Martin/Zimmerman: humble opinions and speculation thread

[Steophan]

@betenoire39

1. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

You are aware that, for it to be murder, he must have ill intentions towards the person killed, right? If he had good intentions, it cannot have been murder. That’s part of what the word “murder” means, both in common parlance and in legal definitions.

2. in your dreams.

And in the rational analysis of all reasonable people.

3. Sympathy? What kind of sympathy are we talking here?
   What violation of rights? What rights? Why even write about the law and retribution? Why would you even say something like that?

The same sympathy that I would feel for anyone who’s lost a son, regardless of the circumstances.

The rights that you are attempting to deny him, such as the right to a fair trial. The right to be judged solely on the laws that applied at the time he acted, and by the evidence available, not by your feelings and poisonous speculations.

Unreal these people…unreal.

No, I’m very real. I’m also intelligent, reasonable, and moral, at least to some extent, and I can clearly see that you are none of these things, due to your wish to punish Zimmerman despite the lack of evidence, and have him tried for murder despite the fact that, as far as we can tell, no murder happened.

The saddest thing is that the politicians in Florida think that acting the way you want will make them popular. Must be a lot of short-sighted idiots there. Hopefully there’ll still be some people like me around when they get unfairly charged due to someone else disliking them.

It makes me laugh that, in the supposed name of liberalism and justice, people are acting like fascists, literally wanting people locked away because they disapprove of their actions. As I’ve said before, utterly disgusting and shameful. How can you not see the danger of what you’re suggesting?

[Magiver]

@betenoire39

Martin chose to defend himself against Zimmerman.

this is an outright lie on your part absent evidence you haven’t produced. You continually refuse to demonstrate how Martin came to be standing in a location he previously ran from. he documented his previous location as being next to his house and this is the direction he traveled from according to Zimmerman’s account. They match.

@betenoire39

Zimmerman shot Martin.

in self defense.

@betenoire39

You can try to taint Martin as much as you want.

Cite an inaccuracy in what I said about Martin.

[Steophan]

@betenoire39

Martin chose to defend himself against Zimmerman.

You have no evidence whatsoever of that. If I’m wrong, show it. If I’m right, stop with the baseless speculation.

Zimmerman shot Martin.

Correct.

You can try to taint Martin as much as you want, but people of conscience see right through your bullshit.

Martin’s character is irrelevant. He’s dead, it doesn’t matter what people say about him. Why he acted is also irrelevant, as he’s not charged with any crime, due to being dead. What matters is solely if his actions put Zimmerman in reasonable fear of death or serious injury, or more precisely if we can prove they didn’t.

If you, and others, want people to stop talking negatively about Martin’s character, even though it’s irrelevant, you need to stop spreading baseless speculation about Zimmerman’s character and actions.

That said, based on the evidence we have, neither of them were particularly great human beings by the sound of it, but only Martin appears to have frequently broken the law. We have evidence of theft, drug possession, vandalism, assault, and trespass. Now, it’s possible that all of them may be untrue, but if you’re going to repeatedly bring up previous unsubstantiated rumours about Zimmerman’s actions, which have actually been shown to be false, then there’s no reason not to do the same for Martin.

Just don’t pretend it has anything to do with whether Zimmerman is guilty.

[dimmy_derko]

@Magiver

And I already stated that the evidence shows Zimmerman complied with the Dispather’s request. There is no evidence that he was following him at that point.

There is no denying that he ran after getting out of his vehicle, and that he didn’t stop running until 10 seconds after the dispather had asked if he was following TM. Are you suggesting Z was running that fast that it took him 10 secs to decelerate, or his it more likely that he ignored the dispatcher and continued with whatever plan he had in mind for “keeping Trayvon in sight”?

@Magiver

As to the point Zimmerman believed Martin was an armed criminal that is difficult to establish. He said Martin had his hands in his waist and had something in his hands. He also described Martin’s demeanor as messed up.

There was no indication that Zimmerman understood Martin to be armed. At best the court can establish that Zimmerman saw an object in Martin’s hand which is extremely vague unless Zimmerman makes a post event conjecture as to the nature of the object.

