Prosecution fucked up bad today. Lead police investigator (prosecution's wit) said he found Zimmerman's account truthful and he is a credible witness.
It could just be the truth coming out. There are a few LEO's that are either aware of the facts of the case or know a LEO that does and from what I heard they think that Zimmerman was justified based on all the facts as they know them and that there should have never been a case in the first place, that all this was done to placate those that were crying out. This of course is all just hearsay and I have no quotes from anyone directly involved. The key now is that if Zimmerman is acquitted, how to handle the sure to come outrage.
I always thought Zimmerman was innocent, but these last few days have really proved that. He will walk, and rightfully so. The prosecution is doing absolutely horrible and I don't know if that is entirely their fault. They are trying to prove an innocent man guilty, in my eyes. I will say it again: I just can't understand why Martin would backtrack toward Zimmerman if he was clear to run home. Just makes no sense to me
I haven't paid much attention to this case, but is there some reason why you believe so strongly that fact somehow justifies the guy getting shot? So he backtracked. Instead of going home. And you cannot make sense of it. After that, I don't see what's so clear about those facts. Why is that legally relevant to whether or not the other guy was acting in self defense? I don't think there is any way you can say backtracking by itself is an inherently provocative act that justifies deadly force. Maybe he was lost, confused, curious or just fucking stupid. Maybe all of the above. So what?
obviously backtracking doesn't mean he deserved to get shot. the entire argument against Zimmerman was that Trayvon was trying to flee from him and Zimmerman chased him down, and by doing so any confrontation was unavoidable by Trayvon, or was Trayvon defnding himself, and thus Zimmerman can not claim a defense of stand your ground. but Trayvon's actions don't validate that story. Zimmerman did not chase him down if Trayvon had a free path to escape and instead was the party to double back to Zimmerman. so, if that is true, that would eliminate the argument above and would mean the stand your ground would still apply if Trayvon was the one that initiated the physical confrontation. do we know which party initiated the physical confrontation? no. but Trayvon's actions completely eliminate the first scenario above that would claim Zimmerman has no claim to stand your ground and was inherently the aggressor. now it is a matter of whether all of the other evidence supports Zimmerman's claims. but doubling back to Zimmerman and not fleeing completely destroys the claim that Trayvon was scared and trying to flee, and if he wasn't scared and trying to flee, it isn't unreasonable to believe he would act as aggressively as Zimmerman claims. that is enough reasonable doubt IMO to not convict Zimmerman. that is why the media has been so hell bent on dishonestly portraying the scenario, from presenting Trayvon as an 11 year old boy and selling the narrative that he was afraid and running for his life, and the big bad white hispanic chased him down. because it is the only way to detract from Trayvon's actual actions that likely were the main reason why a physical confrontation took place.
If you follow the case, then you will know exactly what I am referring to. The prosecution is trying to prove that Martin was fearing for his life and took off running because he felt Zimmerman was following him. He was not lost. He was 70 yards from the back door of where he was staying. Martin turned back around to confront Zimmerman. Zimmerman testified that he lost Martin and got out of the car to tell the police on the phone the exact address he was at. Martin then jumped out of nowhere and sucker punched him in the face. Zimmerman was getting his head slammed into the concrete and feared for his life. He then shot Martin in the chest at point blank range. Why did Martin turn around? He "feared" for his life so he ran. Why turn around? I did mean murder. Whether I believe it is or not, that's what Zimmerman is being charged with. Second degree murder.
If, for example, someone follows me down the block into a dark backyard and I feel threatened, then that person is standing their ground. The law is terribly vague. If you seriously believe this then how does he end up in what appears to be a dark area in which no address #s are visible?
you are confusing being scared with a real imminent threat. if I follow you it may frighten you, but absent of any other act you aren't going to win the argument that my actions of following were a clearly imminent threat that required deadly force to protect yourself from. you might be scared but that isn't enough to validate that your life is in danger from an imminent threat and simply shoot me.
You're failing to realize that a threat doesn't even have to exist; all the defendant/perpetrator (whichever) has to do is just claim self-defense and state that they felt threatened and then it's up to the interpretation of the judge/jury to decide. FL's law in particular has been viciously criticized because, in several recent cases for example, the verdict has come down to an extremely subjective process of gauging the overall credibility of the defendant/perpetrator without taking much evidence into account other than to corroborate the story. (most accessible quote on the law: "Miami Police Chief John F. Timoney called the law unnecessary and dangerous in that "whether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house, you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used.")
Have you been following the case? He was instructed by police on previous calls that he needs to stay a safe distance from the man in question, but provide an area where the police can accurately find him. He was instructed to do this on previous calls he had made in the past. He then followed logic and did just that. Got out to find an exact address and try and spot Martin so he could give police an accurate destination, which would explain why he was in the "dark" alley.
Therein lies the problem, the law essentially gives someones who should not have it a license to kill. In my state we have castile domain which makes much more sense. If someone breaks into my house I have the legal right to kill him but once he is off my property I can't chase him down and shoot him. There was a case of this about a year ago, a criminal was in this guy's yard and the homeowner shot and killed him. Of course the family of the criminal wanted to sue but there is no case. WTF is Johnny doing in that yard grabbing the sliding glass door handles? Stand your ground laws are awfully written and especially in this case. This is a case of a hunter tracking a bear to kill him for sport but then blaming the bear when it gets you first. Zimmerman is going to get off and it's probably going to cause race issues. The sad thing is a young kid lost his life and parents had to bury their son because the vagueness of that law left it open for interpretation that Zimmerman could follow Martin for no good reason and shoot and kill that kid because he attacked Zimmerman. The prosecution had a delicate case to begin with but they haven't really done anything to convict Zimmerman beause while morally I think Zimmerman is a real loser and should go to jail for his actions you can't convict him because this terrible law protects him.
Well, I haven't been following the case, as I said. I still don't get what difference it makes if the kid was running for his life or if he was circling back to the other guy. Isn't the focus of a criminal trial on what the defendant did? As opposed to the state of mind of the victim?
That makes him the aggressor. Hard to be confused, if you see the map of the complex. He needed to get to the end of the courtyard, period. It also, discounts the entire media myth built around this case. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. There was a confrontation, Zimmerman was bleeding on both sides of his head, because after he lost sight of Martin " these assholes always get away" Martin was still being stalked, and consequently murdered? No, he was getting his ass beat, and Martin got shot. Its tragic, and more than a little wild west, but ....would we be covering this if Zimmerman got his skull split, becaise he had no gun? Martin became the stalker, when Zimmerman was heading back to his truck, and...while Zimmermans police statement in real time may have been self serving....there is a reason he wasnt charged, until politics came into play.
The victim, in this case.....is on trial. Thats like saying, you tried to rob me at knife point, and when you thought I was reaching for my wallet, I pulled out a gun and I shot you, so you are the victim.
The prosecution is claiming that Zimmerman chased Martin and instigated a fight. Zimmerman was apparently beating him up when Martin was screaming for help. Zimmerman than shot Martin in the chest and claimed he was being attacked. His motive would be that he is tired of these "assholes" getting away and wanted to do justice for it. That's what the prosecution is trying to prove. What I am saying and the defense is saying is that Zimmerman saw Martin and thought he was suspicious. Zimmerman called the police like he was instructed to do by the police and told them what he saw. The police had instructed all neighborhood watch volunteers to ALWAYS follow the man in suspicion and give an exact location for them to intervene. Zimmerman followed Martin until Martin took off running. Martin's best friend claimed he was scared for his life, so why turn around when you are 70 yards from your back door? Zimmerman got out of his car to both give the police a correct address and to see where Martin ran to tell the dispatcher an exact area. While Zimmerman was looking, Martin had managed to turn around in the dark alley and sucker punch Zimmerman to the ground. Martin was on top, as seen by 2 witnesses, and was said to have been beating Zimmerman's head into the ground. Martin then was said to reach for Zimmerman's gun which is what instigated Zimmerman firing a shot. Zimmerman was said to have been screaming for help to 2 people that emerged from their homes to see what was going on. They immediately ran back inside and called the police. It makes a HUGE deal as to why Martin turned around. It determines whether Zimmerman pursued him or Martin came back to instigate a fight.
You know Barry, about a decade ago in Florida, there was a serial rapist, the police couldnt catch, and the Sherriff of one of the counties, took alot of heat for appearing on TV and advising women to buy guns. Simple fact is, you may disapprove of Zimmermans existence for your own reasons, but attempted thuggery ending in gerting shot, puts a pretty good damper on thuggery. An Armed Society, is a Polite society. Do you think if Martin had the good sense to think Zimmerman was armed, he would be dead? (and being Fla, a state with lax gun laws, that tells you something too.) You may not agree, but take chicago, 500 shooting deaths, mostly black/latino, on black/latino, 500 young people dead. We arent talking about that are we? No, this is a race based story, to make a very ....questionable...case against the natural right to self defense.
*sigh* It wasnt a dark alley. It was the courtyard, where the mailboxes are. Zimmerman made it out of the complex, to the main street beyond(there is a circle street down the front of the complex...) the main road is on the other side of that. I linked the map a couple pages back. Zimmerman was on the phone all the way out to the road. Martin was on the path, free and clear where the mailboxes are.
