RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea...

RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DarqueMirror -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 12:58:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 4u2spoil Let's see. Man has a gun, man shoots person without gun. Yeah, no possible crime there /sarcasm Possible, yes. Definite, no. quote: ORIGINAL: 4u2spoil (Infantile name calling deleted)..., what I'm actually saying is that a man shooting a person who does not have a deadly weapon is probably a criminal act which should be investigated. And this is being investigated. quote: ORIGINAL: 4u2spoil The person responsible for the act should normally be arrested, and justifications for the act should be worked out before a judge. There was sufficient evidence to arrest Zimmerman for manslaughter. Well, trained law enforcement officers and prosecutors seem to disagree with you. You don't mind if I trust the guys with law degrees and experience in criminal justice over you, right? Good.

provfivetine -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 5:43:54 AM)
So many emotionally charged outbursts here, which are all irrelevant. Fact: Martin aggressed upon Zimmerman. http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/news/state/witness-martin-attacked-zimmerman-03232012 You can use lethal self-defense in this instance, and what Zimmerman did was legal. There's a reason that he hasn't been charged.

Hillwilliam -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:05:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror quote: ORIGINAL: 4u2spoil No, it just means that the guy wasn't prepared for the defense coming his way. I remember a woman who was a martial arts expert being attacked by a guy in New York. Her attacker obviously didn't know she was a black belt. She laid the guy out on his ass until the police got there and could arrest the ATTACKER. Even though he lost. You seem to be missing the "reasonable" portion of the "reasonable doubt." Sometimes people start fights, and sometimes they lose the fights they start. The outcome of the fight doesn't "prove" anything about who started it. Apples and oranges. That woman was attacked. Zimmerman only followed and spoke to Martin, who thn followed him as he tried to leave. To quote you. How do you know. You weren't there. You have a nice timeline for things that you didn't see.

Hillwilliam -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:11:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror quote: ORIGINAL: 4u2spoil Let's see. Man has a gun, man shoots person without gun. Yeah, no possible crime there /sarcasm Possible, yes. Definite, no. quote: ORIGINAL: 4u2spoil (Infantile name calling deleted)..., what I'm actually saying is that a man shooting a person who does not have a deadly weapon is probably a criminal act which should be investigated. And this is being investigated. quote: ORIGINAL: 4u2spoil The person responsible for the act should normally be arrested, and justifications for the act should be worked out before a judge. There was sufficient evidence to arrest Zimmerman for manslaughter. Well, trained law enforcement officers and prosecutors seem to disagree with you. You don't mind if I trust the guys with law degrees and experience in criminal justice over you, right? Good. Do you think the fact that Zimmerman's dad is a retired judge has anything to do with it? You automatically trust the PD. I rate that as very naive. In the town I'm in right now, I trust them implicitly. When I lived in miami, I didn't trust them as far as I could throw them. The Sanford PD already has several black marks on their record concerning protecting relatives. This would lead me to think they are closer to miami in behavior than my local PD. Trust but verify.

Hillwilliam -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:15:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: provfivetine So many emotionally charged outbursts here, which are all irrelevant. Fact: Martin aggressed upon Zimmerman. http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/news/state/witness-martin-attacked-zimmerman-03232012 You can use lethal self-defense in this instance, and what Zimmerman did was legal. There's a reason that he hasn't been charged. I'm going to correct that. FACT: A witness saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. There is no evidence in the witness statement as to who attacked who. I have never attacked anyone. I HAVE, however, severely damaged a couple. Just because you get your butt kicked doesn't mean you weren't the agressor.