If he didn’t think TM was armed why did he say he felt fearful when Trayvon allegedly came back to circle his parked vehicle like a menacing shark? Isn’t carrying a gun supposed to be reassuring in these type of situations? He said he’d forgotten he was carrying a gun, but isn’t that about exactly the time when you’d be patting yoour hip to check you’d brought your equaliser out?

[dimmy_derko]

@Magiver

How would it affect Martin’s drug use, theft, vandalism, street fighting, and assault lifestyle choices?

For a proclaimed 17 yr old drug-using street thug, it’s notable how little evidence there is of such a lifestyle choice.

@Magiver

When you talk about choices that night Zimmerman chose to call the police in response to his suspicions of Martin. Martin chose to assault Zimmerman in response to his suspicions of him.

The first part of your sentence is true, however misguided his suspicions; the latter is pure speculation on your behalf, but well done for playing.

[Steophan]

@dimmy_derko

The first part of your sentence is true, however misguided his suspicions; the latter is pure speculation on your behalf, but well done for playing.

That’s true, we don’t actually know why Martin chose to assault Zimmerman. Not sure why it matters, though.

[dimmy_derko]

@Steophan

That’s true, we don’t actually know why Martin chose to assault Zimmerman. Not sure why it matters, though.

It’s better than that. We don’t even know IF Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman. You can choose to believe that is the case, but to claim the evidence is conclusive would be folly indeed.

[Magiver]

@Steophan

If you, and others, want people to stop talking negatively about Martin’s character, even though it’s irrelevant, you need to stop spreading baseless speculation about Zimmerman’s character and actions.
.

this is the thread in a nutshell. When the same speculation about Martin is mirrored back to show how pointless it is it’s seen as character assassination even though Martin was suspended for theft, drugs, and vandalism.

The evidence of the trial shows Martin went out of his way to confront Zimmerman. The confrontation begins with Martin engaging Zimmerman in conversation per his girlfriend’s account and there is no physical evidence that Zimmerman touched Martin in any way.

[betenoire39]

@Steophan

1. You are aware that, for it to be murder, he must have ill intentions towards the person killed, right? If he had good intentions, it cannot have been murder. That’s part of what the word “murder” means, both in common parlance and in legal definitions.

2. And in the rational analysis of all reasonable people.

3. The same sympathy that I would feel for anyone who’s lost a son, regardless of the circumstances.

4. The rights that you are attempting to deny him, such as the right to a fair trial. The right to be judged solely on the laws that applied at the time he acted, and by the evidence available, not by your feelings and poisonous speculations.

5. No, I’m very real. I’m also intelligent, reasonable, and moral, at least to some extent, and I can clearly see that you are none of these things, due to your wish to punish Zimmerman despite the lack of evidence, and have him tried for murder despite the fact that, as far as we can tell, no murder happened.

6. The saddest thing is that the politicians in Florida think that acting the way you want will make them popular. Must be a lot of short-sighted idiots there. Hopefully there’ll still be some people like me around when they get unfairly charged due to someone else disliking them.

7. It makes me laugh that, in the supposed name of liberalism and justice, people are acting like fascists, literally wanting people locked away because they disapprove of their actions. As I’ve said before, utterly disgusting and shameful. How can you not see the danger of what you’re suggesting?

1. Good intentions?

2. “All reasonable people”? Arrogance. Pure fucking arrogance.

3. Whatever.

4. I am not attempting to deny Zimmerman jack shit. Why? Because I am making a case why he should be locked up? What the fuck would I be “denying” him??? Bizarre.

5. So, I am not intelligent, not moral and unreasonable? You have some fucking nerve.
   “Lack of evidence”??? What the fuck are you talking about? Even Bricker (who I have disagreed with) says there there is enough for a case against him, and he definitely has the experience. He even laid out the argument with cites to back it.

You are truly in your own world here.

6. Complete utter non-sequitur.

7. Liberalism and Justice? Get the hell off whatever it is you’re on…I have never used any such terms. Never. Stop projecting your bullshit.

