Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Logo
Search Members FAQ Portal
  • Navigation
  • Our Hoosier Board
  • →
  • Other
  • →
  • Politics
  • →
  • George Zimmerman
Welcome to Our Hoosier Board!

Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions.

Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful.

Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine!

Cheers,
sirbrianwilson

Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • …
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • …
  • 96
George Zimmerman ; Combined Threads
Tweet Topic Started: Apr 11 2012, 01:36 PM (8,506 Views)
HoosierLars Jun 30 2013, 07:29 PM Post #976
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 07:19 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 02:07 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 02:05 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 01:56 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 01:03 PM
You are trying to paint a scene where the reality does not match your picture. TM did not kill anyone that night.
Eel, The reality is TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head. I don't think it's productive to debate whether GZ could have been seriously injured--the pictures speak for themselves.

Dreach, if TM knew GZ had a gun, he probably won't have tried to beat him to death.
I am sure Zimmerman would love to have your evidence to use in court. You presume much and know little. The reality,as you put it, is you have no idea what happened, just like I don't. I have said very little about this case, but I call bullshit when I see it.
I'm seen the pictures, and the one eye witness who said in court that TM was on top pummeling GZ. Now tell me how the evidence can convict GZ without a reasonable doubt?
Huge difference between probable doubt and saying unequivocally that "TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head."

The only conjecture is that TM initiated the physical contact. However, I don't think TM had any wounds except for his knuckles and the gun shot.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
eelbor Jun 30 2013, 07:36 PM Post #977
Member Avatar
Zen Master
Posts:
10,606
Group:
Members
Member
#30
Joined:
February 5, 2008
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 07:29 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 07:19 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 02:07 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 02:05 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 01:56 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 01:03 PM
You are trying to paint a scene where the reality does not match your picture. TM did not kill anyone that night.
Eel, The reality is TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head. I don't think it's productive to debate whether GZ could have been seriously injured--the pictures speak for themselves.

Dreach, if TM knew GZ had a gun, he probably won't have tried to beat him to death.
I am sure Zimmerman would love to have your evidence to use in court. You presume much and know little. The reality,as you put it, is you have no idea what happened, just like I don't. I have said very little about this case, but I call bullshit when I see it.
I'm seen the pictures, and the one eye witness who said in court that TM was on top pummeling GZ. Now tell me how the evidence can convict GZ without a reasonable doubt?
Huge difference between probable doubt and saying unequivocally that "TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head."

The only conjecture is that TM initiated the physical contact. However, I don't think TM had any wounds except for his knuckles and the gun shot.
And that conjecture is the difference on who should be allowed the SYG claim and who should not.
Posted Image

"Liberal, shmiberal. That should be a new word. Shmiberal: one who is assumed liberal, just because he's a professional whiner in the newspaper. If you'll read the subtext for many of those old strips, you'll find the heart of an old-fashioned Libertarian. And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners." - Berkeley Breathed


Meat is Murder. Sweet, delicious murder.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Jun 30 2013, 07:39 PM Post #978
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 07:36 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 07:29 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 07:19 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 02:07 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 02:05 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 01:56 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 01:03 PM
You are trying to paint a scene where the reality does not match your picture. TM did not kill anyone that night.
Eel, The reality is TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head. I don't think it's productive to debate whether GZ could have been seriously injured--the pictures speak for themselves.

Dreach, if TM knew GZ had a gun, he probably won't have tried to beat him to death.
I am sure Zimmerman would love to have your evidence to use in court. You presume much and know little. The reality,as you put it, is you have no idea what happened, just like I don't. I have said very little about this case, but I call bullshit when I see it.
I'm seen the pictures, and the one eye witness who said in court that TM was on top pummeling GZ. Now tell me how the evidence can convict GZ without a reasonable doubt?
Huge difference between probable doubt and saying unequivocally that "TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head."

The only conjecture is that TM initiated the physical contact. However, I don't think TM had any wounds except for his knuckles and the gun shot.
And that conjecture is the difference on who should be allowed the SYG claim and who should not.
And that uncertainly creates "reasonable doubt" and GZ walks. Are you arguing that GZ should or will be convicted?
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Jun 30 2013, 07:54 PM Post #979
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,068
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 07:39 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 07:36 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 07:29 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 07:19 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 02:07 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 02:05 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 01:56 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 01:03 PM
You are trying to paint a scene where the reality does not match your picture. TM did not kill anyone that night.
Eel, The reality is TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head. I don't think it's productive to debate whether GZ could have been seriously injured--the pictures speak for themselves.

Dreach, if TM knew GZ had a gun, he probably won't have tried to beat him to death.
I am sure Zimmerman would love to have your evidence to use in court. You presume much and know little. The reality,as you put it, is you have no idea what happened, just like I don't. I have said very little about this case, but I call bullshit when I see it.
I'm seen the pictures, and the one eye witness who said in court that TM was on top pummeling GZ. Now tell me how the evidence can convict GZ without a reasonable doubt?
Huge difference between probable doubt and saying unequivocally that "TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head."

The only conjecture is that TM initiated the physical contact. However, I don't think TM had any wounds except for his knuckles and the gun shot.
And that conjecture is the difference on who should be allowed the SYG claim and who should not.
And that uncertainly creates "reasonable doubt" and GZ walks. Are you arguing that GZ should or will be convicted?
I feel like half the time you're talking about what you personally feel should happen in the case and half the time you're talking about what should happen legally. They may be the same for you, but for some of us on here what we personally believe happened and what we thinks should happen legally are two different things. So it's confusing to respond to your post with what we personally think should happen and then have you respond with why that wouldn't hold up in court. Does that make sense?
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Jun 30 2013, 07:55 PM Post #980
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,068
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
dreachon
Jun 30 2013, 07:54 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 07:39 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 07:36 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 07:29 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 07:19 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 02:07 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 02:05 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 01:56 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 01:03 PM
You are trying to paint a scene where the reality does not match your picture. TM did not kill anyone that night.
Eel, The reality is TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head. I don't think it's productive to debate whether GZ could have been seriously injured--the pictures speak for themselves.

Dreach, if TM knew GZ had a gun, he probably won't have tried to beat him to death.
I am sure Zimmerman would love to have your evidence to use in court. You presume much and know little. The reality,as you put it, is you have no idea what happened, just like I don't. I have said very little about this case, but I call bullshit when I see it.
I'm seen the pictures, and the one eye witness who said in court that TM was on top pummeling GZ. Now tell me how the evidence can convict GZ without a reasonable doubt?
Huge difference between probable doubt and saying unequivocally that "TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head."

The only conjecture is that TM initiated the physical contact. However, I don't think TM had any wounds except for his knuckles and the gun shot.
And that conjecture is the difference on who should be allowed the SYG claim and who should not.
And that uncertainly creates "reasonable doubt" and GZ walks. Are you arguing that GZ should or will be convicted?
I feel like half the time you're talking about what you personally feel should happen in the case and half the time you're talking about what should happen legally. They may be the same for you, but for some of us on here what we personally believe happened and what we thinks should happen legally are two different things. So it's confusing to respond to your post with what we personally think should happen and then have you respond with why that wouldn't hold up in court. Does that make sense?
See this post

http://s15.zetaboards.com/Our_Hoosier_Board/single/?p=8301985&t=7184833
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
eelbor Jun 30 2013, 09:02 PM Post #981
Member Avatar
Zen Master
Posts:
10,606
Group:
Members
Member
#30
Joined:
February 5, 2008
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 07:39 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 07:36 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 07:29 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 07:19 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 02:07 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 02:05 PM
HoosierLars
Jun 30 2013, 01:56 PM
eelbor
Jun 30 2013, 01:03 PM
You are trying to paint a scene where the reality does not match your picture. TM did not kill anyone that night.
Eel, The reality is TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head. I don't think it's productive to debate whether GZ could have been seriously injured--the pictures speak for themselves.

Dreach, if TM knew GZ had a gun, he probably won't have tried to beat him to death.
I am sure Zimmerman would love to have your evidence to use in court. You presume much and know little. The reality,as you put it, is you have no idea what happened, just like I don't. I have said very little about this case, but I call bullshit when I see it.
I'm seen the pictures, and the one eye witness who said in court that TM was on top pummeling GZ. Now tell me how the evidence can convict GZ without a reasonable doubt?
Huge difference between probable doubt and saying unequivocally that "TM initiated the physical contact, broke GZ's nose, knocked him to the ground, and was pummeling his head."

The only conjecture is that TM initiated the physical contact. However, I don't think TM had any wounds except for his knuckles and the gun shot.
And that conjecture is the difference on who should be allowed the SYG claim and who should not.
And that uncertainly creates "reasonable doubt" and GZ walks. Are you arguing that GZ should or will be convicted?
I have avoided any claims one way or another.
Posted Image

"Liberal, shmiberal. That should be a new word. Shmiberal: one who is assumed liberal, just because he's a professional whiner in the newspaper. If you'll read the subtext for many of those old strips, you'll find the heart of an old-fashioned Libertarian. And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners." - Berkeley Breathed


Meat is Murder. Sweet, delicious murder.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yawnzzz Jun 30 2013, 09:52 PM Post #982
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,964
Group:
Members
Member
#58
Joined:
February 6, 2008
dreachon
Jun 30 2013, 04:49 PM
I understand your opinion on physical violence, and I do agree, but the fact is that the SYG law permits physical violence when someone is threatened.
Have you actually read the statute?

"(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

I care very little about this case, but it's pretty clear from a legal stand-point that whoever threw the first punch is the one committing a crime. Whatever happens to that individual past that point is due to their own actions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
brumdog44 Jun 30 2013, 10:42 PM Post #983
Member Avatar
The guy picked last in gym class
Posts:
43,823
Group:
Members
Member
#181
Joined:
February 20, 2008
Yawnzz -- while that is specific to stand your ground, that's not specific to self-defense.

Florida statute 776.012 reads and 776.041 are going to be the relevant ones I believe....that's saying nothing about how the jury interpret them, but IMO they are more relevant than stand your ground to either Zimerman or Martin.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
brumdog44 Jun 30 2013, 10:43 PM Post #984
Member Avatar
The guy picked last in gym class
Posts:
43,823
Group:
Members
Member
#181
Joined:
February 20, 2008
http://www.self-defender.net/law2.htm

These are the statutes I am referring to.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Jun 30 2013, 10:54 PM Post #985
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
Dreach, I see where you are coming from. I never formed much of a personal opinion and was curious to see what evidence would be presented in court. I started posting a couple of days ago, as I was surprised at how weak the prosecution's case appears to be.

A lot of you feel strongly that GZ should be convicted, and contrary to popular opinion, I don't like to go out of my way to piss people off.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Jul 1 2013, 01:27 AM Post #986
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,068
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
yawnzzz
Jun 30 2013, 09:52 PM
dreachon
Jun 30 2013, 04:49 PM
I understand your opinion on physical violence, and I do agree, but the fact is that the SYG law permits physical violence when someone is threatened.
Have you actually read the statute?

"(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

I care very little about this case, but it's pretty clear from a legal stand-point that whoever threw the first punch is the one committing a crime. Whatever happens to that individual past that point is due to their own actions.
Yawnz, Brum is right. You're quote is from 776.013, which is in regard to Home Protection.
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—

776.012 reads
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony;
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IUCOLTFAN Jul 1 2013, 09:30 AM Post #987
Coach
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#131
Joined:
February 9, 2008
dreachon
Jul 1 2013, 01:27 AM
yawnzzz
Jun 30 2013, 09:52 PM
dreachon
Jun 30 2013, 04:49 PM
I understand your opinion on physical violence, and I do agree, but the fact is that the SYG law permits physical violence when someone is threatened.
Have you actually read the statute?

"(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

I care very little about this case, but it's pretty clear from a legal stand-point that whoever threw the first punch is the one committing a crime. Whatever happens to that individual past that point is due to their own actions.
Yawnz, Brum is right. You're quote is from 776.013, which is in regard to Home Protection.
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—

776.012 reads
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony;
So now you are not relying on SYG to state your case? You have stated that your opinion was that Zimmerman lost his rights after leaving his vehicle and pursuing Martin. Just trying to clarify my understanding of your position.
Edited by IUCOLTFAN, Jul 1 2013, 09:33 AM.
Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Jul 1 2013, 09:52 AM Post #988
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,068
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
IUCOLTFAN
Jul 1 2013, 09:30 AM
dreachon
Jul 1 2013, 01:27 AM
yawnzzz
Jun 30 2013, 09:52 PM
dreachon
Jun 30 2013, 04:49 PM
I understand your opinion on physical violence, and I do agree, but the fact is that the SYG law permits physical violence when someone is threatened.
Have you actually read the statute?

"(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

I care very little about this case, but it's pretty clear from a legal stand-point that whoever threw the first punch is the one committing a crime. Whatever happens to that individual past that point is due to their own actions.
Yawnz, Brum is right. You're quote is from 776.013, which is in regard to Home Protection.
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—

776.012 reads
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony;
So now you are not relying on SYG to state your case? You have stated that your opinion was that Zimmerman lost his rights after leaving his vehicle and pursuing Martin. Just trying to clarify my understanding of your position.
The SYG law here is applying to Martin.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IUCOLTFAN Jul 1 2013, 09:58 AM Post #989
Coach
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#131
Joined:
February 9, 2008
dreachon
Jul 1 2013, 09:52 AM
IUCOLTFAN
Jul 1 2013, 09:30 AM
dreachon
Jul 1 2013, 01:27 AM
yawnzzz
Jun 30 2013, 09:52 PM
dreachon
Jun 30 2013, 04:49 PM
I understand your opinion on physical violence, and I do agree, but the fact is that the SYG law permits physical violence when someone is threatened.
Have you actually read the statute?

"(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

I care very little about this case, but it's pretty clear from a legal stand-point that whoever threw the first punch is the one committing a crime. Whatever happens to that individual past that point is due to their own actions.
Yawnz, Brum is right. You're quote is from 776.013, which is in regard to Home Protection.
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—

776.012 reads
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony;
So now you are not relying on SYG to state your case? You have stated that your opinion was that Zimmerman lost his rights after leaving his vehicle and pursuing Martin. Just trying to clarify my understanding of your position.
The SYG law here is applying to Martin.
Yeah, that's where you lose me. What crime was Trayvon standing his ground against? Harassment by being followed? The only possible crime that Zimmerman could have committed (from what we know) involves the shooting/gun which didn't come into play until after the physical confrontation. I'm not a lawyer and don't claim to understand all of the laws being thrown out here....just pointing out that this is where our opinions take different roads.
Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Jul 1 2013, 10:14 AM Post #990
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,068
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
IUCOLTFAN
Jul 1 2013, 09:58 AM
dreachon
Jul 1 2013, 09:52 AM
IUCOLTFAN
Jul 1 2013, 09:30 AM
dreachon
Jul 1 2013, 01:27 AM
yawnzzz
Jun 30 2013, 09:52 PM
dreachon
Jun 30 2013, 04:49 PM
I understand your opinion on physical violence, and I do agree, but the fact is that the SYG law permits physical violence when someone is threatened.
Have you actually read the statute?

"(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

I care very little about this case, but it's pretty clear from a legal stand-point that whoever threw the first punch is the one committing a crime. Whatever happens to that individual past that point is due to their own actions.
Yawnz, Brum is right. You're quote is from 776.013, which is in regard to Home Protection.
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—

776.012 reads
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony;
So now you are not relying on SYG to state your case? You have stated that your opinion was that Zimmerman lost his rights after leaving his vehicle and pursuing Martin. Just trying to clarify my understanding of your position.
The SYG law here is applying to Martin.
Yeah, that's where you lose me. What crime was Trayvon standing his ground against? Harassment by being followed? The only possible crime that Zimmerman could have committed (from what we know) involves the shooting/gun which didn't come into play until after the physical confrontation. I'm not a lawyer and don't claim to understand all of the laws being thrown out here....just pointing out that this is where our opinions take different roads.
"that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force."

It doesn't say anything about committing a crime. Zimmerman followed Martin in his car. Got out of his car, at night, in the rain, and chased after Martin. When he encountered Martin he didn't identify himself. He didn't say the police were on the way. What could Martin possibly have thought Zimmerman was doing? Coming in for a big hug? Zimmerman's actions were enough for Martin to reasonably believe Zimmerman meant him harm.
Edited by dreachon, Jul 1 2013, 10:17 AM.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • …
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • …
  • 96

Track Topic · E-mail Topic Time: 7:55 PM Jul 10
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy