Trayvon Martin Case

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

This is anything but traditional because the actual aggressor and provoker here is the one claiming self defense.

No, if the defendant was the actual aggressor and provoker, it would be a traditional FAILED claim of self defense. I'm saying this is not the new "stand your ground" case where the burden of proof is on the defense, it's the traditional "self defence" where once the possibility of actual self defence is established, the burden is on the prosecution.

Which again raises the point, how do you know in this case which was the actual attacker and aggressor? Those in the court case would like to know what you do, because neither side had evidence to "know" that. (other than what Zimmerman said, but he's the one on trial.)

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Also strange is the fact the one claiming self defense was the ONLY one armed. The actually person provoked never had a weapon of any kind...nothing...bat, gun, knife, etc....just skittles.

So if someone is armed, they can't use the weapon to defend themselves? Muggers attacking anyone weaker than they are, will be overjoyed by this news.

And again someone lists the skittles in their argument. I'm sure numerous criminals and victims have had M&Ms, Tootsie Rolls, and Pepsi on them when a crime has occurred. What is this fetish people have about skittles?

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Also non traditional is the fact the one claiming self defense is a larger and older adult against a smaller, kid.

Define "larger". Martin was taller and probably in much better shape. Unless Martin was obese.

And "kid" again? Does this look like a "kid"? Martin was 17. If he was arrested the day of the incident, for assault or whatever just saying, he would have been charged as an adult.


(teen in the middle)

Teen, yes. Young man, yes. "Kid"? No. Just to put this in perspective, do you think "kids" killed Sean Taylor? Should they not be tried as adults?

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Rarely you see an older, larger, armed person running up on a smaller, unarmed, child claiming self defense after he has shot and killed the teenager.

I'm willing to bet lots of older people have filed self defence claims against younger people even though only the older person was armed, seeing how it's teen males that commit a plurality of violent crimes. Again you're calling the shorter, more out of shape guy the "larger" guy.

And how do you know Zimmerman actually "ran up" to Martin? Please tell CNN, because the prosecution and defense both missed what you found out.

"CHILD"? Did I post pictures of a "child" up there? Again, to keep perspective in this case, did "children" kill Sean Taylor?