45
   

Do you think Zimmerman will be convicted of murder?

 
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 08:37 am
@oralloy,
Quote:

How does Florida's second degree murder statute differ from the definition of depraved heart murder?

Your argument is stupid since you didn't claim Florida's statute was the same as depraved heart murder. You claimed it was defined by Florida as depraved hear murder. Florida doesn't define it as depraved heart murder. The fact that you can define it as such doesn't change how Florida defined it.

Quote:

Their definition of second degree murder seems pretty close to the definition of depraved heart murder so far as I can tell.
And your argument is pretty close to being defined as factually untrue.

Quote:


I don't have to be Florida. I just have to be capable of reading the statute and understanding that it is describing depraved heart murder.
When you claim Florida defines it a certain way then you use your personal definition then you do have to be Florida for your statement to be factually correct. Since you are not Florida, your statement was factually incorrect and your claim you are always right about everything is clearly not true.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 08:39 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

parados wrote:
So even though you were wrong, you were still right...... Rolling Eyes


Correct. The fact that I am wrong about one thing does not mean I am wrong about all things.

But your claim was you were never wrong about anything. Which is substantially different from now claiming you are not wrong about all things.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 08:52 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
How does Florida's second degree murder statute differ from the definition of depraved heart murder?


Your argument is stupid since you didn't claim Florida's statute was the same as depraved heart murder. You claimed it was defined by Florida as depraved hear murder. Florida doesn't define it as depraved heart murder. The fact that you can define it as such doesn't change how Florida defined it.


Nonsense. Florida's second degree murder statute is Depraved Heart Murder.



parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
Their definition of second degree murder seems pretty close to the definition of depraved heart murder so far as I can tell.


And your argument is pretty close to being defined as factually untrue.


No, it is a fact that their second degree murder statute is Depraved Heart Murder.



parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
I don't have to be Florida. I just have to be capable of reading the statute and understanding that it is describing depraved heart murder.


When you claim Florida defines it a certain way then you use your personal definition then you do have to be Florida for your statement to be factually correct. Since you are not Florida, your statement was factually incorrect and your claim you are always right about everything is clearly not true.


There is no requirement "for me to be Florida" in order for their second degree murder statute to be Depraved Heart Murder.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 08:52 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
parados wrote:
So even though you were wrong, you were still right...... Rolling Eyes


Correct. The fact that I am wrong about one thing does not mean I am wrong about all things.


But your claim was you were never wrong about anything. Which is substantially different from now claiming you are not wrong about all things.


No. I do not claim infallibility (although some people occasionally falsely accuse me of claiming it).

My claim is that I am not wrong in my argument regarding the ridiculousness of charging Zimmerman of Depraved Heart Murder.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 12:22 pm
Given the fact that Zimmerman publicly demonstrated just how suspect his credibility is, by lying to both his own lawyer and the court regarding his assets--after colluding with his wife to transfer the assets to conceal them--I am even more inclined than ever to doubt the truthfulness of anything he says--including his version of the events that led to his shooting and killing Trayvon Martin.

In addition, his decision to lie about his assets, and think his deception wouldn't be discovered, and wouldn't adversely affect him, in a criminal case that hinges on his credibility, reflects such poor judgment on his part, that I am more inclined than ever to believe his judgment was seriously impaired when he shot and killed Trayvon Martin.

So I think this man is quite capable of acting with a "depraved mind"--given these other glaring indications of his poor judgment--and I don't see the 2nd degree murder charge as being such a stretch.

Zimmerman has not only some deep character flaws when it comes to being truthful, he engages in reckless behavior which becomes quite provocative and elicits angry responses from others-- he infuriated the judge in his case. So it's quite possible to understand how and why his behavior of watching and following Martin, and then finally confronting him, would have caused Martin not only anxiety regarding his own safety, but would also have provoked a justifiable angry and defensive physical response from the unarmed teen, because this crazy guy was, in fact, acting in a menacing way toward him.

Zimmerman is a very provocative man--and he doesn't seem to think about how his behavior affects others. He didn't seem to consider, or care, about how his deception maneuvers were going to affect the judge, or his legal case, and he likely didn't think about how his actions that night were going to affect Martin. In both of those instances Zimmerman's judgment was impaired by his own self-serving needs and impulses and obsessions--in one case to protect his assets from discovery by the court, possibly so he could use them (and his undisclosed second passport) to flee prosecution, and in the other case to make sure that the teen he had targeted as being a "bad guy" didn't get away this time, as others had in the past, and holding him until the police arrived would show everyone just what an efficient and impressive wanna-be cop he was. In both cases, he showed poor judgment, and an inadequate consideration of the consequences of what he was doing. In both cases Zimmerman was also trying to demonstrate his grandiosity--he could dupe a judge and foil a bad guy and hold him for the cops.

