Trayvon Martin Case

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Great. Now JR becomes the WP Legal Analyst.

Not until I am put on retainer.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

There will be, the court of popular opinion are against Zimmerman. Just watch Nancy Grace for a sense of how repugnant some of the reporting is. Not while you're eating, obviously.

Even if I am not eating, Nancy Grace makes me lose my breakfest, lunch or dinner.

[Gary84Clark]

According to you guys analysis Zimmerman is sure to walk. The evidence is overwhelmingly in his favor, and there are goigng to be riots!!!?? **Wishful thinking sounds like to me and not analysis** LMAO way out there

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by firstdown

How isd Z responsible. If he was attacked BY Trayvon then it Trayvon who is responsible for his own death. I know Z was told to not follow him but just following him does not make him guilty of anything.

Here's what we KNOW happened. A over-zealous neighborhood watchman followed around someone because he felt he was suspicious. He didn't engage the guy to find out what he was doing in a constructive way (that we know of) rather he acted in a way that created a situation of confrontation. Now TM may have gone too far in his reaction and gave Z a reason to defend himself (who knows) but what we KNOW is that Z should have handled the situation better and then an unarmed teenager wouldn't be dead. Does any of that make him guilty? No. But I am damn sure if it's me in that situation TM doesn't get shot because a more reasonable person doesn't manipulate a situation into being confrontational like that. I think it is hard to see the basic situation any different.

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I have no problem with the use of deadly force if you are being beaten to death. If you're being overpowered, you have the right to defend yourself. [NOTE: If you initiated the fight and are simply losing, no -- deadly force is not okay. Even if you start a fight, the other person doesn't have the right to beat you to death - you can protect yourself but you're right to claim self-defense is severely impaired].

As to the lesser charge, I don't know for sure but would expect manslaughter to be available if they don't find 2nd degree murder. Right now, not sure they even have that.

What they have is: zimmerman following martin, martin telling a friend on the phone that a man is following him and that he is scared, After a verbal confrontation, somehow a fight started, the two were rolling around and, at some point, Zimmerman is his back with Martin giving him the "ground and pound" while Zimmerman has injuries that could put a reasonable person in fear of their life.

Not sure I would send someone to jail on that.

i think we have slightly more than that. i added some more in bold.

plus, to my knowledge we have 2 eyewitnesses saying they believe the larger person was on top (Z being the larger person in their judgment) and one witness saying he believes the lighter skinned person was on the bottom.

if martin was giving zimmerman the ground and pound so hard that zimmerman was fearing for his life, how did zimmerman manage to unholster his firearm and cleanly discharge it right into martin's chest?

if zimmerman was able to do all they above acts seemingly cleanly, was there no other less deadly alternatives?

if martin was on top of him, id imagine a long struggle for the gun would ensue. . . .

joe - watch the reenactment video zimmerman did for the news a few days after and tell me if his version of events would hold water. just too many leaps of faith imo from what ive seen.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Gary84Clark

According to you guys analysis Zimmerman is sure to walk. The evidence is overwhelmingly in his favor, and there are goigng to be riots!!!?? **Wishful thinking sounds like to me and not analysis** LMAO way out there

I have an intense dislike of humanity, it never fails to stoop to the idiocy of the lowest common denominator.

We'll see. Remember this thread.

[Gary84Clark]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

I have an intense dislike of humanity, it never fails to stoop to the idiocy of the lowest common denominator.

We'll see. Remember this thread.

Wait, like your last prediction that Romney was gonna win Pennsylvania, the Presidency, and there would be riots. Remember that one?

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

From a moral judgment standpoint a bunch of stuff matters that doesn't matter in a legal sense and vice-versa. He may not be "guilty" but he almost surely is responsible. That's why something like this is such a big deal media-wise. Responsible and guilty aren't the same thing. The media on the whole feeds the mentality that responsibility = guilt. Same thing happened in the OJ case. The prosecution didn't prove he was guilty. Everyone KNOWS he did it but that doesn't matter.

Ultimately, I think both parties are "responsible" for what happened that night. Clearly, each had the opportunity to avoid escalation to a physical brawl. Right now, for me, the only thing I can say for certain is that this was an avoidable tragedy that has had its tragic consequences multiplied by the irresponsible coverage.

Also - Given my willingness to throw down back in the day and the mindless ferocity I approached it with, I am incredibly lucky to be alive and not in jail today.

[Gary84Clark]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

i think we have slightly more than that. i added some more in bold.

plus, to my knowledge we have 2 eyewitnesses saying they believe the larger person was on top (Z being the larger person in their judgment) and one witness saying he believes the lighter skinned person was on the bottom.

if martin was giving zimmerman the ground and pound so hard that zimmerman was fearing for his life, how did zimmerman manage to unholster his firearm and cleanly discharge it right into martin's chest?

if zimmerman was able to do all they above acts seemingly cleanly, was there no other less deadly alternatives?

if martin was on top of him, id imagine a long struggle for the gun would ensue. . . .

joe - watch the reenactment video zimmerman did for the news a few days after and tell me if his version of events would hold water. just too many leaps of faith imo from what ive seen.

I agree with this analysis.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Here's what we KNOW happened. A over-zealous neighborhood watchman followed around someone because he felt he was suspicious. He didn't engage the guy to find out what he was doing in a constructive way (that we know of) rather he acted in a way that created a situation of confrontation. Now TM may have gone too far in his reaction and gave Z a reason to defend himself (who knows) but what we KNOW is that Z should have handled the situation better and then an unarmed teenager wouldn't be dead. Does any of that make him guilty? No. But I am damn sure if it's me in that situation TM doesn't get shot because a more reasonable person doesn't manipulate a situation into being confrontational like that. I think it is hard to see the basic situation any different.

This. 100%.

[Gary84Clark]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Ultimately, I think both parties are "responsible" for what happened that night. Clearly, each had the opportunity to avoid escalation to a physical brawl. Right now, for me, the only thing I can say for certain is that this was an avoidable tragedy that has had its tragic consequences multiplied by the irresponsible coverage.

Also - Given my willingness to throw down back in the day and the mindless ferocity I approached it with, I am incredibly lucky to be alive and not in jail today.

Disagree,

1. Blaming the media is a common cop out. 2. Zimmerman is responsible, he did his job as a bitch boy wanna be and he told the cops. Putting his hands on someone after following them makes him responsible.

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by Gary84Clark

According to you guys analysis Zimmerman is sure to walk. The evidence is overwhelmingly in his favor, and there are goigng to be riots!!!?? **Wishful thinking sounds like to me and not analysis** LMAO way out there

i do hope he is found guilty but its a close call.

either way, the jurors get to make the call and they are in the best position to make a decision .. assuming none of them harbor strong feelings for or against gun control laws and didnt speak up during voir dire.

[Gary84Clark]

There si no gone too far when someon you don;t know follows you and enters your personal space. You have a right to self defrense at that point. That person brought the problem to you.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Ultimately, I think both parties are "responsible" for what happened that night. Clearly, each had the opportunity to avoid escalation to a physical brawl. Right now, for me, the only thing I can say for certain is that this was an avoidable tragedy that has had its tragic consequences multiplied by the irresponsible coverage.

Also - Given my willingness to throw down back in the day and the mindless ferocity I approached it with, I am incredibly lucky to be alive and not in jail today.

yes

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Gary84Clark

Wait, like your last prediction that Romney was gonna win Pennsylvania, the Presidency, and there would be riots. Remember that one?

No.