-
Based on the current evidence, Zimmerman did everything wrong and what he did was not legal.
-
Martin had every right to defend himself. The evidence shows Martin was defending himself against a psycho who criminalized him and didn’t want him, the asshole, to get away.
-
LOL.
-
Martin did not assault Zimmerman. He was defending himself against a gun-toting psycho.
There was absolutely no reason for Zimmerman to take the steps he did that night.
Unlikely, as your disregarding that doesn’t prove anything.
The lawyer claiming there’s enough for a murder 2 charge is ignoring the self defence claim entirely, and focussing on the criminal intent, which will not be relevant if self defence is upheld. This is in addition to being completely wrong about the criminal intent. Anyone can register and claim to be a lawyer, but posting a misspelled screed containing many things that have already been discredited in this thread doesn’t add anything to the debate.
Bricker’s suggestion that there’s enough for a manslaughter charge is more interesting, if it turns out that SYG doesn’t preclude it. I’m not convinced that Zimmerman’s actions prior to the fight could be seen by a reasonable person as so likely to lead to the death of another as to be criminally reckless, but at least any discussion about that is about Zimmerman’s actual actions, rather than the baseless speculation necessary to suggest murder.
You weren’t about when we began discussing this case, but my original opinion was that he was likely to be guilty of manslaughter. In many jurisdictions, he might well have been, with the same evidence. However, Florida’s laws don’t make him so - not least because of the strong requirement for the state to prove he was not defending himself. A requirement I fully agree with, and would like to see everywhere, but that’s another debate.
My opinion remains that, unless the state can prove he did not act in self defence, he cannot be convicted of any crime related to killing Martin. I’ve asked Bricker some questions to do with a potential manslaughter charge that he’s not answered yet, so that opinion could change.
Just another question I will throw out there:
Can anyone account for Zimmerman’s actions after he hung up from the non-emergency call?
Why are they so sure that he IMMEDIATELY went back to his truck?
How do they know where he initially parked his truck? How do they know it wasn’t moved?
Food for thought (like they care LOL).
False.
There is no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman did anything for Martin to defend himself against. Literally none.
Again, the “gun-toting” thing, as if there’s anything wrong with Zimmerman having a gun. He was perfectly entitled to carry it.
Now, we’ll never know if Martin assaulted Zimmerman, as he’s dead, and can’t be tried for it. But we do know he attacked him, and injured him, and we know that, until the point he shot him, Zimmerman did not injure Martin.
So? The point is, was there a reason for him not to? And if so, was that reason that the steps he took were illegal?
The answers, by the way, are yes, they were stupid things to do, and no, they were not illegal.
Oh boy…you’re a hard sell, aren’t you?
As I said before (and Bricker confirmed), sometimes a person can be charged with something but get lesser charges.
Again, the courts here aren’t this linear black white entity. Deal often are made. Pleas are made.
Negotiations happen. That’s the way things work here.
what evidence? Cite one thing he did wrong before he was assaulted.
Cite the evidence he was defending himself.
cite or admit you made this up.
Yes there is a reason for Zimmerman to take the steps he took that night. He is part of a neighborhood watch. There is ZERO evidence that Zimmerman laid a finger on Martin. ZERO.
I assume Zimmerman can. If it matters, he’ll be asked at the trial.
I don’t know any of those things, but I’ve no particular reason to care about it. There’s no reason to think he didn’t go back, as far as I can see, and no reason to think he did anything particularly interesting in between losing sight of Martin and Martin coming back to attack him.
It’s making me think you’re clutching at irrelevant straws, in an attempt to draw attention away from the fact that you can’t show Zimmerman wasn’t defending himself.
-
First, he wasn’t assaulted.
I think I have devoted dozens of posts as to what I think ZImmerman did wrong that night.
But you asked for one, so I will give it to you: profiling Martin and following him with a loaded gun. -
The injuries, DeeDee’s testimony, the screams, Zimmerman’s statements to the operator, ZImmerman’s statements to the police, Zimmerman’s reenactments, the fact that he was on his way home and Zimmerman was after him.
-
We can’t have a good laugh?
-
Neighborhood watch, eh? From where, Terminator 2? If he was on duty (which I don’t believe he said he was at the time), then that’s going to open up a whole can of worms for the development legally.
Too bad you don’t see that this would destroy Zimmerman’s story (as if it isn’t already damaged).
I think I have been explaining for weeks why it is not self-defense.
You can’t chase someone like that, scare them and then shoot them when they rightfully try to defend themselves.
Sorry I missed the bolded statement reply;
- Also, no evidence? Maybe it’s late and you’re tired to write something like that.
No, it wouldn’t destroy his story at all, as it says absolutely nothing about why he shot Martin.
