Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(610 WIOD)   Zimmerman photos from the night of the incident detailing his injuries, and the 183 pages of court documents, for those who still care, have no life   (610wiod.com) divider line 745
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

7488 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 May 2012 at 1:05 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



745 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-18 03:24:54 PM  

mc6809e: Zimmerman made the right decision. It was his neighborhood and he was doing what he should have to keep it safe.

He guessed correctly that Martin was a drug user. He guessed correctly that Marin was a stranger to the neighborhood. And he guessed correctly that Martin was the sort of person that would try to beat the hell out of someone.


bears repeating.
 
2012-05-18 03:28:02 PM  
If this prosecution fails it will be because florida's definition of what constitutes fear of serious bodily injury is too permissive. Fear of serious bodily injury should require permanent organ damage, life altering phyical injury, or serious disfigurement or some such.
 
2012-05-18 03:29:48 PM  
What are the best pre-riot stretches for looting plasmas and Foot Locker stores?
 
2012-05-18 03:31:07 PM  
One last thing, the idea that treyvon Martin supporters on Fark can keep moving the goal posts and now have settled on "well, Zimmerman might have attacked him first" is really irrelevent as far as this case.

The prosecution as already filed an affidavit, and testified under oath, that they believe Zimmerman got off the phone, chased, confronted, and attacked Martin, continued to assault him while Martin screamed out for help, and finally killed him.. Thus, their reasoning for a premeditated murder, versus a manslaughter charge.

Almost everything about that theory as already been proven wrong, and the State's investigator, who signed off on the affidavit, has testified under oath that they have no evidence to conradict Zimmerman's version of events. By extension, they have no evidence to support their own version of events and all the evidence and witnesses coming out flatly contradict their version of events.

Almost everything Benjamin Crump said about the police, and was repeated unsourced by the media, was flatly wrong. Many of the officers tried really hard to obtain evidence, they took Zimmermans clothes, adminstered a lie detector test, and Zimmerman's story he gave shortly after the events, has been affirmed by every peice of evidence, including witnesses, that has come out later. If he's a liar, he's a damned good one, and may even possess psychic abilities to boot.

During all the hooplah, the lead prosecutor merely scheduled a grand jury trial while the police continued to gather information. When the feds stepped in, they had access to all the information we have now, and clearly saw that Zimmerman was innocent. So the State of Florida absolved everyone on the case, appointed their own reps that will overcharge the case so they can't be seen as racist or incompetent by a hostile media.

The case is a political show trial and it ridiculous that it has come this far.
 
2012-05-18 03:32:19 PM  

relcec: Bontesla SmartestFunniest 2012-05-18 02:19:48 PM

that's all this case hinges on. it has nothing to do with who chased who, what the dispatcher said, who started the actual fight, or whether florida requires Zimmerman to run away before using lethal force because everyone agrees Martin was on top of Zimmerman and had him under control.

Incorrect. The charge is that Zimmerman was acting with a depraved mind. That Zimmerman's actions are consistent with someone acting with blatant disregard for human life.

He (the Defense) will need to affirm to the jury that his actions were legal, reasonable, and necessary to defend himself.


that's exactly what I said, it hinges entirely on whether the jury finds that his actions were reasonable under the circumstances.


Sorry for the confusion - I wasn't taking issue with every single statement you had made. I was only taking issue with something I disagreed with. I should have been clear.

I disagree that this case hinges on whether or not Zimmerman's actions were reasonable. Depraved mind isn't technically the same thing as the reasonable standard. So, I can be unreasonable but still not be depraved. That's the hurdle the prosecution will need to leap in order for the murder 2 charge to land.

behaving reasonably will mean he acted legally. you don't really need to say he needs to prove he acted reasonably AND legally AND that his actions were necessary to defend himself. do you see how your adding words but no substance here?

However, behaving unreasonably may still be legal. For example - if I were to yell at my neighbor because they blew their leafs on to my lawn - it may be an unreasonable response on my part. Yet, me yelling at my neighbor may be completely legal (depending on the content of my speech).

The prosecution is accusing Zimmerman of having a depraved mind at the time of the incident. They have to do more than argue he was being unreasonable. They actually have to establish depravity.

So, when I say that Zimmerman had to act legally, reasonably, and out of necessity - I'm not being redundant. Colloquial speech can be different than legal or technical speech. So, while I may be getting at the same point (a sound mind, for example) - I am making sure several "prongs" are being met. I'm just making an effort to be completely clear because a lot of people will read a general statement and make an argument in the specific.

In other words, it's entirely possible for Zimmerman to have acted unreasonably while still acting legally. It's entirely possible for Zimmerman to have acted reasonably although illegally (see the "Ignorance of the law is not a defense of the law" google results).

and I'd disagree with you about a minor point of florida procedure. Zimmerman merely needs to introduce some evidence he had a reasonable fear of serious bodily injury, then the burden gets thrown back on the prosecutor to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he acted unlawfully. the defendant doesn't have to prove (or affirm) jackshiat.

Your understanding of the law is lacking. Here's a link.

Link
 
2012-05-18 03:32:22 PM  

Magnanimous_J: What are the best pre-riot stretches for looting plasmas and Foot Locker stores?


Don't go for the large stuff. Go for the small, valuable, easily concealable stuff. It's easier to fence and you can grab more.

/work smarter not harder
 
2012-05-18 03:32:43 PM  
DROxINxTHExWIND knows exactly what happened, because, as we all know, he was right there. That is why he can speak with such indignant authority. Right there on the scene. As it happened. Actually, I think there were a bunch of Farkers there with him, although they must have been standing at a different location, because their eye-witness accounts seem to differ.

Hmmm. Well, at least it will all be cleared up when all of you are called to the witness stand.

Your collective firearms, forensics, psychological, and legal expertise will all come in handy too.

//God, is it so much to ask for people to let things play out in, you know, a court of law? With actual witnesses? And actual experts?
//Yes. It is. Silly me. Continue, oh prophets.
 
2012-05-18 03:36:17 PM  

Bontesla: If this goes to trial - I think Zimmerman has a harder time of establishing self-defense based on the information already made available to us. For example - the fact that Martin was shot at a range of 36 inches may be inconsistent with Zimmerman's account.


Except the autopsy report states half that distance ("intermediate range" - 1" to 18").
 
2012-05-18 03:36:46 PM  

codergirl42: redmid17: codergirl42: redmid17: codergirl42: Do you know nothing violent occured at the point? I've already pointed out that assault can take place without violence. Obviously Zimmerman wouldn't feel threatened if he were the one doing the assaulting in the first place though.

You'd have to prove that an assault occurred. How do you plan on doing that?

I don't have any proof I wasn't there, I'm merely speculating. All we have is Zimmerman's word to go on and the evidence that's been submitted into court.

Exactly my point. Prosecutors can't rely on that particular avenue because there is no way to prove it short of Zimmerman absolutely falling apart Law and Order style on the witness stand.

And this is why SYG is retarded.


This is why if you get in an altercation there's only one side of the story that can be told. Don't shoot to injure, shoot to kill. And if you want to murder someone, just make sure you provoke them into attacking you.
 
2012-05-18 03:39:35 PM  

Your Boss: Hence the 'Crow for lunch' comment. but you'll still try to interpret in a way that makes you feel better.


Pilate said "What I have written, I have written".

Write for comprehension if you want to be understood.

s2s2s2: Eye witness > girl on the phone in another location


How so? She heard what was happening, as it was happening, did she not?

s2s2s2: good reason to lie.


OK, I'll bite: what would that "good reason" be? Is she in any sort of personal jeopardy? Does she have a financial interest? What? You seem to be pretty sure of your assertion, so man up and assert it.
 
2012-05-18 03:42:45 PM  

CrazyCracka420: codergirl42: redmid17: codergirl42: redmid17: codergirl42: Do you know nothing violent occured at the point? I've already pointed out that assault can take place without violence. Obviously Zimmerman wouldn't feel threatened if he were the one doing the assaulting in the first place though.

You'd have to prove that an assault occurred. How do you plan on doing that?

I don't have any proof I wasn't there, I'm merely speculating. All we have is Zimmerman's word to go on and the evidence that's been submitted into court.

Exactly my point. Prosecutors can't rely on that particular avenue because there is no way to prove it short of Zimmerman absolutely falling apart Law and Order style on the witness stand.

And this is why SYG is retarded.

This is why if you get in an altercation there's only one side of the story that can be told. Don't shoot to injure, shoot to kill. And if you want to murder someone, just make sure you provoke them into attacking you.


Or just make sure there aren't witnesses to contradict your story.
 
2012-05-18 03:42:49 PM  

daveUSMC: DROxINxTHExWIND knows exactly what happened, because, as we all know, he was right there. That is why he can speak with such indignant authority. Right there on the scene. As it happened. Actually, I think there were a bunch of Farkers there with him, although they must have been standing at a different location, because their eye-witness accounts seem to differ.

Hmmm. Well, at least it will all be cleared up when all of you are called to the witness stand.

Your collective firearms, forensics, psychological, and legal expertise will all come in handy too.

//God, is it so much to ask for people to let things play out in, you know, a court of law? With actual witnesses? And actual experts?
//Yes. It is. Silly me. Continue, oh prophets.


The proper procedure would have been to allow the grand jury trial which was immediately called for by the previous impartial prosecutor.

The current sideshow is merely political theatre, at the intervention of the State and Federal government. That should bother people who are about the rule of law.
 
2012-05-18 03:47:21 PM  

relcec: If this prosecution fails it will be because florida's definition of what constitutes fear of serious bodily injury is too permissive. Fear of serious bodily injury should require permanent organ damage, life altering phyical injury, or serious disfigurement or some such.


Yeah, no one has ever suffered grievous bodily harm from an "MMA style" volley of blows to the head.
 
2012-05-18 03:53:20 PM  

redmid17: Bontesla: redmid17: Bontesla: Incorrect. The charge is that Zimmerman was acting with a depraved mind. That Zimmerman's actions are consistent with someone acting with blatant disregard for human life.

He (the Defense) will need to affirm to the jury that his actions were legal, reasonable, and necessary to defend himself.

He doesn't need to prove it to a jury. He just needs to prove by a preponderance of evidence to a judge that he was acting in self-defense. Murder-2 is a pretty heft charge, and there's a reason why the police recommended manslaughter charges in the capias referral.

In the pre-trial motion, the judge can throw the case out of it is evident that Zimmerman was acting in self-defense. I believe that this is likely what's going to happen. But, we'll see....

If Zimmerman is unable to establish that he was acting in self-defense then the case will move forward to a jury.

In both instances - the burden of proof is on Zimmerman (although to varying degrees).

Murder 2 isn't such a reach - and it leaves the option for Zimmerman to plea to a lesser charge if the trial isn't going his way. The charge places the prosecution with a little bit of advantage. All the prosecution has to do is establish that Zimmerman was behaving in a manner consistent with the depraved mind requirements (at trial). After all - it appears that Zimmerman did escalate (in a totally legally manner) the incident by following (even against the dispatcher's request), entering into a poorly lit area at dusk to follow someone he felt was potentially dangerous, and not identifying himself to Martin as someone who means no harm.

The fact is - there's certainly ways Zimmerman could have gone about this that wouldn't have resulted in Martin's death. While it doesn't secure a victory for the prosecution - it can help to show that Zimmerman was of deranged mind. We're going to need to see this play out.

If this goes to trial - I think Zimmerman has a harder time of establishing self-def ...



So, I got the "36" inches from the below link. The ME documents attached.

Link

Where did you get yours?

Not being snarky. I don't have enough time to follow the 24 hour news cycle - so you may have more precise information than I do.
 
2012-05-18 03:55:51 PM  

codergirl42: CrazyCracka420: codergirl42: redmid17: codergirl42: redmid17: codergirl42: Do you know nothing violent occured at the point? I've already pointed out that assault can take place without violence. Obviously Zimmerman wouldn't feel threatened if he were the one doing the assaulting in the first place though.

You'd have to prove that an assault occurred. How do you plan on doing that?

I don't have any proof I wasn't there, I'm merely speculating. All we have is Zimmerman's word to go on and the evidence that's been submitted into court.

Exactly my point. Prosecutors can't rely on that particular avenue because there is no way to prove it short of Zimmerman absolutely falling apart Law and Order style on the witness stand.

And this is why SYG is retarded.

This is why if you get in an altercation there's only one side of the story that can be told. Don't shoot to injure, shoot to kill. And if you want to murder someone, just make sure you provoke them into attacking you.

Or just make sure there aren't witnesses to contradict your story.


This is what I think will ultimately be the culmination of this case after the trial ... these stand your ground laws will basically lose a lot of support among the public, because with the way that they're described seem ... well, absolutely psychotic.

If I were a proponent of concealed weapons or SYG laws, I would hope they throw Zimmerman in the clink and throw away the key and distance myself as far away from him as possible. Even if he's legally in the clear, if a guy with mental illness under numerous prescribed psychoactive medications can carry a concealed weapon and act out as a vigilante, conduct his own police work, instigate confrontations with people he suspects to be perpetrators and blow them away if it leads to an altercation or turns sour ... it's certainly not doing your cause any favors.
 
2012-05-18 03:56:49 PM  

Oh_Enough_Already: When Zimmerman is acquitted, will all the thug apologists be rushing down to their nearest footlocker to act as human shields against the rioters?

If they really truly believe the whargarble they're preaching I hope they will.

Be like unto Jesus and give up your own life to quell the ravenous black mobs.

It's the right white thing to do.



Thug apologists? Zimmerman probably didn't do anything illegal, but neither did Martin.
 
2012-05-18 03:57:57 PM  

Oh_Enough_Already: When Zimmerman is acquitted, will all the thug apologists be rushing down to their nearest footlocker to act as human shields against the rioters?

If they really truly believe the whargarble they're preaching I hope they will.

Be like unto Jesus and give up your own life to quell the ravenous black mobs.

It's the right white thing to do.


You do your cause proud. Keep it up.
 
2012-05-18 03:59:53 PM  

Bontesla: redmid17: Bontesla: redmid17: Bontesla: Incorrect. The charge is that Zimmerman was acting with a depraved mind. That Zimmerman's actions are consistent with someone acting with blatant disregard for human life.

He (the Defense) will need to affirm to the jury that his actions were legal, reasonable, and necessary to defend himself.

He doesn't need to prove it to a jury. He just needs to prove by a preponderance of evidence to a judge that he was acting in self-defense. Murder-2 is a pretty heft charge, and there's a reason why the police recommended manslaughter charges in the capias referral.

In the pre-trial motion, the judge can throw the case out of it is evident that Zimmerman was acting in self-defense. I believe that this is likely what's going to happen. But, we'll see....

If Zimmerman is unable to establish that he was acting in self-defense then the case will move forward to a jury.

In both instances - the burden of proof is on Zimmerman (although to varying degrees).

Murder 2 isn't such a reach - and it leaves the option for Zimmerman to plea to a lesser charge if the trial isn't going his way. The charge places the prosecution with a little bit of advantage. All the prosecution has to do is establish that Zimmerman was behaving in a manner consistent with the depraved mind requirements (at trial). After all - it appears that Zimmerman did escalate (in a totally legally manner) the incident by following (even against the dispatcher's request), entering into a poorly lit area at dusk to follow someone he felt was potentially dangerous, and not identifying himself to Martin as someone who means no harm.

The fact is - there's certainly ways Zimmerman could have gone about this that wouldn't have resulted in Martin's death. While it doesn't secure a victory for the prosecution - it can help to show that Zimmerman was of deranged mind. We're going to need to see this play out.

If this goes to trial - I think Zimmerman has a harder time of establishing self-def ...


So, I got the "36" inches from the below link. The ME documents attached.

Link

Where did you get yours?

Not being snarky. I don't have enough time to follow the 24 hour news cycle - so you may have more precise information than I do.


It says "within 36 inches"

"Intermediate range" as less to do with actual distance, as it essentially means "within range that they are effected by gunpowder residue", yet not a contact wound where the gun is pressed directly against the skin.

Thus, while there can be different interpretations of how far that might be, it essentially means pretty friggin close. Plus it depends on the type of weapon, ammo that was used, etc.
 
2012-05-18 04:00:54 PM  

InmanRoshi: because with the way that they're described seem ... well, absolutely psychotic


Because they allow you to defend yourself when an " ZOMG: unarmed black teen" attacks you? What makes them sound psychotic?
 
2012-05-18 04:01:52 PM  
Then, after shrugging off four blows to the head like I was Superman, I shot Trayvon-nine-years-of-Jeet-Kune-Do-Martin..........
25.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-05-18 04:02:01 PM  

Theaetetus: 1) Didn't the reports yesterday say these photos were from the following day, not the same night?

2) Why has it taken months for them to come out, particularly with all of the complaints about the video at the police station not showing any blood? If they had still photos, why did we have to go through that week of "look, the video shows nothing! Oh, we've enhanced the video, and maybe there's something... But this video-enhancement guy disagrees and suggests it's just an artifact..."? Why didn't the police just say "here's a full color close up photo"? Were they trying to start riots?


Are you new? Yes the media was trying to start riots.
 
2012-05-18 04:07:31 PM  

Splinshints: Alternately, I invite you to test your theory as I did the other completely wrong poster who also didn't know what he was talking about. You find a woman, follow her around in your car, wait till she runs, get out, and chase her and tell her to stop.


And I have plans for the weekend...
 
2012-05-18 04:07:32 PM  

Splinshints: Did they determine that Zimmerman DIDN'T follow the kid down the street, DIDN'T get out of his car and DIDN'T ignore a request from a 911 operator to leave it to the police?

No.

Then Zimmerman is still the aggressor based on the evidence and unless there's still something else we don't know about, he deserves prison time.

I'd sure hate to live in a country where we set the standard that you can get off on murder as long as you make a concerted effort to goad somebody into attacking you first.

/ or would I....


Based on what evidence? wait..there is none...what if it went down like this " Hey man, what are you doing in this neighborhood?" "Fark you whitey, keep following me and ill beat the shiat out of you" "I am part of the neighborhood watch" "great, enjoy this beat down" "help help' BANG
 
2012-05-18 04:09:46 PM  

InmanRoshi: codergirl42: CrazyCracka420: codergirl42: redmid17: codergirl42: redmid17: codergirl42: Do you know nothing violent occured at the point? I've already pointed out that assault can take place without violence. Obviously Zimmerman wouldn't feel threatened if he were the one doing the assaulting in the first place though.

You'd have to prove that an assault occurred. How do you plan on doing that?

I don't have any proof I wasn't there, I'm merely speculating. All we have is Zimmerman's word to go on and the evidence that's been submitted into court.

Exactly my point. Prosecutors can't rely on that particular avenue because there is no way to prove it short of Zimmerman absolutely falling apart Law and Order style on the witness stand.

And this is why SYG is retarded.

This is why if you get in an altercation there's only one side of the story that can be told. Don't shoot to injure, shoot to kill. And if you want to murder someone, just make sure you provoke them into attacking you.

Or just make sure there aren't witnesses to contradict your story.

This is what I think will ultimately be the culmination of this case after the trial ... these stand your ground laws will basically lose a lot of support among the public, because with the way that they're described seem ... well, absolutely psychotic.

If I were a proponent of concealed weapons or SYG laws, I would hope they throw Zimmerman in the clink and throw away the key and distance myself as far away from him as possible. Even if he's legally in the clear, if a guy with mental illness under numerous prescribed psychoactive medications can carry a concealed weapon and act out as a vigilante, conduct his own police work, instigate confrontations with people he suspects to be perpetrators and blow them away if it leads to an altercation or turns sour ... it's certainly not doing your cause any favors.


Especially if the only evidence is his word. Because the dead can't be compelled to testify on their behalf.
 
2012-05-18 04:11:08 PM  

ChuDogg: One last thing, the idea that treyvon Martin supporters on Fark can keep moving the goal posts and now have settled on "well, Zimmerman might have attacked him first" is really irrelevent as far as this case.


Here's what happened:

- Zimmerman's grandfather held a grudge against Martin's grandfather, for reasons that seemed really important back then, but unfortunately have been lost to the mists of time.

- The fact that both were in Sanford at the time, the as-ye-unexplained incident with women's jewelry discovered in Martin's backpack, his suspension from school, electing Obama as President -- it's all part of the grand conspiracy. It's all just a little too convenient, if you know what I mean.

- In other words, Zimmerman has been groomed from birth (or before birth, really) to be a master assassin and instrument of Grandpa Zimmerman's undying, multi-generational rage and vindictiveness.

/It could be true.
//As long as we're going to speculate ...
 
2012-05-18 04:11:21 PM  

PC LOAD LETTER: TheShavingofOccam123: A third way was Martin became aware he was being followed. He started home but decided to conceal himself. Zimmerman walked past him and Martin jumped him. Martin beat the crap out of Zimmerman, Zimmerman screamed for help, then pulled his gun and shot the kid in self-defense. There's plenty of other scenarios but I figure that is probably pretty close to what happened.

I agree, but that's not self-defense. That's still shooting an unarmed kid dead. From "intermediate range". So he had time to get up and take out his gun, undo the safety, and shoot him in the heart. If you have a gun, you don't shoot to kill unless the other person has a farking weapon. This is what happens when you decide to go Yosemite Sam. There was nothing here that warranted deadly force. Stupid man provokes a fight, gets his ass handed to him, decides to win by killing him with a shot to the chest from some distance away. Nice.


Actually, if you are going to brandish a firearm you should only do so if you plan to use it as deadly force. Warning shots indicate that the circumstances did not escalate to a point where deadly force was needed, yet you used deadly force. i.e. attempted murder etc
 
2012-05-18 04:14:14 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: I don't see a neighborhood watch person like Zimmerman actually picking a fight with a 6'3'' person


You've obviously never walked the street with a concealed, loaded handgun.
 
2012-05-18 04:21:39 PM  

Bontesla: So, I got the "36" inches from the below link. The ME documents attached.

Link

Where did you get yours?

Not being snarky. I don't have enough time to follow the 24 hour news cycle - so you may have more precise information than I do.


My mistake - I did read that article, and the autopsy report only references "intermediate range". I did hear an interview with some forensic expert where he stated the 1"-18" data point. I just merged the two together...
 
2012-05-18 04:22:08 PM  
When "keeping it real in the hood" goes wrong.

The "No Limit nubian" got offended that some honky thought he looked suspicious and wanted to teach that cracker a lesson. Oops, turns out that's not a good idea when the cracker is armed.
 
2012-05-18 04:24:26 PM  

Bontesla: So, I got the "36" inches from the below link. The ME documents attached.

Link

Where did you get yours?

Not being snarky. I don't have enough time to follow the 24 hour news cycle - so you may have more precise information than I do.


Forensic report - Link

But there are different descriptions of the gunshot wound to Martin. The Volusia County Medical Examiner said the shot was at a "intermediate range." However, the FDLE report notes residue from the gun is consistent with a "contact shot."

Pathologist's book defining intermediate range : Link

Starts at 10 mm
 
2012-05-18 04:24:56 PM  

s2s2s2: InmanRoshi: because with the way that they're described seem ... well, absolutely psychotic

Because they allow you to defend yourself when an " ZOMG: unarmed black teen" attacks you? What makes them sound psychotic?


Prior to the SYG laws Zimmerman clearly would have been in violation of the law to persue Martin. Concealed weapon holders were ordered to avoid conflict at all costs, unless you were inside your home and then the Castle Clause came into effect. The purpose of SYG was to remove the order for concealed gun carriers to flee a possible situation if at all possible, so you could you could defend yourself. That's a huge leap from letting people create their own dangerous situations, and then letting them lean on the SYG laws to shield them from your own stupidity and self created confrontations they instigated. So now if a guy makes lewd remarks about woman in front of her husband, if the husband retaliates by punching the guy, the instigator is legally in the clear to blow him away? This is going to seem insane to a lot of people.

Zimmerman will now and forever be the face of Stand Your Ground laws, and maybe even concealed weapons going forward. Everything about George Zimmerman and all his deep dark secrets are going to be trotted out in court for the cameras as the prosecution goes about establishing motive. We know they have eye witness accounts of Zimmerman showing racist behavior. We already know they've inquired about his medications he was taking for any mental illnesses. We're going to hear about every off color joke. Every uttered racial slur. You can bet they're going to bring out why he was disqualified from police academy . By the time this trial is over, whether Zimmerman is declared legally innocent or guilty, he will be painted as a racist nutjob.

If you're a friend of concealed weapons and stand your ground laws, this is not a man or an incident you want to get behind.
 
2012-05-18 04:26:04 PM  

natas6.0: roughly a thousand murders in florida every year since 1970.

nobody gave a damn before

so why should I start caring now?



No one asked you too.

/Carry on.
 
2012-05-18 04:29:00 PM  

serpent_sky: kingoomieiii: And once again this amount of blood looks ridiculous to me. It's a head wound, for christ's sake, allegedly from repeatedly slamming the head against the sidewalk. Almost no blood. Doesn't even look like there's bruising. Again, HEAD WOUND.

And why is there no blood on his clothes from a supposedly broken nose and head wound? You'd really think there would be some blood on his clothing after all of this. (Maybe they changed his clothes? You'd think there would also be spatter from shooting someone at close range as well)


Because generally when someone is covered in blood you wipe them off before their blood gets on someone else, potentially getting them sick. You can't have a bloody person walking around.
 
2012-05-18 04:29:19 PM  
Most likely with this new evidence the prosecution can't satisfy the burden of evidence for murder 2. Had they left it at negligent manslaughter they probably would be able to make a case. However Martin slamming Zimmerman's head into the ground and busting his nose alone would give him the right to shoot in Florida. Add the fact that Martin had drugs in his system (whether or not it matters to you isn't important, its the jury that matters) and murder 2 will go byebye. I don't really understand why they chose that charge to begin with... in PA murder 2 is murder in commission of another crime, non premeditated (IE you rob someone and they have a heart attack).
 
2012-05-18 04:29:35 PM  

InmanRoshi: Prior to the SYG laws Zimmerman clearly would have been in violation of the law to persue Martin


Under what statute?
 
2012-05-18 04:34:20 PM  
How about this problem be decided by trial of combat?

encrypted-tbn1.google.com
 
2012-05-18 04:37:06 PM  

Drubell: How about this problem be decided by trial of combat?

[encrypted-tbn1.google.com image 259x194]


I've never known the man to be wrong in matters of combat.
 
2012-05-18 04:52:36 PM  

s2s2s2: InmanRoshi: Prior to the SYG laws Zimmerman clearly would have been in violation of the law to persue Martin

Under what statute?


The duty to retreat.
 
2012-05-18 04:54:11 PM  

Bontesla:

that's exactly what I said, it hinges entirely on whether the jury finds that his actions were reasonable under the circumstances.

Sorry for the confusion - I wasn't taking issue with every single statement you had made. I was only taking issue with something I disagreed with. I should have been clear.

I disagree that this case hinges on whether or not Zimmerman's actions were reasonable. Depraved mind isn't technically the same thing as the reasonable standard. So, I can be unreasonable but still not be depraved. That's the hurdle the prosecution will need to leap in order for the murder 2 charge to land.



this might be our problem. do you know what an affirmative defense actually is?

it is an absolute legal excuse for alleged crime. it doesn't matter even a little bit if the prosecution can prove the elements of the charged crime if they can't get over the legal excuse to what they are accusing him of. this case is absolutely about whether Zimmerman's state of mind was reasonable because he will quite obviously guilty of an unlawful killing of some sort if he can't rely on this affirmative defense. if the prosecution can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that zimmerman did not act reasonably we don't even get to mens rea. it's over.



behaving reasonably will mean he acted legally. you don't really need to say he needs to prove he acted reasonably AND legally AND that his actions were necessary to defend himself. do you see how your adding words but no substance here?

However, behaving unreasonably may still be legal. For example - if I were to yell at my neighbor because they blew their leafs on to my lawn - it may be an unreasonable response on my part. Yet, me yelling at my neighbor may be completely legal (depending on the content of my speech).

The prosecution is accusing Zimmerman of having a depraved mind at the time of the incident. They have to do more than argue he was being unreasonable. They actually have to establish depravity.

So, when I say that Zimmerman had to act legally, reasonably, and out of necessity - I'm not being redundant. Colloquial speech can be different than legal or technical speech. So, while I may be getting at the same point (a sound mind, for example) - I am making sure several "prongs" are being met. I'm just making an effort to be completely clear because a lot of people will read a general statement and make an argument in the specific.

In other words, it's entirely possible for Zimmerman to have acted unreasonably while still acting legally. It's entirely possible for Zimmerman to have acted reasonably although illegally (see the "Ignorance of the law is not a defense of the law" google results).

and I'd disagree with you about a minor point of florida procedure. Zimmerman merely needs to introduce some evidence he had a reasonable fear of serious bodily injury, then the burden gets thrown back on the prosecutor to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he acted unlawfully. the defendant doesn't have to prove (or affirm) jackshiat.

Your understanding of the law is lacking. Here's a link.

Link


the rest of this stuff is complete nonsense. you aren't hitting several prongs of self defense by saying reasonably, legally, and necessarily. you're just being redundant. you're being a cargo lawyer. you're saying big words you hear other people say and expecting magic will make it legal analysis. and how is it possible for zimmerman to act reasonably in shooting martin but still illegally? what the f*ck are you talking about man?!?!? if he does that he's a free man.

and the link doesn't say anything that contradicts me. you just posted a link from a lawyers website and said you are wrong. wtf is that about?

and you are dead wrong about the burden shifting to the defense to affirm that he acted in a reasonable manner. all the defense is required to do is merely introduce evidence that he was acting in self defense. then the burden is back on the prosecution.


http://www.ohioverticals.com/blogs/akron_law_cafe/2012/04/zimmermans -l ow-burden-of-proof-on-the-issue-of-self-defense/
Zimmerman's Low Burden of Proof on the Issue of Self Defense

by Professor Will Huhn on April 13, 2012

in Criminal Law,Wilson Huhn

In her news conference announcing that George Zimmerman was being charged with second degree murder in the death of Trayvon Martin, Florida Special Prosecutor Angela Corey mentioned several times that self-defense is an "affirmative defense" under Florida law. She also said that "Stand Your Ground" is "a tough affirmative defense to overcome." It will be "tough" for the prosecution because although Zimmerman has to introduce some evidence that he acted in self-defense, that doesn't mean that he has to convince the jury that he acted in self-defense. All he has to do is to create a "reasonable doubt" as to whether he acted in self-defense. A proposed amendment to the Florida Jury Instructions makes that perfectly clear.

Six years ago in Murray v. State, 937 So.2d 277, 279 (Fla. 4th Dist. 2006), the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Florida ruled that once a defendant in a criminal case has introduced proof that he acted in self-defense the jury is entitled to consider the defense, and the jury may not convict the defendant unless it finds beyond a reasonable that he did not act in self-defense. The Fourth District Court of Appeal stated:
 
2012-05-18 04:54:22 PM  

ChuDogg: One last thing, the idea that treyvon Martin supporters on Fark can keep moving the goal posts and now have settled on "well, Zimmerman might have attacked him first" is really irrelevent as far as this case.

The prosecution as already filed an affidavit, and testified under oath, that they believe Zimmerman got off the phone, chased, confronted, and attacked Martin, continued to assault him while Martin screamed out for help, and finally killed him.. Thus, their reasoning for a premeditated murder, versus a manslaughter charge.

Almost everything about that theory as already been proven wrong, and the State's investigator, who signed off on the affidavit, has testified under oath that they have no evidence to conradict Zimmerman's version of events. By extension, they have no evidence to support their own version of events and all the evidence and witnesses coming out flatly contradict their version of events.

Almost everything Benjamin Crump said about the police, and was repeated unsourced by the media, was flatly wrong. Many of the officers tried really hard to obtain evidence, they took Zimmermans clothes, adminstered a lie detector test, and Zimmerman's story he gave shortly after the events, has been affirmed by every peice of evidence, including witnesses, that has come out later. If he's a liar, he's a damned good one, and may even possess psychic abilities to boot.

