Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics and News' started by blankslate, Mar 9, 2012.
So, there no evidence anywhere, no arrest records, no court records of GZ ?
None of it is relevant to this case...period. Just like all the all the posts about TM past, none of it is relevant to what transpired on 2/26/2012 and will never be allowed at the trial if the case makes it to that point.
The state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that GZ claim if self defense is not valid as well as he's guilty of the charges against him.
a photo of a bloody nose tells us nothing about how or why an incident occurred.
Its just as likely to come from Martin defending himself as it is from Martin assaulting Zimmerman.
So the question has to be answered from other evidence, including what led to the incident.
If the decider of fact decides its relevant.
The Judge will be the one that determines if a fact or evidence is relevant to the case.
Then why did MoM want TM's school records, etc.?
I do realize the judge will decide.
All evidence shows felony assault and battery by martin, all of it. Every single bit of evidence proves this, and nothing to the contrary. It is because of this overwhelming evidence that proves self defense why this will never make it to trial.
What led up to the incident is of little matter when these known facts are true:
1) martin repeatedly beat zimmerman about the head while on his back including breaking nose and multiple lacerations to back and front of head
2) martin mounted zimmerman and prevented retreat/escape
3) zimmerman, by law and precedent, is presumed to fear for his life in that position, verified by all evidence and eye witness
No matter how any of it started, once martin committed those crimes and actions zimmerman is well within his rights to lawfully defend himself from the attack with any means of force including deadly.
I guess he wanted to see if there was something potentially relevant to the case. Then he could request that the judge review/rule on for use in the immunity hearing and/or trial.
No matter how it started? What if a gun was pulled out first, and a verbal threat to kill was made?
Not saying that happened in this case, but I don't buy into the notion that it doesn't "matter" how it started. It does matter. In fact, the Trevor Dooley manslaughter conviction proves it matters. Despite being attacked himself, he was found guilty of manslaughter for flashing his weapon at the guy he ended up shooting.
And before the Zimmerman fan club goes ballistic, I'm not saying that happened in this case, but I disagree with Spidey's notion that it doesn't "matter" how it started.
I think the jury will think much differently. They'll be presented w\ piles of evidence showing irrational, erratic actions by Zimmerman leading up to the shooting and will be shown clear as day how irresponsibly he acted.
They'll see that his many mis-steps and horrible judgment put him in the situation which culminated in him shooting to death a minor.
They'll follow the narrative we all know of zimmerman leaving his car presumptively to go after that fucking asshole he just stated was likely to get away.
They'll have no problem realizing that zimmerman was carrying out all of these actions under the false assumption that Trayvon ( because he was black ) was one of the criminals who'd been victimizing people in the area. This will help them find him without a doubt responsible for murder 2 or negligent homicide.
The Trevor Dooley conviction is proof that it does matter how an altercation starts. Dooley was convicted of manslaughter despite being attacked by a man much bigger than him. It had to do with him flashing his gun first, and possibly making some kind of threat.
They will be presented what the judge deems relevant to the case and nothing more.
It's pretty much known that you can't be committed a crime or forcible felony and claim self defense, you're being obtuse here.
There was NOTHING mentioned in the affidavit about zimmerman committing a forcible felony or crime nor is there ANY evidence of such.
Who said there was?
I was simply disputing the ridiculous notion that it doesn't matter how the altercation started. It does in fact matter.
It doesn't matter WHO started it or how it started, that's the point and why it's such a clear case of self defense. It doesn't matter what happens before, how it started, etc provided no crime is committed by shooter.
This is all pretty basic self defense law stuff.
So then it does matter.
How can he be found guilty of a crime he's not charged with?
Should the state try to tear into Zimmerman profiling; the past of Martin becomes relevant for the defense.
The judge has already ruled that the past of Zimmerman is irrelevant to the case.
Toss out the profiling issue and you have Zimmerman following Martin (audio evidence); Martin challenging Zimmerman (audio evidence); Zimmerman on the losing end of a fight (visual evidence); Martin not stopping the fight when yelled at (witness) and Zimmerman shooting Martin when Martin was over him (ballistics).
Those become the facts of the case using evidence.
Three of those reflect negatively on Martin.
One against Zimmerman.
The last/final demonstrates the issue of self defense per state law.
Absolutely none of that reflects negatively on zimmerman.
It was perfectly ethical, moral, and legal for him to keep an eye on a known thug who appeared to be up to no good.
Even if trayvon was that all A rap cherub superstar you were misled to believe in, it wasn't like zimmerman was going over the top by keeping an eye on someone wearing a deep cover hoodie specifically to conceal ID, in a neighborhood that was rampant with break ins and home invasions up until this incident.
Zimmerman did NOTHING wrong that night, based on what evidence we know. You might not like the fact that some neighbors keep an eye on things, but that's not something illegal.
Bahahaha.... many missteps.. ROFL! You crumponites are really starting to fall apart.
In all likelihood trayvon was one of the criminals who were performing robberies and home invasions. We know he was caught with stolen jewelry that didn't come from the area, along with burglary equipment. That little community probably sleeps a lot safer knowing there's one less burglar out and about.
If trayvon was the little cherub boy the crumponites want to worship then most would think differently. As of now, based on both of their 'current' history, it's far FAR more likely that hothead trayvon bit off more than he can chew.
Also, your example is a great indicator of how society doesn't care about thugs.... If the 'victim' was actually a decent person it would be treated much differently than someone with a history such as trayvon's.
Where's the audio evidence of the bolded at? First I've heard of it.
You mean "why are you following me" is somehow a "challege"? Talk about a stretch.
Anything new on what trayvon was doing during that 3-5 minute time gap while zimmerman was politely waiting for the police?
To me, that's a hugely pivotal point in this case. If trayvon was as scared as the crumptonites make out, why didn't he call 911, why didn't he continue on his path home?
Him going back to confront zimmerman was what cost him his life. It's too bad that trayvon decided to delve out some street justice.