I think otherwise. You’ve claimed it wasn’t self defence, and every time you’ve been questioned on it, you’ve changed the subject. Like right now, where you’re claiming that some uncertainty over exactly where Zimmerman parked his truck destroys his whole story, and proves it wasn’t self defence.
Actually, you can in Florida, even if you started the fight, if the person “defending themselves” puts you in reasonable fear of death or serious injury, and you have no other way to escape apart from shooting them. The reason for the quotes is that, of course, one doesn’t defend oneself by doing that. At least, not successfully.
That’s not overly relevant, though, as following someone, with or without a loaded gun, and asking them what they are doing cannot put someone in reasonable fear of attack. There is no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman did anything Martin was allowed to use force to defend himself from.
Also, you added this onto the wrong post (maybe it’s late and you’re too tired to edit correctly), but I’ll answer it anyway. There is, in fact, zero evidence that Zimmerman laid a hand on Martin before Martin punched him.
If you believe this claim is false, show the evidence. Don’t simply claim that the evidence exists, cite it.
No again, I say it was not self defense because of the totality of his actions: he saw Martin as a criminal and was determined that Martin “the asshole” would not get away. He stalked him that night. Martin fled from him.
Zimmerman himself said he was not afraid of Martin…
Again, this can’t be self-defense.
Again, Zimmerman put himself in that situation. The law does not protect him. We disagree on that.
OMG, you’re barking. He’s (Zimmerman) has clearly been assaulted. There is no dispute here.
you’ve devoted more than a dozen posts posting opinion that was legally incorrect.
It’s been pointed out to you time and again that there is nothing wrong with what Zimmerman did. He called the police because he saw someone in the rain at night standing on property that wasn’t his and looking around. He had every right to call the police and he did. At no time did he attempt to detain Martin during the call and stood down from even following him when asked.
The injuries of the fight are all Zimmerman’s except for one abrasion on the front of Martin’s fist.
There is no “duty” to be on. It’s a volunteer watch. Zimmerman literally documents himself watching Martin the whole time he’s on the phone.
Zimmerman was where he said he was and where the evidence shows the fight started. Martin was not where he said he was and the fight started in the direction Martin came from. He had to travel back to that point.
The totality of his actions are utterly and completely irrelevant. His state of mind at the moment he shot Martin is what’s relevant. If he was in reasonable fear, he is innocent of any crime under Florida law.
Also, stop saying he stalked him. This was the first time they had encountered each other, stalking requires an ongoing pattern of behaviour. It’s ridiculous to keep using that word.
False. He says he was defending himself because he feared further injury.
False.
False. Martin put him in that situation when he was on top of him, causing him reasonable fear of death or serious injury, and the law exists precisely to protect him. We disagree on this solely because you do not understand the law or the evidence, and think that your dislike of the fact that Martin is dead means it must be illegal. It doesn’t.
And what evidence is there that Martin punched Zimmerman?
Zimmerman’s own word, nothing more. But Zimmerman’s credibility is low due to the apparent inconsistencies in his story, a few outright fabrications he has made, and the lack of physical evidence supporting his claims about the fight.
This is why we have juries. Maybe he’s telling the truth, maybe not, but a kid walking home from the store died, and there is only his killer’s word to suggest he deserved to die.
If Martin were a 16 year old white chick, but everything else about Zimmerman’s story remained the same, would there be any question that an intensive criminal investigation would be warranted?
There are documented injuries by medical personnel that coincide with multiple witness descriptions of Zimmerman’s facial injuries.
Again, didn’t DeeDee say that Martin was screaming “let go, let go”?
The injuries to Zimmerman’s face and Martin’s fist, and the witnesses that saw the fight. Ok, it’s possible Martin didn’t punch Zimmerman. Maybe he headbutted him. Maybe he was a secret ninja and it was a flying kick. That doesn’t really matter. What matters is that Zimmerman’s statement is backed up by all the evidence, and contradicted by none.
No-one has suggested he deserved to die. Good job pretending we do think that, it will give the weak minded another reason to lynch Zimmerman despite the lack of evidence of his guilt.
There is no question that, in this case as in your hypothetical, an intensive criminal investigation was warranted. Fortunately, such an investigation has occurred. Unfortunately, the evidence gathered in said investigation is being ignored by the prosecutors and several posters in this thread, yourself included, who continue to falsely claim Zimmerman should be charged with anything.
and again, she says she hears “let go, let go” a little bit. She is asked to repeat this and again she says she hears it a little bit. Unless you wish to posit that this was whispered by Martin the logical conclusion is that a voice farther away was picked up. There were only 2 people there which makes the person who said it Zimmerman.