how Zimmerman came to be bleeding from the nose and the back of his head that doesn’t involve Martin punching him, please share it.
Of course they do. If you can suggest another plausible cause in this instance I’m all ears.
Maybe, but that is not what we were discussing.
You seemed to be saying that it was too dangerous to react to being asked what you are doing by saying what you are doing (or walking away) because the asker might be psycho. Under what circumstances is it safer to punch a psycho in the face than to ignore him, or walk away from him, or even answer his questions reasonably and find out that he is not a psycho but the local neighborhood watch?
One might even think that attacking a stranger, even one who asks you rude questions, is not a good idea, because said stranger might be armed.
No, that happens sometimes. Spontaneously bleeding from the scalp is a lot less common.
Regards,
Shodan
So what if a spike in crime led Zimmerman to be extra distrustful? All that means is that Zimmerman prejudged Martin for reasons that had nothing to do with Martin’s behavior, and all to do with him being extra jumpy about break-ins in the neighborhoods.
To bad Martin didn’t have ESP and couldn’t deduce what Zimmerman was thinking and why he was thinking it. All he could see is some creepy guy following and then running after him.
The records of his calls are online. Go to town. Count the black vs white (vs no race mentioned) references.
I think one of the initial determinants of individuals’ opinion on this is necessarily speculation about how how things blew up.
We are unaware of any reliable indication that Martin was prone to impulsive violence - there is more (though perhaps not much more) reason to paint Zimmerman’s character with the thug brush, given that he has a couple of allegations of violent offences in his past.
But without making inferences based on relatively remote occurrences, what about what we know happened immediately before the confrontation? Zimmerman was running in Martin’s direction, complaining that “these assholes always get away.” Why would you then imagine that he most likely switched gears and tactfully approached Martin to ask him a reasonable question? Martin was an asshole who was probably going to get away.
Bricker slapped me down like a little puppy for asserting upthread that Zimmerman would have to prove a reasonable fear of being permanently disfigured in order be okay under the SYG legislation, countering that a bloody nose fits the bill just fine. I should confess that I did not find his earlier cite for that, but I assume that it’s a solid one, yet I still hold out some hope that what constitutes serious bodily harm is some sort of mystical Schroedinger’s cat of a concept, because I find small indications elsewhere that my initial impression isn’t that far wide of the mark, such as here:
I hold out some small hope that this may be true, partly as a salve for my wounded pride - but mainly because (like all good Canadians) I sometimes entertain the notion of retiring to Florida, and have a hard time accepting that the law there was deliberately crafted in such a way as to permit the use of lethal force in order to spare someone who has provoked a fight the inconvenience of a bloody nose, because that is just nuts.
If Zimmerman tried to tackle Martin and Martin tried to get out of his grasp, he could have banged his nose against his elbow, ground, or any other object in the immediate vicinity during the scuffle.
Or, Martin could have punched him defensively if Zimmerman grabbed him first.
Or, Zimmerman could be prone to spontaneous nosebleeds. Like I am.
Or, Zimmerman’s nose wasn’t bleeding at all; his face was contaminated with Martin’s blood and the cops assumed it was from his nose.
I’m not going to believe Zimmerman took an unprovoked punch to the face simply because Zimmerman claims he did. That’s nuts.
I think you misread both what **Bricker **told you and the law. He probably said that bloody nose is enough of an indicator that great bodily harm was feared. Not that bloody nose is an indicator of great bodily harm inflicted.