When have I said that it’s not okay to take evidence of Martin’s character into account?
Sounds like you’re making assumptions about me in the absence of evidence.
Ok, fine, maybe I’m confusing you with someone else. So instead il ask my question of anyone who thinks Martin’s character doesn’t matter (and I definitely have seen posts to that effect in one of these threads) .
There may be some (intentional?) confusion on both sides between the questions “does Martin’s character matter when determining the likelihood that he spontaneously and aggressively attacked Zimmerman” and “does Martin’s character matter when determining whether an unarmed black kid walking down the sidewalk deserves to be shot and killed.” If possible, let’s all agree that the answer to the latter is “no” and focus on the first question.
Let’s also say that if someone brings up things like the suspension for an empty bag of weed, the jewelry and a screwdriver, the grill and stupid screen name, and somebody says, “Those things don’t matter,” that they’re not saying, “Martin’s character doesn’t matter,” but rather, “Those specific things that you’ve brought up don’t matter.”
Of course, steronz, "pathetic " and "compelling " are in the eye of the beholder. The only thing you mentioned that seems completely different than the others is the screwdriver and jewelry. I don’t see how that can be so easily dismissed as just evidence that he was a normal teenager.
The whole “empty bag of weed” thing has just got to be bullshit, at least as far as the claim (from somebody) that it “tested positive for marijuana residue”. Can you imagine any school system, anywhere, ever, sending off empty plastic bags to commercial testing labs for chemical analysis, in order to justify suspending a kid for a couple of days? I’m sure some administrator smelled it and decided it was weed (and it probably was, but so what?) and later this morphed into a bizarre “scientific” justification.
Sounds like a very special episode of “Blossom.” I did worse when I was 17, and I showed no signs of violent behavior of the sort that would compel me to jump a stranger in the dark and try to beat him to death. But if you and your friends were all angels in high school and never stole anything for shits and grins, I doubt I can convince you otherwise.
But let’s face it, everyone knows that folks who consume whole bags of weed go into murderous rampages when they get the munchies. Skittles, hello?
I have no idea.
The state’s attorney has presumably seen Zimmerman’s complete statement and all the associated reports. That person is in an excellent position to judge whether probable cause to believe that the force Zimmerman used was unlawful existed.
Of course, reportedly at least one other state’s attorney looked at the same set of evidence and reached the conclusion that probable cause to believe that the force Zimmerman used was unlawful did not exist.
Since the determination of probable cause is usually a no-brainer, based on those two facts I am inclined to believe there is at least some problem, some hedging, some aspect of “Yes, with the right judge, this is probable cause.”
But since I haven’t been made privvy to that complete set of evidence, I really don’t – can’t, in fact – reach a good conclusion.
And since monstro is in the same position I am, I am curious to know what set of facts she believes so unequivocally establish probable cause to believe that the force Zimmerman used was unlawful.
I assume he was wrong, or at least iffy, because he is not an attorney and he was overruled by an attorney. But for that, I’d say he was in a better position than I, for the same reasons mentioned above.
In other words, I’m saying I don’t know, and I’m saying that anyone here who says they do know is either privvy to additional information I don’t have, or mistaken as to the probative value of the information (s)he does have.
I have consistently said that these bits of info about Martin’s high school discipolinary record are absolutely irrelevant.
I don’t want to hijack this thread (because I agree that the information is irrelevant) but I do want to strongly disagree that the normal high school student steals things for shits, grins, or any other reason.
On reflection, Rand (and on edit, Bricker too), perhaps the fact that I experimented with petty thievery made me abnormal, or at least in a minority. Among my friends, it was normal, but I don’t know about the population at large. So for the sake of civility, assume that when I say “normal,” I just mean “non-violent.”
And for the record, there are many things that would make me reconsider Martin’s mindset that night, such as: evidence that he was suspended for fighting, testimony from his friends saying that he liked to get into fights, police reports where Trayvon was arrested for violent incidents, Youtube videos of him talking about how he likes to beat people up, etc.
Bricker, I agree that these bits of info are irrelevant in court. But if someone is going to come up with their own narrative based on news stories, I find it strange if they choose to take Zimmerman’s past into account and completely ignore the same types of items about Martin.
Really?
How much would any of those things be worth in proving that Martin acted that way on that particular night?
Very little worth, in my view.
I have given up on that, because this is the IMHO forum, and so it’s perfectly reasonable for people to post their opinions about how Zimmerman might have acted.
So you are saying that Martin is the one that initiated the confrontation?
BTW, I was reading yesterday that investigators still haven’t talked to Martin’s girlfriend. I found that remarkable and probably wrong.
In a previous post, I pointed out that if a bruise wasn’t visible, there are procedures to performed during a autopsy to detect bruising by checking under the skin for damage to the blood vessels and if the marks of that exam would be visible. The funeral director said he examined the body carefully and didn’t see any bruising and by implication any signs of an examination for subcutaneous damage
Sorry. Most of my gambling experience is playing Windows Solitaire. I’ve tried casino gambling games once or twice, but I don’t enjoy them.
Character, Shmaracter, we’re taking him at his words that he uttered to the 911 operator. Big difference from the strawmen Martin’s detractors are spinning out of whole cloth.
Improper Exhibition Of A Firearm Or Oher Weapon is a first degree misdemeanor in Florida.
http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/Improper-Exhibition-Firearm-Weapon.html
The normal method is if you are dealing with someone scary would be to scratch yourself under your jacket without displaying your weapon, but your hand is on or near your firearm. Did you notice that Zimmerman’s jacket is really too heavy for the weather? Over 60 and drizzling when all you have to do is walk from your truck to the Walmart is a windbreaker at most.
I’m still trying to figure out why someone carries around an empty baggie instead of throwing it away.
It appears the notion of technical enhancement is cutting both ways here - first the remastered audio that some seem to claim shows Martin screaming for help. Now the other way - digital enhancement of the video of Zimmerman at the police station appears to show wounds to the back of his head. Which would tend to support Zimmerman’s account of things (not that it will matter to those who already have made up their minds).
But ISTM that it takes a good deal more to create a cut to the back of the head than to cause a bloody nose. It would also be more difficult to fake, especially in the very few seconds between the shooting, and when the neighbors and police showed up. Anyone can, in theory, bang himself in the face. Reaching around to hit yourself on the back of the head, hard enough to create a cut, is more problematic. Especially when you are in a hurry to think up a good story to cover all the circumstances.
Regards,
Shodan