People want him locked up because he killed Martin** ILLEGALLY** for the thousandth fucking time.

Again, whatever it is you’re on, get off it.

What a completely unhinged post…

WOW

[Magiver]

@dimmy_derko

It’s better than that. We don’t even know IF Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman. You can choose to believe that is the case, but to claim the evidence is conclusive would be folly indeed.

That is a complete lie. We have extensive physical evidence backed by witnesses.

[dimmy_derko]

@Magiver

this is the thread in a nutshell. When the same speculation about Martin is mirrored back to show how pointless it is it’s seen as character assassination even though Martin was suspended for theft, drugs, and vandalism.

If someone of a previously non-aggressive character is accused of something and is too dead to respond to such allegations, anyone who knows Trayvon should be able to question the character of the person making the acusation. You don’t get to have immunity AND have your entire explanation for why you deserve it go without question. You certainly shouldn’t be able to kill someone and then say “I don’t want to talk about it!” without your uncooperation being deemed extremely suspicious.

@Magiver

The evidence of the trial shows Martin went out of his way to confront Zimmerman. The confrontation begins with Martin engaging Zimmerman in conversation per his girlfriend’s account and there is no physical evidence that Zimmerman touched Martin in any way.

"The evidence of the trial "? Have you been doing some time travelling?

[dimmy_derko]

@Magiver

That is a complete lie. We have extensive physical evidence backed by witnesses.

“Extensive”? Go on, I’ll bite… remind us what that is.

[Steophan]

@betenoire39

1. Good intentions?

Yes. IF Zimmerman had good intentions, it cannot have been murder. To be murder, he MUST have had bad ones. What about this do you not understand?

4. I am not attempting to deny Zimmerman jack shit. Why? Because I am making a case why he should be locked up? What the fuck would I be “denying” him??? Bizarre.

No, it’s because you want him locked up despite your inability to make a case that you want his rights denied.

5. So, I am not intelligent, not moral and unreasonable? You have some fucking nerve.

Wow, you actually understood something I wrote. That may be a first.

“Lack of evidence”??? What the fuck are you talking about? Even Bricker (who I have disagreed with) says there there is enough for a case against him, and he definitely has the experience. He even laid out the argument with cites to back it.

I don’t particularly like to speak for Bricker, but he’s repeatedly said there’s no grounds for a murder charge. If you’ve actually read my posts, you’ll know I agree with him that there’s grounds for a manslaughter charge. I disagree that he should be convicted of it, though.

You are truly in your own world here.

I’m in a world populated by everyone who’s posted rationally in this thread, even those who believe he is guilty but recognise they can’t prove it.

6. Complete utter non-sequitur.

Not at all. It cuts to the heart of why he’s been charged, why idiots support him being charged, and why said idiots are so dangerous.

People want him locked up because he killed Martin** ILLEGALLY** for the thousandth fucking time.

False. Absolutely false. They may want him convicted of murder because they incorrectly believe he committed murder, but they should not want that. In the sense that it’s morally wrong and dangerous to want that.

For the thousandth fucking time, THERE IS NO PROOF THAT TRAYVON MARTIN WAS MURDERED. What there is, is evidence he was lawfully killed in self defence.

What a completely unhinged post…

If it’s that unhinged, you should be able to rebut it easily. As it is, your response is

Whatever.

How erudite. How convincing. I look forward to the defence lawyer demonstrating how Zimmerman was defending himself from someone he had no intention of confronting, and the prosecution come back with

Whatever.

That should get the job done. What jury could resist that?

Try coming up with something actually approaching a defence of your position, rather than nonsense and vague insults.

[Steophan]

@dimmy_derko

If someone of a previously non-aggressive character is accused of something and is too dead to respond to such allegations, anyone who knows Trayvon should be able to question the character of the person making the acusation. You don’t get to have immunity AND have your entire explanation for why you deserve it go without question. You certainly shouldn’t be able to kill someone and then say “I don’t want to talk about it!” without your uncooperation being deemed extremely suspicious.

