Author Topic: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution  (Read 29725 times)

Offline The Skeletal Atheist

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #360 on: July 22, 2013, 10:01:17 PM »
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"
Quote from: "The Skeletal Atheist"
So if someone is following you, you punch them rather than try to get away first? Oh geeze, I didn't know I should just punch people, then ask questions later.
The quoting out of context is strong with this one.
Actually I didn't quote at all that time, but for the hell of it I'll quote what I was referencing:
Quote
Right, slug a guy who might be armed, leave him there, run away. Definitely a smart idea. No, you stay there, and you hit him until he stops getting up. When you're unarmed and the other guy is armed, this is the only way to remove the threat. The only thing different I would have done in Martin's shoes is that I would have actually tried incapacitating/killing Zimmerman, not just hammering at him like an untrained idiot. But then, I'm an adult and actually have martial arts training; two advantages Martin did not have.

After which of course PopeyesPappy replied saying you don't slug someone in the first place, to which you replied "No Popeyes, what you do is not follow a guy against NHW regulations and police instructions and make him think he needs to do so in the first place.

We can do this all day, bud."

And then my comment came up.

Basically, to you it's ok to just slug someone, then try "incapacitating/killing" them because they're following you. You know, rather then trying to get away or finding out why the person is following you. So there, some context.

I mean, unless you think it's not ok to just hit someone...in which case you have an odd way of showing that you don't think it's ok to just hit someone.
Some people need to be beaten with a smart stick.

Kein Mehrheit Fur Die Mitleid!

Kein Mitlied F�r Die Mehrheit!

Offline Hijiri Byakuren

  • ULC Minister, Honorary Doctor of Divinity
  • Jacuzzi Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5505
  • Total likes: 2182
  • That's DOCTOR Hijiri, to you!
    • Sargon Lore
Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #361 on: July 22, 2013, 10:13:44 PM »
Quote from: "The Skeletal Atheist"
Basically, to you it's ok to just slug someone, then try "incapacitating/killing" them because they're following you.
You clearly haven't been reading most of what I've said during this thread if you think that, and I don't feel the need to correct your dumbass conclusion. Don't read two recent posts by me in a 25 page thread and act like you understand my position. If it's too much of a chore for you to catch up on the thread, don't bother engaging me in conversation.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Offline The Skeletal Atheist

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #362 on: July 22, 2013, 10:57:11 PM »
Ok, I read every post you made in this thread. This one is particularly nice:
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"
Except we know from Trayvon's phone call that Zimmerman confronted him, and that the fight started shortly thereafter. If someone has been following you, confronts you, and (being the deep south) is most likely armed, you have every right to attack them with any and all force necessary. My criticism of Trayvon in this case isn't that he attacked Zimmerman, it's that he clearly didn't attack with enough ferocity to incapacitate him.

As well as this earlier one:
Quote from: "Hijiri Byakuren"
One good reason might be, "It's the deep south, a guy is following you, he might have a weapon but hasn't brandished it yet, so beat him senseless before he has a chance to hurt you." Granted, that's probably not what I would do in Trayvon's place. Beating a man still gives him a chance to get his weapon. Strangulation is much more effective once he's on the ground beneath you, as is a quick jab to the throat if you have an opening. If you fear for your life, you shouldn't be picky about how you disable/kill the person beyond how quickly you can eliminate the threat.

This is assuming I picked a fight, of course; had I time to assess the situation I might try talking him down first if I thought I could. I don't know if Trayvon had that chance or not. Given that Zimmerman tried talking first (which we could hear through Martin's phone), I'm inclined to believe Martin had that chance. Since his first reaction was to attack Zimmerman up close, it's also unlikely that Zimmerman had his gun unholstered, much less pointing at Martin right then. Basically, the evidence suggests that Martin should have been able to engage Zimmerman in dialogue and establish that this was a misunderstanding.


Don't take that to mean I'm blind to Zimmerman's role in creating the situation in the first place. Just because it's not what I'm talking about at the moment doesn't mean I'm ignoring it.

So before you talk of trying to talk Zimmerman down, but later on you say you wouldn't have down anything different than Martin would have except for trying to incapacitate/kill Zimmerman more effectively. Well, you certainly are consistent.
Some people need to be beaten with a smart stick.

Kein Mehrheit Fur Die Mitleid!

Kein Mitlied F�r Die Mehrheit!

Offline Hijiri Byakuren

  • ULC Minister, Honorary Doctor of Divinity
  • Jacuzzi Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5505
  • Total likes: 2182
  • That's DOCTOR Hijiri, to you!
    • Sargon Lore
Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #363 on: July 22, 2013, 11:11:42 PM »
Quote from: "The Skeletal Atheist"
So before you talk of trying to talk Zimmerman down, but later on you say you wouldn't have down anything different than Martin would have except for trying to incapacitate/kill Zimmerman more effectively. Well, you certainly are consistent.
Right, because omitting part of a previous argument to expand on a particular portion of it obviously means that I no longer hold that position. :roll:

Come back when you have an argument.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Offline Johan

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #364 on: July 23, 2013, 12:34:21 AM »
I have followed this thread from the beginning and participated in it a fair amount as well. And after twenty some odd pages, I think it ultimately comes down to the fact that the four word thread title had it exactly right all along. The case against Zimmerman was weak. There is no way around that fact.

