Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GilesB

Here is the problem, if you follow someone, and he notices that you are. Most people will move on quickly, some may turn and ask what the hell you are up to? In his mind you may be up to no good. No one is around to tell the jury GZ was away at reasonable distance or GZ was eyeing him and following him close. No one knows. GZ is the only one alive to tell the tale. TM is not. Jentel can only testify that TM noticed GZ following him and he is agitated. GZ attorney can nit pick the details, but the overall testimony is TM noticed that he was followed. The neighbor who called 911 can only testify that moments TM was shot, TM was on top of GZ beating him. Both do not tell you what happen in between. As far I can tell, the DA cannot refute GZ story that he stopped following TM, was walking back to his SUV and TM followed him, challenged him and punched him. Forensic is next and they will use a computer generated 3d to show the location of the two men when the cops arrived, GZ SUV and Jentel’s father’s condo unit location. That may shed clues of who was chasing who. Unless there is another witness, GZ should win, but all this could have been avoided if he did not follow TM to see where he went around the corner. Never give a hair of reason for the DA to come after you. DA are a funny lot. Some see convictions as scores for future higher office, others just respond to political pressure from higher ups. Problem is don’t give them an excuse to prosecute you. A trial is legal risk, innocent people have been found guilty, and even if you win, the financial costs are unbelievable. Anytime you want to play policeman and it result in shooting someone, you better have all your ducks in order. Cops have more latitude then a CCW to shoot someone. They can kill you without you doing anything, CCW have very strict criteria if the shooting is not so clear cut.


75 posted on 07/01/2013 1:01:41 AM PDT by Fee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]


To: Fee

You keep getting hung up on “following.” Even if there were videotape evidence that Zimmerman got out of his car and walked five paces behind Martin the whole time up until the fight that would be completely, legally, utterly irrelevant.

As for the verbal confrontation, even Jeantel (the “earwitness”) confirms that Martin initiated it.

Finally, while it’s true that nobody saw who threw the first punch, Zimmerman had extensive injuries to his face and head, resulting in a great deal of blood and of documented, life-threatening severity. Martin had scratches on his knuckles and a bullet wound.

Don’t overcomplicate this. The police saw all this and did not charge Zimmerman until it became politicized.


77 posted on 07/01/2013 1:16:09 AM PDT by PhatHead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies ]

To: Fee
HERE is the problem - being followed by someone, in and of itself, is not sufficient evidence of imminent danger to justify a claim of self defense.
104 posted on 07/01/2013 6:25:22 AM PDT by GilesB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson