George Zimmerman, the Constitution, and the shifting politics of self-defense

[RaiseTheDead]

Sounds like good old fashioned poisoning the well.

*ahem* post #228 Great minds think alike?

 

[jgarden]

..... My guess is that Zimmerman will indeed get a new judge as Lester is certainly biased against him at this point.

A lot of information has been falsified abut what happened between Zimmerman and Martin, and some of that falsifying seems to have come from the authorities

"MachZerO" is good at speculating and making unsubstantiated accusations against the judge and the authorities, and then has the audacity to demand a high degree of legal correctness from everyone - except himself.

"MachZerO" completely ignored post #219 that details the circumstances under which Zimmerman had his bail revoked because it contradicts into his predetermined version of what transpired.

George Zimmerman reminds me of an O. J. Simpson who may have escaped the initial murder conviction but is now doing time in jail.

Zimmerman may never be be convicted of murdering Martin, but having demonstrated a pattern of behavior (conspiring to withhold his financial assets) that “under any definition ... flaunted the system” (Judge Lester's words) coupled with lying on his application for a 2nd passport and sexual molestation creates a downward spiral that can only result in one outcome - major jail time!

 

[MachZer0]

Plenty if evidence suggested he acted recklessly, and the courts will decide if his course of actions are what a person of sound mind would do.

Sorry, but there isn't a hint of recklessness in Zimmerman's actions. We can't necessarily say the same for Martin however.

 

[RaiseTheDead]

Sorry, but there isn't a hint of recklessness in Zimmerman's actions.

I dunno, laying flat on your back having the back of your head pummeled into concrete, smacks of reckless behavior to me ...

 

[ulu]

How did this stuff about when he was 8 get in there? That doesn't speak to his character, everyone does reckless and dumb things when they are kids.

According to the report it was ongoing from the time he was 8-18.

 

[mpok1519]

Sorry, but there isn't a hint of recklessness in Zimmerman's actions. We can't necessarily say the same for Martin however.

According to you, however, most people would say Zimmerman did not exhibit the behavior of a normal rational person who's motto is "safety first". Arming yourself and go chasing some poor kid before shooting them just isn't normal
behavior.

To most people, at least. He could be tap dancing on the ceiling and you'd think the was normal.

 

[MachZer0]

According to you, however, most people would say Zimmerman did not exhibit the behavior of a normal rational person who's motto is "safety first". Arming yourself and go chasing some poor kid before shooting them just isn't normal
behavior.

To most people, at least. He could be tap dancing on the ceiling and you'd think the was normal.

Arming yourself is not reckless, and trying to keep tabs on a suspicious person until police arrive is not reckless either. So I would most people would disagree with you.

 

[Vylo]

According to the report it was ongoing from the time he was 8-18.

Oh my. The timing is a bit suspicious, but if this turns out to be true, thats awful.

 

[RaiseTheDead]

Oh my. The timing is a bit suspicious, but if this turns out to be true, thats awful.

I fail to see the relevance. You're going to try an adult as a juvenile? You're suggesting Z shot M so he could rape him? What?

 

[mpok1519]

Arming yourself is not reckless, and trying to keep tabs on a suspicious person until police arrive is not reckless either. So I would most people would disagree with you.

When youre on prescription drugs, armed, and suspicious of an individual who has committed no crime, and the result is a dead kid, common sense would say no, he was not acting in a careful manner, but rather reckless.

This will be for the courts to decide. Not your armchair lawyer commentary.

 

[MachZer0]

When youre on prescription drugs, armed, and suspicious of an individual who has committed no crime, and the result is a dead kid, common sense would say no, he was not acting in a careful manner, but rather reckless.

This will be for the courts to decide. Not your armchair lawyer commentary.

What you just described was a person acting completely within the the law. You did not describe one illegal act on Zimmerman's part.

On the other side of the story though, we have Martin who tested positive for illegal drugs, who viciously attacked Zimmerman without cause, threatened to kill him, savagely battered him and indeed attempted to kill him. That's why I expect no trial and no civil action against Zimmerman

 

[mpok1519]

All of those things individually are not crimes; however, you put all of that together, it can be determined that his actions were indeed reckless that ended up with a dead kid.

More factors are involved than you care to acknowledge.

One way or another, it looks like he will be spending time in jail.

 

[mpok1519]

Lol an illegal drug that has killed no one, as opposed to prescriptions that kill more people a year than any other drug. Yeah, stick with that.

Fat out of shape excuse for a human being arms himself, involves himself in an altercation, gets the crap beat out of him in a brawl, and kills the better human specimen.

Dont be surprised if I'm not sympathetic.

 

[RaiseTheDead]

All of those things individually are not crimes; however, you put all of that together, it can be determined that his actions were indeed reckless that ended up with a dead kid.

More factors are involved than you care to acknowledge.

Do you acknowledge that Martin himself, introduced some factors into this? If I were in his shoes, I could've avoided violence altogether. If you were in his shoes, you would've attacked Zimmerman as soon as you saw he had a gun. Which one of us would have survived?

I suggest you could re-evaluate your values, and come out ahead

 

[RaiseTheDead]

Fat out of shape excuse for a human being arms himself, involves himself in an altercation, gets the crap beat out of him in a brawl, and kills the better human specimen.

Dont be surprised if I'm not sympathetic.

Suddenly your entire stance makes sense; you favor a master race, and you think members of it should be able to impose their will upon the rest. Ok, I get it, but that's where the comprehensible part stops. You then acknowledge it was indeed self-defense, but you choose to deny the victor that right because he is a "fat out of shape excuse for a human being." (You also ignore that he dropped a lot of weight in recent years, but none of that has any bearing on what happened that fateful night)

 

[MachZer0]

All of those things individually are not crimes; however, you put all of that together, it can be determined that his actions were indeed reckless that ended up with a dead kid.

More factors are involved than you care to acknowledge.

One way or another, it looks like he will be spending time in jail.

Taken altogether, they reveal noting reckless at all. Rather they reveal a person with a community minded spirit. looking out for his neighbors as he was requested to do by the HOA

 

[MachZer0]

Do you acknowledge that Martin himself, introduced some factors into this? If I were in his shoes, I could've avoided violence altogether. If you were in his shoes, you would've attacked Zimmerman as soon as you saw he had a gun. Which one of us would have survived?

I suggest you could re-evaluate your values, and come out ahead

Martin was running toward his destination. Had he continued on toward his destination, he would be alive today.

 

[mpok1519]

Do you acknowledge that Martin himself, introduced some factors into this? If I were in his shoes, I could've avoided violence altogether. If you were in his shoes, you would've attacked Zimmerman as soon as you saw he had a gun. Which one of us would have survived?

I suggest you could re-evaluate your values, and come out ahead

Its difficult to say. In many instances people have saved their own lives by preemptively attacking an armed assailant before they have a chance to draw their weapon. There are also instances of people being shot inthe back because they chose to flee from confrontation.

Martin probably could have ran. But when approached by a stranger who is armed, who most likely did not calmly and politely introduce himself to appear nonthreatening, it's difficult to say what course of action is the safest.

 

[RaiseTheDead]

In many instances people have saved their own lives by preemptively attacking an armed assailant before they have a chance to draw their weapon.

Certainly. In fact, just yesterday a neighbor asked for help, that could very well have put me in exactly the position of needing to make such a pre-emptive strike. The difference is, instead of being out in the open, I would've had every advantage, being inside a house and waiting for a known, repeated stalker, with the element of surprise on my side. Rest assured said individual would have been given NO opportunity to draw a weapon, or even to use it if it were already drawn. Fortunately it didn't come to that. And unfortunately this creep is still at large ...

What this does not address is the fact that if Zimmerman had a gun, he shouldn't have been within 20 feet of Martin without having it drawn, and decidedly controlling the situation.

Martin probably could have ran. But when approached by a stranger who is armed, who most likely did not calmly and politely introduce himself

How did Martin ever get in such a position in the first place? He had lost Zimmerman, completely. All he had to do was go home, as has been claimed was his innocent intent. This "superior specimen" got beaten in a foot race by Zimmerman? You and I both know better. Neither of us know what happened, but there is more to this than has come to the surface so far. If it wasn't Martin's intent to confront Zimmerman, how did they ever meet face to face? Note that this is a serious question!

Even if Zimmerman was hunting him, with intent to kill, how did he get within arm's reach of Martin, without Martin also desiring that to happen? Note that I don't buy that Zimmerman was actually hunting Martin with intent to kill after calling the Police to the scene; I'm just pointing out the absurdity of this hypothetical, which you seem to have convinced yourself is reality.

 

[MachZer0]

Its difficult to say. In many instances people have saved their own lives by preemptively attacking an armed assailant before they have a chance to draw their weapon. There are also instances of people being shot inthe back because they chose to flee from confrontation.

Martin probably could have ran. But when approached by a stranger who is armed, who most likely did not calmly and politely introduce himself to appear nonthreatening, it's difficult to say what course of action is the safest.

Martin did run. The question is, why did he return. The apparent answer is that he returned in order to start a fight with Zimmerman. For that, he paid a heavy price.