Open Thread on Zimmerman Verdict

[BroomWagon]

What are you doing trying to inject common sense, reality and the laws of concealed carry into the discussion, maryjk?

Oh, and I suppose you believe George Zimmerman’s statement that Trayvon Martin said to him “Tonight your going to die”, oh yes, that is real believable!! I must have seen that in a movie.

 

[maryjk]

What are you doing trying to inject common sense, reality and the laws of concealed carry into the discussion, maryjk?

I know, crazy. :whacky:

 

[fix]

Thank you for this thread. I was just inspired to seek out Mr Ayoob’s blog and now believe that Z was guilty of gross stupidity when he left his vehicle, but probably nothing else.

More importantly, I have reinforced that I as a citizen should remain in my vehicle and report possible property crimes from a place of safety remote from the crime. For crimes against persons, if I choose not to directly intervene I should also call from a remote place of safety even if that means a further delay in response time. Most importantly, if I have time to consider whether I would do the same thing if I was unarmed and the answer is no, I should most probably call from a remote place of safety.

Staying in your car is a great idea. Others may be concerned for the safety of their neighbors. To accent only this aspect is to deny the entire truth of the matter though. The real issue is that people ought not act like thugs regardless of their age. If one is not being attacked there is no moral reason to try and beat a man to death. Frankly, that I need to point this out is disturbing.

 

[Cider]

. If one is not being attacked their is no moral reason to try and beat a man to death. Frankly, that I need to point this out is disturbing.

It’s astounding that people are actually defending Martin’s violent act. After all it’s a sin to condone violence.

 

[lcburgundy]

Oh, and I suppose you believe George Zimmerman’s statement that Trayvon Martin said to him “Tonight your going to die”, oh yes, that is real believable!! I must have seen that in a movie.

Um, I’m sure Trayvon saw a lot of movies growing up, and I don’t see what’s so outlandish about the idea of him saying that as an idle boast or something he meant.

EDIT: If you watch GZ’s actual police reenactment, according to him TM says that only he was underneath TM and after TM became aware GZ was carrying a gun.

I also don’t see the amusement in mocking a crime victim’s testimony.

 

[maryjk]

Oh, and I suppose you believe George Zimmerman’s statement that Trayvon Martin said to him “Tonight your going to die”, oh yes, that is real believable!! I must have seen that in a movie.

Actually if you read my post, the one that SwizzleStick commented on, I didn’t say anything one way or the other about “tonight your (sic) going to die.”

I was commenting about having a weapon drawn while walking around the community.

 

[BroomWagon]

When you take 'facts not in evidence" and try to fit them into what happened, you are making up fantasies.

Zimmerman’s word is backed by actual facts in evidence. Facts based on times, position and eye witnesses.

Your interpretation, there is NOTHING that indicates Trayvon Martin started this fight. If you are accusing people of fantasies, all we have is that George Zimmerman got a good punch to the nose area. So in other words, George Zimmerman was found “not guilty” of the crime, not that his self-defense was valid.

Heck, Zimmerman’s word is backed by statements made by prosecution witnesses.

That Zimmerman was losing the fight. The witnesses do not back up Trayvon Martin initiating the fight, that is only Zimmerman’s word.

 

[SwizzleStick]

I suspect this is a partly a result of the use of identity politics. Instead of Democrats and Republicans with a variety of races, sexes, ethnic groups, education levels in each we have sharply polarized segments who seem to identify with “their tribe” regardless of the issue.

When blacks spoke up with respect to the jury finding in a positive way they were threatened, demeaned, and marginalized. Holder stands up and pontificates on SYG although it had nothing to do with this case and states there will be a federal investigation, completely ignoring the judge, jury and FBI investigation, none of which found a whiff of racism. Obama talks about needing more gun control, again totally irrelevant to this case. Does ANYONE think this case would have received a fraction of the attention had GZ killed a white man? It was just a convenient opportunity to distract us from the myriad of scandals, the moribund economy, the violence in the middle east and perhaps of more importance to us as Catholics the ever increasing violence against Christians in Muslim countries.

Meanwhile we’re focused on a sad situation that resulted from poor judgment and a set of unfortunate circumstances in a small community in Florida. I think SamH was right about 950 posts ago. Why are we wasting time on this particularly when it’s simply doing battle with the overactive imaginations of several posters who don’t want to consider the facts or the evidence.

Instead of beating the dead horse, I need the head knocker emoticon.

Lisa

Very good summation. Thank you, Lisa.

 

[BroomWagon]

Actually if you read my post, the one that SwizzleStick commented on, I didn’t say anything one way or the other about “tonight your (sic) going to die.”

I was commenting about having a weapon drawn while walking around the community.

I read your post. I brought up a scenario on Zimmerman because basically, we have 4 minutes of silence and only his version.

Okay, but seeing how you did say others are engaging in fantasy, do you think it is true per Zimmerman’s story that Trayvon Martin said to him “Tonight you are going to die”?

abcnews.go.com/US/video/george-zimmerman-claimed-trayvon-martin-said-you-are-going-to-die-tonight-19547337

 

[Cider]

Your interpretation, there is NOTHING that indicates Trayvon Martin started this fight. If you are accusing people of fantasies, all we have is that George Zimmerman got a good punch to the nose area. So in other words, George Zimmerman was found “not guilty” of the crime, not that his self-defense was valid.

That Zimmerman was losing the fight. The witnesses do not back up Trayvon Martin initiating the fight, that is only Zimmerman’s word.

For the millionth time, it doesn’t matter legally who started it.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Because both perspectives are not of equal weight. Why should anyone consider ideology in place of evidence and reason?

You’re being biased again. Whose to say that either perspective is not plausible?

 

[Robert_Sock]

Again, to condone violence is a sin! And that’s what I see happening on this thread.

 

[lcburgundy]

That Zimmerman was losing the fight. The witnesses do not back up Trayvon Martin initiating the fight, that is only Zimmerman’s word.

Sigh. Evidence, evidence, evidence. There was no evidence of wounds or contusions or scratches or otherwise on TM’s body, other than around his knuckles and obviously, the gunshot wound. I have no idea how GZ could have started a physical altercation and managed to leave no evidence of it.

EDIT: And as another poster pointed out, the minutiae of this is not really relevant to a self-defense claim.

 

[SwizzleStick]

Actually the dead do talk though forensic evidence. Which supported Zimmerman’s account. They are ignoring TM’s account already.

Yes, that is true, the dead do talk through forensics. I stand corrected.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Again, to condone violence is a sin! And that’s what I see happening on this thread.

Let me ask you this. If you were at home in the evening with your family, and an intruder decided to rape your daughter, what would you do?

 

[maryjk]

I read your post. I brought up a scenario on Zimmerman because basically, we have 4 minutes of silence and only his version.

Okay, but seeing how you did say others are engaging in fantasy, do you think it is true per Zimmerman’s story that Trayvon Martin said to him “Tonight you are going to die”?

abcnews.go.com/US/video/george-zimmerman-claimed-trayvon-martin-said-you-are-going-to-die-tonight-19547337

What difference does it make? It has no bearing on anything.

You’re being biased again. Whose to say that either perspective is not plausible?

The evidence.

Again, to condone violence is a sin! And that’s what I see happening on this thread.

Yep, you are condoning the violence against Zimmerman.

 

[Robert_Sock]

Sigh. Evidence, evidence, evidence. There was no evidence of wounds or contusions or scratches or otherwise on TM’s body, other than around his knuckles and obviously, the gunshot wound. I have no idea how GZ could have started a physical altercation and managed to leave no evidence of it.

EDIT: And as another poster pointed out, the minutiae of this is not really relevant to a self-defense claim.

Why didn’t TM have GZ’s DNA on his hands if he was the true aggressor?

 

[BroomWagon]

For the millionth time, it doesn’t matter legally who started it.

Self-defense is the right to use reasonable force to protect oneself or members of the family from bodily harm, or to a lesser extent, one’s property, from the attack of an aggressor, if the defender has reason to believe he/she/they is/are in danger. Self-defense is a defense to a criminal charge or to tort liability. To establish the defense, the person must be free from fault or provocation, must have no means of escape or retreat,and there must be an impending peril.- definitions.uslegal.com/s/self-defense/

Let’s break that down:

“To establish the defense, the person must be free from fault or provocation, must have no means of escape or retreat, AND there must be an impending peril.”

This does not seem to say “It doesn’t matter legally who started it.” I would say again, this is more evidence that the Jury could find Zimmerman not guilty of the charges rather than an affirmation of Self-Defense.

 

[Robert_Sock]

The evidence.
Yep, you are condoning the violence against Zimmerman.

What evidence except a scenario as painted by GZ?

I’m not condoning any violence by either potential aggressor.

 

[lcburgundy]

Why didn’t TM have GZ’s DNA on his hands if he was the true aggressor?

Wow, it’s a good thing there wasn’t a trial about this where the medical examiner testified that TM’s body was basically mishandled and DNA evidence may have been compromised as a result.

Maybe you’re right though and GZ broke his own nose and slammed his own head into the sidewalk. All perspectives are equally correct, as we all know.