During all the hooplah, the lead prosecutor merely scheduled a grand jury trial while the police continued to gather information. When the feds stepped in, they had access to all the information we have now, and clearly saw that Zimmerman was innocent. So the State of Florida absolved everyone on the case, appointed their own reps that will overcharge the case so they can't be seen as racist or incompetent by a hostile media.

The case is a political show trial and it ridiculous that it has come this far.



hazzah! a calm and rational assessment of the events and trial, thank you, good sir, your posts will not immediately be disregarded as most are in this thread.
 
2012-05-18 04:55:21 PM  
Has anyone else noticed that as more and more evidence comes to light that confirms Zimmerman's story and paints a more accurate picture of Martin's character, Al Sharpton & Jessee Jackson seem to have shut the fark up? What ya wanna bet they're going to distance themselves from this whole thing? They see the writing on the wall and they're both shrewd enough to avoid being on the wrong side of history here. They're like free agents who quit a team that is showing a losing trend.
 
2012-05-18 04:58:53 PM  
So just out of curiosity. Does SYG mean that duels are legal again?
 
2012-05-18 05:01:39 PM  

LeroyBourne: Even if this guy walks, he's gonna have to move to the other side of the world. His life is totally farked regardless.



I'm not so sure about that. Based on the threads and comments I've read since this all went down, Zimmerman has a legion of fans out there. Some have called him a hero for what he did.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if he becomes a very popular figure and makes some good money from his notoriety.
 
2012-05-18 05:01:50 PM  

Woot_Gawd: Splinshints:
Based on what evidence? wait..there is none...what if it went down like this " Hey man, what are you doing in this neighborhood?" "Fark you whitey, keep following me and ill beat the shiat out of you" "I am part of the neighborhood watch" "great, enjoy this beat down" "help help' BANG


Do you think there is any reasonable human being on this planet who would buy that story?

Even if it were true, Zimmerman is still the aggressor, the kid didn't notice/follow/stalk/pursue Zimmerman.
 
2012-05-18 05:03:36 PM  

codergirl42: So just out of curiosity. Does SYG mean that duels are legal again?


Some states outlaw dueling but others don't. SYG doesn't cover you if you're engaging in illegal activity. If your state doesn't outlaw it, it might technically be legal if your state has a Florida style SYG law.
 
2012-05-18 05:04:48 PM  

InmanRoshi: The duty to retreat


I asked for a statute. How does one retreat when pinned down?
 
2012-05-18 05:06:28 PM  

CrazyCracka420: How can you initiate a confrontation with someone, make them feel their life is in danger enough to defend themselves, and then yourself claim self defense?

When you are the aggressor, you can't claim self defense...

Like others are saying, this is a bad precedent to set. So if I don't like someone, I just corner them in a dark alley, threaten I'm going to kill them, and as soon as they raise their fist, I draw and kill them?

Am I missing something here?


A Lot actually.

First off, your analogy was recently tried (in FL, no less) and made FARK, where it was made pretty apparent that the law does not permit that. Link

as for the rest of your comments, others have already pointed out the logical and factual errors, so I won't rehash those.

Still too early to determine Zimmerman's guilt/innocence, but the information released definitely shows that his account of events has more credence than originally presumed or reported.
 
2012-05-18 05:07:34 PM  
DID YOU STOP THE INTERNET?
 
2012-05-18 05:08:02 PM  

Blowmonkey: Woot_Gawd: Splinshints:
Based on what evidence? wait..there is none...what if it went down like this " Hey man, what are you doing in this neighborhood?" "Fark you whitey, keep following me and ill beat the shiat out of you" "I am part of the neighborhood watch" "great, enjoy this beat down" "help help' BANG

Do you think there is any reasonable human being on this planet who would buy that story?

Even if it were true, Zimmerman is still the aggressor, the kid didn't notice/follow/stalk/pursue Zimmerman.


SYG doesn't care if Zimmerman pursued Martin or not. Even if Zimmerman swung first, if Martin escalated the situation to a sufficient level (eg to the level of inflicting great bodily harm or death) and Zimmerman is unable to escape, he is legally in the clear.

There was a guy who grabbed a knife and chased down a thief who stole his car radio. The thief swung a bag of radios at the knife holder's head, and the guy stabbed and killed him. A judge dismissed the charge and granted immunity because a bag of stolen radios can apparently inflict great bodily harm.
 
2012-05-18 05:09:27 PM  

s2s2s2: InmanRoshi: The duty to retreat

I asked for a statute. How does one retreat when pinned down?


How does one get pinned down so far away from their own home if they've sufficiently retreated to "the last wall"?
 
Displayed 50 of 745 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report