And the interview he did with Hannity didn't help him either--he doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut.

So, the state alleging that Zimmerman acted with a "deranged mind" does not seem to be a stretch for me...





oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 12:53 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:
So I think this man is quite capable of acting with a "depraved mind"--given these other glaring indications of his poor judgment--and I don't see the 2nd degree murder charge as being such a stretch.


In order to show a depraved mind, they would need to show that Zimmerman did not believe his life was in danger (in other words, that he shot Trayvon when there was no confrontation happening at all). They would need to prove that he shot Trayvon simply to wound him for the fun of it.

Not likely that they'll be able to do that.



firefly wrote:
So it's quite possible to understand how and why his behavior of watching and following Martin, and then finally confronting him, would have caused Martin not only anxiety regarding his own safety, but would also have provoked a justifiable angry and defensive physical response from the unarmed teen, because this crazy guy was, in fact, acting in a menacing way toward him.


Got any evidence that Zimmerman confronted him?



firefly wrote:
In both of those instances Zimmerman's judgment was impaired by his own self-serving needs and impulses and obsessions--in one case to protect his assets from discovery by the court, possibly so he could use them (and his undisclosed second passport) to flee prosecution, and in the other case to make sure that the teen he had targeted as being a "bad guy" didn't get away this time, as others had in the past, and holding him until the police arrived would show everyone just what an efficient and impressive wanna-be cop he was. In both cases, he showed poor judgment, and an inadequate consideration of the consequences of what he was doing. In both cases Zimmerman was also trying to demonstrate his grandiosity--he could dupe a judge and foil a bad guy and hold him for the cops.


Got any evidence that he in any way tried to "hold" Trayvon?



firefly wrote:
So, the state alleging that Zimmerman acted with a "deranged mind" does not seem to be a stretch for me...


That's because you continue to ignore what it would take to prove a depraved mind.

If Zimmerman believed his life to be in danger, even if that belief was not legally reasonable, that's not a depraved mind. That's a case for manslaughter (if the belief was not reasonable).

In order to prove a depraved mind, they will need to prove that Zimmerman knew he was in no danger, and shot Trayvon anyway.
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 01:56 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
In order to show a depraved mind, they would need to show that Zimmerman did not believe his life was in danger (in other words, that he shot Trayvon when there was no confrontation happening at all). They would need to prove that he shot Trayvon simply to wound him for the fun of it.

Sorry, that's not the way the law reads, or the way the law is applied.

You seem to be wrong, again. In fact, it seems to be your normal state of being.

Reality: 53,283
Orally: 0
parados
 
  2  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 03:48 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:

Nonsense. Florida's second degree murder statute is Depraved Heart Murder.

Funny thing is they don't call it that. You do.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 03:58 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:



That's because you continue to ignore what it would take to prove a depraved mind.

If Zimmerman believed his life to be in danger, even if that belief was not legally reasonable, that's not a depraved mind. That's a case for manslaughter (if the belief was not reasonable).

In order to prove a depraved mind, they will need to prove that Zimmerman knew he was in no danger, and shot Trayvon anyway.

Nope. That isn't the way it rolls at all for second degree murder. Is it 2nd degree murder if you play Russian roulette and someone shoots themselves?

DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 04:07 pm
@parados,
Orally can barely function in reality, let alone hypothetical situations.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 07:52 pm
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:
oralloy wrote:
In order to show a depraved mind, they would need to show that Zimmerman did not believe his life was in danger (in other words, that he shot Trayvon when there was no confrontation happening at all). They would need to prove that he shot Trayvon simply to wound him for the fun of it.


Sorry, that's not the way the law reads, or the way the law is applied.


Yes it is.



DrewDad wrote:
You seem to be wrong, again. In fact, it seems to be your normal state of being.


It seems that way to you because you never have the slightest clue what you are talking about.



DrewDad wrote:
Reality: 53,283
Orally: 0


Nope. Me and reality are on the same side, as always.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 07:53 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
Nonsense. Florida's second degree murder statute is Depraved Heart Murder.


Funny thing is they don't call it that. You do.


So?
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 07:54 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
That's because you continue to ignore what it would take to prove a depraved mind.

If Zimmerman believed his life to be in danger, even if that belief was not legally reasonable, that's not a depraved mind. That's a case for manslaughter (if the belief was not reasonable).

In order to prove a depraved mind, they will need to prove that Zimmerman knew he was in no danger, and shot Trayvon anyway.


Nope. That isn't the way it rolls at all for second degree murder.


