Absolutely. To not do so demonstrates depraved indifference to human life.
No need to imagine that, since Zimmerman apparently stated to the authorities that Martin appeared as though he might be high. As far as I recall, he said nothing about marijuana.
Of course.
I’m not ready to rule it out. Martin was apparently over the legal limit for driving while intoxicated in some jurisdictions.
If you are concerned about vilification, then perhaps you should stop referring to Martin as “the victim.” I do agree that the marijuana use should be inadmissible to show that Martin was a bad person. Just like the picture of him as a 14-year-old should be inadmissible to show that he was a sweet innocent angel.
I am still waiting for a cite as to what the guidelines for Florida Neighborhood Watch are, or if they exist in any formal sense at all.
IIUC, when they formed the Neighborhood Watch, Zimmerman was the only person to volunteer. I suppose it is possible that a one man operation voluntarily fills out a lot of paperwork, but I would like to see it. How formal was the program? Training? Where are the guidelines, and how were they communicated?
Regards,
Shodan
Absolutely. Even if I thought the guy was dead.
I meant a reason which is consistent with Zimmerman being innocent of the charges against him.
Well that’s a separate issue. AFAIK in America, anyone is perfectly free to ask another person to state his business.
I have no idea what you are trying to say here. Let’s break it down:
-
Do you agree that Zimmerman’s position seems to be that Martin aroused his attention because Martin appeared to be behaving erratically?
-
Do you agree that it would be helpful to the prosecution to show that Zimmerman initiated the encounter with Martin because of some other reason, e.g. he was suspicious of Martin because Martin is black; or that Zimmerman was looking for trouble?
-
Do you agree that if Martin was indeed high on drugs, it raises the probability that he was indeed behaving erratically as Zimmerman seems to be claiming?
-
Do you agree that if Martin was indeed behaving erratically, it helps Zimmerman’s case because it raises the chance that Zimmerman’s stated reason for his interest in Martin is correct and honest?
Another WTF is the lack of blood smear on the back of his head and the lack of injury to the base of hs skull. To me, this suggest the cuts came from him smacking his head against a sharp object, not a smooth horizontal surface.
For Martin to have grabbed his head and repeatedly slammed it, Zimmerman’s neck would likely need to be in some form of flexion. This would expose his occipital skull to injury more than any other part. And yet one of his cuts is near the crown of his head.
The blood dribbles are odd too. Very defined and not smeared. Looking at the pic, you would never think his head had even been in contact with the ground, let alone thrusted against it with force. And there’s no abrasions to go with those cuts nor bruises, at least that I know of. Very odd that a surface area as wide as the back of his head should have discreet cuts to it, rather than a diffuse pattern of scrapes.
Anyone who thinks Zimmerman’s injuries jibe with his story might want to think again. There is WTFness all over the place.
Well, Monstro is onto something. Key witness #6 has changed his story according to MSNBC. Reference on MSN home page.
I definitely would if I had time for cool reflection. But in reality, I would probably be such a wreck that it might not occur to me.
Of course the best practice is to think in advance about what you will do in such a situation.
IIUC, the police arrived a few minutes or seconds after Martin was shot. Maybe I am not altruistic enough, but once the police arrive on the scene, I would let them worry about calling an ambulance for the guy who just tried to kill me. I doubt the ambulance is going to get there any faster if I call vs. if they call.
Plus I imagine Zimmerman’s attention was fully taken by matters at hand, what with being investigated for murder and all.
As I mentioned earlier, “I shot him in self-defence” strikes me as something an innocent but not-too-bright person would say right off the bat. To the lawyers - would this count as “excited utterance”?
Regards,
Shodan
Lol, here’s what you with the face said before:
But here’s my favorite quote from her:
Lol, keep holding out for that tiny ray of hope.
I think you’re projecting an idealized view of the situation in retrospect and not a realistic one. If a gun is used in self defense then the object is to kill the aggressor.
Realistically, when police defend themselves they shoot multiple times. This is what Zimmerman would have done with that level of training.
The first is more credible.
But that doesn’t mean that the other possibility is “remotely possible under just the right conditions.”
If a story involves a dice roll, the claim that the shooter rolled a seven is more credible than the claim the shooter rolled an eleven.
But obviously the “eleven” claim isn’t something we’d have to struggle to believe.
So too here.
He also elaborated a bit on the reasoning for his suspicion:
Of course, we know something that Zimmerman didn’t - while Zimmerman was making this description, Martin was having a telephone conversation using a bluetooth earpiece.
Zimmerman was watching someone work the McLuhanist trick of putting a significant amount of their consciousness into an abstract space, where their physical environment is not the primary focus of their attention. If you don’t know someone is engaged in a phone conversation, their behaviour can seem a bit “off,” because they are relating to something that is remote from the scene and have withdrawn a bit from the space you’re sharing with them. I’m sure everyone has experience that moment of WTF? with someone in a store on the street with someone using an unobserved phone.
The suggestion that 1.5ng/ml of THC in the blood is an intoxicating level is ridiculous.
No need to break it down, I’ve already said that THC presence might not help with a jury who most likely won’t have Honesty’s expertise to draw from. My opinion is it wasn’t the hoodie. It wasn’t the ‘erratic behavior’. It was the melanin.
Is that known for a fact? It wouldn’t have much of an impact on my assessment of the case, but I am curious.
I’m not sure what you mean by “intoxicating.” Do you agree that Martin was on the north side of the DUI threshold for some jurisdictions?
I disagree, but anyway, it’s not clear what – if anything – about my position you disagree with.
You assert that it’s not legitimate to ask another person to state his business, but you have not explained what you mean by “legitimate.”
Certainly it was legal and did not in any way waive Zimmerman’s right to self-defense.
And police will call for an ambulance. Just I would have. We don’t know what level of training GZ had.
Wait, what? Trayvon was driving that night? Cite?
[QUOTE=brazil84]
You assert that it’s not legitimate to ask another person to state his business, but you have not explained what you mean by “legitimate.”
[/QUOTE]
Yes I have.
[QUOTE=enomaj]
If you meant the authority to ask Martin to state his business like I meant, Zimmerman doesn’t have it.
[/QUOTE]
Your claim was that if Martin was high, that would bolster the argument that Zimmerman had legitimate claim to interrogate Martin about his actions. That’s not true. He has a reason to call 911. He doesn’t have a reason to ask what are you doing here as he hasn’t witnessed anything untoward. No peeking in windows or anything like that.
How exactly does one discern that someone walking in the dark is under the influence of marijuana? He looked hungry? He laughed a little too hard at a so-so joke?
In general, when people are described as “looking like they are on drugs”, the odd behavior is associated with heavy drugs like crack, LSD, heroin or PCP. The common sense explanation for Zimmerman’s claim is that he was too busy creating a criminal profile to realize Martin was either listening to music or talking on the phone.
All this blather about marijuana “intoxication” stems from either ignorance or intellectual dishonesty.