The law doesn't operate under the assumption that one bad act justifies another bad act. I'm sorry you're too stupid to understand that.

Do you really want beat this dead horse again?


He was never placed under arrest and the detective recommended charges but there was not enough evidence to back up the charge. Those are the facts.


Again, they are opening themselves up to a slew of civil lawsuits if they arrest him and he is deemed immune from prosecution or acquitted in a later trial. He's not a flight risk, it's easier to release him and build a case. Which is what they have done.

Zimmerman told them two different stories at two different times. That itself is enough to provide probable cause he used force unlawfully. That law as you quoted it doesn't have much impact on this set of facts, although I'm sure the PD is trying to use it as cover.

Since I'm so stupid, please show me where I even said or even hinted that. Let me save you the time, smartass. I didn't and I don't. My point, that flew over your head, is that someone is dead from a bullet to the chest. That's pretty much proof that a 'confrontation' took place.

Thought that was pretty obvious, but let me help you connect the dots.

 

-----signature-----

Only in bizarro world or Florida can "stand your ground" be interpreted as "follow the guy in a car, when you lose him, get out of the car and search for him, then kill him".

That's all the evidence I need to see that the entire situation was precipitated by Zimmerman. Not a biased view, an accurate one. If at any time Zimmerman would have simply stopped following the kid trying to play bad ass cop wanna be, the shooting would have never happened. He didn't "stand his ground", he chased a kid, who tried to run away, then killed him.

If you think him using a gun on a child he chased, who had nothing but a bag a skittles vs that gun, is in any way justified after Zimmerman chased the kid in the first place.....you make me sick.

No matter how low and mean spirited I think this country has become, devoid of all sanity and reason.....I'm always wrong. It's even worse than I though. Every damn time.

What do you tell your kids if you live in Florida? If some guy starts beating your ass, don't fight back...because then he can shoot you and get away with it? Run, run and run and hide and pray, because if they want to kill you, all they have to do is say they feared for their lives, you might murder them with that bag of candy.

Uh no one's saying there was no confrontation. The issue is who started the physical violence. If Martin started the physical violence and was on top of that fatty Zimmerman punching him repeatedly in the face Zimmermanwas justifeid in shooting him. If Zimmerman started the violence he obviously wasn't.

You sure?





Seems to me, you're the stupid one here.

 

-----signature-----

Maybe you just can't read english.


"Zimmerman confronted Martin" has a specific meaning that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation. Bowlartz was saying there is no evidence of that, not that there was no evidence that the two ever got involved in a fight.


FWIW I don't agree with Bowlartz in general and Bowlartz has been the biggest Zimmerman apologist on these boards. Or maybe that's Bonzo. I always get them confused. But you're still stupid for not being able to read.

Florida's law doesn't make that distinction. No matter who started it, if you "fear for your life" you can use the level of force required to insure your life is not in danger. I've been listening to a radio program for the past couple of hours where they were talking to a number of lawyers and retired judges about the statute.

Some came down on the side of, "the law was never intended to be that broad".

Other came down on the side of, "Intended or not, that's the way it has been interpreted by judges in the past and that precedent will stand".

Guess which side will win?

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, a guy chased a man down, and stabbed him to death in the back...and a judge ruled that he was justified under "stand your ground" and dismissed the charges of manslaughter against him. In what kind of world do we live where you can chase a guy and stab them in the back....and get away with it? The guy did nothing to you, you just thought he was trying to rob your neighbor. Now he is dead, and you get to tell all your buddies how you "shanked that bitch".

Uh huh. It's English, by the way. Nice attempt at damage control.

 

-----signature-----