Sure it is.



parados wrote:
Is it 2nd degree murder if you play Russian roulette and someone shoots themselves?


In a state that defines second degree murder as depraved heart murder, oddly enough, probably yes.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 07:54 pm
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:
Orally can barely function in reality, let alone hypothetical situations.


Says the clown who can't point our any flaws in my position.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 09:37 pm
@oralloy,
The fact that you refuse to acknowledge any deficiencies does not mean that they do not exist.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 09:49 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

DrewDad wrote:
Orally can barely function in reality, let alone hypothetical situations.


Says the clown who can't point our any flaws in my position.

Your position that you are Florida? I think that flaw has been pointed out and you ignore it. Florida doesn't define it's law as depraved heart. It never uses that definition in it's law. When you claim they do, it is a flaw in your position.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2013 09:53 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:


parados wrote:
Is it 2nd degree murder if you play Russian roulette and someone shoots themselves?

In a state that defines second degree murder as depraved heart murder, oddly enough, probably yes.

Are you saying that if they put someone in a position where they may be hurt even if you don't intend to kill them that is 2nd degree murder? Are you saying the person charged with 2nd degree murder is in no danger? Heck, they don't even have to pull the trigger.
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Jan, 2013 05:27 am
@oralloy,
oralloy, if you assert that your comments are fact based, and connected to reality, cite some references from Florida case law to support your statements regarding what the state of Florida has to prove in a 2nd degree murder charge.





firefly
 
  2  
Reply Tue 8 Jan, 2013 08:13 am
@DrewDad,
oralloy fails to see that, by charging Zimmerman with 2nd degree murder, they also intend to prove that he created the dangerous condition that led to the death of Martin.

That will likely include Zimmerman's getting out of his car, following, and confronting Martin--which are all provocative actions, which point to Zimmerman as the instigator and creator of the dangerous condition for Martin. What made the condition most dangerous for the unarmed Martin was the fact that Zimmerman was armed with a weapon while doing all of those things. And, after provoking Martin into a fight, Zimmerman needlessly killed him with that weapon while Martin was trying to defend himself from someone he saw as menacing him.

And, what motivated Zimmerman's actions to respond to Martin as "suspicious", to call the police, and to follow and confront him, seems mainly based on racial profiling--he was a young black male wearing a hoodie, and fit Zimmerman's perception of criminal types in that housing complex--and fit Zimmerman's perception of the (criminal) person he was shooting at when he killed him. Acting on such erroneous perceptions--and the animus inherent in them--would also constitute a "deranged mind".

Zimmerman had negative feelings toward Martin from the moment he spotted him--he saw him as a criminal type, based mainly on his physical appearance, and Zimmerman didn't like seeing such alleged criminals in his housing complex, and it bothered him when they were able to elude the police. In reality, Martin wasn't actually doing anything wrong or even remotely criminal--he was the victim of Zimmerman's racial profiling. Martin was returning from the store to go back to the residence where he was a guest, and he was walking around talking on his cell phone as he did that--that's all he was doing. The "suspicious" activity was all in Zimmerman's mind. And it was Zimmerman's mind-set--and his own decision not to sit in his vehicle until the police showed up-- and his own determination not to let this particular criminal type elude the police--that led him to create the dangerous condition that culminated with Martin's death through the use of Zimmerman's gun.

And, if oralloy would bother to look at and read the evidence which has been made publicly available, he would see that there is evidence to back up a charge of 2nd degree murder based on that sort of scenario, and to challenge Zimmerman's claim of justifiable self-defense.

If Zimmerman did not instigate and provoke and create the entire situation that led to Martin's death, one would have to believe that, on his way back from the store, Martin spotted Zimmerman, went up to him, and for no logical or sufficient reason, began beating him in a way that caused Zimmerman to fear for his life, forcing him to shoot in self-defense. Think anyone can provide any evidence to support that theory? Is there anything at all, in Martin's past history, to suggest he would suddenly act in such an irrational and extremely aggressive/homicidal fashion toward a total stranger--particularly after having behaved in a perfectly appropriate manner in a store a few minutes before that? Do Zimmerman's relatively minor injuries--a punch in the nose and a few tiny scrapes on the back of his head--even support his claim of how severely he was being beaten or endangered? Where is the credibility in Zimmerman's version of events?

The state may, or may not, be able to convince a jury at trial, but they do have evidence to support a 2nd degree murder charge.


DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Jan, 2013 09:34 am
@firefly,
What Orally fails to see is that sites like free republic are full of nutjobs talking to nutjobs, and are completely disconnected from reality.

This is what happens when Freeper doubletalk meets reality:

 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/21/2024 at 06:40:14