Zimmrman case

[Ryry4]

Originally Posted by ali#1

He defended himself is his story that's why it's in court.

Not even close.

[MrSmooth]

Originally Posted by Ryry4

And why are you walking through my neighborhood for no reason?

This a joke? lol

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by ali#1

If I walked up to you and punched you in the face and then you got the better of me could I claim "self defence" ?.

If a guy is following you through your neighbourhood for no reason would you question him if he suddenly appeared? I know I would if some guy is following me by my house for no reason, if he were a cop then sure this guy has no right to ask anybody anything, my answer to him would start with a 4 letter word and probably have a few more thrown in for good measure.

Well, I assume that if you punched me in the face and then I started beating on you to the point that you feared great bodily harm or death, then you would be allowed to defend yourself. I'm really not sure what would come of this situation here in Canada, but I believe that in Florida, this is the way it goes.

Sure, I would question someone who is following me. Or, I would blast outta there, that's why I always wear runners lol.. I really can't see myself punching someone in the face for a non-physical act. I'm not that type of person.

You say that because he's not a cop, he has no right to ask anybody anything.. that's nuts.

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by ali#1

Maybe he's a terribly fighter ?

Maybe he took a swing ad missed the kid jumped on him and landed a few for his troubles. They got up and he pulled te gun and shot him claiming self defence ? Who knows I know I don't and in pretty sure you don't either.

If you don't believe Zimmerman just because anything could have happened, and there's no video of the event, then whats the point of even discussing this? Most people talking about this case are discussing evidence and what seems reasonable. Others, not so much.

[Roughneck Country]

When i was living in TX we had this black guy trolling in our neighborhood looking in peoples windows in the middle of the day damm rights I asked him what he was doing in my neighborhood. Down south I found everyone knows everyone in the neighborhood not like in Calgary where I dont even know my next door neighbor. Everyone in my neighborhood knew who was who and who was cming and going, somone that was not normally there would stick out like a sore thumb and the neighbors would deff approach them to find out there business there.

In response to Ryan 4 / Mrs Smooth

[canoes]

Do you think he was rethinking his choice of lawyer at this point???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LRSJGFoXEY

[MrSmooth]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

When i was living in TX we had this black guy trolling in our neighborhood looking in peoples windows in the middle of the day damm rights I asked him what he was doing in my neighborhood. Down south I found everyone knows everyone in the neighborhood not like in Calgary where I dont even know my next door neighbor. Everyone in my neighborhood knew who was who and who was cming and going, somone that was not normally there would stick out like a sore thumb and the neighbors would deff approach them to find out there business there.

In response to Ryan 4 / Mrs Smooth

Mrs Smooth? Hope you're not trying to insult.

Texas is different animal. I've been there quite a few times but still we are talking about a young teenager here who had nothing on him but a pack of skittles in his pockets. Get real.

[dty]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

Been trying to follow this case, just wondering what peoples thoughts on it are and the stand your ground law? Been working in TX a fair bit and there is pretty much 3 opinions down there.

Black Opinion - Zimmerman is guilty (even though many of them know nothing about the case other than a black kid was killed)

Non Black Opinion - Zimmerman was clearly justified (even though many of them don't know any details about the case)

Legal opinion - Not technically guilty by the law, however antagonized the situation that lead to the shooting.

Zimmerman's story changed several times.

He told the police he was worried that Martin was going for his gun. He told his friend that Martin grabbed the gun. Forsenics found No Martin DNA on the gun.

He told police Martin jumped him & after brief struggle Martin was on top of him banging his head on the ground "like" 25 times in his written statement he claimed while Martin was banging his head on the ground Martins hands covered both his mouth and nose. He told his friend he was walking back to his car when Martin surprised him grabbed his gun and in the struggle he shot Martin. Forsenics found no Zimmerman DNA on Martins hands or under his nails which they assumed would be found if he had grabbed Zimmerman's head around the mouth and nose and banged it on the sidewalk or if they struggled for a gun. Zimmerman's car was parked on the street, the pathway were Martin was shot isn't visible from the street, it runs between a lane of houses and opposite to Zimmerman's car. The house which Martin was staying was on a direct line from where his body was found to this house.

Zimmerman claimed during the struggle he was in fear for his life, Martin had banged his head hard and multiple times, tried to smother him by covering his mouth and nose and went for Zimmerman's gun. The Medical Examiner testified Zimmerman's injuries were insignificant.

Zimmerman claimed he wasn't aware of the "stand your ground Law" and shot Martin because he was being badly beaten and feared for his life. A teacher of a Law School class Zimmerman took said Zimmerman was an "A" student, attentive and the "stand you ground" law was covered in detail in the class.

The gun Zimmerman shot Martin had a round in the chamber. (Although I understand the current thought that self defense guns are useless unless they're ready to shoot. When I was growing up this was a really big no No and if I carried there would be no way I'd do it.)

[brownbomber]

Originally Posted by Pincherguy

They are digging into Zimmerman's back ground because he went to college and took a law enforcement class. If they were allowed to bring Martins back ground into play they would see that he was a fighter and apparently at one time he was looking to buy a gun. The kid was no angel for sure, only in his parents eyes.

I went to a store once and made enqueries about a gun.....

[Roughneck Country]

Originally Posted by MrSmooth

Mrs Smooth? Hope you're not trying to insult.

Texas is different animal. I've been there quite a few times but still we are talking about a young teenager here who had nothing on him but a pack of skittles in his pockets. Get real.

Sorry wasnt trying to insult I meant MrSmooth.

Kid with a pocket full of candy is the posecutions pitch, he was well known by the police and deff kicked Simmermans azz

[Roughneck Country]

Originally Posted by dty

Zimmerman's story changed several times.

He told the police he was worried that Martin was going for his gun. He told his friend that Martin grabbed the gun. Forsenics found No Martin DNA on the gun.

He told police Martin jumped him & after brief struggle Martin was on top of him banging his head on the ground "like" 25 times in his written statement he claimed while Martin was banging his head on the ground Martins hands covered both his mouth and nose. He told his friend he was walking back to his car when Martin surprised him grabbed his gun and in the struggle he shot Martin. Forsenics found no Zimmerman DNA on Martins hands or under his nails which they assumed would be found if he had grabbed Zimmerman's head around the mouth and nose and banged it on the sidewalk or if they struggled for a gun. Zimmerman's car was parked on the street, the pathway were Martin was shot isn't visible from the street, it runs between a lane of houses and opposite to Zimmerman's car. The house which Martin was staying was on a direct line from where his body was found to this house.

Zimmerman claimed during the struggle he was in fear for his life, Martin had banged his head hard and multiple times, tried to smother him by covering his mouth and nose and went for Zimmerman's gun. The Medical Examiner testified Zimmerman's injuries were insignificant.

Zimmerman claimed he wasn't aware of the "stand your ground Law" and shot Martin because he was being badly beaten and feared for his life. A teacher of a Law School class Zimmerman took said Zimmerman was an "A" student, attentive and the "stand you ground" law was covered in detail in the class.

The gun Zimmerman shot Martin had a round in the chamber. (Although I understand the current thought that self defense guns are useless unless they're ready to shoot. When I was growing up this was a really big no No and if I carried there would be no way I'd do it.)

Sounded like it was raining and even when a gun is grabbed DNA is not nessesarily transfered. I agree story changed a few times. Not sure why he lied about his knowledge of stand your ground

My take on it is he pushed this kid to snap and got his azz whooped then shot him while he was gettig beat up. The kid was known by police so pretty sure he was no angle but a tragic situation for both guys involved

[rugatika]

Innocent. Zimmerman may have been an overzealous neighbourhood watch dude, but the prosecution's case sucks. There is no way he should even be on trial.

The Florida prosecutor was found guilty of falsifying his arrest warrant for crying out loud.... http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/07/fl...-warrant-what/

Rachel Jenteal's testimony FOR the prosecution basically outlined Trayvon as a racist....he called Zimmerman a crazy ass cracker by her own admission. He was on top of Zimmerman smashing his head into a curb and got shot. He'll walk as he should, but he will be living in fear for his whole life.

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

Been trying to follow this case, just wondering what peoples thoughts on it are and the stand your ground law? Been working in TX a fair bit and there is pretty much 3 opinions down there.

Black Opinion - Zimmerman is guilty (even though many of them know nothing about the case other than a black kid was killed)

Non Black Opinion - Zimmerman was clearly justified (even though many of them don't know any details about the case)

Legal opinion - Not technically guilty by the law, however antagonized the situation that lead to the shooting.

The agreed upon facts indicate that option 3 is in order.

The problem with this case is that people are ignoring some pretty obvious facts.

One... the kid had good reason to suppose that he too needed to stand his ground. An armed man shadowed him to his home. IOW... he may have been standing his ground and died for the effort.

Two- Both sides of the argument have resorted to innuendo and to smearing whoever they do not support.

Three... Zimmerman made it happen. If he had simply listened to the dispatcher and done what he was told to do... that kid would be alive and he would not be on trial.

Neither party is exactly sympathetic.
Zimmerman is clearly a liar.... he has been caught too many times to deny it... and the kid was... as mentioned...no angel either.

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by Ryry4

Not even close.

Please explain why he is in court then mr law.

[rugatika]

Originally Posted by ali#1

Please explain why he is in court then mr law.

Duh. Because the media whipped the black community up into a tizzy over the damn thing looking for a juicy story on racism that wasn't there. He wasn't even charged for a long time until the media got the ball rolling. If you doubt me, just look at any of the thousands examples of black people shooting black people. Not a word.

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

Sorry wasnt trying to insult I meant MrSmooth.

Kid with a pocket full of candy is the posecutions pitch, he was well known by the police and deff kicked Simmermans azz

Then why does the blood evidence and DNA evidence not seem to support that?

Zimmerman was soaked with the kids blood but the boy had barely any of Zimmermans blood on him.
Hmmm.... sounds like that kid really worked him over.
Also... none of Zimmermans DNA was found under the kids nails etc... again... thats pretty hard to immagine in a knock down, grapple and fist fight.

I suspect that Zimmermans injuies... at least some of them... are self inflicted.... and that is why the DNA evidence including that on the gun is important.

[Gust]

Originally Posted by Pincherguy

They are digging into Zimmerman's back ground because he went to college and took a law enforcement class. If they were allowed to bring Martins back ground into play they would see that he was a fighter and apparently at one time he was looking to buy a gun. The kid was no angel for sure, only in his parents eyes.

Why would it be a crime for Trayvon to be looking into guns? Don't we go on about 2nd ammendments this and that and gun rights and so forth, but all of a sudden this young American doesn't have a right to have an interest in guns????

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

If you don't believe Zimmerman just because anything could have happened, and there's no video of the event, then whats the point of even discussing this? Most people talking about this case are discussing evidence and what seems reasonable. Others, not so much.

The whole defense is based upon what could have happened.

Don't forget... we only have his word against a deadmans and no witnesses as to how Zimmerman was injured.

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by rugatika

Duh. Because the media whipped the black community up into a tizzy over the damn thing looking for a juicy story on racism that wasn't there. He wasn't even charged for a long time until the media got the ball rolling. If you doubt me, just look at any of the thousands examples of black people shooting black people. Not a word.

Why so racial ?

He's in court because the state don't believe his story of self defence and charged him with second degree murder.

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by ali#1

Please explain why he is in court then mr law.

rage

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

rage

Happens some times, the police chief resigned.

[Roughneck Country]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger

Then why does the blood evidence and DNA evidence not seem to support that?

Zimmerman was soaked with the kids blood but the boy had barely any of Zimmermans blood on him.
Hmmm.... sounds like that kid really worked him over.
Also... none of Zimmermans DNA was found under the kids nails etc... again... thats pretty hard to immagine in a knock down, grapple and fist fight.

I suspect that Zimmermans injuies... at least some of them... are self inflicted.... and that is why the DNA evidence including that on the gun is important.

Usually dna under finger nails is a self defence sign from scratching the attacker. If the kid was pounding his head on the cement he might not have got it on him. Plus it was raining. I think the kid worked him after he was antagonozed. Just my opinion, im sure the truth is somewhere between the defence and prosecution

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger

I suspect that Zimmermans injuies... at least some of them... are self inflicted.... and that is why the DNA evidence including that on the gun is important.

Really? Watch the walking dead much?

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

Usually dna under finger nails is a self defence sign from scratching the attacker. If the kid was pounding his head on the cement he might not have got it on him. Plus it was raining. I think the kid worked him after he was antagonozed. Just my opinion, im sure the truth is somewhere between the defence and prosecution

It usually is...

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

Usually dna under finger nails is a self defence sign from scratching the attacker. If the kid was pounding his head on the cement he might not have got it on him. Plus it was raining. I think the kid worked him after he was antagonozed. Just my opinion, im sure the truth is somewhere between the defence and prosecution

If someone is smashing your head into cement would you have more than a few band aids on your scalp. Plus the doctor testified that the wounds weren't that bad.

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

Really? Watch the walking dead much?

What?

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by ali#1

If someone is smashing your head into cement would you have more than a few band aids on your scalp. Plus the doctor testified that the wounds weren't that bad.

How bad do the wounds have to be for someone to believe they are in grave danger?

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger

What?

Shane, on the walking dead, killed a kid he didn't trust and then smashed his own face into a tree, creating evidence that the kid sucker punched him.

Maybe Zim watches the walking dead!

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

Shane, on the walking dead, killed a kid he didn't trust and then smashed his own face into a tree, creating evidence that the kid sucker punched him.

Maybe Zim watches the walking dead!

Maybe...
Your refernce threw me though.
At first I thought you were yanking my chain.

Wouldn't be the first time someone faked an assault.
Hell... I'd break my own nose to stay out of prison on a potential murder rap.
Be nuts not to try it if you thought you might get away with it.

In fact... any course taken regarding a self defence scenario would almost certainly include some by the side advice on how to avoid prosecution.
Thats why people take them.
And Zimmerman took a few such courses...no?

I've taken similar training and all sorts of wink wink nudge nudge advice was always offered.

Whoi knows?
We'll have to hope that the courts see through the BS and get down to what really happened... whether that means a conviction or not.

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

How bad do the wounds have to be for someone to believe they are in grave danger?

Worse than what I saw he had, I have seen a lot worse beating taken place after hours at a bar and nobody died.