State pushes to keep Trayvon Martin's past out of George Zimmerman trial

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

I see no where were I am informed that 911 operators are law enforcement agents who are thus authorized to speak for the state. any advise that they give is thus on the same grounds as advise from grandma...who of course has the authority to speak her mind.

That is a bullshit argument hawkeye. When people call their grandma before they call 911 you can make that argument. Until then it is simple bullshit meant to deflect responsibility from Zimmerman for failing to heed the advice he was given by professionals trained to give advice in situations like that.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:
that you must drive slower in bad weather is a law

No, it's not in most states. That you have to drive according to the conditions might be the law but that is subjective.

I am willing to bet that every state says that I must drive according to weather conditions....now kindly show me the law that says that I must follow directions given by 911 operators.

2 Replies

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

I wonder if it is the correct thing to do to disallow all past behavior and comments by both men? Looking forward to see how the judge decides.

It would need to be relevant for either man.

In the case of Zimmerman, a propensity to confrontation would be relevant to show he initiated the confrontation. He would be able to take the stand and refute it if the court allowed the argument.

The court would probably be less likely to allow such an argument in Martin's case since he is not able to take the stand in his defense.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

The simple fact is that when someone helps create the conditions which result in a death then they become partially responsible for that death. The court and the jury will need to decide how responsible Zimmerman is in creating the conditions when he acted in a fashion that a reasonable person following advice would have resulted in never being in the situation.

"you knew that he has a bad rep with women yet you went out drinking with him. you should have known better, your rape is your own fault"

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:

I see no where were I am informed that 911 operators are law enforcement agents who are thus authorized to speak for the state. any advise that they give is thus on the same grounds as advise from grandma...who of course has the authority to speak her mind.

That is a bullshit argument hawkeye. When people call their grandma before they call 911 you can make that argument. Until then it is simple bullshit meant to deflect responsibility from Zimmerman for failing to heed the advice he was given by professionals trained to give advice in situations like that.

are you telling me that this 911 operator had been sent through the police academy?

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

parados wrote:

Quote:
that you must drive slower in bad weather is a law

No, it's not in most states. That you have to drive according to the conditions might be the law but that is subjective.

I am willing to bet that every state says that I must drive according to weather conditions....now kindly show me the law that says that I must follow directions given by 911 operators.

Just more bull **** from you. Where does the slower driving mean I have to go less than 50 in 65mph zone? If I am driving 55 in a 65 and kill someone how do you decide I was going to0 fast since there is no law saying I have to drive less than 55?

Zimmerman by not following the directions of the 911 operator created a situation where someone died. THAT is the law that is relevant. It has nothing to do with whether he had to legally follow the advice or not. By NOT following the advice he created helped create the situation. His negligence and his intent against advice of a professional are there in the law that they charged him with. It has nothing to do with the word of a 911 operator being law.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

parados wrote:

The simple fact is that when someone helps create the conditions which result in a death then they become partially responsible for that death. The court and the jury will need to decide how responsible Zimmerman is in creating the conditions when he acted in a fashion that a reasonable person following advice would have resulted in never being in the situation.

"you knew that he has a bad rep with women yet you went out drinking with him. you should have known better, your rape is your own fault"

Interesting except in THIS case it is the rapist that is charged and you want to argue that his acts leading up to the rape mean nothing. It isn't illegal to hang around in a park where women might walk at night so therefor he can't be charged with rape because the woman walked by him.

Zimmerman is the one that committed the killing. He is not the victim of a shooting. Your argument is so fallacious I wonder why you didn't see it.

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

Zimmerman by not following the directions of the 911 operator created a situation where someone died. THAT is the law that is relevant.

you have given an opinion, but where is the law? Courts decide based upon the law, not the opinion of parados

what about the other side of the coin....that by not answering questions respectfully Martin created the conditions where he died so it is his own fault? true that martin had constitutionally guaranteed rights to not do that, but zimmerman had rights on the same grounds to do what he did, which you want to deny him. why the double standard?

3 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

are you telling me that this 911 operator had been sent through the police academy?

What does the police academy have to do with anything? Just more of your bullshit argument.

911 operators have training to give directions to people when they call in. The training doesn't have to be from a police academy. They are professionals with information that people should listen to. The majority of people recognize that 911 operators give good advice. Failure to follow that advice shows bad judgment on Zimmerman's part. Bad judgment that leads to death of another is chargeable as a crime.

Now go ahead and make your next idiotic argument.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Zimmerman by not following the directions of the 911 operator created a situation where someone died. THAT is the law that is relevant.

you have given an opinion, but where is the law? Courts decide based upon the law, not the opinion of parados

And the court will do exactly that in this case. They will decide on the law. You want to pretend the law doesn't exist when you claim Zimmerman is being railroaded and claim that 911 operators aren't police officers. You are deflecting from Zimmerman's actions by declaring since no police officer ordered him he has the right to act stupidly. While he may have that right the law also says he has to be held accountable if his stupid actions result in injury to someone else.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

A caller is not legally obligated to follow the instructions of the 911 operator. However, it shows a certain arrogance if someone calls 911 and then disregards the instructions of the operator.

The prosecution will almost certainly use it to demonstrate Zimmerman's state of mind.

1 Reply

@parados,

Quote:

While he may have that right the law also says he has to be held accountable if his stupid actions result in injury to someone else.

if being stupid was the basis for a crime this country would have many more criminals. the standard is depraved indifference, and zimmerman was no where near that line.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Quote:

The prosecution will almost certainly use it to demonstrate Zimmerman's state of mind.

i am betting that the jury members take the news as the heroics of a man named zimmerman, and wonder why they are all wasting a month to try him for his attempt at a good deed.

1 Reply

@parados,

Quote:

Now go ahead and make your next idiotic argument.

Like this one.

Quote:

Just more bull **** from you. Where does the slower driving mean I have to go less than 50 in 65mph zone? If I am driving 55 in a 65 and kill someone how do you decide I was going to0 fast since there is no law saying I have to drive less than 55?

Zimmerman by not following the directions of the 911 operator created a situation where someone died. THAT is the law that is relevant. It has nothing to do with whether he had to legally follow the advice or not. By NOT following the advice he created helped create the situation. His negligence and his intent against advice of a professional are there in the law that they charged him with. It has nothing to do with the word of a 911 operator being law.

Now that's a dose of parados!

Translation to English, please?

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

what about the other side of the coin....that by not answering questions respectfully Martin created the conditions where he died so it is his own fault? true that martin had constitutionally guaranteed rights to not do that, but zimmerman had rights on the same grounds to do what he did, which you want to deny him. why the double standard?

What double standard on my part?

I think it is likely both were partially to fault. Martin has already paid with the ultimate penalty. Martin is dead. Zimmerman is alive. You want Zimmerman to not face any consequences for contributing to the situation. That would seem to be the ultimate in double standards.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Heroics? Scaring a teen aged kid, getting your ass handed to you, and pulling a gun when you're losing a fist fight is heroic?

Sheesh. Someone get JJ Abrams on the phone to write that screenplay, because it's going to be HUGE in Nebraska.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

the standard is depraved indifference, and zimmerman was no where near that line.

Yes, that will be decided in the court which for some reason you don't want the court to decide.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Quote:

Scaring a teen aged kid, getting your ass handed to you, and pulling a gun when you're losing a fist fight is heroic?

Sheesh, who needs eyewitnesses when there's Drewdad to the rescue.

Case closed, thanks to the jury but you weren't needed - the US justice system has got Drewdad!

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

that by not answering questions respectfully Martin created the conditions where he died so it is his own fault...

Martin's death was his own fault? Since when should "not answering questions respectfully"--questions asked by a total stranger, who's been following you in the dark and rain, for no apparent reason-- create the conditions for one's death? Why was Zimmerman deserving of respect in that situation? Why should Martin have had to answer any questions Zimmerman asked him? Should Martin have known Zimmerman might kill him?

What makes you think Zimmerman approached Martin, or spoke to him, with any degree of respect? He thought Martin was a suspicious character, a criminal type, and up to no good--that's why he called the police. Is it likely that Zimmerman would have maintained respectful behavior toward such a person? We don't know, and we will likely never know, exactly what Zimmerman might have said to Martin, or what his tone or demeanor was like, that might have been sufficient, and justifiable, provocation for Martin to hit him. But we do know how Zimmerman was regarding Martin, and that he trailed this teen on a dark and rainy night, and that there was no way that Martin could know what Zimmerman was up to, or intended to do to him, if he caught up to him.

Even the staunchest supporters of Zimmerman should be willing to admit that he showed poor judgment in his actions prior to the shooting, because he needlessly created a situation where someone wound up dead. The tragedy in this situation is that this death was totally avoidable. Had Zimmerman stayed in his parked vehicle, and just waited for the police to show up, Martin would not have been killed.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

Quote:
the standard is depraved indifference, and zimmerman was no where near that line.

Yes, that will be decided in the court which for some reason you don't want the court to decide.

right, I am not not in favor of the state dragging citizens in front of a court simply because the mob demands it, there must be a basis in law and evidence for the charge. I dont think that the state met its burden for criminal prosecution here, I think what we see here is the throwing of a citizen in front of a jury with no case in the hopes that the jury will ignore the law and punish this citizen unjustly.

I am opposed to the state using abuse of the law to hurt singled out citizens that the state wants to get, and I am opposed to the emotion driven mob deciding who gets punished rather than the process of the law.

2 Replies

State pushes to keep Trayvon Martin's past out of George Zimmerman trial

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know