Do I think Zimmerman is innocent? I think he was found innocent so there's that. I do not believe that his account of what happened is really what happened. Too much fuzziness between what he claimed and what is known for me. But then again if Martin had survived the shooting, I don't know that I'd be inclined to believe his version of the events either. I think they were both guilty of making stupid choices. And there but for the grace of god go I.

I don't think anyone is qualified to say they would have done things different than Martin did unless they can know exactly what Martin saw that night and also what Martin saw every previous moment of his life. And obviously none of that can ever be known.

And for Zimmerman, the same applies. No one can know what was going on in his head. No one can know which parts of his story (if any) are accurate and which parts (if any) are not. Experts have testified that his injuries were not at all life threatening. But that doesn't mean he wasn't afraid for his life.

The bottom line is I have no idea if Zimmerman is innocent or guilty nor what it is exactly that might be guilty of. But I know that the case against him was weak and I know that was found innocent of the charges against him. And that is as it should be.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false and by the rulers as useful

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #365 on: July 23, 2013, 03:01:44 AM »
Quote from: "Johan"
I have followed this thread from the beginning and participated in it a fair amount as well. And after twenty some odd pages, I think it ultimately comes down to the fact that the four word thread title had it exactly right all along. The case against Zimmerman was weak. There is no way around that fact.

Do I think Zimmerman is innocent? I think he was found innocent so there's that. I do not believe that his account of what happened is really what happened. Too much fuzziness between what he claimed and what is known for me. But then again if Martin had survived the shooting, I don't know that I'd be inclined to believe his version of the events either. I think they were both guilty of making stupid choices. And there but for the grace of god go I.

I don't think anyone is qualified to say they would have done things different than Martin did unless they can know exactly what Martin saw that night and also what Martin saw every previous moment of his life. And obviously none of that can ever be known.

And for Zimmerman, the same applies. No one can know what was going on in his head. No one can know which parts of his story (if any) are accurate and which parts (if any) are not. Experts have testified that his injuries were not at all life threatening. But that doesn't mean he wasn't afraid for his life.

The bottom line is I have no idea if Zimmerman is innocent or guilty nor what it is exactly that might be guilty of. But I know that the case against him was weak and I know that was found innocent of the charges against him. And that is as it should be.
It is true, the case against him was weak. There likely was nothing else the jury could do, even though half of them wanted to.

But let us be clear, he was not found innocent, he was found not guilty of the charges brought against him. It may seem like semantics, but there is a legal difference between innocent and not guilty. He may later be charged with different crimes concerning the same incident, and be found guilty of those, hence why they do not say found innocent.

Anyway, I think the difference of opinion  here mostly boils down to if that is indeed "as it should be". Some of the jurors initiallt agreed that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation unneccesarily, and was therefore guilty of manslaughter, due to negligent behavior. Apparently there is no provision in the law for initiation though. Who started it really turns out to be irrelivant. If you start a fight, and the other person causes you to fear for your life, you have a right to defend yorself.

Not sure how laws could be rewritten to close this pretty gaping loophole, but maybe this case will prompt lawmakers to try. Probably not though, as it seems most people agree with the laws as they stand.
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory.  LLAP"
Leonard Nimoy

Offline Colanth

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #366 on: July 23, 2013, 01:02:00 PM »
Quote from: "PopeyesPappy"
I propose an experiment. Get a video camera. Take it outside and set it up so that it has a good shot of you laying on your back on the sidewalk. Now lift your head up and let it fall back onto the concrete.
I have a better one.  Ask any first responder how bloody a scalp wound is.  You'll most likely hear "stuck pig" in there somewhere.  I can make a much bloodier mess of my head without suffering the slightest bit of inconvenience.  Go ahead - ask your favorite health care professional, then report back.

Zimmerman's "injuries"?  I do worse every time I stick my hand into a tomato cage to pick a few tomatoes.  (I was asked, the other day, by a cop in Walmart, while I was shopping, whether I was being abused at home.  I have long thin scabs on both forearms.)

He had 3 puncture wounds in his scalp.  Read the initial reports - he was treated at the scene by an EMT.  IF they even suspected a concussion - not always a serious injury, but what you get if your head is slammed into concrete - they would have transported him.  He had MINOR SCRATCHES - not something you'd sustain if someone were seriously trying to injure you, but something you'd get from rubbing your scalp on concrete.

