Open Thread on Zimmerman Verdict

  • Thread starter Thread starter sweetcharity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
SwizzleStick said:
Without it, Zimmerman would possibly be dead or brain-damaged and none of us would have ever heard of either Zimmerman or Martin.

According to evidence, including Zimmerman’s injuries and statements and other witness statements.
Click to expand...
Without the gun he probably wouldn’t confront anybody and Tryvon would have been at home eating skittles.
 
SwizzleStick said:
Without it, Zimmerman would possibly be dead or brain-damaged and none of us would have ever heard of either Zimmerman or Martin.
Click to expand...
Assumption: He might not deal as aggressively with a situation if he does not have such an equalizer. If he has to fend for himself instead of pulling a gun out if he should find himself losing a fight.
According to evidence, including Zimmerman’s injuries and statements and other witness statements.
Click to expand...
The witness Johnathan Good says he saw what appears to be Martin on top using “ground and pound” action. This is not saying Martin was slamming Zimmerman’s head into the concrete. No DNA under Martin’s finger nails, likely if one were slamming someone’s head into the concrete, they might have some DNA on them, DNA does not wash off.

So all we can say as to “witness statements” is that, IF I fell off a bike, I could hit my head on the concrete and kill myself, that has happened but these kinds of events are rare.

And we use George Zimmerman’s unsworn testimony.
 
april32010 said:
people die every year from being knocked down and their head hitting the pavement once,your posting ad nauseam on your perception of the severity of his injuries shows a gross unfamiliarity with head injuries. and i will add physical altercations.
Click to expand...
Thank you for this. Anytime there is a fight and someone is losing, whether they started it or not, the person on the losing side has a right to pull out a gun and shoot the other person.
 
J_Peterson said:
Without the gun he probably wouldn’t confront anybody and Tryvon would have been at home eating skittles.
Click to expand...
Or, enjoying some Lean that he made with his Skittles and Arizona Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail, since he did like it.
 
BroomWagon said:
Assumption: He might not deal as aggressively with a situation if he does not have such an equalizer. If he has to fend for himself instead of pulling a gun out if he should find himself losing a fight…
Click to expand...
I agree that that is an assumption.
BroomWagon said:
…The witness Johnathan Good says he saw what appears to be Martin on top using “ground and pound” action. This is not saying Martin was slamming Zimmerman’s head into the concrete. No DNA under Martin’s finger nails, likely if one were slamming someone’s head into the concrete, they might have some DNA on them, DNA does not wash off.

So all we can say as to “witness statements” is that, IF I fell off a bike, I could hit my head on the concrete and kill myself, that has happened but these kinds of events are rare.

And we use George Zimmerman’s unsworn testimony.
Click to expand...
Zimmerman’s statements are supported by physical evidence, his injuries.
 
Any number of ingredients can make lean, purple drank, jolly ranchers, sprite, grape soda, candies with a cough syrup.
 
BroomWagon said:
Thank you for this. Anytime there is a fight and someone is losing, whether they started it or not, the person on the losing side has a right to pull out a gun and shoot the other person.
Click to expand...
No. What the law provides is that a person defending themselves from an attack is justified in using lethal force in self-defense— until the point where his attacker is no longer a threat. If that person continues to use force after the other person is no longer a threat, he becomes the aggressor.

If for example, you punched me and I counter attack and you decide to run away, I am not justified in pursuing you and using lethal force.

Had Martin, ceased beating Z and simply gotten up, Z would not have been justified in pulling his gun.
 
SwizzleStick said:
Zimmerman’s statements are supported by physical evidence, his injuries.
Click to expand...
Zimmerman’s injuries would also support that a stronger man, Martin would defeat an obese shorter person.

All you say is you believe unsworn testimony of someone who if found guilty would go to jail and possibly for a very long time, plenty of motivation to say anything to one’s own benefit.
 
J_Peterson said:
Either way he would not have been shot to death.
Click to expand...
Zimmerman’s violence had shown itself a number of times we know of in the past, with the police officer, by the domestic violence charges and by stories where he moonlighted as a security officer.
 
BroomWagon said:
…

The witness Johnathan Good says he saw what appears to be Martin on top using “ground and pound” action. This is not saying Martin was slamming Zimmerman’s head into the concrete. No DNA under Martin’s finger nails, likely if one were slamming someone’s head into the concrete, they might have some DNA on them, DNA does not wash off.
…
Click to expand...
Did you catch that the ME was asked who had clipped M’s fingernails, and the ME could not answer? He was unaware if Martin’s had even been clipped, whether they would have been long enough to have scrapings under them. We do know that by the MEs testimony, Martins hands were not properly processed and negatively impacted the ability collect DNA.

As to injuries, again the extent of injuries was a ‘look a squirrel’ effort by the prosecutor and not relevant to self-defense.

Martin’s lack of injuries is not evidence he wasn’t acting in self-defense. Being good at fighting isn’t a crime, there is nothing in the law stating that you have to actually suffer a particular severity of injury prior to defending yourself.

The basis for lethal force in self-defense is that a reasonable person in the same situation and circmustances could be in fear of imminent serious bodily harm or death.

You do not have to let yourself get stabbed or shot prior or your skull fractured prior to defending yourself. The whole point to self-defense law is to allow a person to prevent serious injury.
 
styrgwillidar said:
Did you catch that the ME was asked who had clipped M’s fingernails, and the ME could not answer? He was unaware if Martin’s had even been clipped, whether they would have been long enough to have scrapings under them. We do know that by the MEs testimony, Martins hands were not properly processed and negatively impacted the ability collect DNA.

As to injuries, again the extent of injuries was a ‘look a squirrel’ effort by the prosecutor and not relevant to self-defense.

Martin’s lack of injuries is not evidence he wasn’t acting in self-defense. Being good at fighting isn’t a crime, there is nothing in the law stating that you have to actually suffer a particular severity of injury prior to defending yourself.

The basis for lethal force in self-defense is that a reasonable person in the same situation and circmustances could be in fear of imminent serious bodily harm or death.

You do not have to let yourself get stabbed or shot prior or your skull fractured prior to defending yourself. The whole point to self-defense law is to allow a person to prevent serious injury.
Click to expand...
There is an issue with the scraping of Martin’s fingernails. Apparently, the scraped nails were put in the same envelope rather using a separate envelope for each one. That is improper protocol.
Bao agrees that would be improper but says it’s not his job, it was a technician who did that. He testified no bags were placed on Martin’s hands.
Click to expand...
No fingernail clippings (as opposed to scrapings) were kept. Bao says that is a policy decision of the Chief Medical Examiner of his office, and he’s only the associate associate examiner.
Click to expand...
talkleft.com/story/2013/7/5/145044/7130/crimenews/Zimmerman-Medical-Examiner-Changes-Opinions
Click to expand...
As to self-defense, I have little argument with that. Except Zimmerman’s demeanor and history seems to contribute to this whole tragedy.
 
SamH said:
Possibly, then Martin would have passed over Zimmerman and attacked someone else instead .
Click to expand...
Or he could have continued to case the houses in the complex.
BroomWagon said:
As to self-defense, I have little argument with that. Except Zimmerman’s demeanor and history seems to contribute to this whole tragedy.
Click to expand...
Where I look at it as Martin’s demeanor and history seems to contribute to this tragedy.
 
This thread should be renamed as the never ending beating of a dead horse thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top