farglebargle -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:16:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Didn't I JUST get through explaining how you CANNOT invoke 776.013 as a defense because 776.041 SPECIFICALLY EXEMPTS it. 776.041 Use of force by aggressor. 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 Nice editing, but what the statute actually says is: 776.041 Use of force by aggressor. — The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who: (1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or (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 (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force. Even if Zimmerman is everything you say he is, your willingness to snip and trim the law in order to convict him is despicable. K. Well, for the purposes of the prosecution's MANSLAUGHTER CHARGES, it's irrelevant, but in the affirmative defense, this is actually a VERY GOOD POINT. THIS IS NOT THE PLACE TO ARGUE IT, THOUGH. It's a decision for a Judge to decide in pretrial motions against a manslaughter charge, since those facts are established and uncontested or a Jury at trial if the facts are at issue. So, why is the Sanford PD denying Due Process and Equal Protection of the Law to someone who is accused of manslaughter? THAT is what the FBI and DOJ are going to figure out.

farglebargle -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:21:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: provfivetine So many emotionally charged outbursts here, which are all irrelevant. Fact: Martin aggressed upon Zimmerman. http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/news/state/witness-martin-attacked-zimmerman-03232012 You can use lethal self-defense in this instance, and what Zimmerman did was legal. There's a reason that he hasn't been charged. Stop using this disproven anonymous claim from a fox news source. TWO 9-1-1 calls verify that Zimmerman was standing over Martin's dead body in one of the 9-1-1 caller's backyards. I can't wait until the FBI rounds up depositions on everyone and establishes a clear timeline.

provfivetine -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:21:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam I'm going to correct that. FACT: A witness saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. There is no evidence in the witness statement as to who attacked who. I have never attacked anyone. I HAVE, however, severely damaged a couple. Just because you get your butt kicked doesn't mean you weren't the agressor. Irrelevant (and no one cares about your personal story). A witness saw Martin on top of Zimmerman punching him. That's aggression. Paramedics confirmed the wounds that resulted from this beating. Apparently, he suffered a broken nose and a lacerated skull. If you want to ignore evidence provided by the witness, then this amounts to an all out assault on legal recourse.

Hillwilliam -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:25:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: provfivetine quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam I'm going to correct that. FACT: A witness saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. There is no evidence in the witness statement as to who attacked who. I have never attacked anyone. I HAVE, however, severely damaged a couple. Just because you get your butt kicked doesn't mean you weren't the agressor. Irrelevant (and no one cares about your personal story). A witness saw Martin on top of Zimmerman punching him. That's aggression. Paramedics confirmed the wounds that resulted from this beating. Apparently, he suffered a broken nose and a lacerated skull. If you want to ignore evidence provided by the witness, then this amounts to an all out assault on legal recourse. I will repeat. Winning is NOT agression. If you jump me, I was not the agressor. If you end up a broken mess, I was still not the agressor, you were. (by the way, there's no such thing as a 'lacerated skull'.)

farglebargle -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:25:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: provfivetine quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam I'm going to correct that. FACT: A witness saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. There is no evidence in the witness statement as to who attacked who. I have never attacked anyone. I HAVE, however, severely damaged a couple. Just because you get your butt kicked doesn't mean you weren't the agressor. Irrelevant (and no one cares about your personal story). A witness saw Martin on top of Zimmerman punching him. That's aggression. Paramedics confirmed the wounds that resulted from this beating. Apparently, he suffered a broken nose and a lacerated skull. If you want to ignore evidence provided by the witness, then this amounts to an all out assault on legal recourse. What witness? Where is their SWORN STATEMENT? That aside, Since Zimmerman was, without legal authority, armed and chasing after Martin, who was going about his lawful business. Martin is COMPLETELY JUSTIFIED in self-defense under 776.013(3). How close do you let an armed attacker, twice your size, get before you consider them a threat?

provfivetine -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:26:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Stop using this disproven anonymous claim. TWO 9-1-1 calls verify that Zimmerman was standing over Martin's dead body in one of the 9-1-1 caller's backyards. I can't wait until the FBI rounds up depositions on everyone and establishes a clear timeline. The article I linked to contains the best sourced witness, who talked to the police that night (the only one). Why would it matter that Zimmerman was standing over Martin's dead body? This means nothing. Martin aggressed upon Zimmerman and was shot because of it, and justly so. You just say it's disproven, then say nothing. That's just an assertion without an argument (or evidence). Good job. I'm glad you're not a lawyer.

