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.

(NewsBusters)   Zimmerman's lawyer: Hey I thought he was guilty and believed everything the media said before I became his lawyer, then I saw the facts, presented it in court and won. Not my fault Americans are a factless lynch mob   (newsbusters.org) divider line 442
    More: Interesting, Mark O'Mara, Benjamin Crump, Alan Dershowitz, guilty  
•       •       •

2799 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Jul 2013 at 1:38 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-15 12:21:32 PM  
Yes. A lawyer changed his opinion based off who was paying him.

America was shocked.
 
2013-07-15 12:27:58 PM  
It's also not his fault the prosecutor overreached with the charges.
 
2013-07-15 12:29:44 PM  
From NewsBusters? Really? When have they every bothered with facts before jumping to conclusions?
 
2013-07-15 12:56:28 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-07-15 12:59:29 PM  
Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges.  The problem is the law in the state of Florida.  All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman.  They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying.  They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

He is responsible for Martin's death, but not guilty of a crime.
 
2013-07-15 01:03:50 PM  
Guilty or not if he would have stayed in his car this whole thing would have never happened.
 
2013-07-15 01:08:35 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges.  The problem is the law in the state of Florida.  All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman.  They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying.  They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

He is responsible for Martin's death, but not guilty of a crime.


I think you still would have been hard to find a jury that would convict no matter what the law said.
 
2013-07-15 01:10:11 PM  

antidisestablishmentarianism: Guilty or not if he would have stayed in his car this whole thing would have never happened.


You haven't got a clue what would have happened. If Martin hadn't punched him in the face, this wouldn't have happened either.
 
2013-07-15 01:15:29 PM  
While NewsBusters has (in my mind and many others, I'm sure) a less-than-stellar reputation, we could always look at the CNN transcript, and glean what we need to know from there: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1307/12/cnr.13.html

...or glean what we WANT to know from there, anyway.

...and it's CNN... *shrug*
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-07-15 01:22:47 PM  

king_nacho: antidisestablishmentarianism: Guilty or not if he would have stayed in his car this whole thing would have never happened.

You haven't got a clue what would have happened. If Martin hadn't punched him in the face, this wouldn't have happened either.


Well, Martin couldn't have punched Zimmerman in the face if Zimmerman had followed in a car instead of on foot.  Not if the window was up.
 
2013-07-15 01:35:43 PM  
Could have thrown a rock, my point simply is that you can't say anything for certain, because you weren't there, and you don't know the state of mind of either of them
 
2013-07-15 01:35:54 PM  

vpb: king_nacho: antidisestablishmentarianism: Guilty or not if he would have stayed in his car this whole thing would have never happened.

You haven't got a clue what would have happened. If Martin hadn't punched him in the face, this wouldn't have happened either.

Well, Martin couldn't have punched Zimmerman in the face if Zimmerman had followed in a car instead of on foot.  Not if the window was up.


Well Zimmerman couldn't have shot Trayvon if he hadn't gone to the store for munchies. The fault is clearly on Martin.
 
2013-07-15 01:39:30 PM  

Elegy: [i.imgur.com image 300x406]


Need more sparkles and wolves in the background with three moons.
 
2013-07-15 01:40:13 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.


Even more sadly, is how many people think this case was tried on "Stand your ground".
 
2013-07-15 01:42:13 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges.  The problem is the law in the state of Florida.  All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman.  They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying.  They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

He is responsible for Martin's death, but not guilty of a crime.


If Zimmerman's parent's wouldn't have farked some 29 or 30 years ago Zimmerman wouldn't be around to kill Martin. I say we charge them with a crime as well since they're partially responsible for this situation.
 
2013-07-15 01:42:58 PM  
Hahahaha - Newsbusters whining about "factless lynch mobs"
 
2013-07-15 01:43:11 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges.  The problem is the law in the state of Florida.  All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman.  They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying.  They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

He is responsible for Martin's death, but not guilty of a crime.


Yeah... it's because of Florida's stand your ground law that he got off:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-f or -firing-warning-shots/
 
2013-07-15 01:43:14 PM  
Yep, it's almost like a bunch of civilians thought Zimmerman was doing something wrong, so they took the law into their own hands, tracked him down and killed him. Doing something like that would be a terrible injustice.
 
2013-07-15 01:44:54 PM  

CtBORDER: Elegy: [i.imgur.com image 300x406]

Need more sparkles and wolves in the background with three moons.


And a waving flag.
 
2013-07-15 01:45:01 PM  
It still amazes me that people think an overweight 29 year old could "stalk" a young guy who could likely have run much faster than Z could walk

They're both stupid: Z for getting out of the car and carrying a gun in violation of Neighborhood Watch regulations, T for not just running back to his house and calling the police. I find it hard to get terribly outraged about two stupid people doing what stupid people do. This kind of thing isn't uncommon

/Don't start pretending I'm a conservative or something, I've earned the ire of both "sides" to this trial
 
2013-07-15 01:45:58 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: AdolfOliverPanties: The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

Even more sadly, is how many people think this case was tried on "Stand your ground".


For shiat's sake THIS.

SYG had NOTHING to do with this case.  I want to throttle the idiot who tries to blame it on Florida law every time I hear it.  This was a straight up self-defense case.  Period.
 
2013-07-15 01:47:11 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges.  The problem is the law in the state of Florida.  All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman.  They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying.  They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

He is responsible for Martin's death, but not guilty of a crime.


In every state except maybe Ohio (there's one goofy one out there) what Zimm did was standard self defense.  This had nothing to do w/ SYG, nor has any proof been shown that Zimm is a racist.
 
2013-07-15 01:47:19 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.


The fault in this is obviously 50/50 as Trayvon Martin did go out walking after dark while black. If Trayvon Martin would have just left his black at home that night, he would still be alive today.

It's kind of ironic that the safest place for Zimmerman now would be a state that doesn't allow concealed carry for any and all idiots that want it and doesn't have a "He's comin' right for us" "Stand yer ground" law.
 
2013-07-15 01:48:47 PM  
I was in my workplace lunch room with several middle-aged black ladies when the OJ verdict came in. There was much rejoicing to say the least. It didn't matter that he most likely did the crime - it was only that a black man got off - that was all that mattered and all that will matter here. A black was killed and a "white" guy did it. Automatic guilty.

Pray for America.
 
2013-07-15 01:49:15 PM  

aircraftkiller: I find it hard to get terribly outraged about two stupid people doing what stupid people do.


I totally agree, it just sucks that Z gets to continue to be stupid in public.
 
2013-07-15 01:49:57 PM  

aircraftkiller: It still amazes me that people think an overweight 29 year old could "stalk" a young guy who could likely have run much faster than Z could walk

They're both stupid: Z for getting out of the car and carrying a gun in violation of Neighborhood Watch regulations, T for not just running back to his house and calling the police. I find it hard to get terribly outraged about two stupid people doing what stupid people do. This kind of thing isn't uncommon

/Don't start pretending I'm a conservative or something, I've earned the ire of both "sides" to this trial


Darwin, man.
 
2013-07-15 01:50:25 PM  

Befuddled: It's kind of ironic that the safest place for Zimmerman now would be a state that doesn't allow concealed carry for any and all idiots that want it and doesn't have a "He's comin' right for us" "Stand yer ground" law.


Again, there was NO STAND YOUR GROUND defense in play here.

Keep repeating that to yourself and anyone else you meet until the urge to show everyone your ignorance passes.
 
2013-07-15 01:51:36 PM  

vonster: Pray for America.


No, I think I'd rather do something than nothing.
 
2013-07-15 01:52:36 PM  

DeathBySmiley: Yes. A lawyer changed his opinion based off who was paying him.


A good lawyer knows to keep his or her opinion out of the equation. It is irrelevant, their job is to represent their client the best they can.
 
2013-07-15 01:52:41 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: AdolfOliverPanties: The problem is the law in the state of Florida. All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman. They made what he did legal.

Even more sadly, is how many people think this case was tried on "Stand your ground".


Yes and no. Zimmerman's team didn't specifically claim it, no.  But, the judge's instructions to the jury (explaining relevant laws)  did in fact reference explain Stand Your Ground quite directly.
 
2013-07-15 01:54:16 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Befuddled: It's kind of ironic that the safest place for Zimmerman now would be a state that doesn't allow concealed carry for any and all idiots that want it and doesn't have a "He's comin' right for us" "Stand yer ground" law.

Again, there was NO STAND YOUR GROUND defense in play here.

Keep repeating that to yourself and anyone else you meet until the urge to show everyone your ignorance passes.


Reading comprehension fail on your part.
 
2013-07-15 01:54:41 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges.  The problem is the law in the state of Florida.  All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman.  They made what he did legal.


Wrong.  Under the self-defense laws of every state, even those where you have a positive duty to retreat, Zimmerman would have in all likelihood acquitted, given the same facts.

Here is the law in my state (New York):

2.  A  person  may  not  use deadly physical force upon another person
  under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
    (a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is  using  or
  about  to  use  deadly  physical  force. Even in such case, however, the
  actor may not use deadly physical force if he or  she  knows  that  with
  complete  personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the
  necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is  under  no
  duty to retreat if he or she is:
    (i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;


Even if Florida law was identical to that (interestingly, I didn't know NYS had Castle Doctrine), he still would have been covered as he couldn't retreat in complete safety to him and others, because Martin had him pinned to the ground.

This case wasn't what you think it was about.
 
2013-07-15 01:55:02 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Befuddled: It's kind of ironic that the safest place for Zimmerman now would be a state that doesn't allow concealed carry for any and all idiots that want it and doesn't have a "He's comin' right for us" "Stand yer ground" law.

Again, there was NO STAND YOUR GROUND defense in play here.

Keep repeating that to yourself and anyone else you meet until the urge to show everyone your ignorance passes.


The two nominally separate strategies are inextricably linked.
 
2013-07-15 01:55:28 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: It's also not his fault the prosecutor overreached with the charges.


...please stop with this. The jury was allowed to consider lesser charges, but acquitted him anyway. In fact, Florida law pretty clearly states that he probably shouldn't have even been tried at all, meaning the prosecutor was "overreaching" by charging him with any crime.  The prosecutor was in zugzwang from Day 1, and he knew it.
 
2013-07-15 01:56:17 PM  

dittybopper: AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges.  The problem is the law in the state of Florida.  All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman.  They made what he did legal.

Wrong.  Under the self-defense laws of every state, even those where you have a positive duty to retreat, Zimmerman would have in all likelihood acquitted, given the same facts.

Here is the law in my state (New York):

2.  A  person  may  not  use deadly physical force upon another person
  under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
    (a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is  using  or
  about  to  use  deadly  physical  force. Even in such case, however, the
  actor may not use deadly physical force if he or  she  knows  that  with
  complete  personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the
  necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is  under  no
  duty to retreat if he or she is:
    (i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;

Even if Florida law was identical to that (interestingly, I didn't know NYS had Castle Doctrine), he still would have been covered as he couldn't retreat in complete safety to him and others, because Martin had him pinned to the ground.

This case wasn't what you think it was about.


Did Treyvon Martin have the right to defended himself from an armed assailant?
 
2013-07-15 01:56:34 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder


yes, but now Zimmerman has to live the rest of his life looking over his shoulder for vigilantes who may try to take the law into their own hands.

The hunter has become the hunted.
 
2013-07-15 01:56:49 PM  

hardinparamedic: vonster: Pray for America.

No, I think I'd rather do something than nothing.


How YOU doin'!
 
2013-07-15 01:57:03 PM  
There's not a shred of doubt in my mind...if the facts of the case were exactly the same, except teenage Trayvon was the guy wandering the neighborhood at night with a loaded pistol and GZ was the unarmed dead guy, there would have been an arrest right then and there, TM would have been tried and found guilty and not a single person here would have cared a bit. Including me.
 
2013-07-15 01:57:18 PM  

dittybopper: AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges.  The problem is the law in the state of Florida.  All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman.  They made what he did legal.

Wrong.  Under the self-defense laws of every state, even those where you have a positive duty to retreat, Zimmerman would have in all likelihood acquitted, given the same facts.

Here is the law in my state (New York):

2.  A  person  may  not  use deadly physical force upon another person
  under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
    (a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is  using  or
  about  to  use  deadly  physical  force. Even in such case, however, the
  actor may not use deadly physical force if he or  she  knows  that  with
  complete  personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the
  necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is  under  no
  duty to retreat if he or she is:
    (i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;

Even if Florida law was identical to that (interestingly, I didn't know NYS had Castle Doctrine), he still would have been covered as he couldn't retreat in complete safety to him and others, because Martin had him pinned to the ground.

This case wasn't what you think it was about.


There's one state in the Midwest that doesn't match the rest of the US (think its Ohio) and the burden of proof is on the defense instead of the prosecution
 
2013-07-15 01:57:35 PM  
The fact that it was Zimmerman who was on the phone with the police not Martin went a long way to corroborate his story. I still think it's his fault but other than being overwhelmingly stupid I don't see that he did anything criminal.

And for god's sake people just because the victim is a different race than the shooter doesn't mean it was racist. All the evidence indicates that Zimmerman followed because Trayvon was wandering around a neighborhood, on foot, at night, in a hoodie not because he was black. I hate to say it but until we can murder each other without immediately jumping to racism we will never live MLK's dream.
 
2013-07-15 01:58:19 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: dittybopper: AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges.  The problem is the law in the state of Florida.  All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman.  They made what he did legal.

Wrong.  Under the self-defense laws of every state, even those where you have a positive duty to retreat, Zimmerman would have in all likelihood acquitted, given the same facts.

Here is the law in my state (New York):

2.  A  person  may  not  use deadly physical force upon another person
  under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
    (a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is  using  or
  about  to  use  deadly  physical  force. Even in such case, however, the
  actor may not use deadly physical force if he or  she  knows  that  with
  complete  personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the
  necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is  under  no
  duty to retreat if he or she is:
    (i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;

Even if Florida law was identical to that (interestingly, I didn't know NYS had Castle Doctrine), he still would have been covered as he couldn't retreat in complete safety to him and others, because Martin had him pinned to the ground.

This case wasn't what you think it was about.

Did Treyvon Martin have the right to defended himself from an armed assailant?


You think ditty's ever going to say that the guy with the gun was in the wrong?
 
2013-07-15 01:58:46 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges.  The problem is the law in the state of Florida.  All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman.  They made what he did legal.

This was a racist, wannabe cop vigilante with a short temper, a shiatty brain that makes horrible decisions and a chip on his shoulder.

Gun owners have a responsibility to be the cooler head, to go away from conflict and confrontation when they are carrying.  They are the ones with the responsibility to ONLY use the weapon in self-defense, and to NOT go looking for situations where they may be forced to defend themselves with it.

Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but according to the farked up Florida law, he did nothing illegal.

He is responsible for Martin's death, but not guilty of a crime.


Amazing you're the 11ty billionth person to get it wrong.  If he had invoked stand your ground he'd have had a hearing to avoid trial.  He would have lost that hearing.  He was found not guilty because he used a self defense...defense.  In a civil trial he could face financial penalties regardless if he is found to have been negligent or what have you.  But stand-your-ground does not apply.  But we can all pretend it does right?  maybe it makes you feel more self righteous?
 
2013-07-15 01:58:47 PM  

aircraftkiller: /Don't start pretending I'm a conservative or something, I've earned the ire of both "sides" to this trial


Both sides are bad so vote child killer?

/New spin on old meme.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-07-15 02:03:23 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Even more sadly, is how many people think this case was tried on "Stand your ground".


