The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

@firefly,

lets be sure to say the same thing about failure to avoid attack to victims of sexual assault after they spend the night drinking and then go home with their rapist, MKay?

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

lets be sure to say the same thing about failure to avoid attack to victims of sexual assault after they spend the night drinking and then go home with their rapist, MKay?

My lord give me warnings before posting such materials as I fell off my chair and almost killed my cat by landing on her.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Those who sexually assault intoxicated women are violating rape laws--the responsibility for violating the law rests with the one who does that.

If you leave your front door unlocked that does not mean you are giving a burglar permission to enter and steal your property--burglary is still burglary, just as rape is still rape, even when the victims of such crimes could have taken better precautions.

When you follow someone around in the dark, without identifying yourself, you are acting in a menacing and provocative manner--and the person being stalked, and frightened, has every reason to conclude you mean to harm them, and to respond defensively.

It was Zimmerman's poor judgment and impaired impulse control that caused the needless death of Trayvon Martin.

1 Reply

@firefly,

I dont think Martin gets dead without both parties making wrong turns, it usually takes two to tango. But it was very clear that Zimmerman did not do anything criminally wrong, so him ending up in a courtroom was abuse.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Your attempts to equate what Zimmerman did to Martin is a total disrespect of logic and common sense. You're foolish and dumb!

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Your attempts to equate what Zimmerman did to Martin is a total disrespect of logic and common sense. You're foolish and dumb!

a logical person who understands english would have said " your attempts to equate x with y is a total disrepect of logic and common sense". Your post is nonsense.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

No. Any person who can't respond directly to any charge of being foolish and dumb can't be that smart.

The majority reading my post understands what is meant; only stupid people like you try to correct the grammar - when it's not needed.

1 Reply

Every person who is physically assaulted to such a degree that he is in fear for his life, or at least his physical integrity, has the right to defend himself and the right to the means to defend himself.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

sometimes it is possible to get beyond the miss use of words to figure out what is being attempted to be said. in this case your post is so garbled that nothing can be figured out but that you intend to insult, there is no clue of any idea related to the thread topic.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

That holds true only if that person was not the pursuer - with a gun.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

But it was very clear that Zimmerman did not do anything criminally wrong, so him ending up in a courtroom was abuse.

When even one of the jurors says, "George Zimmerman got away with murder," I'm not so sure about that.

Zimmerman was acquitted under Florida's self-defense laws, and another of the jurors has said she feels those laws should be changed. In states without SYG laws, or with less vague and subjective self-defense laws, Zimmerman would probably have been found guilty of manslaughter because his reckless actions provoked a needless confrontation that wound up causing an unnecessary death--his actions were what provoked the altercation.

In another post you said you didn't think he had to use deadly force, but now you say he did not do anything criminally wrong. Well, his questionable use of excessive force, against an unarmed opponent, was enough to justify his winding up in a courtroom, so you really defeat your own argument that he was abused by being held legally accountable at trial.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Well, that rules Zimmerman out as his injuries were not life threatening and were in fact exaggerated as was testified to in court. What in the world does "physical integrity" even mean?

3 Replies

@revelette,

Quote:

Well, that rules Zimmerman out as his injuries were not life threatening and were in fact exaggerated as was testified to in court. What in the world does "physical integrity" even mean?

As one of the prosecutor own witnesses repeat a prosecutor own witness stated to the jury you do not need to wait until you are half killed before taking self defense actions.

The prosecutor case was so very weak that most of the prosecutor own witnesses sounded more like defense witnesses.

1 Reply

@revelette,

Prosecutor own witness.........

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

As one of the prosecutor own witnesses repeat a prosecutor own witness stated to the jury you do not need to wait until you are half killed before taking self defense actions

But you do have to be in reasonable fear for your life. And the threat has to be real and imminent.

Someone whose very minor injuries don't even require Band-Aids, or any follow-up medical treatment, is nowhere close to being in a life-threatening situation.

Trayvon Martin's life had the same value as George Zimmerman's life.

George Zimmerman did not act reasonably when he erroneously concluded that someone just walking around talking on a cell phone was somehow a "suspicious character" planning criminal activity, he did not act reasonably when he stalked Martin, against neighborhood watch rules and the advisement of the police dispatcher, he did not act reasonably in failing to identify himself to Martin. So why should anyone believe he was reasonable in assessing the threat to his life? Particularly since he sustained no serious injuries, his opponent was unarmed and not that physically imposing, and he knew the police were on their way.

Trayvon Martin's life had the same value as George Zimmerman's life. And there was no need for Zimmerman to have ended that life.

Quote:

The prosecutor case was so very weak...

The prosecution actually had quite a good case, but, under Florida law they would have had to prove a negative--that Zimmerman did not act in self defense, and beside that being a formidable task for any prosecutor, Florida law requires that the jury give Zimmerman the benefit of any doubt about whether he did act in self-defense. That's why the laws in Florida need to be changed--they are too vague and subjective. And they do allow people to get away with murder.

Known liars, like George Zimmerman, can claim they felt their life was in jeopardy, but their subjective statements should be weighed against objective evidence--and Zimmerman's injuries were all very minor, very minor. Where was the reasonableness for such fears to his life?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

That holds true only if that person was not the pursuer - with a gun.

You're now alleging that Zimmerman chased Martin brandishing a gun so that Martin reasonably believed that he was in imminent danger of death? If so, wouldn't the jury have convicted? The mere fact that someone is following you, provided they are not waving a gun around, does not justify assault. Being followed by someone with a gun out of sight in his pocket doesn't justify assault. For myself, if someone were following me, I would attempt to escape. It wouldn't be my natural inclination to turn and beat them senseless.

3 Replies

@revelette,

revelette wrote:

Well, that rules Zimmerman out as his injuries were not life threatening and were in fact exaggerated as was testified to in court. What in the world does "physical integrity" even mean?

The term is self-explanatory. You seem to be alleging that a person being beaten to the degree that Martin was beating Zimmerman could not reasonably conclude that he was in serious danger. That doesn't sound right to me.

1 Reply

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

Quote:
As one of the prosecutor own witnesses repeat a prosecutor own witness stated to the jury you do not need to wait until you are half killed before taking self defense actions

But you do have to be in reasonable fear for your life. And the threat has to be real and imminent.

Someone whose very minor injuries don't even require Band-Aids, or any follow-up medical treatment, is nowhere close to being in a life-threatening situation.

Trayvon Martin's life had the same value as George Zimmerman's life.

George Zimmerman did not act reasonably when he erroneously concluded that someone just walking around talking on a cell phone was somehow a "suspicious character" planning criminal activity, he did not act reasonably when he stalked Martin, against neighborhood watch rules and the advisement of the police dispatcher, he did not act reasonably in failing to identify himself to Martin. So why should anyone believe he was reasonable in assessing the threat to his life? Particularly since he sustained no serious injuries, his opponent was unarmed and not that physically imposing, and he knew the police were on their way.

Trayvon Martin's life had the same value as George Zimmerman's life. And there was no need for Zimmerman to have ended that life.

Quote:
The prosecutor case was so very weak...

The prosecution actually had quite a good case, but, under Florida law they would have had to prove a negative--that Zimmerman did not act in self defense, and beside that being a formidable task for any prosecutor, Florida law requires that the jury give Zimmerman the benefit of any doubt about whether he did act in self-defense. That's why the laws in Florida need to be changed--they are too vague and subjective. And they do allow people to get away with murder.

Known liars, like George Zimmerman, can claim they felt their life was in jeopardy, but their subjective statements should be weighed against objective evidence--and Zimmerman's injuries were all very minor, very minor. Where was the reasonableness for such fears to his life?

Most of this is irrelevant to the legal issue. The legally relevant question is whether Zimmerman, while being beaten, could have reasonably concluded that he was in serious danger.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

CI like firefly need to make up facts to try to take away Zimmerman right of self defense such as Zimmerman had his gun out as he chase Trayvon.

Strange how Trayvon was allowed to knocked Zimmerman down and jump on top of him if Zimmerman had his gun out and ready is it not?

The last thing I would do is to turn and attacked someone with a handgun out and ready and I question if before the attacked Trayvon had a clue that Zimmerman was armed.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

not only is Firefly's claims about the inferority of Zimmerman not legally relavant but her claims that he was a moral reprobate are rendered false by his obvious motive to but up a fight against crime and help to keep his neighborhood safe. All she is left with is that she does not like what he did and she would do differently, which is fine.

1 Reply

The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know