provfivetine -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:30:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle What witness? Where is their SWORN STATEMENT? That aside, Since Zimmerman was, without legal authority, armed and chasing after Martin, who was going about his lawful business. Martin is COMPLETELY JUSTIFIED in self-defense under 776.013(3). How close do you let an armed attacker, twice your size, get before you consider them a threat? "John" the witness. I can't give you a sworn statement. That's confidential and something only the Sanford police department have. Zimmerman already has legal authority to establish a neighborhood watch and use lethal self-defense. He had a CCW permit and was completely legal. Your question is irrelevant to legal recourse and this case. Keep making things up.

farglebargle -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:33:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: provfivetine quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Stop using this disproven anonymous claim. TWO 9-1-1 calls verify that Zimmerman was standing over Martin's dead body in one of the 9-1-1 caller's backyards. I can't wait until the FBI rounds up depositions on everyone and establishes a clear timeline. The article I linked to contains the best sourced witness, who talked to the police that night (the only one). The article you linked to contains no FACTS. Let's try to keep this on FACTS, and LAW. And for both, cite well for clarity. If you offer OPINION, please ensure it's clear either explicitly or thorough context. quote: Why would it matter that Zimmerman was standing over Martin's dead body? This means nothing. Martin aggressed upon Zimmerman and was shot because of it, and justly so. Under Florida MANSLAUGHTER LAW, you need to PROVE TWO THINGS: 1) Trayvon Martin is dead ( CHECK - One dead kid. ) 2) George Zimmerman, through act or negligence did it (CHECK ) ( Zimmerman ADMITS shooting Martin dead ) THAT IS IT FOR ESTABLISHING "PROBABLE CAUSE" to arrest and charge Zimmerman for Manslaughter under florida law. Now, all this arguing self-defense? That's for Zimmerman's LAWYER to do in pretrail motions. That's why it's important. It establishes EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO ARREST ZIMMERMAN. Period. Full Stop. End of Story. quote: You just say it's disproven, then say nothing. That's just an assertion without an argument (or evidence). Good job. I'm glad you're not a lawyer. More to the point, you're saying that's the single report from an anonymous source of Fox News, a company so disreputable they went to court to enforce their right to lie to the public on the air is something which any lawyer WOULD consider to be anything but laughable?

provfivetine -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:34:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Winning is NOT agression. If you jump me, I was not the agressor. If you end up a broken mess, I was still not the agressor, you were. (by the way, there's no such thing as a 'lacerated skull'.) Martin is dead. He can't speak his side of the story. We will NEVER know exactly what happened. All we can go by is the witness report (as with any other criminal reconstruction case). "John" the witness stated that Martin was beating Zimmerman. Zimmerman reacted by using legal using self-defense. This is completely legal. You're letting emotions get the best of you.

farglebargle -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:39:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: provfivetine quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle What witness? Where is their SWORN STATEMENT? That aside, Since Zimmerman was, without legal authority, armed and chasing after Martin, who was going about his lawful business. Martin is COMPLETELY JUSTIFIED in self-defense under 776.013(3). How close do you let an armed attacker, twice your size, get before you consider them a threat? "John" the witness. I can't give you a sworn statement. That's confidential and something only the Sanford police department have. Statements in felony cases are public records. Ever hear of this website "TheSmokingGun.Com"? You can READ EVERY WITNESS STATEMENT COLLECTED BY SANFORD PD AS PART OF THE INCIDENT REPORT. You know, FACTS. quote: Zimmerman already has legal authority to establish a neighborhood watch and use lethal self-defense. He had a CCW permit and was completely legal. Zimmerman's "Neighborhood Watch" isn't registered with any organization as a legitimate neighborhood watch with any organization, and since Zimmerman is the only member, calling it a Neighborhood Watch is a stretch. IF IT IS A NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH, then Zimmerman BROKE EVERY RULE. No legitimate N/W member goes on patrol armed. NONE. No legitimate N/W member would EVER follow someone suspicious. NONE. Their ENTIRE program is "Watch And Report". quote: Your question is irrelevant to legal recourse and this case. Keep making things up. Considering that TRAYVON MARTIN was being CHASED BY AN ARMED ATTACKER, I think it's very relevant in determining legal culpability and liability. For example, if Zimmerman NEVER LEFT HIS CAR, Martin would be alive. Zimmerman's NEGLIGENT ACT is directly contributory. How close do you let an armed attacker, twice your size, get before you consider them a threat?

