398 replies to this topic

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

Typical Woman, on 22 April 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

Here's a blog post by a reporter, detailing the time line. I encourage people to also read the comments section, as there are plenty of people who disagree with the reporter's take on the event that night:

http://blogs.chicago...012/04/411.html

Compared to a lot of the one-sided crap we got in the early going, this piece is a marked improvement...

Quote

The yawning gaps in the timeline strongly suggest that this is not a simple story of predator and prey, or of a noble neighborhood hero demonized and facing second-degree murder charges simply for doing the right thing.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

NestorMakhnosLovechild, on 21 April 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

... You can read, can't you? I don't think your quote, nor the original article, says what you think it says.

Basically, the article says: the first part of Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law just regurgitates your standard "self-defense" affirmative defense. The second part, the expanded castle doctrine, is the really controversial part, and that part's not at issue here.

Your summary concludes by saying, if Zimmerman attacked Martin, SYG doesn't apply to Zimmerman. If Martin attacked Zimmerman, and if Zimmerman reasonably believed he was subject to death or serious bodily injury, SYG does apply to him but it's no big deal since pretty much every state has a similar standard for self-defense. In other words, SYG would apply, it's just not really that controversial.

So... again... how you can say with certainty that SYG doesn't apply to this situation... I have no idea.

Actually, NY doesnt have that, it seems...thats why Roderick Scott WAS charged with Manslaughter when he shot that teen to defend HIS life.

Quote

Also, sci and FLOW - I don't and have not seen any facts that have been revealed that have really changed anything substantial about what happened or what the issues were.

-we still have Zimmerman shooting and killing an unarmed 17 year old boy with no prior history of violent crime in a place that he had every right and reason to be.
-we still have the Sanford police being stupid.
-we still have Zimmerman's history of racial profiling
-we still have Zimmerman's ignoring the 911 operator
-we still have evidence of a physical confrontation
-we still do not have any direct witnesses

What's changed? To my knowledge there's no legal basis for defending yourself when someone punches you that allows you to use lethal force in response. And there's no justification for the Sanford police's response (or lack thereof) either. Zimmerman still appears to be pretty racist, as does the police department. What, exactly, has changed since the first few weeks?

What is changed, Kalbear, is that we are finding out more and more that Zimmerman was CORRECT. Media played up the tape that showed he was not injured...ooops, turns out he was, even if those wounds to his head may be minor (head wounds bleed ALLOT; cant tell from the amount of blood how severe the injury is). By the way, while Trayvon was savagely pounding Zimmermans head against the pavement, ZIMMERMAN had no way of knowing if the injuries would be minor or so severe as to leave him a vegetable. Of course he felt a REASONABLE fear for his life. Oh, and we ARE finding out, as you say Trayvon had no history of "violent crime" that the boy WAS a bit of a thug, as seen by his facebook and twitter accounts; he may have assaulted a busdriver. Then again, he enjoys presumption of innocence as he was not convicted on such, JUST AS ZIMMERMAN does...he to was never convicted of a crime of violence.

Legal indeed for Zimmerman to disregard the 911 operator. 911 did NOT say DONT follow, merely that it was not needed. And, as I stated in the last thread, reasonable profiling is very rational; as that area had been robbed by blacks, I could see why Zimmerman would think a strange black male acting oddly would be suspicious...just as Id suspect white men if I heard on the news that a white serial rapist was on the prowl. I bet YOU do it, even if its on a sub consious level. Oh, and we do have a bunch of witnesses.

[Sci-2]

FLOW, I suspect you will now get your wish and see this thread explode with comments.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Res ipsa loquitur, on 22 April 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

Actually, NY doesnt have that, it seems...thats why Roderick Scott WAS charged with Manslaughter when he shot that teen to defend HIS life.


What is changed, Kalbear, is that we are finding out more and more that Zimmerman was CORRECT.

No, we are finding out that the case is not as completely one-sided as it was being portrayed by some.  It is entirely possible Zimmerman still broke the law.

Honestly, RiL, I don't get this.  Why is it so important to make that determination now, before the trial?  I don't get what anyone has invested in a factual situation where we don't yet know all the facts.  How can people even know which "side" to take before that point, unless they're just opining based on preconceived stereotypes going either way?

Edited by Former Lord of Winterfell, 22 April 2012 - 05:56 PM.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

Former Lord of Winterfell, on 22 April 2012 - 05:53 PM, said:

No, we are finding out that the case is not as completely one-sided as it was being portrayed by some.  It is entirely possible Zimmerman still broke the law.

Honestly, RiL, I don't get this.  Why is it so important to make that determination now, before the trial?  I don't get what anyone has invested in a factual situation where we don't yet know all the facts.  How can people even know which "side" to take before that point, unless they're just opining based on preconceived stereotypes going either way?

I have an opinion based on what has been presented.  Yes, certainly, my own beliefs are coming into play...like the right to defend ones life...which is why I think it was unfair that Roderick Scott was charged for manslaughter when he killed to protect his own life in a similar situation. I dislike people being falsely and unjustly accused.

I have said that IF Zimmerman had been chasing after Trayvon whilst waving his gun around, THEN Trayvon would have been justified in the attack on Zimmerman to defend his life...as then Trayvon would have had reasonable belief that his own life was in deadly peril. But thats not the case...facts are showing it was the way Zimmerman presented it as, which is why I maintain that its not right to convict Zimmerman of a crime.

Zimmerman may indeed be convicted of a crime. That doesnt mean he actually broke law or comitted an offense...it would mean he was falsely convicted, just like thousands of others are across the nation.

[gryphon strike]

RiL then explain how it is that Trayvon was killed in someones BACKYARD when he was supposedly bashing Zimmermans head into the pavement?
There is a nice gap between where he had to move into the backyard is there not?
As FLoW said how about you stop being silly and ignoring facts until we actually get to see the trail result.
The gaps in Zimmermans story make it clear he is lying somewhere, unless of course those gaps get satisfactorily explained ie paving stones in the backyard have bloodstains on them or something similar. Personally I still suspect that Zimmermans injuries were selfinflicted, I have no proof of this so it is merely a suspicion just as you beleive that Zimmerman is innocent but have no PROOF thus it is your belief.

[Thlayli]

Zimmerman, by virtue of leaving his car to confront the dead kid, unnecessarily escalated the situation. By bringing a gun into the equation, he compounded his stupidity. Is Zimmerman a racist? I don't care. Was Martin a thug? I don't care. This kid's (not BOY, please, c'mon) death was completely avoidable. That Zimmerman may get off is lamentable. Sadly, being a complete idiot isn't against the law.

[Sci-2]

Quote

RiL then explain how it is that Trayvon was killed in someones BACKYARD when he was supposedly bashing Zimmermans head into the pavement?

Yeah, this is the thing that sticks in my mind craw. What exactly are the events that lead up to this situation?

[Res ipsa loquitur]

Thlayli, on 22 April 2012 - 07:24 PM, said:

Zimmerman, by virtue of leaving his car to confront the dead kid, unnecessarily escalated the situation. By bringing a gun into the equation, he compounded his stupidity. Is Zimmerman a racist? I don't care. Was Martin a thug? I don't care. This kid's (not BOY, please, c'mon) death was completely avoidable. That Zimmerman may get off is lamentable. Sadly, being a complete idiot isn't against the law.

Whats the issue with boy? Come on...Trayvon was A) male, and  B 17.  Put those two together and you get a minor...and children of the male persuasion are called BOYS.

And yes, Trayvons death was preventable...by him. If the boy had NOT attacked Zimmerman, hed be alive. Gryphon I saw footage of the backyards, there were concrete pathways, so its possible for Zimmerman to be injured on one. I dont think I am being "silly" or "ignoring facts" here.

Edited by Res ipsa loquitur, 22 April 2012 - 07:42 PM.

[Ser Robin Hill]

Res ipsa loquitur, on 22 April 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:

Whats the issue with boy? Come on...Trayvon was A) male, and  B 17.  Put those two together and you get a minor...and children of the male persuasion are called BOYS.

I think it safe to say that calling someone 4 or 5 years past puberty, a boy is a bit misleading.  He might be a minor, under the law, but it still is a poor description to call him a boy.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Res ipsa loquitur, on 22 April 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

I have an opinion based on what has been presented.  Yes, certainly, my own beliefs are coming into play...like the right to defend ones life...which is why I think it was unfair that Roderick Scott was charged for manslaughter when he killed to protect his own life in a similar situation. I dislike people being falsely and unjustly accused.

