George Zimmerman not guilty.

[martyn20]

More good news for George Zimmerman and the Black youth of Florida, he can get his gun back now apparently, nothing to stop him carrying it out and about.

 

[pastafarian]

Without wishing to get too sidetracked or burble on, I think that the 'stand your ground' law opens up a huge amount of eventualities that could be avoided. Zimmerman was clearly well versed on the law. At least, he should have been, in his position. He knew he had the law on his side.

have you not just made an assumption?

Zimmerman actually went on record with his lawyer in attendance that he had no knowledge of the "stand your ground" law before this whole episode.

Read into that what you like as to whether or not it is a truthful statement, im just offering it out there.

the media in this case have been offering up far too many half truths,stoking up people according to race and political persuasion......after all it makes good TV in the States.

 

[Acker79]

have you not just made an assumption?

Zimmerman actually went on record with his lawyer in attendance that he had no knowledge of the "stand your ground" law before this whole episode.

Read into that what you like as to whether or not it is a truthful statement, im just offering it out there.

the media in this case have been offering up far too many half truths,stoking up people according to race and political persuasion......after all it makes good TV in the States.

BoF did say "at least, he should have been, in his position".



http://jezebel.com/los-angelenos-shut-down-freeway-for-trayvon-martin-prot-783348708

 

[Barrel of Fun]

It was more in hope that he knew the relevant laws.

So, we know he, apparently, didn't know the law and he ignored instructions from the dispatcher. He doesn't sound like the ideal candidate to keep the neighbourhood safe.

 

[yxee]

Stand your ground is irrelevant, he shot TM when he was being assaulted on the ground: retreat was not an option. It is basic self-defence.

And the dispatcher didn't give GZ an "instruction", the explicit wording was "we don't need you to do that" which is a legally non-binding remark.

This whole story is full of embellishments and misinterpretations.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Zimmerman requested a Stand Your Ground trial, so I don't see why it is irrelevant.

How do we know that Zimmerman didn't receive those injuries through Martin defending himself?

 

[yxee]

This question seems to verge on suggesting someone is guilty until proven innocent.

At the trial there was physical evidence (no injuries to TM apart from the gunshot and cuts on his left knuckle, GZ has wounds on the back of his head), grass stains on GZ's back, testimony from an eyewitness that saw TM on top of GZ and, the thing that I think might convince me, when interrogating GZ a policeman lied and said they had caught the whole incident on film, GZ's reply: "thank god".

 

[Acker79]

Stand your ground is irrelevant, he shot TM when he was being assaulted on the ground: retreat was not an option. It is basic self-defence.

And the dispatcher didn't give GZ an "instruction", the explicit wording was "we don't need you to do that" which is a legally non-binding remark.

This whole story is full of embellishments and misinterpretations.

Retreat may not have been an option, but staying away when instructed to do so by the police dispatcher was.

 

[yxee]

Retreat may not have been an option, but staying away when instructed to do so by the police dispatcher was.

It wasn't an instruction! This is an important point. If a policeman instructs you to do something then you should do it. If they say "you don't need to do that" then it's categorically different from an instruction. It's technically not even advice, it's a legal disclaimer to prevent liability on the part of the police (they can't tell you to do something that might put you in danger).

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Where and how did the assumption that Martin instigated the tussle come about?

Where is the proof that the deceased attacked Zimmerman first?

 

[halbpro]

Where and how did the assumption that Martin instigated the tussle come about?

Where is the proof that the deceased attacked Zimmerman first?

Possibly the lack of injuries on Martin?

 

[martyn20]

Possibly the lack of injuries on Martin?

Apart from the bullet hole?

 

[halbpro]

Apart from the bullet hole?

Well yes, obviously apart from that. But given that forensics have shown that came when Martin was on top of Zimmerman (or at least that the wound is consistent with that positioning) that's not that one that caused the tussle, but sadly ended it.

 

[Husty]

Apart from the bullet hole?

But if they were fighting before then why does GZ have a lot more injuries than TM? It does open up the possibility of self defence, even when it is obvious that GZ initially persued TM.

 

[martyn20]

Zimmerman says he felt his life was in danger and that's why he acted, sadly we can't ask Trayvon if he felt his life was in danger from the man following him.

 

[martyn20]

But if they were fighting before then why does GZ have a lot more injuries than TM? It does open up the possibility of self defence, even when it is obvious that GZ initially persued TM.

Zimmerman did not have to fight Trayvon of course, he just pulled out his gun and ended his life. If this was fight Zimmerman got a few bruises and Trayvon got a bullet, how does that turn into Trayvon being the aggressor.
Zimmerman went out with a gun to hunt troublemakers, Trayvon went out to buy skittles, that's how the evening started, who is the aggressor?

 

[yxee]

Zimmerman did not have to fight Trayvon of course, he just pulled out his gun and ended his life. If this was fight Zimmerman got a few bruises and Trayvon got a bullet, how does that turn into Trayvon being the aggressor.
Zimmerman went out with a gun to hunt troublemakers, Trayvon went out to buy skittles, that's how the evening started, who is the aggressor?

Zimmerman did not get a few bruises, he got a broken nose, two black eyes, and multiple lacerations to the rear of his head which corroborates the testimony of the only other eyewitness who said he saw TM on top of GZ.

Your conjecture that GZ "did not have to fight Trayvon" is not found in evidence, neither is "he just pulled out his gun and ended his life". Court testimony estimated the fight went on for 40 seconds before the shot was fired.

The aggressor is not automatically defined as the person who didn't get shot. That would make self-defence a contradiction in terms.

Where and how did the assumption that Martin instigated the tussle come about?

Where is the proof that the deceased attacked Zimmerman first?

Why are you asking for proof that someone is not guilty?

It's the other way around. Where is the proof that GZ attacked TM? We know there is none because it would have been put forward by the prosecution, if it existed.

 

[martyn20]

Just for a little background to the Florida way of doing things, while this year George Zimmerman gets off after killing an unarmed young man, last year a Black Florida woman was jailed for 20 years for using a gun to warn off her abusive husband, she just fired into the air, not actually at him. She said she feared for her life....

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/soci...rs-firing-warning-shot-while-george-zimmerman

 

[martyn20]

Zimmerman did not get a few bruises, he got a broken nose, two black eyes, and multiple lacerations to the rear of his head which corroborates the testimony of the only other eyewitness who said he saw TM on top of GZ.

Your conjecture that GZ "did not have to fight Trayvon" is not found in evidence, neither is "he just pulled out his gun and ended his life". Court testimony estimated the fight went on for 40 seconds before the shot was fired.

The aggressor is not automatically defined as the person who didn't get shot. That would make self-defence a contradiction in terms.




Why are you asking for proof that someone is not guilty?

It's the other way around. Where is the proof that GZ attacked TM? We know there is none because it would have been put forward by the prosecution, if it existed.

So you are saying the evidence shows Trayvon was the aggressor?

 

[daveinprague]

Well, I wouldnt want to be in Zimmermans shoes... he's a marked man...im guesing he will be returning to his mother country.