Trayvon Martin

[Y2HH]

Sure we do. Zimmerman followed him around the neighborhood and chased him on foot. He doesn't do that, no one is dead.

 

I know you don't like it, because it's grey area...but that's not initiating. I know you really really really want it to be...but it's not. If it was that cut and dried, he'd have been f***ing charged by now with the national attention on this...it's obvious a touch more complicated than you want it to be.

[Balta1701]

Based on the law that exists and is in effect...it matters very much.

 

Look, we all hate the law, but it's still the law. And that's that. You can't just choose to ignore it because you disagree with it. I vehemently disagree with laws that say I cannot walk into a Lamborghini dealership and drive out with a Countach model for free...but they exist...so I don't ignore them.

And I think I've been pretty consistent here in saying the law is the problem, and this guy is almost certain to walk scot-free unless some audio guy can prove he used a racial slur or some other video evidence emerges.

[MexSoxFan#1]

So we can fight over more ambiguous language like "when it's safe to do so?"

 

Let's apply that here. Zimmerman was just tailing the guy because he thought he looked suspicious. Nothing wrong with that. Next thing he knows, Martin's on top of him beating him up. He shot. Was it reasonably safe for him to leave (and when exactly would that duty start here?) Would the duty to retreat even apply?

 

BLOW IT UP! GET RID OF IT! TERRIBLE LAW!

 

Let's just ignore the fact Zimmerman got out of his car on his own, he wasn't pulled out or has he tried to claim that? Zimmerman initiated a confrontation and he got one, if you are being stalked by some nut who isn't a cop, you aren't going to defend yourself when cornered? The kid DID NOTHING WRONG but be a black kid with a hoodie. This case is a simple case of cold blooded murder complicated by a stupid vauge law.

 

[Y2HH]

And I think I've been pretty consistent here in saying the law is the problem, and this guy is almost certain to walk scot-free unless some audio guy can prove he used a racial slur or some other video evidence emerges.

 

You have been, and I agree. Without more beyond a reasonable doubt evidence, he's going to walk...and it doesn't look like any exists at the moment. In the end, he might get "charged" so the national attention goes away...but I don't see a conviction happening in court. Due to the media taint on this, it wouldn't be a jury trial at this point...and I don't see any judge making a conviction on this due to the law and the total lack of solid evidence.

[MexSoxFan#1]

Sure we do. Zimmerman followed him around the neighborhood and chased him on foot. He doesn't do that, no one is dead.

Common sense...the dispatcher told him to not pursue and he ignored that order, Zimmerman obviously started the confrontation.

[Y2HH]

Let's just ignore the fact Zimmerman got out of his car on his own, he wasn't pulled out or has he tried to claim that? Zimmerman initiated a confrontation and he got one, if you are being stalked by some nut who isn't a cop, you aren't going to defend yourself when cornered? The kid DID NOTHING WRONG but be a black kid with a hoodie. This case is a simple case of cold blooded murder complicated by a stupid vauge law.

 

You should invent a jump to conclusions mat.

 

It's obvious you want Zimmerman to be guilty, unfortunately, that's not how the law works. You also reek of racial bias, by the way.

[Y2HH]

Common sense...the dispatcher told him to not pursue and he ignored that order, Zimmerman obviously started the confrontation.

 

Dispatchers have no authority to issue orders.

[iamshack]

Based on the law that exists and is in effect...it matters very much.

 

Look, we all hate the law, but it's still the law. And that's that. You can't just choose to ignore it because you disagree with it. I vehemently disagree with laws that say I cannot walk into a Lamborghini dealership and drive out with a Countach model for free...but they exist...so I don't ignore them.

I really don't hate the law, honestly...I just think this is not the proper application of it....this is a situation which would be difficult to convict Zimmerman without more evidence whether the SYG law was codified or not.

[StrangeSox]

I know you don't like it, because it's grey area...but that's not initiating. I know you really really really want it to be...but it's not. If it was that cut and dried, he'd have been f***ing charged by now with the national attention on this...it's obvious a touch more complicated than you want it to be.

 

I was unclear, sorry. I was not referring to the legality but to what actually happened, call it moral responsibility maybe. Trayvon Martin would be alive today but for Zimmerman's rash actions. There really is no doubt about this.

[StrangeSox]

You should invent a jump to conclusions mat.

 

It's obvious you want Zimmerman to be guilty, unfortunately, that's not how the law works. You also reek of racial bias, by the way.

 

I wish the law was clear that someone how performed the actions Zimmerman did was guilty of at least manslaughter for initiating the confrontation even if he may not have initiated physical contact.

[Y2HH]

I was unclear, sorry. I was not referring to the legality but to what actually happened, call it moral responsibility maybe. Trayvon Martin would be alive today but for Zimmerman's rash actions. There really is no doubt about this.

 

I wouldn't argue that, either.

 

Do I think Zimmerman's actions led to the Martin's death? Yes. What am I basing this on? Nothing more than the story I've heard repeated by the media and a personal attempt to put what vague details we have, such as the 911 call, together in a logical fashion. All of that requires quite a few assumptions on my part. So I have to ask, is that enough to convict someone of murder?

 

Unfortunately, I'm going to have to say no, it's not.

[Balta1701]

I really don't hate the law, honestly...I just think this is not the proper application of it....this is a situation which would be difficult to convict Zimmerman without more evidence whether the SYG law was codified or not.

And if that's the case (and I think it is), then I conclude that the concealed carry laws also have to be thrown in with things that should face reform.

[Y2HH]

And if that's the case (and I think it is), then I conclude that the concealed carry laws also have to be thrown in with things that should face reform.

 

It's pretty obvious that everyone here, at least I think everyone here, disagrees with the vagueness of the law in question...and it's complicating the matter. But the fact is, the law exists...but that's also why they let trained police, lawyers and judges make the decisions on this sort of thing...unfortunately, i think even they are handcuffed when it comes to this because of the law as it's written.

Edited March 27, 2012 by Y2HH

[iamshack]

And if that's the case (and I think it is), then I conclude that the concealed carry laws also have to be thrown in with things that should face reform.

I'm not a big guns person (neither for or against them too strongly)...

 

I'm chalking this up to Zimmerman being an idiot more so than this being any failure of the law.

[MexSoxFan#1]

You should invent a jump to conclusions mat.

 

It's obvious you want Zimmerman to be guilty, unfortunately, that's not how the law works. You also reek of racial bias, by the way.

I'm hispanic just like Zimmerman so I don't see how I'm racially biased...I see this as a simple case of some nut who's biggest fantasy was to be a cop so he goes around pretending to be one, sees a "suspicious looking person" (young black kid in a hoodie) and started a confrontation against NW protocal. The kid ends up dead and this asshole can get off because of a stupid law.

 

Not complicated at all.

Edited March 27, 2012 by MexSoxFan#1

[iamshack]

It's pretty obvious that everyone here, at least I think everyone here, disagrees with the vagueness of the law in question...and it's complicating the matter. But the fact is, the law exists...but that's also why they let trained lawyers and judges make the decisions on this sort of thing...unfortunately, i think even they are handcuffed when it comes to this because of the law as it's written.

This isn't a matter of the law being vague, IMO, but rather of this being a bizarre fact pattern, which is the result of Zimmerman being an idiot and doing things that are bound to eventually cause something ugly to happen.

 

No law that I can really think of could have prevented at the very least, there being a nasty altercation here where someone got seriously injured.

[Balta1701]

I'm not a big guns person (neither for or against them too strongly)...

 

I'm chalking this up to Zimmerman being an idiot more so than this being any failure of the law.

From my point of view...if he doesn't have the gun, he never starts this. The psychology on what having the ability to kill does to a person is pretty clear, they're consistently more aggressive toward conflict. Take the gun away, and he doesn't get out of his car pissed off at the fact that "These assholes always get away".

[iamshack]

From my point of view...if he doesn't have the gun, he never starts this. The psychology on what having the ability to kill does to a person is pretty clear, they're consistently more aggressive toward conflict. Take the gun away, and he doesn't get out of his car pissed off at the fact that "These assholes always get away".

I dunno...you may be right, but never underestimate the behavior of the small percentage of the biggest idiots out there...

[Y2HH]

I'm hispanic just like Zimmerman so I don't see how I'm racially biased...I see this as a simple case of some nut who's biggest fantasy was to be a cop so he goes around pretending to be one, sees a "suspicious looking person" (young black kid in a hoodie) and started a confrontation against NW protocal. The kid ends up dead and this asshole can get off because of a stupid law.

 

Not complicated at all.

 

I'm glad you finally responded, because now I can make my point.

 

Sorry, but that racial charge was me jumping to conclusions...and before I wrote what I wrote, I guessed you were Hispanic due to your avatar, which I assume is your daughters face. Point is, jumping to conclusions with little to no evidence, other than circumstantial (which is all you're going on), which is what most of you are doing, is bad...for the reason you helped me highlight.

[Balta1701]

Here's today's leak, in case people were waiting for it.

The lead homicide investigator in the shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin recommended that neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter the night of the shooting, multiple sources told ABC News.

 

But Sanford, Fla., Investigator Chris Serino was instructed to not press charges against Zimmerman because the state attorney's office headed by Norman Wolfinger determined there wasn't enough evidence to lead to a conviction, the sources told ABC News.

 

Police brought Zimmerman into the station for questioning for a few hours on the night of the shooting, said Zimmerman's attorney, despite his request for medical attention first. Ultimately they had to accept Zimmerman's claim of self defense. He was never charged with a crime.

 

Serino filed an affidavit on Feb. 26, the night that Martin was shot and killed by Zimmerman, that stated he was unconvinced Zimmerman's version of events.

 

Zimmerman, 28, claimed he shot Martin, 17, in self defense.

 

One complicating factor in the investigation was that the first detective to interview Zimmerman about the shooting was a narcotics officer rather than a homicide detective.

 

The State Attorney's office said only "no comment" when asked about the affidavit today.

[Y2HH]

From my point of view...if he doesn't have the gun, he never starts this. The psychology on what having the ability to kill does to a person is pretty clear, they're consistently more aggressive toward conflict. Take the gun away, and he doesn't get out of his car pissed off at the fact that "These assholes always get away".

 

I'm not a lawyer, but in court, I see his lawyer striking that down as speculative and/or circumstantial.

 

And the judge upholds it as such.

 

You can speculate all you want on Zimmerman's words, but you don't know for sure. Beyond a reasonable doubt means you need to know for sure. Right now, reason to doubt exists...and without more evidence, I don't see it happening. Whatever he said that's scrambled...people are saying it was something racist, but that's PURE speculation and assumption, unless they can clearly decipher it, and it ends up being racially charged...they have nothing. Right now, it's unfair to simply assume he said something racial, because nobody knows if he did or not.

[MexSoxFan#1]

From my point of view...if he doesn't have the gun, he never starts this. The psychology on what having the ability to kill does to a person is pretty clear, they're consistently more aggressive toward conflict. Take the gun away, and he doesn't get out of his car pissed off at the fact that "These assholes always get away".

[MexSoxFan#1]

I'm glad you finally responded, because now I can make my point.

 

Sorry, but that racial charge was me jumping to conclusions...and before I wrote what I wrote, I guessed you were Hispanic due to your avatar, which I assume is your daughters face. Point is, jumping to conclusions with little to no evidence, other than circumstantial (which is all you're going on), which is what most of you are doing, is bad...for the reason you helped me highlight.

It's my son ...it's not a very complicated case, if Zimmerman stays in his car and waits for the police to handle the sitiuation, Msrtin would be alive today. Zimmerman acted like an overzealous idiot and is the reason a kid is dead.

 

Simple.

[Balta1701]

I'm not a lawyer, but in court, I see his lawyer striking that down as speculative and/or circumstantial.

 

And the judge upholds it as such.

 

You can speculate all you want on Zimmerman's words, but you don't know for sure. Beyond a reasonable doubt means you need to know for sure. Right now, reason to doubt exists...and without more evidence, I don't see it happening. Whatever he said that's scrambled...people are saying it was something racist, but that's PURE speculation and assumption, unless they can clearly decipher it, and it ends up being racially charged...they have nothing. Right now, it's unfair to simply assume he said something racial, because nobody knows if he did or not.

That is clearly speculative, I will grant, but it is speculation based at least in part on a whole lot of research. That's not something I'd get a conviction with, but that doesn't mean it's untrue.

 

However, I can happily use "Speculation based on statistical evidence" as a motivating factor for saying we need to have much stricter concealed carry laws to get rid of situations like this, rather than things like my state is doing (overriding the authority of private property owners to say that guns can't be carried on their property by making all parking lots legal concealed carry territory. Oh, and the guns in bars thing.).

[Y2HH]

It's my son ...it's not a very complicated case, if Zimmerman stays in his car and waits for the police to handle the sitiuation, Msrtin would be alive today. Zimmerman acted like an overzealous idiot and is the reason a kid is dead.

 

Simple.

 

See what I mean? Damn me for jumping to another conclusion. I based my guess on his sex solely on the length of his hair...

 

Yes, we agree Zimmerman was overzealous...but that's not showing he broke any laws leading to the incident...and that's the issue. There are too many unknowns right now to throw the guy in prison and throw away the key...just because it "looks like it".