So since it's common practice to call people racist simply for believing that Zimmerman committed no crime that night, is it also acceptable to call the black funeral home worker racist for claiming that Trayvon had no wounds on his hands?

jso2897: rudemix: Zimmerman got the beating he deserved for stalking children. I wonder how many other 'suspicious' children he followed around after dark? Too bad a young man had to die to find out what kind of pervert, control freak Zimmerman is. If nothing else the media attention this has brought to light will prevent Zimmerman from stalking children anymore, at least in this country anyway.

[i18.photobucket.com image 400x356]
9/10 - and may I say, well-played, Sir. I just can't decide between Bacon Flavor and Double Butter.

It's still early...bacon is breakfasty.

Sir Vanderhoot: Ding ding ding. Judging by the conversations Martin had with others at the time, he had good reason to fear for his life because he was being followed. All of these injuries could be caused by a single blow to the nose (and hitting the ground after) which could have been very justified by the fact that Martin was, you know, likely fearing for his life. And trying his best to stand his ground against an attacker.

Seriously, the fact that he hit Zimmerman has no real impact on anything. If Zimmerman started it, then he's at fault.

That's a wonderful theory. Unfortunately, it has absolutely nothing to do with the law in Florida. Zimmerman could have been the first aggressor and still been justified in using deadly force under the law.

776.041Use of force by aggressor (new window).-The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

* * *

(2)Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a)Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

* * *

So long as a first aggressor is in fear of great bodily injury and is unable to escape at the moment he pulls the trigger, he's still justified.

austin_millbarge: None of which he would have gotten had he done what the 911 operator said and NOT FOLLOW MARTIN.

/still clear zimmerman got the better end of the deal

I came to say the same damn thing.
All of this could have been avoided if Zimmerman wasn't a fking idiot

Headline should read "Prosecution has evidence that Zimmerman had injuries the day after he killed a kid." No injuries on videotape makes me think Zimmerman was trying to fortify his story.

Correction subby - their records show that he had two black eyes, a broken nose and 2 cuts the day AFTER the altercation.

Serious Black: Why did it take almost three full months for his medical records to be released?

HIPAA?

Under Fla stand your ground they have no farking case. He we will walk.


But him being injured still doesn't answer the question of who attacked who first.

9beers: So since it's common practice to call people racist simply for believing that Zimmerman committed no crime that night, is it also acceptable to call the black funeral home worker racist for claiming that Trayvon had no wounds on his hands?

Since the term "racist" has been semantically abused far beyond the point of meaninglessness, it's probably acceptable to call anything you want "racist" - if you think there's any point to it.

Unoriginal_Username: austin_millbarge: None of which he would have gotten had he done what the 911 operator said and NOT FOLLOW MARTIN.

/still clear zimmerman got the better end of the deal

I came to say the same damn thing.
All of this could have been avoided if Zimmerman wasn't a fking idiot

All of this could have been avoided if Martin had just gone straight home. You can play what if all day long. It doesn't matter under the law.

Nick Spiceyweiner: Is this the thread where everyone has their own version of what happened that night, even though none of you were there?

Whoa, logic in a GZ/Trayvon thread? Say it isn't so....

so why did all the initial reports indicate Zimmerman didn't have a scratch on him? wtf?

Erix: jso2897: otobucket.com image 400x356]
9/10 - and may I say, well-played, Sir. I just can't decide between Bacon Flavor and Double Butter.

Is your popcorn really just shredded paper?

There is no more real popcorn on the Internet than there are real girls.

The only thing this shows is that at some point during the confrontation, Zim was probably losing.

Says nothing about:
-Who 'stalked' whom
-Who started the physical confrontation
-Who was 'winning' a minute later
-Why Zim pulled the trigger

Of course, we will have some trollspeople chime in here stating that this proves that Martin followed Zim back to the car and attacked him with no provocation.

Still waiting for the outrage in the media about the white guy on his porch that was beaten by a mob of blacks for being a white guy. Or the white couple that was dragged out of their car and beaten by a mob of blacks for being a white couple. Or the soldier in Florida that was beaten by a mob of blacks for being white (and having a job).
C'mon black people, we helped you elect Americas first gay president. Quit beating us up because of our race! We're on your side. We fixed the black civil rights struggle. Now it's time to focus on the equally oppressive gay civil rights struggle.

9beers: So since it's common practice to call people racist simply for believing that Zimmerman committed no crime that night, is it also acceptable to call the black funeral home worker racist for claiming that Trayvon had no wounds on his hands?


Yes, the poor dear only shot and killed a juvenile he had no reason to be following in the first place.


/You can call anyone racist you want, champ, the truth is as plain as the n*** on your face.

skoobx: Headline should read "Prosecution has evidence that Zimmerman had injuries the day after he killed a kid." No injuries on videotape makes me think Zimmerman was trying to fortify his story.

That's nonsense. There's plenty of documentation of his injuries, from the photographs taken at the scene to the observations of the responding officers and the statements of his neighbors.

austin_millbarge: None of which he would have gotten had he done what the 911 operator said and NOT FOLLOW MARTIN.

