Trayvon Martin Case

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Gary84Clark

Disagree,

1. Blaming the media is a common cop out. 2. Zimmerman is responsible, he did his job as a bitch boy wanna be and he told the cops. Putting his hands on someone after following them makes him responsible.

TM bears zero responsibility huh?

[Gary84Clark]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

i do hope he is found guilty but its a close call.

either way, the jurors get to make the call and they are in the best position to make a decision .. assuming none of them harbor strong feelings for or against gun control laws and didnt speak up during voir dire.

I think the gun control angle is being over played here. This has nothing to do with gun control its a stalking case. No one is saying it was illegal for Zimmermn to have the gun we are saying it was illegal for him to kill that teenager.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

i do hope he is found guilty but its a close call.

either way, the jurors get to make the call and they are in the best position to make a decision .. assuming none of them harbor strong feelings for or against gun control laws and didnt speak up during voir dire.

Or are closet racists.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Here's what we KNOW happened. A over-zealous neighborhood watchman followed around someone because he felt he was suspicious.

OK, but how do you KNOW any of the rest?

Originally Posted by FRPLG

He didn't engage the guy to find out what he was doing in a constructive way (that we know of) rather he acted in a way that created a situation of confrontation. Now TM may have gone too far in his reaction and gave Z a reason to defend himself (who knows) but what we KNOW is that Z should have handled the situation better and then an unarmed teenager wouldn't be dead. Does any of that make him guilty? No. But I am damn sure if it's me in that situation TM doesn't get shot because a more reasonable person doesn't manipulate a situation into being confrontational like that. I think it is hard to see the basic situation any different.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Gary84Clark

There si no gone too far when someon you don;t know follows you and enters your personal space. You have a right to self defrense at that point. That person brought the problem to you.

Wrong. DEAD WRONG. Being bothered by someone does not mean you can't "go too far".

[Gary84Clark]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

TM bears zero responsibility huh?

zero follow me and Ima whoop yo ass.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

OK, but how do you KNOW any of the rest?

You're correct. "know" is the wrong word. "Strongly believe without much evidence, discussion, assertion, or testimony to the contrary" is better. The picture painted by almost everyone in general follows that line. The details of exactly how everything played out are being debated. No one makes much of an argument any other way. Given what has been testified to..if you're in that situation can you see it going down the way it did?

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Gary84Clark

zero follow me and Ima whoop yo ass.

And you might get shot. It's the risk you're taking. And to me in that situation you absolutely bear some responsibility.

[Gary84Clark]

Following someone is an aggressive act. If your logic is correct, then how can stalking laws be upheld in court?

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Gary84Clark

zero follow me and Ima whoop yo ass.

Abso-****ing-lutely. Too many predators out there to allow yourself to give someone an edge. I don't let people closer that arms length plus a rolled up WSJ. Just good self preservation.

[Gary84Clark]

So if you follow someobody and after you upset them you then shoot them when they confront you? You are going to jail.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

i think we have slightly more than that. i added some more in bold.

plus, to my knowledge we have 2 eyewitnesses saying they believe the larger person was on top (Z being the larger person in their judgment) and one witness saying he believes the lighter skinned person was on the bottom.

The two witnesses had Zimmerman on top after the gunshot fired which conflicts with how Martin's body was found (face down) or simply could mean Martin rolled over after Martin collapsed from being shot. Also, the photo they were shown of Martin for size comparison to Zimmerman was Martin in his football uniform that looked like it was from when he was 14 and had no reference for TM's height or size - It was clearly NOT a photo of Martin at or near the time of the shooting. On the other hand, the guy 15 feet away identified Z as being on the bottom by the color of his jacket and said Z's arms were free while TM had him in the "ground and pound".

Originally Posted by over the mountain

if martin was giving zimmerman the ground and pound so hard that zimmerman was fearing for his life, how did zimmerman manage to unholster his firearm and cleanly discharge it right into martin's chest?

if zimmerman was able to do all they above acts seemingly cleanly, was there no other less deadly alternatives?

if martin was on top of him, id imagine a long struggle for the gun would ensue. . . .

How? I can imagine any number of ways. Been on the bottom of a fight and needed to pull a knife while being choked? It's a brawl my man. Shit happens. "you would imagine a long struggle"? Martin is angry, is staring him in the eye as he does the "pound" and momentarily loses track of Z's hands; taking advantage of the momentary lapse of his opponent, Z fumbles his gun out and gets a lucky shot off. Not saying that's how it happened but it's one of a myriad of ways a moment can turn a fight.

Originally Posted by over the mountain

joe - watch the reenactment video zimmerman did for the news a few days after and tell me if his version of events would hold water. just too many leaps of faith imo from what ive seen.

I did when it was first posted. Can't remember what it said or my impressions. If you can post hte link, great. Otherwise, I'll try to find it and watch it again. It will be interesting to compare to the testimony that is now coming out.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

plus, to my knowledge we have 2 eyewitnesses saying they believe the larger person was on top (Z being the larger person in their judgment) and one witness saying he believes the lighter skinned person was on the bottom.

This could be significant, but wasn't one witness basing his judgement off seeing the pictures of Trayvon as a kid and thinking the guy on top had been a lot bigger than that? And the other was talking about Zimmerman being on top after he shot Martin?

Some co-workers and I saw the bit recently where a witness says he actually saw Martin on top of Zimmerman pounding him.

The thing that gets me is, what's important is who attacked who. And the ONE witness I've seen so far that gives any clue as to how the confrontation started was the "girlfriend". I think the prosecution would have been better off not bringing her into the case. She was a horrible character witness for Trayvon.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Gary84Clark

There si no gone too far when someon you don;t know follows you and enters your personal space. You have a right to self defrense at that point. That person brought the problem to you.

No. You don't. As long as I don't threaten you with physical violence, I can get in your face all day long. You don't like it? Walk away or call the cops. You DO NOT have the right to become violent. Period.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

You're correct. "know" is the wrong word. "Strongly believe without much evidence, discussion, assertion, or testimony to the contrary" is better. The picture painted by almost everyone in general follows that line. The details of exactly how everything played out are being debated. No one makes much of an argument any other way. Given what has been testified to..if you're in that situation can you see it going down the way it did?

I could see things going down a lot of ways, plenty of idiots around, including yours truly. My point is that there's too much speculation, with people making Z or TM out to be guilty with zero evidence to their speculation.

If only there was video surveillance of the confrontation, like the cameras at schools. (I'm not really crazy about "Big Brother", but would come in handy now.)