farglebargle -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:40:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: provfivetine quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Winning is NOT agression. If you jump me, I was not the agressor. If you end up a broken mess, I was still not the agressor, you were. (by the way, there's no such thing as a 'lacerated skull'.) Martin is dead. He can't speak his side of the story. We will NEVER know exactly what happened. All we can go by is the witness report (as with any other criminal reconstruction case). "John" the witness stated that Martin was beating Zimmerman. Zimmerman reacted by using legal using self-defense. This is completely legal. You're letting emotions get the best of you. What we do know, is everything we need to charge Zimmerman for manslaughter under florida law. If he has any defense to that, he can make motions to the court for dismissal. Why SHOULDN'T Zimmerman have to defend himself against the UNCONTESTED charge of manslaughter?

provfivetine -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 6:47:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle That's why it's important. It establishes EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO ARREST ZIMMERMAN. Period. Full Stop. End of Story. According to you... The police determine cases of self-defense, not you. They don't arrest all individuals that use lethal self-defense because it would be a waste of time. FACT. quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle More to the point, you're saying that's the single report from an anonymous source of Fox News, a company so disreputable they went to court to enforce their right to lie to the public on the air is something which any lawyer WOULD consider to be anything but laughable? This is ridiculous. Any one could say that about any media outlet. But just in case, I'll link you to a Vancouver based media outlet: http://www.vancouversun.com/story_print.html?id=6355020&sponsor=escapes.ca All you're doing here is telling me to use facts, and at the same time, you use ad hoceries and assert normative statements.

MrBukani -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 7:00:48 AM)
So lets see a few things that might not be right. If police determine a case is selfdefense then the police sort of becomes the judge and juror. What if tray was alive in an ambulance and he had said it was selfdefense? Police are unable to decide in that case. Another thing wich strikes me as odd, cause we had a case where there was tempered evidence. If the police decides not to investigate a crime scene, cause any self defense involves crime with the result of self defense. So now they are left with a contaminated crime scene. Possible clues about tray attackin zimmerman have not been investigated on the spot. Besides the point of guilt, the greatest flaw is with the police department IMO. And you know what they are like. You cant really win a case against the police, its near to impossible.

thishereboi -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 7:13:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle George Zimmerman was the only member of the Forever Alone Neighborhood Watch he founded all by himself. There's no Neighborhood Watch there. It's just the cover story Zimmerman used to go peeping in other people's windows, and stalk and kill black kids like they're animals. Do you have a link for that? Aside from Zimmerman being the self-appointed "Captain" of a Neighborhood Watch which isn't registered with the National Sheriff's Association ( the governing body for NW programs )? No. All that tells me is the watch wasn't registered. It doesn't tell me that he was the only one in the group and it certainly doesn't tell me why he actually started the group. That part seems to have come from your own thoughts and since it's clear you have already tried and convicted him, why would I listen? edited to add: When I first started reading this thread I was on the side of "hang the bastard". I think I even suggested he had injured himself to justify the shooting. After reading all the posts of those frothing at the mouth. I realize that was wrong.

tj444 -> RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... (3/25/2012 7:29:26 AM)
FR I dunno.. this guy was charged with assaulting a police officer.. seriously, how many people are stupid enough to do that??? Imo, this guy is a hothead and reacts without thinking about consequences at all.. Zimmerman had a gun on his person.. did he tell the kid he had a gun? cuz imo if I knew someone had a gun i would run, i would not confront the person or get into a fight with him.. I get the impression the kid didnt know Zimmerman was armed..

Page: << < prev 20 21 [22] 23 24 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875