/still clear zimmerman got the better end of the deal

That's odd. I've never heard any evidence that the 911 operate said NOT FOLLOW MARTIN. Because that wasn't what was said. Go look it up. Go ahead.

Typically, when someone murders someone, there's a struggle. That's why the police couldn't call it a suicide.

Scerpes: All of this could have been avoided if Martin had just gone straight home.

What...was he walking around in circles at night? Do you have evidence that he WASN'T going home?

It seems like he was walking home and then some guy started following him so he turned and tried to get away.

mitEj: The entire point is that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation and killed the teen boy. If the young man fought back that was his right under the statute that Zimmerman erroneously used to get away with murder.

Why wasn't Trayvon allowed to stand his ground? You're walking along, minding your own business, when you're confronted by some fruitcake with a gun. What would you do?

Presumably stand-your-ground only counts if you're a white(ish) male.

Both of them had the right to defend themselves from an attacker.

We don't know who did the attacking.

This incident will be used to deprive the rest of us of another chunk of liberty.

And most people will cheer for it.

wademh: HIPAA?

HIPAA doesn't work like that.

He could have waived this and released the records himself, and STFU'd a lot of the criticism against him.

But no. Someone advising him to keep this secret allowed them to play the troll card for 3 months.

Scerpes: Unoriginal_Username: austin_millbarge: None of which he would have gotten had he done what the 911 operator said and NOT FOLLOW MARTIN.

/still clear zimmerman got the better end of the deal

I came to say the same damn thing.
All of this could have been avoided if Zimmerman wasn't a fking idiot

All of this could have been avoided if Martin had just gone straight home. You can play what if all day long. It doesn't matter under the law.

Unless Zimmerman ended up between Martin and his home, which is extremely plausible.

It means that it shouldn't be tried as murder, just manslaughter. There's no evidence that Zimmerman went into the altercation intending to kill Trayvon.

There was a black woman who was convicted of shooting a warning shot when she managed to pull away from her abusive husband. That was in Florida too. The Stand Your Ground law seems to be applied somewhat arbitrarily.

Scerpes: Unoriginal_Username: austin_millbarge: None of which he would have gotten had he done what the 911 operator said and NOT FOLLOW MARTIN.

/still clear zimmerman got the better end of the deal

I came to say the same damn thing.
All of this could have been avoided if Zimmerman wasn't a fking idiot

All of this could have been avoided if Martin had just gone straight home. You can play what if all day long. It doesn't matter under the law.

It should; if you think you're being followed, do you go straight home? Now the guy knows where you live.

bulldg4life: Scerpes: All of this could have been avoided if Martin had just gone straight home.

What...was he walking around in circles at night? Do you have evidence that he WASN'T going home?

It seems like he was walking home and then some guy started following him so he turned and tried to get away.

Logic dictates that he couldn't have gone straight home. He had a head start on Zimmerman. He started running. Zimmerman still had to get out of his truck. There's no reason he shouldn't have beaten Zimmerman the 100 yards to his house.

Nick Spiceyweiner: Is this the thread site where everyone has their own version of what happened that night reality , even though none of you were there?


ftfy.

this is fark.

fark yeah!! Trayvon thread!

AdmirableSnackbar: Unless Zimmerman ended up between Martin and his home, which is extremely plausible

The only way that's plausible is if Martin stopped running. Or ran somewhere besides straight home.

wademh: Who really started it, and was it necessary to shoot.

Well in general you are entitled to use deadly force in situations where you reasonably fear death or serious bodily harm. Certainly the injuries to Zimmerman are relevant to whether or not he was in danger of death or serious bodily injury. You are also correct in noting that it does matter who started it. The law will not allow you to provoke a fight and then later claim self defense. But that exception to the general rule has still another exception. If you start a fight, and the other party unexpectedly escalates the level of violence from the level of force you used to deadly force or force likely to cause serious bodily injury, you're once again entitled to self defense.

Translated into hypos: 1) If Zimmerman did start something by confronting Martin, or even by calling him a racial slur, Zimmerman couldn't then claim self defense and use deadly force just because Martin shoved him. 2) But even if Zimmerman started a fist fight with the guy, as soon as Martin's level of violence rose to a level where Zimmerman was in reasonable fear for his life, he could use deadly force in self defense. 3) However, if the fight started with Zimmerman threatening deadly force (i.e. pointed a loaded gun at Martin) and Martin responded, Zimmerman cannot later claim self defense.

The evidence here seems to remove scenario 1 from play. This wasn't a situation where Zimmerman shot Martin without ever being in fear of his life. That leaves scenarios 2 and 3 as possibilities. If you previously thought Zimmerman was guilty, then you assume that 3 is probably what happened. If you previously thought Zimmerman was innocent then you probably think 2 happened (or you think Martin attacked an armed man for no reason, which seems unlikely).

Scerpes: So long as a first aggressor is in fear of great bodily injury and is unable to escape at the moment he pulls the trigger, he's still justified.

Who the hell thought that law was a good idea in the first place?