Except how do we know he was falsely and unjustly accused?

Quote

Zimmerman may indeed be convicted of a crime. That doesnt mean he actually broke law or comitted an offense...it would mean he was falsely convicted, just like thousands of others are across the nation.

Well, could it actually mean that Zimmerman really should be guilty?  I'm not rejecting the possibility of a false conviction or false equittal, but to be as sure as you are before the case has even been presented smacks of no less a bias than what you've supposedly been criticizing.

[felice]

Typical Woman, on 22 April 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

http://blogs.chicago...012/04/411.html

The big question is what was Zimmerman doing all that time? Why isn't he back in his car? The blog links to another timeline that suggests he did get back in his car, where Martin approached him, then ran away again, with Zimmerman getting out to follow him a second time leading to the fatal confrontation. It makes a lot of sense to me; if Martin had wanted to attack Zimmerman instead of going home, he waited out of sight an awfully long time before doing so.

Res ipsa loquitur, on 22 April 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:

If the boy had NOT attacked Zimmerman, hed be alive... I dont think I am being "silly" or "ignoring facts" here.

The facts are there is no evidence whatsoever that Martin attacked Zimmerman, beyond Zimmerman's own claim. It's not inconceivable that Martin started the fight, but it's a long, long way from being the fact you present it as; the girlfriend's testimony strongly implies otherwise.

[gryphon strike]

Res ipsa loquitur, on 22 April 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:

Whats the issue with boy? Come on...Trayvon was A) male, and  B 17.  Put those two together and you get a minor...and children of the male persuasion are called BOYS.

And yes, Trayvons death was preventable...by him. If the boy had NOT attacked Zimmerman, hed be alive. Gryphon I saw footage of the backyards, there were concrete pathways, so its possible for Zimmerman to be injured on one. I dont think I am being "silly" or "ignoring facts" here.

Yes and where is the evidence this happened there?
Something like the homeowner being a witness to blood on the paving?
Or how about a police officer taking a sample and pictures as a proper investigation would?
Unlike you I am yet to be convinced as to guilt or innocence I am however smart enough to know that the "evidence" we have so far does not gell with the story told by the killer. Now I am also smart enough to admit that this could just be a result of a total cock up by the Stanford PD. The reason for this would be interesting to know because either way they did stuff things up.

[Nukelavee]

RiL - here's where I have a huge problem with your version of the encounter - the head bashing.

So, Martin attacks Zimmerman, breaks his nose, knocks him down, and begins bashing teh back of his head on concrete.  The Zim-Meister draws his pistol, and shoots Martin.

Right?

Ok.  But....getting your nose broken?  It's kinda shocking, definitely clears your mind of any real thought for a few seconds.  Getting your head bounced off concrete?  Again -It's REALLY hard to maintain any kind of thinking or coordination while this happens, trust me.  That includes drawing a pistol, prepping it to fire, and doing so.  Next, personally, whenever I've been trying to finish somebody off with a good skull smashing... I've been on top of my target, using the rest of my body to impede their arms, preventing them from fighting back.

So... somehow, Zimmerman took a series of blows that totally discombobulated him, but managed to draw a pistol, chamber a round, release the safety, and shoot Zimmerman?

Really?

I doubt it.

[Ser Robin Hill]

Nuke,

Sorry, but your idea doesn't quite cut it.  Several years ago, while walking one of our dogs, I accidentally backed up and fell over backwards, hitting my head on a concrete driveway.  I didn't fully black out, but let's say I went to charcoal grey.  I was on the ground and realized my dog's leash was no longer in my hand.  I made a determined effort to find it, grab it and make sure the dog didn't get away.  Not only had I suffered a concussion, but it turns out I'd fractured my skull.  It is surprising what people are capable of despite head trauma.  A series of blows producing relatively little bleeding would have been insufficient to incapacitate Zimmerman, as you suggest.

Edited by Robin Hill, 23 April 2012 - 10:03 AM.

[Sci-2]

I thought RiL was going to say "I think" and "I believe" in front of all her claims.

eta:

Quote

It makes a lot of sense to me; if Martin had wanted to attack Zimmerman instead of going home, he waited out of sight an awfully long time before doing so.