All it boils down to is - for whatever reason - the prosecution didn't present any evidence that Zimmerman did anything wrong, so the jury correctly failed to find him guilty of anything.  I don't object to what the jury did, I object to what the prosecution did.  If they had such a poor case (no case, from what they presented), they should have bit the bullet, admitted it and dropped it.  If they had evidence enough to bring the case to trial they should have presented it.  (What they brought to trial wasn't enough evidence to have a stern talk with Zimmerman.)

But evidence of enough force that killing Martin was justified?  (That's what Zimmerman claimed.)  That's too funny for the Comedy Channel.
Afflicting the comfortable for 70 years.
Science builds skyscrapers, faith flies planes into them.

Offline Colanth

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #367 on: July 23, 2013, 02:18:22 PM »
Quote from: "PopeyesPappy"
Quote from: "Colanth"
In actual fact, almost no actual evidence at all was presented to the jury.
Sorry but you haven't been paying attention Colanth. The juror that first spoke about the case said that they were convinced Martin started the physical altercation.
WHO hasn't been paying attention?  There was no evidence presented that Martin started it.  (There was no evidence presented, period, just Zimmerman's assertions and a few very minor injuries.  The phone transcript was mostly inconclusive.)  And the question isn't who started the PHYSICAL ALTERCATION, the question is who presented the first threat.  At that point, according to Florida law, the threatened person has the right to stand his ground.  (Not that I agree with the law - I think it's just an invitation to legalized battery.)
Afflicting the comfortable for 70 years.
Science builds skyscrapers, faith flies planes into them.

Offline Colanth

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #368 on: July 23, 2013, 02:22:47 PM »
Quote from: "PopeyesPappy"
No Hijiri, What you do is not slug anyone to begin with.
So if you perceive that someone is a threat you just wait until he attacks you, in the hope that he won't?  People who do that often get the prefix "the late" prepended to their names.
Afflicting the comfortable for 70 years.
Science builds skyscrapers, faith flies planes into them.

Offline Colanth

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #369 on: July 23, 2013, 02:26:25 PM »
Quote from: "The Skeletal Atheist"
So if someone is following you, you punch them rather than try to get away first? Oh geeze, I didn't know I should just punch people, then ask questions later.
Martin asked the question first.  He asked Zimmerman why he, Zimmerman, was following him, Martin.  That's what you're supposed to do, right?  So if he asks he's wrong and if he punches without asking he's wrong.  How would he have been right?  Just letting Zimmerman do whatever he wanted to do?  (And we have no way of knowing what that might have been, but more to the point, Martin had no way of knowing, so he had to make a guess based on past history or white adult/black youth interaction in the south.  And that quite often resulted in the black youth no longer needing to worry about oxygen.)
Afflicting the comfortable for 70 years.
Science builds skyscrapers, faith flies planes into them.

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #370 on: July 23, 2013, 02:43:00 PM »
???  ??

Offline The Skeletal Atheist

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #371 on: July 23, 2013, 03:34:42 PM »
Edit: Actually fuck it. I'm jumping out of this conversation and will concede that I had nothing to add. Sorry.
Some people need to be beaten with a smart stick.

Kein Mehrheit Fur Die Mitleid!

Kein Mitlied F�r Die Mehrheit!

Offline missingnocchi

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #372 on: July 23, 2013, 10:31:36 PM »
Quote from: "Jmpty"
[ You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login ]
Hi emotional manipulation, I'm Tim. Nice to meet yOOOOOOHHHH WHY DID YOU STAB ME!!!??
What's a "Leppo?"

Offline missingnocchi

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #373 on: July 23, 2013, 10:55:44 PM »
I've been on the fence about this case for a while, but as it stands, my feelings are as such: George Zimmerman probably committed voluntary manslaughter, but there isn't quite enough evidence to convict. We don't really know what started the fight, but if Zimmerman either threatened Martin, started the fight, or made a move to start a fight, then he's guilty. I have a feeling that he did, but given the situation, there's no way to prove it. Following Martin alone is not enough. Self-defense by Florida law must be in order to prevent a felony, meaning Martin had to be reasonably certain a felony was going to occur, if it hadn't already. Whether or not being followed the way he was is a cause for reasonable certainty is a subjective question, although I'm inclined to say no. And that's where this conversation has come to: a bunch of irrelevant rehashes of past arguments, along with a shit slinging fest to see whose subjective opinion about the validity of Martin's actions under Florida law is better. And that is the very essence of a flame war. Didn't we have rules about that sort of thing?
What's a "Leppo?"

Re: George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution
« Reply #374 on: July 23, 2013, 11:02:18 PM »
Quote from: "missingnocchi"
Quote from: "Jmpty"
[ You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login ]
Hi emotional manipulation, I'm Tim. Nice to meet yOOOOOOHHHH WHY DID YOU STAB ME!!!??
8-) Bazinga.
???  ??

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk