Posted on 05/19/2012 9:08:10 AM PDT by Fido969
Leftie claims at this point seem to be more flailing around then based in the evidence:
Leftie claim #1: Zimmerman's wounds weren’t serious, and he didn't need to shoot Trayvon
Fact: Although it would be unusual to be beaten to death, the fact it is does occur. Slate's article: Punched to Death (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/05/george_zimmerman_claims_he_was_fighting_for_his_life_how_deadly_is_an_unarmed_teenager_.html)
Leftie claim #2: The amount of THCs in Martin blood were so low that he probably hadn't smoked in days.
Fact: The amounts of THC in Martin's blood were 1.5 nanograms per liter of THC, and of 7.3 of THC-COOH. The California level of "intoxication while driving" is 2 ng/ml for THC and 5 ng/ml for THC-COOH. Martin was close to that. Doing a rough calculation, and an expert could correct me, it seems that this points to his having smoked pot within the last three hours of his being killed.
Leftie Claim #3: The fact that he wasn't violent or aggressive when buying his tea and skittles shows that he wasn't violent with Zimmerman.
Fact: What? How does that follow? Lefties are insane and naive.
Leftie Claim #4: The tape of the 7-11 purchase show a normal kid buying tea and skittles. Awww!
Fact: OK, if you say so. He looks stoned to me, he's leaning against the counter, swaying and seems to take forever to count his change. The guy was doped up, the toxology shows it, and he looks buzzed. How he "looks" is just my opinion. Since I have 20 years experince in being overly-inebriated, I might have some insight into the behavior.
Leftie claim #5: Zimmerman is using the "stand your ground law" because he didn't have a duty to retreat.
Fact: "Duty to retreat"? Martin was on top of him, beating his brains out, while he was screaming for help - how on earth could he have retreated? He didn't have the OPTION of retreating.
Leftie claim #6: Zimmerman continued to pursue Martin after being "ordered by the police not to."
Fact: Obviously the lefties also have a large concentration in their blood of THC. First of all, the claim he was "ordered by the police" is weak - it was a dispatcher, and the dispatcher didn't tell him to stop, he told him "we don't need you to that." That's NOT an order to stop. And, Zimmerman's response was: "OK." So, from the evidence we see so far, he might, in fact, have stopped. The entire base of the lefties' argument is not only weak, it's on thin ice.
Leftie claim #7: Zimmerman confronted Martin aggressively.
Fact: The evidence show that Zimmerman asked Martin: "What are you doing here?" That drives the lefties crazy. But, so what? It's a perfectly legal question to ask, and not only that, a REASONABLE question for a neighborhood watchperson to ask. Why didn't Martin just answer the question? Why was his response to cold-cock Zimmerman? The insane lefties have completely turned around who was acting reasonably, and who was the aggressor.
Leftie Claim #8: The police concluded that the killing was "avoidable."
Fact: Well, duh, you'd think any killing would be "avoidable" at one level or other. If Martin hadn't wailed on Zimmerman, it would be avoidable, too. But Martin was a little innocent who must never be held to account for his own actions.
The police statement "He should have waited in his car for the police to arrive" is what the police almost always say. How often have you read a news story that goes something like: "His wife was being raped - and the husband pulled out a gun killed the attacker. We don't condone the idea that people take the law into their own hands, we recommend that the call the police and wait for them to arrive."
The lefties LOVE this argument, and will keep pounding it home in this case.
The lefties just make claim after ridiculous claim, who is calling them on it?
Yes, a little light on the head injuries. Blows to the head, especially from hard solid objects, are always very dangerous and easily fatal as opposed to other parts of the body.
Trayvon Martin probably got what he deserved.
Fact #1 and the primary fact in argument:
This is not a case of Z v. M.
It is the State proving their indictment against Z.
M has no “legal voice”” in this!
Then why won't his "legal team" STFU?
IOW, leftists believe would be heroes should stay in their cars. Leftists do not support neighborhood watch programs. We should all be completely dependent on the gov’t for protection.
Thank you for my morning chuckle!
Problem: Dershowitz is missing the reason why this became a national story in the first place. Had Zimmerman been arrested on the fateful night, this current discovery/autopsy process would have begun immediately.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/05/18/george_zimmerman_s_blood.html
So, make the arrest, THEN determine if there is evidence to charge the guy.
Lefties are the smartest people in the world. Just ask them and they'll tell you.
That's basically how I regard it -- Even if we accept the lefty contention that Zimmerman instigated a fatal shooting by exiting his vehicle which led to a confrontation with Martin, it becomes irrelevant because Martin prevented Zimmerman from retreating when he was sitting on Zimmerman's chest, striking him with his fists.
So, yes, even those who willfully place themselves into dangerous positions that they can't escape from still have the same right to self defense up to and including the use of deadly force if they're being violently attacked.
Even those lefty weasels who curiously reason that Trayvon Martin had every right to lurk in the shadows on a rainy night while at the same time George Zimmerman had no right to exit his vehicle in a neighborhood where he served the community as their recognized citizen watchdog need to be made to understand this point.
And you’ve put your finger on it.
However, remember there will be an attempted lawsuit by Crump and gang. Zimmerman WILL need to justify his actions to avoid liability in that lawsuit.
I don't know if that claim to Florida's 'Stand Your Ground' law is factual, or if acquittal of any/all charges restores your protection in Florida. You'd think that it would be.
It ought to be, shouldn't it? Just because some Nifong-like district attorney running for re-election charges you with murder and loses their case against you shouldn't mean you're rightfully exposed to a civil suit all of a sudden. What, is the DA some righteous kamikaze pilot destroying the reputation of their public office on behalf of some third-party trial lawyer? Sounds like horsecrap to me.
Anyway, I think that if Zimmerman prevails against the criminal charges and by some means the civil suit against him goes forward, there might be a lot of lawyers interested in his case on procedural grounds that no grand jury was ever convened to hear the case against Zimmerman and that acquittal still exposed him to a civil trial -- and those lawyers might be eager to see him prevail again for a great number of reasons not having a whole lot to do with his case. Precedent like that could slither its way into completely unrelated areas of case law which might make a great number of legal sphincters pucker. Product liability, for instance.
If I was Zimmerman -- and I'm glad I ain't -- I'd have already quietly made some kind of contact with Alan Dershowitz who is obviously interested enough to be warming up in the bullpen... "Obi Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope..."
There's another element of the potential outcome of this case centered on the things I've opined above which bother me a lot, but I don't want to state it openly. I'm not at all ready to talk about it yet.
MODERATOR: Could you change the attribution? From reviewing that blog, that author is Tom C, not thejohnchapmen, who was just another poster.
It could have been avoided if those same police had stepped up their presence in that community after a rash of burglaries by young black males wearing hoodies.
Um, Zimmerman WAS arrested on the night in question.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.