Scerpes: 2)Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a)Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or


Here's what I'd like to know about this law. Say I'm pacing back and forth on the sidewalk in front of your house and acting rather suspicious. After a while of this you come out acting all angry like and start telling me to get away from the front of your house. I feel "threatened", so I pull a gun out and shoot you.

Who's at fault?

Dey wuz self-inflicted, dey wuz!

scarmig: Both of them had the right to defend themselves from an attacker.

We don't know who did the attacking.

This incident will be used to deprive the rest of us of another chunk of liberty.

And most people will cheer for it.

Don't you acknowledge that it is at least possible that Florida's particular itreration of the "stand your ground" concept may have gone a bit too far, or be badly framed and worded?
Is that, to your mind, utterly beyond the realm of possibility?
I'm not trying to argue with you here - just curious.

Scerpes: Logic dictates that he couldn't have gone straight home. He had a head start on Zimmerman. He started running. Zimmerman still had to get out of his truck. There's no reason he shouldn't have beaten Zimmerman the 100 yards to his house.

I would go out on a limb and assert that neither person exhibited very much logic that night.

I would also go out on a limb and assert that being followed at night by some one makes one NOT act logically, especially as a teenager.

Scerpes: bulldg4life: Scerpes: All of this could have been avoided if Martin had just gone straight home.

What...was he walking around in circles at night? Do you have evidence that he WASN'T going home?

It seems like he was walking home and then some guy started following him so he turned and tried to get away.

Logic dictates that he couldn't have gone straight home. He had a head start on Zimmerman. He started running. Zimmerman still had to get out of his truck. There's no reason he shouldn't have beaten Zimmerman the 100 yards to his house.

Possibly, but Martin's girlfriend claims that he refused to run, only walked fast. And Zimmerman was running, so if Zimmerman took a different path than Martin he could easily have ended up between Martin and Martin's safety.

Sir Vanderhoot: Ding ding ding. Judging by the conversations Martin had with others at the time

Can you offer up anything that proves what was said during Martin's conversation with his girlfriend?

On the subject of the girlfriends statement, why is is that she never mentions the fact that Trayvon took off running? Phone records show that she was on the phone with him from before Zimmerman exited his vehicle until just before the shooting. We know that Trayvon runs from what Zimmerman says on the 911 call and even the prosecution doesn't dispute that he ran.

Not only does she not mention that Trayvon ran, she goes as far as claiming that Trayvon said he wasn't going to run. Why? I'll tell you why, she concocted a story and is lying about what really happened because it would be incriminating against Trayvon.

Scerpes: AdmirableSnackbar: Unless Zimmerman ended up between Martin and his home, which is extremely plausible

The only way that's plausible is if Martin stopped running. Or ran somewhere besides straight home.

We don't know that Martin ran.

HailRobonia: So? Trayvon was just standing his ground.

And we're done in 7.

mitEj: So you mean the teenage boyyoung 6'2" man may have defended himself when a crazy person concerned resident chased him down in a SUV in the middle of the night and then chased him into the grass way between houses as he tried to get home to his stepmothers house.
Attempted to follow him and requested the police to contact him as soon as they arrived

The entire point is that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation and killed the teen boy. If the young man fought back that was his right under the statute that Zimmerman erroneously used to get away with murder.

We do no not know who intiated the physical alltercation.

What we do know is
1) a young man is dead
2) the media has grossy mis represented the facts of this case
3) Obama wishes us to know that if he had a son, he'd look like Martin (honeslty, wtf?)

If Zimmerman had "stood his ground" as the 911 operator had told him to, he'd have been waiting at the phone when the police showed up and none of this would have happened.

I've no sympathy for him.

Scerpes: The only way that's plausible is if Martin stopped running.

So, the only way to get away from Zimmerman was to continue to run. Well, then that totally makes it wrong that he didn't get home. He didn't freaking run for his life all the way home.

dinch: Scerpes: 2)Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a)Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or


Here's what I'd like to know about this law. Say I'm pacing back and forth on the sidewalk in front of your house and acting rather suspicious. After a while of this you come out acting all angry like and start telling me to get away from the front of your house. I feel "threatened", so I pull a gun out and shoot you.

Who's at fault?

Simply feeling threatened isn't enough. You have to be in "reasonable fear" of "great bodily harm." That fear must be objectively reasonable.

A broken nose will cause two black eyes. Those are not 3 separate injuries.

austin_millbarge: None of which he would have gotten had he done what the 911 operator said and NOT FOLLOW MARTIN.


And we still don't know that he didn't. There is no evidence, released so far, to refute his claim that he was heading back to his car when Treyvon confronted him. None, zero, zip, zitch. Not that the media would ever point that out.

Fascinating. It doesn't actually matter to the outcome of the case, though. That Trayvon was running away at the time Zimmerman shot him is not in dispute, and that means the threat was neutralized. I support self-defense, and even stand-your-ground laws, but when the threat is neutralized, you stop. This is not a difficult thing to understand.

AdmirableSnackbar: The only way that's plausible is if Martin stopped running. Or ran somewhere besides straight home.

We don't know that Martin ran.

We have evidence that he did - Zimmerman's contemporaneous statement to the 911 dispatcher.