| Author |
Topic:
Trayvon Martin might have been the attacker after all, not Zimmerman [Locked] |
jeune  Posts: 216
Registered: 2005-5-29 13:25:11
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:03am
Subject:
Trayvon Martin might have been the attacker after all, not Zimmerman |
Rhodoman posted:
Even if the facts of the case bear out Zimmerman's story and innocence, the police NOT arresting him will continue to cause a huge stink for weeks or months.
Rho
The fact he was a minor unarmed getting stalked and killed by someone claiming self-defense there is no excuse he should not of been arrested.
-----signature-----
"Whenever the white man treats the Indian as they treat each other then we shall have no more wars. We shall be all alike — brothers of one father and mother, with one sky above us and one country around us and one government for all."
|
Chogram  Posts: 945
Registered: 2001-8-23 02:52:32
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:03am
Subject:
Trayvon Martin might have been the attacker after all, not Zimmerman |
ikkoikki posted:
Sith_Mauler posted:
ikkoikki posted:
Even if Trayvon beat up Zimmerman, does that justify the use of deadly force?
A guy comes at you with fists, so you come back with guns? No.
Isnt that the point of carrying concealed?
If someone attacks you, you dont know what their true intentions are, so do you ask are you going to kill me or just beat me up?
Before you decide to use deadly force.
All I know is one kid was armed with a soft drink and some candy, and the other guy (who is also bigger and heavier) was armed with a gun. People call Trayvon a thug, but Zimmerman is the guy who acted thuggishly, no? He escalated the sitution the moment he pulled out his gun. I don't believe for one second that Trayvon set upon this man unprovoked and started beating him viciously for no reason.
"He was such a good kid."
|
ikkoikki  Posts: 1,964
Registered: 2009-2-8 10:34:47
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:03am
Subject:
Trayvon Martin might have been the attacker after all, not Zimmerman |
and he looks like a good kid, and a good student with no criminal history. That's the problem with this account, it seems so out of character and unbelievable. A 16 year old kid set upon a bigger, heavier man for no reason?
It sounds ludicrous on its face
-----signature-----
Chicago Bulls: 43-13
post game gem from Joakim Noah: "We cannot play with our heads down and have a poo poo face. Sometimes we have a poo poo face."
|
-Mithan- Title: VNBoard Admin
Posts: 1,287
Registered: 2000-3-1 11:53:15
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:03am
Subject:
Trayvon Martin might have been the attacker after all, not Zimmerman |
lol Anderson Cooper has the Black PAnther idiot on line right now.Anderson is tearing a stripe off his ass now.I love Anderson.
-----signature-----
I survived to the end and got nothing out of it, but hey.
|
Arc_DT  Title: Mithan said I am smart
Posts: 363
Registered: 2002-5-28 08:25:51
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:03am
Subject:
Trayvon Martin might have been the attacker after all, not Zimmerman |
jeune posted:
The law got rid of civil liability too.
I thought you claimed to be a law student at Dartmouth. The liability is not in the shooting itself. It's in creating the situation where the shooting was necessary. Lawyers who are actually competent can make that distinction to the jury. If he negligently created the situation, then he wouldn't even have to have been the shooter to be liable. It was a foreseeable consequence of him ignoring instruction to not pursue, and the stand your ground statute doesn't cover that.
-----signature-----
"... We just need a president to sign this stuff... Pick a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen to become president."
-Grover Norquist
.
MICHIGAN - Where the trees are the right height!
|
Dark_EternalFF Title: Official ACF Turd
Posts: 1,838
Registered: 2002-11-8 22:44:06
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:03am
Subject:
Trayvon Martin might have been the attacker after all, not Zimmerman |
I was here
-----signature-----
Max Fox (AC), Zygran (WoW, SWTOR)
"We poison our air and water to weed out the weak! We set off fission bombs in our only biosphere! We nailed our God to a stick! Don't fk with the human race!"
DE/Mr Pants 2012  |
jeune Posts: 216
Registered: 2005-5-29 13:25:11
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:03am
Subject:
Trayvon Martin might have been the attacker after all, not Zimmerman |
Arc_DT posted:
jeune posted:
The law got rid of civil liability too.
I thought you claimed to be a law student at Dartmouth. The liability is not in the shooting itself. It's in creating the situation where the shooting was necessary. Lawyers who are actually competent can make that distinction to the jury. If he negligently created the situation, then he wouldn't even have to have been the shooter to be liable. It was a foreseeable consequence of him ignoring instruction to not pursue, and the stand your ground statute doesn't cover that.
1) D does not have a law school.
2) the law immunizes the whole situation so you cannot second guess EVER.
Monday, May. 02, 2005
"Last week, Governor Jeb Bush signed a bill that has become known as the "Stand Your Ground" law. The law immunizes citizens who use deadly force in self-defense against criminal prosecution and civil liability.
Critics of the law are afraid it will promote vigilantism..."
-----signature-----
"Whenever the white man treats the Indian as they treat each other then we shall have no more wars. We shall be all alike — brothers of one father and mother, with one sky above us and one country around us and one government for all."
|
Arc_DT Title: Mithan said I am smart
Posts: 363
Registered: 2002-5-28 08:25:51
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:03am
Subject:
Trayvon Martin might have been the attacker after all, not Zimmerman |
JD_HOGG posted:
Once again though, facts ignored. You guys aren't even reading the materials readily available, just sucking up the crap that Al Sharpton is saying on MSNBC, right?
Zimmerman did not call 911. He called a non emergency police number. I listened to the recording. I read the transcripts. They did not give him explicit instructions to not follow Martin.
Operator: "Are you following him?"
Zimmerman: "  eah"
Operator: "Ok we don't need you to do that."
When I tell my kids to not play with matches, I don't say "Hey kids, I don't need you to play with matches."
That is NOT an explicit instruction.
However, Zimmerman did take that as an instruction, he clearly answered "Ok" and he started back for his vehicle, telling the operator he'd meet the police at the clubhouse. On his way back, Martin approached him from behind and they had some words, and Martin punched him, breaking his nose, knocking him on his back and began beating him, bashing his head against the sidewalk. Police found him bloodied, broken nose, a gash on his head, grass stains and wet on his back.
I find the distinction of 911 versus a "non-emergency police number" to be irrelevant, even if accurate. If your timeline is correct, however, then that is relevant. It seems like that could be at least partially corroborated by juxtaposing the call logs of this call versus the 911 calls of the neighbors in which we hear the gunshot. (I would imagine this has been checked by now.)
If he indeed broke off pursuit at that point, then I see no civil liability, either.
EDIT: I forgot to mention... splitting hairs on the verbage of the instruction to back off would be a question for the jury, not a get out of jail free card.
-----signature-----
"... We just need a president to sign this stuff... Pick a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen to become president."
-Grover Norquist
.
MICHIGAN - Where the trees are the right height!
|
Arc_DT Title: Mithan said I am smart
Posts: 363
Registered: 2002-5-28 08:25:51
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:03am
Subject:
Trayvon Martin might have been the attacker after all, not Zimmerman |
jeune posted:
2) the law immunizes the whole situation so you cannot second guess EVER.
Then you just suck at interpreting statutes. By your definition, I could cover any crime or civil by shooting someone in "self defense" at some point. The law even specifically forbids application where the shooter is committing a crime or not lawfully entitled to be where the shooting occurred, so it's obviously not "whole situation" and obviously wouldn't apply to someone who has negligently manufactured the scenario.
Here, have a good read:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html
And remember, the shooting itself was NOT where he might have been civilly liable.
EDIT: LOL at giving me a "legal" opinion by quoting a news article...
-----signature-----
"... We just need a president to sign this stuff... Pick a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen to become president."
-Grover Norquist
.
MICHIGAN - Where the trees are the right height!
|
jeune Posts: 216
Registered: 2005-5-29 13:25:11
|
Date Posted:
1/1/00 12:04am
Subject:
Trayvon Martin might have been the attacker after all, not Zimmerman |
Wait what are you saying?
Even if the 911 operator told him something was not a good idea... how does that make it rise to the level of civil liability? He did not break any law or do anything that would make him liable for anything... except kill someone.
-----signature-----
"Whenever the white man treats the Indian as they treat each other then we shall have no more wars. We shall be all alike — brothers of one father and mother, with one sky above us and one country around us and one government for all."
|
|
