ZIMMERMAN CHARGED!? Tune in @ 6:00pm EST News

[WilliamB]

So that is exactly where all those phone recordings of Zimmerman are coming from - his moment-by-moment calls into the police asking them to come and help with a suspicious person in his neighborhood.

And that is where Martin found Zimmerman - at Zimmerman's car - by the entrance to the subdivision waiting for the police that Zimmerman had called.

And then inexplicably -- Martin apparently attacked Zimmerman.

I guess Martin did not suspect that Zimmerman would be armed.

How sad for him.

But fortunately for Zimmerman - he had urged the police to get there as fast as possible AND fortunately for him Florida has a law allowing lethal force in cases where one is in fear of being attacked. No need to get beat up first -- according to their law.

in Christ,

Bob

Is this sarcasim or do you really not know the facts in the case? Zimmerman would have had to have been parked between two apartment buildings, on the grass and sidewalk. This has to be sarcasim. Good one!

 

[WilliamB]

thanks for that, can you point me as to where Martin's body was located? I'm sure there is a report showing Martin's body and Zimmermans vehicle.

I just responded to that. I'm like, huh? Where can those facts be located? I'm thinking it's sarcasim.

 

[Lovely Lane]

untill their is proof, and that would be video, not some supposed eye witness testimony, of which i give little relevance to either side, considering it was.....
1 dark
2 rainy
3 multiple witnesses saying different things
4 now apparently 4 supposed eye witnesses changing their stories.

give me a break.....eye witness testimony in this case is worthless. so like i started to say, unless you can provide irrefutable video of george zimmerman starting the arguement, throwing the 1 st punch, and thus initiating the attack, there is no evidence contrary to refute zimmermans claim that he was acting in self defense. period. one can assume, make up scenarios, make presumptions, etc..etc...dont change anything. prove zimmerman attacked first, you win your case. dont prove zimmerman threw the first punch, the case should be thrown out. and 'following' someone is NOT throwing the first punch. again, its not illegal in this country. one can go and walk wherever he/she wants to on public property, or private property if they have right to be there, keep bringing this up all you want, it isnt illegal.. attacking someone with physical force is.

It's hard to be an eyewitness, and I bet few are accurate in perpetrator identification in line-up's.

Zimmerman was advised to stay in his vehicle, he didn't. He created the incident, got his butt kicked, pulled gun, and shot point blank. Zimmerman is no hero, just a zealot out hunting.

 

[Sadalmelik]

Not sure how you got to prison statistics but ok. It's important to understand that self-defense is a DEFENSE strategy. While the defense teams burden of prove is far less than the prosecutions, the defense still must prove to at least one juror that Zimmerman acted in self-defense. The prosecutions job will be to tear down that self-defense argument.

Since he's already confessed to killing Trayvon and they have the murder weapon, the defense is going to have a lot of explaining to do and it is highly likely that Zimmerman himself will have to take the stand to try to convince the jury it was self-defense.

i read the report on yahoo last week, im trying to find it, as its been archived already, if i find it ill post it., your entitled to your opinion, i disagree with it. like ive said, and will say one more time....the defense should not have to prove anything, the prosecutor should have to prove he didnt act in self defense....

now maybe with the play of the stand your ground law that changes something, but under normal circumstances, the defense doesnt have to prove anything. and if the state does not prove that zimmerman did not act in self defense, then justice would only be served by zimmerman being acquitted. again this is not just my opinion, or thoughts, this is the way, i believe, the law is supposed to work.

though, again, im not a legal expert, so i dont know all the nuances of using this defense. im speaking to our judicial system in general. and am assuming the court process and due process would work the same here too.

 

[Lovely Lane]

I just responded to that. I'm like, huh? Where can those facts be located? I'm thinking it's sarcasim.

lol, I see it now. I had forgotten the location of Martin's body and the vehicle.

What was Zimmerman driving , an ATV?

 

[Sadalmelik]

It's hard to be an eyewitness, and I bet few are accurate in perpetrator identification in line-up's.

Zimmerman was advised to stay in his vehicle, he didn't. He created the incident, got his butt kicked, pulled gun, and shot point blank. Zimmerman is no hero, just a zealot out hunting.

thats quite a judgement. the problem with your timeline is this, what happened between, he created the incident, and got his butt kicked?

even if i give you....he created the incident, insert.....martin attacked first, and zimmerman got his but kicked, etc.

so ill ask you once again, since you didnt answe the 1st time.....if the scenario of timeline i just gave, for arguements sake, lets say for just a moment it did., that martin attacked first.....you still think zimmerman should be charged with anything?

 

[WilliamB]

i read the report on yahoo last week, im trying to find it, as its been archived already, if i find it ill post it., your entitled to your opinion, i disagree with it. like ive said, and will say one more time....the defense should not have to prove anything, the prosecutor should have to prove he didnt act in self defense....

now maybe with the play of the stand your ground law that changes something, but under normal circumstances, the defense doesnt have to prove anything. and if the state does not prove that zimmerman did not act in self defense, then justice would only be served by zimmerman being acquitted. again this is not just my opinion, or thoughts, this is the way, i believe, the law is supposed to work.

though, again, im not a legal expert, so i dont know all the nuances of using this defense. im speaking to our judicial system in general. and am assuming the court process and due process would work the same here too.

And your assumption of the judicial burden of proof, is pretty much dead on accurate. Self-defense cases are just a bit different. In this case, the prosecution really only needs to prove negligence and reckless behavior that lead to Trayvon's death. That's manslaughter by definition. They will have a much harder time proving murder 2. That will all come down to who was screaming for help on the 911 call, for nearly 1 minute.

Dont get me wrong, I'm totally against anyone going to prison for a crime they didn't commit. Just for me in this case, the same evidence that gave authorities probably cause for an arrest, is all they really need to find Zimmerman's reckless and negligent behavior prior to the confrontation, responsible for Trayvon's death. This is all assuming the judge dosent toss the case out in a couple weeks.

 

[WilliamB]

lol, I see it now. I had forgotten the location of Martin's body and the vehicle.

What was Zimmerman driving , an ATV?

 

[Lovely Lane]

thats quite a judgement. the problem with your timeline is this, what happened between, he created the incident, and got his butt kicked?

even if i give you....he created the incident, insert.....martin attacked first, and zimmerman got his but kicked, etc.

so ill ask you once again, since you didnt answe the 1st time.....if the scenario of timeline i just gave, for arguements sake, lets say for just a moment it did., that martin attacked first.....you still think zimmerman should be charged with anything?

You, I and 17 year old Martin have a right to stand our ground, right?

Zimmerman shot and killed Martin, yep, he goes to jail on manslaughter do to negligence and being stupid. my thoughts.

 

[Sadalmelik]

You, I and 17 year old Martin have a right to stand our ground, right?

Zimmerman shot and killed Martin, yep, he goes to jail on manslaughter do to negligence and being stupid. my thoughts.

well then you might as well throw the stand your ground law into the shredder, cause according to you, if one uses it, regardless of the circumstances, they should be thrown in jail if someone ends up dead. i 100% completely disagree with you, and quite frankly am astonished that someone can believe this. someone attacks someone first, the person could die because their head is being bashed into concrete, and the person has no right to shoot the person to defend themselves, because they 'provoked' it. this is what your saying. unbelievable.

 

[Sadalmelik]

i guess that would give people all kinds of excuses and new defenses for physically attacking someone. well they were looking at me funny, so i ripped their lips off, or they were watching me eerily, so i poked their eyeballs out. or he said something i found offensive, so i went over and bashed his head repeatedly into the concrete, well no, i didnt mean to kill him, i was just mad, and i didnt know smashing someones head into the concrete could kill them.......well, he was following me ya know.


talk about lawlessness, and anything goes. your logic opens up a whole new can of worms.

 

[WilliamB]

i guess that would give people all kinds of excuses and new defenses for physically attacking someone. well they were looking at me funny, so i ripped their lips off, or they were watching me eerily, so i poked their eyeballs out. or he said something i found offensive, so i went over and bashed his head repeatedly into the concrete, well no, i didnt mean to kill him, i was just mad, and i didnt know smashing someones head into the concrete could kill them.......well, he was following me ya know.

I think the thing that's being missed in all this is that there may very well be two instances where the stand your ground law could apply to both parties. One has already been established and that is Trayvon had the right to stand his ground. Just as you or I would. Thats how zimmerman gets manslaughter. Now whether Trayvon crosses the line of self-defense into attempted murder, is something that will need to be proved to justify the shooting and avoid the murder 2 conviction.

 

[Sadalmelik]

I think the thing that's being missed in all this is that there may very well be two instances where the stand your ground law could apply to both parties. One has already been established and that is Trayvon had the right to stand his ground. Just as you or I would. Thats how zimmerman gets manslaughter. Now whether Trayvon crosses the line of self-defense into attempted murder, is something that will need to be proved to justify the shooting and avoid the murder 2 conviction.

trayvon had no ground to stand if zimmerman didnt attack him first, which HAS NOT been proven, following someone, is not grounds for attacking first, and beating the tar out of someone. if there is no proof to prove zimmerman attacked first, he shouldnt be charged with anything. as ive stated and will again....following and observing someone in public is not against the law, and is not grounds for self defense, or standing your ground or attacking and beating the tar out of someone, that in a sense would be considered anarchy. which some seem to argue on one hand against, but then so its ok.

 

[Texan40]

trayvon had no ground to stand if zimmerman didnt attack him first, which HAS NOT been proven, following someone, is not grounds for attacking first, and beating the tar out of someone. if there is no proof to prove zimmerman attacked first, he shouldnt be charged with anything. as ive stated and will again....following and observing someone in public is not against the law, and is not grounds for self defense, or standing your ground or attacking and beating the tar out of someone, that in a sense would be considered anarchy. which some seem to argue on one hand against, but then so its ok.

second degree murder n. a non-premeditated killing, resulting from an assault in which death of the victim was a distinct possibility. Second degree murder is different from First Degree Murder which is a premeditated, intentional killing, or results from a vicious crime such as arson, rape, or armed robbery. Exact distinctions on degree vary by state.

By the exact legal definition the death had to result from an "assault" by Zimmerman. As misguided and ignorant as I find Zimmerman's actions I don't know if they constitute an assault or implicitly show malicious intent. To the contrary this guy probably took his neighborhood watch position too seriously which led to his cavalier attitude on making his presence known on the street. The altercation was pointless and could have been easily avoided. It is a real tragedy.

 

[WilliamB]

trayvon had no ground to stand if zimmerman didnt attack him first, which HAS NOT been proven, following someone, is not grounds for attacking first, and beating the tar out of someone. if there is no proof to prove zimmerman attacked first, he shouldnt be charged with anything. as ive stated and will again....following and observing someone in public is not against the law, and is not grounds for self defense, or standing your ground or attacking and beating the tar out of someone, that in a sense would be considered anarchy. which some seem to argue on one hand against, but then so its ok.

Under florida law, being followed is grounds to attack someone, if you feel threatened. Zimmerman's 911 call, Trayvon's girllfriends testimony and the location of the body, all contradict what you believe. According to Florida law, one of the two had the right to stand their ground. We know it's not Zimmerman because he pursued without probable cause. You can disagree, but that's the law. That leaves Trayvon, who based on the evidence mentioned above, was well within his rights to stand his ground and not flee. If Trayvon had shot Zimmerman dead, he would have walked free based on this same evidence. He would have been arrested and charged immediately I'm sure but he would have beat the case based on the stand your ground statute.

 

[Sadalmelik]

baloney, 1st read the reports about trayvons, so called 'girlfriend' another thing totally being misled by the bias media. 2nd the 911 call imo proves nothing. other that zimmerman was observing/following trayvon, it does NOT show or prove that any confrontation happened while on the phone, cause it didnt, so we dont know who initiated the actual confrontation. 3rd, even if you listen to supposed eyewitness testimony of girlfriend, i dont believe, correct me if im wrong, that trayvon said he felt his life threatened, your assuming that. 4th, what does the location of the body have to do with anything? that doesnt prove anything imo. so he was following him, big deal, one could just as easily argue that had trayvon shut his mouth and went home like he was supposedly doing, none of this would have happened.

imo, and assumption, (notice i state this as a possibility), and not a fact, as you seem to indicate your assumption of events are absolute fact.......zimmerman was approached by trayvon, words were exchanged, trayvon got ticked off cause in his mind he was being 'profiled', lost his temper and attacked. therefore zimmerman had a right to defend himself, period...end of story. im sure thats about what zimmermans defense will be, and untill you prove otherwise, ill give him the benefit of the doubt. like i keep saying, it called presumption of innocence.....of which you and others contiually ignore.

dont make this guy trayvon martin out to be some angel, cause if the reports on this guy are even half true, he wasnt, nor are the people he associated with....ie...supposed girlfriend.

 

[Lovely Lane]

well then you might as well throw the stand your ground law into the shredder, cause according to you, if one uses it, regardless of the circumstances, they should be thrown in jail if someone ends up dead. i 100% completely disagree with you, and quite frankly am astonished that someone can believe this. someone attacks someone first, the person could die because their head is being bashed into concrete, and the person has no right to shoot the person to defend themselves, because they 'provoked' it. this is what your saying. unbelievable.

Martin stood his ground, got killed, Zimmerman goes to jail. And stop with the scenario's of what happened, you don't know.

 

[Sadalmelik]

Martin stood his ground, got killed, Zimmerman goes to jail. And stop with the scenario's of what happened, you don't know.

neither do you, spite the fact that you have this all figured out and have thrown zimmerman under the bus with all the rest of the bias media, the ignorant public, and the black panthers and other racist groups. you werent there either, there is no video showing otherwise, so ill take zimmermans word on what happened. ITS CALLED PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE. LOOK IT UP. cause apparently you dont know what it means.

there is nothing to show otherwise, he has not been proven to be a compulsive liar, he has not been proven to be a racist, etc in fact, if you look at him and his history, it has shown the complete opposite.

 

[WilliamB]

baloney, 1st read the reports about trayvons, so called 'girlfriend' another thing totally being misled by the bias media. 2nd the 911 call imo proves nothing. other that zimmerman was observing/following trayvon, it does NOT show or prove that any confrontation happened while on the phone, cause it didnt, so we dont know who initiated the actual confrontation. 3rd, even if you listen to supposed eyewitness testimony of girlfriend, i dont believe, correct me if im wrong, that trayvon said he felt his life threatened, your assuming that. 4th, what does the location of the body have to do with anything? that doesnt prove anything imo. so he was following him, big deal, one could just as easily argue that had trayvon shut his mouth and went home like he was supposedly doing, none of this would have happened.

imo, and assumption, (notice i state this as a possibility), and not a fact, as you seem to indicate your assumption of events are absolute fact.......zimmerman was approached by trayvon, words were exchanged, trayvon got ticked off cause in his mind he was being 'profiled', lost his temper and attacked. therefore zimmerman had a right to defend himself, period...end of story. im sure thats about what zimmermans defense will be, and untill you prove otherwise, ill give him the benefit of the doubt. like i keep saying, it called presumption of innocence.....of which you and others contiually ignore.

dont make this guy trayvon martin out to be some angel, cause if the reports on this guy are even half true, he wasnt, nor are the people he associated with....ie...supposed girlfriend.

1. You apparently have no understanding of the stand your ground law in Florida.

2. You apparently don't think those rights apply to Trayvon as he should have "shut his mouth and went home".

3.The rest of this rhetoric is exactly that. Rhetoric.

No further comment.

 

[Sadalmelik]

Martin stood his ground, got killed, Zimmerman goes to jail. And stop with the scenario's of what happened, you don't know.

ya zimmerman goes to jail, and we all move on.....got that already.
and oj walked free for cutting off the heads of 2 people, and casey anthony walked free for murdering and duct taping her babys mouth shut and so on. so whats your point. it bothers me when i see injustice. apparently your ok with it.