I found the conjecture of the links kinda ridiculous, implying Martin had something to prove so he double backed and confronted Zimmerman. When talking to girls I was interested in, I remember wandering around the area so that I wouldn't have parents or roommates listening.

It seems far more logical to me that Martin simply was walking home, but decided to wander in circles to chat-up his lady friend before going inside. I've done that often enough.

Edited by sciborg2, 23 April 2012 - 10:20 AM.

[TerraPrime]

Thlayli, on 22 April 2012 - 07:24 PM, said:

Zimmerman, by virtue of leaving his car to confront the dead kid, unnecessarily escalated the situation. By bringing a gun into the equation, he compounded his stupidity. Is Zimmerman a racist? I don't care. Was Martin a thug? I don't care. This kid's (not BOY, please, c'mon) death was completely avoidable. That Zimmerman may get off is lamentable. Sadly, being a complete idiot isn't against the law.

We are not punishing idiocy. We are punishing people for causing harm to others around them. Being an idiot shouldn't exculpate you when you kill someone.



Re: gryphon strike

Seems to me that *IF* (and that's a big IF) the Sanford Police had done their proper job, then there would have been forensic evidence taken from the crime scene, included blood smears from Zimmerman's head on the concrete. When the trial commences, we will get to see those and determine whether Zimmerman's story is corroborated by evidence or not.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Nukelavee, on 23 April 2012 - 09:19 AM, said:

RiL - here's where I have a huge problem with your version of the encounter - the head bashing.

So, Martin attacks Zimmerman, breaks his nose, knocks him down, and begins bashing teh back of his head on concrete.  The Zim-Meister draws his pistol, and shoots Martin.

Right?

Ok.  But....getting your nose broken?  It's kinda shocking, definitely clears your mind of any real thought for a few seconds.  Getting your head bounced off concrete?  Again -It's REALLY hard to maintain any kind of thinking or coordination while this happens, trust me.  That includes drawing a pistol, prepping it to fire, and doing so.  Next, personally, whenever I've been trying to finish somebody off with a good skull smashing... I've been on top of my target, using the rest of my body to impede their arms, preventing them from fighting back.

So... somehow, Zimmerman took a series of blows that totally discombobulated him, but managed to draw a pistol, chamber a round, release the safety, and shoot Zimmerman?

Really?

I doubt it.

He may very well have chambered a already round.  From there, it's just a tiny thumb pressure from a fairly natural grip to release most safeties.  But who knows.

To me, one of the more interesting pieces of alleged evidence are the powder burns on Trayvon's sweatshirt, indicating it was fired at extremely close range.  That means they were in extremely close proximity to each other when it was fired, which is consistent with some sort of physical struggle.  But that still doesn't answer the critical question.

[Nukelavee]

Flow - Yeah, I considered point that out, and, with Zimmerman, I pretty much expect he was stupid enough to have it chambered.

Of course...  that implies he chambered the round at some point earlier, which fits with the whole "I don't buy his defense story".

Robin - sooooo, honestly, any idea how long it took you to actually find and grab the leash, or realize you'd lost it?  Because, if you greyed out, you lost time.  Losing time in a fight serious enough to fear for your life?  It's a big difference.

And, your dog wasn't continuing to bounce your head off the ground, or pinning you, or fighting you.  You also weren't fumbling for a gun, drawing, aiming, and firing...

Of course, if the gun was already in his hand when he went down from a shove or a punch, and hit his head...but that puts a big hole in his "he was bouncing my head off teh ground" or he drew the weapon after the attack story.

Comparing falling and grabbing a leash to supposedly what Zimmerman experienced doesn't cut it.  I've taken hits like yours, I've been knocked out by punches and kicks...and, well, even at best, I'm pretty uncoordinated and ineffective for a bit afterwards...

[felice]

sciborg2, on 23 April 2012 - 10:14 AM, said:

I found the conjecture of the links kinda ridiculous, implying Martin had something to prove so he double backed and confronted Zimmerman.

It does explain the discrepancy between different accounts of their confrontation, in particular whether it started with "why are you following me?" or "what’s your problem?". This obviously didn't happen during the period Zimmerman was on the phone to 911: "Trayvon approached his vehicle, walked up to the car and asked Zimmerman, ‘Why are your following me?' Zimmerman then rolls his car windows down, tells Trayvon ‘I'm not following you.' He rolls his car windows up".