Page 1 of 36 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 353

Thread: Zimmerman/Martin

  1. #1
    Administrator Sandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,683

    Default Zimmerman/Martin

    No doubt you've all heard the latest buzz on this case. I've been asserting that had Zimmerman not exited his vehicle in the first place, then none of this would have ever happened. I've also been asserting that IF Trayvon Martin did pound Zimmerman it was likely because he felt fear for his life, having been followed and then chased by a complete stranger.

    So when I saw this cartoon, I almost chuckled because the latest thing the defense has been doing is claiming that Zimmerman was acting in self defense, but how can he be acting in self defense if the guy he was essentially accosting was acting in self defense? Who made the first move, then?

    Since Florida's law contains no duty to retreat, I think that Martin may be considered justified under the law to have pounded Zimmerman even if Zimmerman was turning and walking away - after all, how was the boy to know the guy wasn't going after a gun or was going to come back and chase him again.

    Hmmm.... considering that he's dead, I guess his fear must have been realized. At any rate, this cartoon seems to capture one aspect of the three ring circus that this entire case seems to have turned in to.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Opinions expressed by me are mine only and are not in any way, shape, or form representative of the Pueblo Chieftain or Pueblo Community Forums.

  2. #2
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sandra View Post
    No doubt you've all heard the latest buzz on this case. I've been asserting that had Zimmerman not exited his vehicle in the first place, then none of this would have ever happened. I've also been asserting that IF Trayvon Martin did pound Zimmerman it was likely because he felt fear for his life, having been followed and then chased by a complete stranger.

    So when I saw this cartoon, I almost chuckled because the latest thing the defense has been doing is claiming that Zimmerman was acting in self defense, but how can he be acting in self defense if the guy he was essentially accosting was acting in self defense? Who made the first move, then?

    Since Florida's law contains no duty to retreat, I think that Martin may be considered justified under the law to have pounded Zimmerman even if Zimmerman was turning and walking away - after all, how was the boy to know the guy wasn't going after a gun or was going to come back and chase him again.

    Hmmm.... considering that he's dead, I guess his fear must have been realized. At any rate, this cartoon seems to capture one aspect of the three ring circus that this entire case seems to have turned in to.
    Lessee, do I understand that . . IF I'm supposed to be watching a neighborhood, and call in a potential suspect, then retreat, it's OK for the "suspect" to come after me and assault me?

    You've got to be on drugs . . . . Basically, you've just made a mockery of anyone who might attempt to perform the civic duty of calling the police when they see people who are "Out of Place" in their community or neighborhood . . According to your reasoning, it would be OK for someone to assault the resident when he/she returns to their residence because the "Suspect" would assume that they were going inside to get a gun . .

    I don't F--king think so . . .

    Understand THIS . . Once and for all.

    Zimmerman was doing what he was charged with doing. Being part of the neighborhood watch. He did what he was supposed to do. He watched an out of place person and called it in. When he was told to discontinue watching/following the "Suspect" he apparently did so. (there's no viable testimony or witness to say otherwise) And, then, according to Zimmerman, Trayvon (the "Suspect") attacked him as he was "retreating" to his vehicle . .

    That's the testimony that was presented in the Bond Hearing, with the prosecution's own "Expert" witness testifying that he couldn't dis-prove Zimmerman's version of the incident.

    Now . . If you want to continue to convict someone who hasn't been given full due process, go for it, but that makes you nothing more than another member of a racist lynch mob!

    Let the courts do what they're supposed to do. Stay out of it. It's not in your neighborhood, your city, your state and so, it's not really any of your business!
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,717

    Default

    Things seem to be looking up for Zimmerman.

  4. #4
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc.N View Post
    Things seem to be looking up for Zimmerman.
    Not necessarily. It seems that those who continue to make this a "racist" thing, aren't happy with the fact that Zimmerman made bail, or with the amount of bail set by the Judge. ($150k) The uproar now is, the web site put up to help Zimmerman's defense has raised about $200+k and now, the parents and the "Activists" are crying "Foul" because the bond "should have been more" . . Why? Because now, he has more money than he did when the bail was initially set.

    Shouldn't matter. He should have been let go on a PR bond . . If he was going to flee or become a fugitive, he had 55 days to take off before he was even arrested and charged. And he came in when asked, accepted the arrest and charges and made bail when it was set, based upon his circumstances on the day bail was set. Again, so far, Zimmerman has acted within the law as it's been set out for him . . I cannot understand the unreasonable actions of a bunch of @ssholes who act more like a Jim Crow Lynch mob than those who used to and gave it the name . .

    Again, I don't see this as being anything more than something the court will straighten out, but, if Zimmerman is found to have acted in self defense, the "activists" will have people in the streets, looting and burning . . Probably at the suggestion of the President!
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

  5. #5
    Administrator Sandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,683

    Default

    No, Large - first - Neighborhood watch rules - if you see something or someone suspect, call the police. That's all. If you can remain at a safe distance and observe while the police are enroute, do, but otherwise retreat. Neighborhood Watch volunteers DO NOT CHASE, and they DO NOT WEAR GUNS while making any rounds. They are not police and they are not security guards.

    Second, you have to understand FL law to understand how different it is from Colorado's laws - you're thinking in terms of our laws and not theirs. In Florida, there is NO duty to retreat for either party. If he is in fear of his life and he sees the other guy walking away, by law, he is not bound to let the guy go. Why? How does the victim know that the perp isn't going to turn around and come back at him again?

    Try to place yourself in three positions here: Zimmerman's, Martin's, and Martin's parents. In all cases, what would you do?

    In Zimmerman's case, would you have exited your vehicle and chased the kid?

    In Martin's case, would you have stood up for yourself to someone chasing you?

    In the parents' case - if this were your son, how would you feel towards Zimmerman?

    I looked at this from every perspective I could, plus looked into the SYG law, and weighed that with the police reports I read, the 911 calls I heard, and various things the witnesses said - and all the witnesses have different perspectives and stories.

    Then I asked myself, "When did this incident begin and where does the responsibility lie?"

    Did it begin when Zimmerman saw what he thought might be a shady character and call the police? Did it begin when he gave chase? Did it begin when he allegedly turned around to leave and Martin allegedly pounded him?

    I would place that alleged pounding more in the middle of the incident. I would say that it began when Zimmerman spotted the kid and called the police, and it escalated when Zimmerman exited his vehicle and chased the kid. Given his level of training, he really should have known better - that's where I identify that a line was crossed.

    Because Florida's law has no duty to retreat (which includes duty to allow another to back down), is it possible that Martin may have been justified if he pounded Zimmerman? It looks like it from past case history, but I didn't do a thorough search on existing FL caselaw on that; I just did a quick topical search and found that the police just flat out aren't making arrests in cases where SYG is claimed, so there's not a lot to go by statistically - or in caselaw. But the few cases there do indicate the no duty to retreat, and they also indicate that one can not claim self defense against someone who is defending themselves. Which means that Zimmerman can't use "self defense" as a claim if Martin was reasonably defending himself.

    Since Martin is not here to defend himself, the court is going to have to determine whether Martin was acting in self defense, or whether it's reasonable to assume so, and based on the evidence I've seen, I'd say yes, he had sufficient reason to feel the need to defend himself. IF Zimmerman was telling the truth about turning around and walking away, how was Martin supposed to know that he wasn't just going after a gun or something? How was Martin to know the guy wasn't going to continue to follow him to his home and come back at him again later, endangering not only him but also anyone else in the home?

    Additionally, police reports indicate that Zimmerman's statements aren't lining up with forensic evidence, and while not all of those details are given, a few of those include the location of Zimmerman's vehicle, the location and position of the body, and autopsy reports.

    Additionally - the latest thing - it doesn't look so good for Zimmerman in the courtroom now - he's causing a shadow of doubt to be cast over his own credibility concerning his finances. Everyone in his family has testified that they've scrimped and scraped to come up with defense money for him, yet he set up a website asking for people to donate to his legal defense - and raked in $200,000 and DID NOT disclose that to the judge during his bail hearing.

    Now, I read about that website a couple of weeks ago, and the bond hearing happened just a few days ago - so my thinking is that keeping that information from the judge is deliberate and the guy deserves to have his bond revoked for lying to the court, which is usually a violation of bond. And now I wonder if his whole family who claimed they scrimped and scraped to come up with the money were just saying that in order to cover up where the money really came from. If so, they're not helping Zimmerman's case any, because now they're establishing that he's a liar, so what else did he lie about? Maybe he's also lying about the death of Trayvon Martin?

    His defense attorney is barking like a mad dog, threatening the prosecutor (claiming she'd better lawyer up because she's committing a crime) and making all kinds of noise - and completely ignoring the provisions of the SYG law in the process - to make his client look innocent. And he's making himself look foolish in the process. He may or may not get his client off, I don't know - I was beginning to think it might look better for Zimmerman than I had hoped, until this latest baloney about the bond money came up. He's already had one defense team quit on him, and now he's made his current defense team look bad with this issue of his defense funding. I saw the attorney covering his butt to the judge claiming he didn't know anything about it. FFS - the website asking for help with his defense fund was all over the news, how could he not have known about it?

    This entire case is a 3 ring circus - good luck to the judge and jury who have quite a job ahead of them. I'm glad I'm not a part of that. yikes!
    Opinions expressed by me are mine only and are not in any way, shape, or form representative of the Pueblo Chieftain or Pueblo Community Forums.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,717

    Default

    This thing is getting silly. Maybe it's because of the "Dumbing Down Of America" crud programs.

    I'd personally like to smack Zimmerman upside his head for getting out of his vehicle and chasing but that doesn't make him guilty of any crime nor would I smack him if we came face to face. I would be performing a criminal act. I find it disgusting to break the law out of emotional and personal bias. It's probable I would say nothing to him

    Just because I don't like some of the things he did does not mean he broke any laws or performed any criminal acts.

    At this point the emotional bozo's who cannot think rationally I personally would like to see lose their right to vote. That doesn't mean if a ballot was shoved at me I'd vote that their right to vote was taken away.

    I've been in court cases a bunch of times where some libtard moron judge puked his/her leftard personal dissaproval of the company I worked for since we wanted to get paid for what we did rather than forgive the debt and give our parts and labor away and go bankrupt and work for free. The judge had to rule in our favor in all cases.

    So it goes with Zimmerman. He has a right to set up a fund for his defense no matter what a persons PERSONAL PROBLEM is against him. I am tempted to say STFU to a lot of ignorant people but they're entitled to their opinion no matter how idiotic it is so I'll not attempt to impede it in any way.

    Sometimes the debate is stupid but it's still debate. So debate away. I'll sneer and scorn but I'd still fight for your right to puke emotional irrational opinion even though you're disgusting, smell bad and your mother dresses you funny.

  7. #7
    Administrator Sandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,683

    Default

    Marc, no one is saying the man doesn't have a right to set up a website asking for money. The point I was making is that he had all that money and never disclosed it to the court during the bond hearing. In essence, it would appear that he may have perjured himself. It appears that he was being deceitful. This will likely discredit any chances that he does have with the court.

    As for whether he committed a crime - my opinion is that yes, he did. I think getting out of his car and chasing an innocent party walking down the street is a crime. I know our laws are different here, but try it sometime - watch someone walking down the street, follow them in your car for a bit, then get out of your car and chase them then demand to know what they're doing there and see if you don't end up with some kind of criminal charges for that. And if they wallop you and you wallop them back - who gets to claim self defense. I can see it now. "But officer, all I did was follow him and then get out of my car and chase him. Then he walloped me so I smacked him in self defense."

    But then you have the other guy - "Officer, he was following me in his car as I walked down the street. Then he got out of his car and started chasing me!"

    Then you find out the person you were chasing was just a kid - is it legal for adults to go around chasing kids they don't know?


    BTW - the proper term to describe Zimmerman's initial act towards Martin would be "accost" and/or "harass". Harassment would be unsolicited, and Martin did nothing to solicit Zimmerman's accosting him. The definition of accost would be to approach boldly as with hostility - and Zimmerman's actions were clearly hostile and aggressive. Getting out of his car and chasing the boy and demanding to know what he was doing there meets the definition of accost, and because it was unsolicited, also meets the definition of harassment.
    Last edited by Sandra; 04-28-2012 at 10:43 AM.
    Opinions expressed by me are mine only and are not in any way, shape, or form representative of the Pueblo Chieftain or Pueblo Community Forums.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,717

    Default

    Harassment would be unsolicited
    Thank you very much to let me know I should never talk to another person because it would be harrassment. I never realized how these things went. Only other people can solicit. Got it.

  9. #9
    Administrator Sandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,683

    Default

    Come on, Marc - you know that intent plays a role here. Zimmerman wasn't chasing Martin because he wanted to say hello or make a new friend. And even if he was - chasing someone isn't the proper way to go about that, for obvious reasons.
    Opinions expressed by me are mine only and are not in any way, shape, or form representative of the Pueblo Chieftain or Pueblo Community Forums.

  10. #10
    Forum Royalty large's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    14,078

    Default

    Sandra . . WTF? Zimmerman DID NOT HAVE ANY MONEY WHEN THE BOND HEARING WAS HELD!

    The site was set up, according to several news sources, on the day of the hearing . . So . . it didn't have any money in it at the time the judge set bail . . And no one, apparently, except you and the rabble rousers, seem to think that because the judge was less than clarivoyant, he should throw Zimmerman back in Jail and demand more money . .

    I'm not too sure you're absolutely sure about how all this works . . and I used to think you did . . .

    Plus, If you have read the preliminary (Before Racial involvement of half the Black Nation) report of the scene, and listen (once again) to the "Expert" Witnesses, and the stumbling direct from the prosecutor, unless you're a big believer in "Hope (he changes his story)", I don't think they have much of a case . . Apparently, in Sanford, FL, they don't have the same rules as they (or you) have in Pueblo by the Reever . . . But they do have the same Justice system, and due process is due . . .

    Y'see, when one party shoots and kills another party and there's only one story, with a partial witness backing up that story, CSI isn't going to be able to disprove much of it, despite what you see on TV . . . All Zimmerman and his defense has to prove is that Zimmerman was on the ground and Martin was on top of him . . And that's already been established by the forensics . . and literally admitted to by the prosecution at the Bond hearing . . Done deal . . What led up to it, again, is a moot point!

    Uhhh, are you going out and burn and loot when they let George go?

    If they do . . .
    "A man with a firearm is a citizen... a man without one is a subject"

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •