said the person who refuses to debate.
Where is the lie you keep talking about?
That’s observably false, if you’ve read these threads, and read as my opinion changed from his probable guilt to his innocence as I learned about the facts of the case and the peculiarities of Florida law. The same, incidentally, is true of Magiver.
The same is not true of you.
Also, what evidence do you have that Zimmerman lied? I, and others, have repeatedly laid out the evidence that supports his claim. Where is the evidence that shows it’s false?
Thanks for this. I knew there had to be a reason why the Martin family was sitting there alone with no support.
- Honesty
and the reason would be? Seeing how you just made a baseless statement.
You know what, we don’t know it was self defense. The important thing is that the state is going to have a hell of a time proving it wasn’t self defense.
I find it appalling that you think that only black people could support the family.
NM
If you want to argue that it wan’t self defence, you need to account for Zimmerman’s injuries, and the witnesses who saw Martin on top of him.
You may be able to claim that he used excessive force in self defence, and that was illegal (although I can’t think what would prove that, save for an admission by Zimmerman that he wasn’t frightened), but it’s clear that Zimmerman was defending himself in the fight.
She said it wasn’t visible if you were standing specifically behind the bush. It was clearly visible if you were walking up from the where Zimmerman parked his truck - in fact, you can actually see it in the video walkthrough.
what good does giving the police “1221” do? 1221 where?
Stoid, I’ve wasted the afternoon waiting for you to formulate a simple sentence explaining why Martin’s hand position constituted a lie on Zimmerman’s part. Maybe you can figure out your own point in the next 8 hrs. I’ve got stuff to do.
Are these your people?
Easy. Zimmerman, using his kickboxing judo skills, attempted to delivery 12 consecutive roundhouse kicks to Martin’s head. Martin, deftly avoided all attacks, used physical force to knock his attacker to the ground, and then physically restrained him while shouting for help. Zimmerman, realizing he was losing the fight the he started (and not realizing that he attacked an innocent kid instead of a drugged out burglar), pulls a gun and fires in self defense.
In other words, you can’t claim self defense in the legal sense if you’re losing a fight that you started, and losing a fight that you started accounts for his injuries.
Man, that was easy.
And yet Florida law says you can.
Cite? I thought we’d covered this last year.
In the scenario you claim, if Martin was acting in such a way as to put Zimmerman in fear of death or serious injury - such as, for example, by repeatedly bashing his head against the ground - he would be entitled to shoot him. If he was, in fact, simply restraining him, he would not.
Prove he was simply restraining him, and you can probably convict Zimmerman.
Yes you can, if you are in reasonable fear of death or serious injury, and have exhausted all possible means of escape.
You kinda forgot to provide evidence that proves your assertions. Have you also forgotten that Zimmerman doesn’t need to prove anything, and the State needs to prove everything?
Yes, we did.
Your statement:
“you can’t claim self defense in the legal sense if you’re losing a fight that you started, and losing a fight that you started accounts for his injuries.”
Florida law:
776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
So, yes, Florida law says that you can be the aggressor (as in “fight that you started”) and still claim self-defense if you satisfy one of those two paragraphs above - (a) or (b).
You didn’t say prove, you said “account for,” so I did. Odesio just say that we don’t KNOW it was self defense, and he’s right. You can’t prove it either way at this point. I came up with a plausible scenario in which it wasn’t self defense without contradicting any of the physical evidence. That you refuse to acknowledge this scenario as possible is telling.
— nm
Is aggravated assault (say, a dozen roundhouse kicks) a felony? Seems 1 would apply.