Posted on 05/18/2012 5:58:15 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
___________________________________________
Or, once Zimmerman showed the gun he was, more likely than not, going to get punched.
Point is...nobody knows which happened first.
Martin could have been scared to death of the stranger with the gun and fighting for his life. Only Zimmerman knows.
Name calling as argument - cool.
Seems a politcal report. Across the country do they say EVERY neighborhood watch person who gets out of the car has some guilt?
________________________________
There is no evidence that Martin did anything illegal or improper in this episode.
“That’s the conclusion of a NEW police report on the unarmed teen’s killing at the hands of George Zimmerman in Sanford, Fla.” (emphasis mine)
“New” police reports aren’t going to count for much in court. What will count is the -actual- police report and evidence directly linked to the scene of the incident.
The Daily News is a biased source. It’s become a left-leaning paper catering to the “black/liberal New York Jewish” audience, and has been like this for some time now. Of course, they accentuate their article with the “trademark” picture of young Master Martin...
This is junk reporting, designed to sway opinions rather than to present facts...
OR: IF he didn’t get multiple school suspensions in the first place, causing his ‘mother’ to send him to ‘daddy’ for the most recent 10 day cycle of suspension?????
I should think all deaths are avoidable, depending on where you start the chain of causation. Unless you adopt the stupid fatalism Clarence Darrow in his “defense” of Leopold and Loeb.
Ah, so the eyewitness report of Martin on top of Zimmerman is not evidence.
Nor are Zimmerman's injuries and the abrasions on Martin's knuckles.
There are statutes in Florida that assault is criminal. There are no such statutes that following a suspicious person is criminal - the point you seem to be trying to make here.
And beyond that, your bleating about Martin is downright asinine. Zimmerman is the one on trial, and is the one to whom evidentary standards apply here. Of course, outside the courtroom, he has already been tried in the minds of anti-self defense liberals, who sound an awful lot like you here.
Go ahead and have the last word, I have found that debate with a poster whose head is so firmly shoved up his arse is pointless.
The problem is the black community has to quit it with this single mother BS and black men who impregnate 12 different women so they can loook macho. They actually brag about that if you can believe it. I live in New York city and right across the street from me is a welfare motel filled with black women (they are ALL black) with 9000 kids who run amok in the streets. These women could give a rats ass about those kids as long as they get their free room and board and food stamps. They do absolutely nothing all day long and the cops are constantly there breaking up fights, oh yeah and if you walk by there you can hear the moaning and groaning from sex DAY as well as night. That’s all they do is party and have sex and spew out more kids. It’s nothing but a breeding ground for future crooks all paid for by the taxpayers and sanctioned by liberals.
You just showed your own prejudice against Zimmerman, twink. You really seem to harbor a visceral dislike against a person engaging in a neighborhood watch-type activity.
“The cops told him to stop following Traydmark so what is the evidence he continued to do so?”
There is no evidence Zimmerman continued following Martin. All we know is that he said “okay” and sometime later they were fighting. It wasn’t the cops who told him, by the way, and even if it was I’m not sure they can lawfully order you not to do something that’s perfectly legal—i.e. following and “confronting” someone—away from the scene like that.
It really does appear as if the only thing the prosecution has going for it is that no matter who started the fight it wouldn’t have happened had Zimmerman not exited his truck. That has to be the weakest murder 2 case ever.
It’s a laughably weak case, only going forward because of fear of black savages running amok through city streets. Which ironically is THE example of racism in this whole thing.
“They could just as easily have said: The shooting could have been avoided had the governor ordered everyone to stay in their homes for the entire day. Presto...now it’s the governor’s fault too.”
I’ll up the ante. Courts allow all sorts of fringe “expert” testimony, right? Well, how about a failry well-established discipline like chaos theory? According to the butterfly effect, insects flapping their wings on the other side of the globe can affect weather patterns in distant lands at distant times. If it hadn’t been “f-ing cold” and raining that night maybe Martin wouldn’t have been wearing his hoodie, Zimmerman wouldn’t have profiled him for being black and wearing a hoodie, and there would’ve been no fight and no killing.
Bam! You’ve been scienced, coppers.
besides, it doesn't matter too much in a car accident if the guy infront of you suddenly slams his brakes on and you end up rear ending him....the car slamming into the other is at fault no matter the circumstances...
Z had no legal nor moral reason to not be in his neighborhood, doing his watch like he usually does....and by all accounts, he was retreating, when the Martin slammed him...
If only he didn’t look like obammas son!!
You can’t go around monday morning quarterbacking what sort of manners would’ve stopped other people from committing crimes against you. That is, assuming Martin attacked Zimmerman. We don’t know if it was the other way around, but according to the burden of proof they have to prove it was Zimmerman, not Martin.
That being said, there’s a reason we have laws to tell us what constitutes instigation of violence. It’s never entirely clear-cut, but it does allow us to avoid the sort of elaborate and unending psychological, physiological, and analysis that the MSM and the internet’s been abusing lately. It boils down to the fact that Zimmerman can assert self-defense so long as Martin started the fight. And no matter how stupidly, unadvisedly, impractically he acted, Zimmerman cannot be blamed for the fight unless what he did was illegal.
He had to initiate physical contact, use directly threatening fighting words along the lines of “I’m gonna kill you!,” make threatening gestures possibly including brandishing his weapon, chase Martin down so as to make Martin reasonably fear for his immediate safety, etc. Simply “following” and “confronting” someone does not count. It’s perfectly legal to follow and/or confront people, assuming they don’t have a restraining order against you. Certainly leaving your truck is not illegal.
I don’t care how much Zimmerman precipitated conflict short of instigating violence against or somehow giving Martin legal recourse to defend himself with violence. The internet is plastered with people saying “Zimmerman started it,” but according to what we know they’re talking out their asses. I might not expect them to know better. Laymen may reasonably assume following someone at night and asking what they’re up to constitutes looking for trouble. They don’t know any better.
But the DA must know that it isn’t illegal merely to follow and confront people, and that doing so by itself cannot remove your right to self-defense. That’s why this is the biggest politically-motivated prosecution since Duke lacrosse.
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.