Actually, you have the right to silence. That is unambiguous, and does not prompt suspicion.

To repeat again, Zimmerman does not have to prove his innocence. No-one does (or at least, no-one should have to - it’s a flaw of a lot of self-defence laws that they require this). The state has to prove his guilt, and he is not required to help them do that.

[dimmy_derko]

@Steophan

Actually, you have the right to silence. That is unambiguous, and does not prompt suspicion.

To repeat again, Zimmerman does not have to prove his innocence. No-one does (or at least, no-one should have to - it’s a flaw of a lot of self-defence laws that they require this). The state has to prove his guilt, and he is not required to help them do that.

Do you have the right to silence if you are expecting not to be charged with the death of a person you are known to have killed? I thought to first get that immunity, the person’s circumstances have to be accepted as fitting the available evidence?

[Magiver]

@dimmy_derko

There is no denying that he ran after getting out of his vehicle, and that he didn’t stop running until 10 seconds after the dispather had asked if he was following TM. Are you suggesting Z was running that fast that it took him 10 secs to decelerate, or his it more likely that he ignored the dispatcher and continued with whatever plan he had in mind for “keeping Trayvon in sight”?

I dispute your count of 10 seconds but it doesn’t matter. You admit it’s clear he ceases his pace. Per the evidence of both phone conversations they lost sight of each other when Martin ran and it was never reestablished.

@dimmy_derko

If he didn’t think TM was armed why did he say he felt fearful when Trayvon allegedly came back to circle his parked vehicle like a menacing shark? Isn’t carrying a gun supposed to be reassuring in these type of situations? He said he’d forgotten he was carrying a gun, but isn’t that about exactly the time when you’d be patting yoour hip to check you’d brought your equaliser out?

He never said he felt fearful of Trayvon. He repeated his earlier observation that Martin looked messed up, not dangerous.

[Magiver]

@dimmy_derko

“Extensive”? Go on, I’ll bite… remind us what that is.

bleeding wounds on both sides of his head, visual proof of multiple contact points. Witness, EMT, Police, and Doctor observations of same. Witness accounts of the assault. Phone records where his screams are heard.

[dimmy_derko]

@Magiver

I dispute your count of 10 seconds but it doesn’t matter. You admit it’s clear he ceases his pace. Per the evidence of both phone conversations they lost sight of each other when Martin ran and it was never reestablished.

I don’t care if you dispute my claim, count them yourself.

@Magiver

He never said he felt fearful of Trayvon. He repeated his earlier observation that Martin looked messed up, not dangerous.

txantimedia.com - txantimedia Resources and Information.

Singleton: Um, I still, I still don’t understand, when he walked up to your car, why didn’t you say anything to him?
Zimmerman: I guess fear. I didn’t want to confront him. He seemed…
Singleton: You were afraid of him?
Zimmerman: Yes, ma’am.

He said it, not me.

[dimmy_derko]

@Magiver

bleeding wounds on both sides of his head, visual proof of multiple contact points. Witness, EMT, Police, and Doctor observations of same. Witness accounts of the assault. Phone records where his screams are heard.

Evidence of injury is not evidence of cause and the source of the recorded screams is disputed territory.

[Steophan]

@dimmy_derko

Do you have the right to silence if you are expecting not to be charged with the death of a person you are known to have killed? I thought to first get that immunity, the person’s circumstances have to be accepted as fitting the available evidence?

The immunity is a separate issue, where the burden of proof is on Zimmerman. Apart from that, the police or the courts can consider self defence if someone is silent. If they assert self defence, they must consider it.

The point is, though, you cannot expect someone to speak so that you can use it against them, and you can’t compel them to speak in their own defence.

A technical point about the SYG immunity hearing. Zimmerman is not proving his innocence at that hearing, as he is not accused there of any crime. He is proving that he acted in self defence, in accordance with the SYG law. This is separate from a criminal hearing.

As I’ve said before, I think that the scarcity of evidence in this case will lead to him failing to get immunity.