Florida's Stand your Ground law

U bend over backward to assume and insist
that decedent was the most pristine essence of innocence.
U have no evidence that he did not become violent with Mr. Z
with little or no provocation.

It 'd go something like this:
Z: "Excuse me, Sir. Can I ask u what u r doing in the naborhood?"

U bend over backward to assume and insist
that decedent was the most pristine essence of innocence.
U have no evidence that he did not become violent with Mr. Z
with little or no provocation.

NO such bending is necessary. We have a statement by someone that was on the phone with Trayvon. She thought the person following was a threat. Trayvon, according to her thought the person was a threat. That is 2 people IN the situation that thought that. According to the law, they only had to perceive a threat to respond with force.

It 'd go something like this:
Z: "Excuse me, Sir. Can I ask u what u r doing in the naborhood?"

Or.. more likely...
Z - Get the hell out of here you f*** coon or I'll kill you!
DAVID - Oh.. I'm sorry sir. I didn't realize I was not supposed to be here. Please don't kill me. I'm not black.

For all we know, the recoil of the gun may have smacked it back into his face at which point he fell and hit his head.

To say that murder was justified because Trayvon fought back against the guy who attacked him is farked up.

As far as Zimmerman being injured, I read this on another site today:

For all we know, the recoil of the gun
may have smacked it back into his face at which point he fell and hit his head.

To say that murder was justified because Trayvon fought
back against the guy who attacked him is farked up.

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force.

Actually, the law DOES say that. One only needs to believe they are under threat.

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force.

So.. if someone threatens to start a fire, it is a threat
but if someone threatens to kill you it isn't? You have some odd ideas David.

DrewDad wrote:

As far as Zimmerman being injured, I read this on another site today:

Quote:

For all we know, the recoil of the gun
may have smacked it back into his face at which point he fell and hit his head.

That 's ridiculous! He was shot with a little 9mm Luger round.
When I was a little boy around 8 years old, I was firing those
at gunnery ranges; thay have very slight recoil; next to nothing.
Thay were very comfortable to fire. U can do it all day, with no fatigue.

Quote:

To say that murder was justified because Trayvon fought
back against the guy who attacked him is farked up.

From what I heard on the news at 12n,
a witness told police that Trayvon approached Z, and started a fight.
Last nite on the news, someone identified Z 's voice on the tape
as calling for help. I read that decedent 's father denied
that it was his son 's voice on that tape.

This may be shaping up that Trayvon decided to avenge himself
for Z 's following him, by a violent personal battery,
thus accounting for the fx nose and presumably the injuries behind
his head, tho I don 't know their specific etiology.

Yes, the captain of the neighborhood watch was assaulted when he left his vehicle to read a street sign. In the middle of the block. That's entirely plausible.

As far as Zimmerman being injured, I read this on another site today:

For all we know, the recoil of the gun
may have smacked it back into his face at which point he fell and hit his head.

That 's ridiculous! He was shot with a little 9mm Luger round.
When I was a little boy around 8 years old, I was firing those
at gunnery ranges; thay have very slight recoil; next to nothing.
Thay were very comfortable to fire. U can do it all day, with no fatigue.

Well, now here you are speculating about what Zimmerman can and cannot do.
But of course, you refuse to speculate about about what else he may have done.

Also, you seem curiously informed about how he was armed,
considering how uninformed you are about what else transpired that evening.

Quote:

To say that murder was justified because Trayvon fought
back against the guy who attacked him is farked up.

From what I heard on the news at 12n,
a witness told police that Trayvon approached Z, and started a fight.
Last nite on the news, someone identified Z 's voice on the tape
as calling for help. I read that decedent 's father denied
that it was his son 's voice on that tape.

This may be shaping up that Trayvon decided to avenge himself
for Z 's following him, by a violent personal battery,
thus accounting for the fx nose and presumably the injuries behind
his head, tho I don 't know their specific etiology.

Yes, the captain of the neighborhood watch was assaulted when he left his vehicle to read a street sign.
In the middle of the block. That's entirely plausible.

And the police failed to note his injuries in the report.
And failed to get him medical attention. Again, entirely plausible.

I don 't know what Z can do,
but I know what the recoil of the 9mm Luger cartridge can do; its not much.

DrewDad wrote:

Yes, the captain of the neighborhood watch was assaulted when he left his vehicle to read a street sign. In the middle of the block. That's entirely plausible.

In the rain. In a neighborhood he was quite familiar with - unless he was watching a neighborhood on the opposite side of town from which he lived. Also entirely plausible.

I don 't know what Z can do,
but I know what the recoil of the 9mm Luger cartridge can do; its not much.

Evidently it's enough to kill a man.

As we have already established, at the time Trayvon and the girl he was talking to felt he was threatened.
Most reasonable people would consider someone slowly following them
in a vehicle that then gets out of the vehicle to be some kind of threat.

There is NO requirement that the threat be "overt with a weapon".

If that is your requirement then what weapon was Zimmerman threatened with?

You're dancing around semantics in order to avoid the facts, and you know it.

It sounds paranoid, to me.

DrewDad wrote:

Yes, the captain of the neighborhood watch was assaulted when he left his vehicle to read a street sign. In the middle of the block. That's entirely plausible.

In the rain. In a neighborhood he was quite familiar with - unless he was watching a neighborhood on the opposite side of town from which he lived. Also entirely plausible.

Assaulted by someone who was simultaneously having a phone conversation with his girlfriend.
I know I like to multitask when I attack guys from behind. Definitely possible.