Yes, everyone who knows that the immunity from prosecution part of the law (776.032) that has gotten the most attention isn't the whole law.  There is a lot more to it than that. (pdf)

Chapter 776.013(3) states:

(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.
 
2013-07-15 02:03:29 PM  
I am still kind of puzzled why everybody in the US sees the race factor as so important in this case. Martin isn't dead because he is black, he is dead because civilians/morons are allowed to carry guns. In any other civilized country Zimmerman would have stayed in his car because he wouldn't have had a gun.
 
2013-07-15 02:04:04 PM  

aircraftkiller: It still amazes me that people think an overweight 29 year old could "stalk" a young guy who could likely have run much faster than Z could walk

They're both stupid: Z for getting out of the car and carrying a gun in violation of Neighborhood Watch regulations, T for not just running back to his house and calling the police. I find it hard to get terribly outraged about two stupid people doing what stupid people do. This kind of thing isn't uncommon

/Don't start pretending I'm a conservative or something, I've earned the ire of both "sides" to this trial


ionenewsone.files.wordpress.com

On the left is Zimmerman shortly after the shooting, when he was regularly going to the gym and taking mixed martial arts.  He gained a significant amount of weight before the trial even started, and continued to pack on fat during the trial.  His lawyer claimed that he was gorging out of depression, but a few people theorized he did it to deliberately to project that exact image to the jury.  Too fat to catch the kid, much less win a fight with him.
 
2013-07-15 02:04:09 PM  

Mr_Fabulous: There's not a shred of doubt in my mind...if the facts of the case were exactly the same, except teenage Trayvon was the guy wandering the neighborhood at night with a loaded pistol and GZ was the unarmed dead guy, there would have been an arrest right then and there, TM would have been tried and found guilty and not a single person here would have cared a bit. Including me.


Yeah the law is totally biased in favor of Hispanics.....
 
2013-07-15 02:04:37 PM  

Lawnchair: The two nominally separate strategies are inextricably linked.


The defenses' argument was that Martin was pinned on the ground with Trayvon on top of him, which absolutely nullifies any need for "Stand your ground". You do not need to argue you had no requirement to flee when your argument is that there was no ability to flee.

Perhaps you can explain how you see these two legal strategies "are inextricably linked" in anyone but the general public's minds.
 
2013-07-15 02:05:12 PM  

dittybopper: AdolfOliverPanties: Sadly, Zimmerman was not guilty of the charges.  The problem is the law in the state of Florida.  All those assholes who pushed for the stand your ground law to be enacted are have blood on their hands along with Zimmerman.  They made what he did legal.

Wrong.  Under the self-defense laws of every state, even those where you have a positive duty to retreat, Zimmerman would have in all likelihood acquitted, given the same facts.

Here is the law in my state (New York):

2.  A  person  may  not  use deadly physical force upon another person
  under circumstances specified in subdivision one unless:
    (a) The actor reasonably believes that such other person is  using  or
  about  to  use  deadly  physical  force. Even in such case, however, the
  actor may not use deadly physical force if he or  she  knows  that  with
  complete  personal safety, to oneself and others he or she may avoid the
  necessity of so doing by retreating; except that the actor is  under  no
  duty to retreat if he or she is:
    (i) in his or her dwelling and not the initial aggressor;

Even if Florida law was identical to that (interestingly, I didn't know NYS had Castle Doctrine), he still would have been covered as he couldn't retreat in complete safety to him and others, because Martin had him pinned to the ground.

This case wasn't what you think it was about.


How'd he have him pinned to the ground while he was in his car?

The ability to retreat without harm was available throughout the entire pre-fight confrontation, therefore, he had a duty to retreat before the fight started. Thus, he can't use deadly force. It's that simple.  No New York jury you could get would not convict Zimmerman for murder.
 
2013-07-15 02:05:42 PM  

aircraftkiller: carrying a gun in violation of Neighborhood Watch regulations


He wasn't "on duty" that night, he was returning from a trip to the grocery store.  Does participation in Neighborhood Watch require that you must surrender your CCW license?
 
Displayed 50 of 442 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report