Congratulations for not answering my question, what would YOU do if I was pursuing you in the middle of the night and I wasn't clearly marked or identified as a Police officer?Quote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
Printable View
Congratulations for not answering my question, what would YOU do if I was pursuing you in the middle of the night and I wasn't clearly marked or identified as a Police officer?Quote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
First, I would not be trespassing into a gated community in the middle of the night. Second, if someone were following me that worried me, I would use my cell phone, and Martin had a cell phone that he could have used to call police but did not. Third, once I lost sight of you and you lost sight of me, I would leave. Fourth, I would not circle around and come after you, then beat and knock you to the ground, while you scream for someone to help you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Dude! We had a family of scum who lived up the road and their kids would act "suspicious" at all hours of the night, not once did I feel the need to put myself in a situation where I could get hurt or where there'd be the need for confrontation, the Police were called many times by various people and drove by and/or talked to the kids and no one got shot or hurt, THAT is how law and order works.Quote:
Originally Posted by leighton323
So if you had been dumb enough to trespass then I'd be justified in pursuing you and shooting you? You've got to remember that this kid was a 17 year old, most kids that age are idiots. Don't get me wrong, Martin could have done things differently and lived, but ultimately the adult and supposedly mature Neighbourhood Watch member shouldn't have created a situation which ended this way.Quote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
And it is easy to talk about in the quiet of a debate or in the middle of a courtroom long after it is over. Hindsight is perfect as they say. It is all together different in the few seconds of stress, panic, fear, pain and uncertainty, with your life hanging in the balance. Speaking of which, it is my bedtime.
But I still refer back to the fact that he was doing a job, not saying it was his job, but he was part of an organisation or community group that had wanted someone to keep an eye out on the community, I'm sure you weren't part of a group that was trying to protect the community. If there was such a group I'm sure they would have kept an eye out for these kids. I know i wouldn't do what he did but i can see why he did. what if Zimmerman had prevented a crime that night. How was he supposed to know the circumstances which were about to unfold. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
You would be justified in watching me to see what sort of evil I might be up and calling the police. Which is what Zimmerman did. Martin may have been 17 but was more than capable of beating someone to death. It just happened that, much to the probable surprise of Martin, Zimmerman had a gun and did not just lie there and get beaten to death. Instead of attacking Zimmerman, Martin could have attacked someone else who did not have a gun---or Zimmerman could have been unarmed. As you put it, go looking for trouble, you just might find it. Martin found it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Hindsight, anyone with half a brain wouldn't have pushed it further. If I saw someone who looked suspicious, but was commiting no crime, I wouldn't create a situation where possibly innocently intentioned actions on both sides create a situation where one or more people get hurt or killed. It's common sense sadly.Quote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
If Zimmerman had actually seen some sort of crime committed then you could understand him pursuing Martin, but there was no crime committed.
Can I ask a question Leighton? How old are you?Quote:
Originally Posted by leighton323
No, you chose to live in fear and avoid confrontation, leaving the problems to repeat themselves over and over again. Ask Richard martin about how your country fails to protect victims and leaves the "family of scum" to run wild. Oh well, I have more important things to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Hahah call me Matt, my middle name is Leighton, and why do you ask?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
And once and for all, Zimmerman was not "pursuing" him. If he had wanted to do that, he could have pulled the gun and taken him prisoner. He did not. He was watching him, and obviously not very closely, as he lost track of Martin.
What victims? No single digit IQ kids were making noise late at night and being a nuisance, all managed by a few drivebys by the Police. I don't live in fear, it's warm at the moment and I feel completely safe sleeping with the windows open :)Quote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
Well he was, Martin was going in one direction, Zimmerman chose to go in the same direction purely because that was the direction Martin was going, that's the very definition of pursuing someone.Quote:
Originally Posted by markabilly
This, very surprisingly since it's from Daniel, is the closest thing to the truth in the whole thread. He then returns to norm and misquotes and exaggerates what others have posted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
It could have ended in a verbal confrontation or with both on their phones calling 911 and being embarrassed as heck when they both found out what the other was doing. Instead Martin chose to escalate it to a violent confrontation and paid the price for misjudging his opponent.
Of course Martin did the wrong thing in hindsight, but what would most 17 year olds do?
Most is a slight exaggeration.. Less than than 1% Easily. But yes I can see your understand about irrational thought from someone very young.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
You can not possibly say that - no one can.Quote:
Originally Posted by Starter
The only two witnesses were Martin and Zimmerman and Martin is dead. Forensically it's very easy to say that Martin was standing over Zimmerman at the time the shots were fired but that's it.
This case hinges on the standard that the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and the simple fact is that in this case the burden of proof which rests on the prosecution (not the defence) renders that impossible because there's doubt all over this.
The jury has delivered a fair verdict.
The utter stupidity about this is that this case even exists. Culturally there is a position which allows people to carry weapons, which escalates the problem and the castle doctrine which appears to be uniquely American (I've done previous research on this and found nothing in English Common Law which it supposedly rests on - LINK)
Yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Not saying i would do it but I would find anyone perfectly justified in shooting a hooded trespasser.
My property is more valuable to me than the life of a criminal.
BTW
Martin was in Sanford Fl because he was suspended from school for dealing illegal drugs. He also had a history of disciplinary problems in school which were inadmissible as evidence,
Burglar Tools that were proven to be Martin's was found to have been hidden in the immediate vicinity.
It was proven in court that Zimmerman was being assaulted and was fearing for his life.
Never did Zimmerman give any indication that race was a motive for his actions.
Martin, on the other hand used a vile, racial insult when talking about Zimmerman.
Some more facts:
911 operators are not police officers and have no power whatsoever to tell anyone what to do. In fact most have a remedial education and can only garner a low level, government job and so are usually never paid attention to. "Just send the cops OK!"
In the US we are not so oppressed and weak to solely depend on the police to protect ourselves. (Europeans please refrain from commenting on this one. Your recent history with Communism, Fascism and Monarchies along with present lack or personal freedom precludes any possible standing in disparaging that USA on this.)
By listening to the police operator/dispatcher who told Zimm' in no uncertain terms: "do not persue" Instead Zimm' decided to try and play Dirty Harry only he aint freakin' bad enough to kick a 17yo ass and ended up getting his ass kicked, and I guarntee he has a whole mess more ass-kickins comin', and I believe diiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirectly. :arrowed: :bulb:Quote:
Originally Posted by leighton323
Or rather, do you not properly pay people to enforce or administer the law properly? By inference you've just made an argument that American police are not competent enough at their jobs.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
I'll accept that.
I wont argue with that as some constabularies are better than others. But I bet Any Cop who has graduated from a major cites academy would not have gotten his ass in the kind of crack that Zimm did. When he says his nightly prayers, he should include in them: God please help me from becoming even more of an idiot!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
to beat your head in Daniel - what elseQuote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
While being stalked and/or followed or in any another form intimidated, would most 17 year olds have the presence of mind to get rid of their burglary tools before going on to assault the person who so threatened them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Most cops would have turned tail and run, screaming for back up allowing the criminal to continue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Alca-Tazizzle
BTW When Martin was looking for a home to break into the cops were nowhere to be found but Zimmerman was there.
well, being a moron isn't illegal. if it were, Obama wouldn't even be able to get elected to student council. besides, was he really that stupid? He's fat and happy, and he's about to clean NBC's pockets for megamillions, and will never have to work again in his life. Hhe showed the world the savage racist nature of many leftists today,especially black ones, and made Darwin smile just a little bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Alca-Tazizzle
And his ass is grass!!Quote:
Originally Posted by vhatever
Ya right, what are you gonna do about it? his ass is going to be sitting in a lounger all day staring at some beautiful sunset while sipping on a mytie, where all the local women are half dressed and all the men are his servants. All thanks to people like you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Alca-Tazizzle
You don't want to confront me.........Scro'. trust me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkPGlVqqEP0]
You are gonna fail at posting a youtube link? wow, george must be shaking in his boots.
:bulb: I guess we'll see!!....scro :dork:
This thread once again confirms how liberals debate--largely ignoring the law and the facts of the case, while hurling insult not only at GZ but also fellow posters.
Namely who? :confused: :angel: Such a claim requires documentation!. :bulb: :bulb: :bulb:Quote:
Originally Posted by keysersoze
yeah the liberals want the Italian court system - just keep trying them until they are found guilty.
I don't get it Alca - Why are you digging up Whitney?
Can I just ask for a link to this evidence of him getting rid of a burglary tool on the night? Nowhere seems to mention it, please don't like to any websites like http://www.liberalsallsuck.com or http://www.peoplewithgenitalwartsfortruth.com or anyting like that, something reputable, I'll even accept a link to Fox.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koz
No need
George Zimmerman trial: Chris Serino, lead detective in case of Trayvon Martin killing, takes stand again Tuesday - Crimesider - CBS News
A burglary tool found 5 or 6 days later. This sort of thing would have been completely inadmissable in court due to the time it took to turn up....... Anyone who's watched Law and Order knows that :rotflmao:
Quote:
Originally Posted by vhatever
http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/nationa...il-rights-suitQuote:
-- His GPS monitor has been cut off and George Zimmerman is free -- but only legally.
Zimmerman fears for his life. He's a reviled figure to millions, despite his acquittal Saturday night in Trayvon Martin's killing.
Zimmerman's attorney describes him as a marked man.
Zimmerman, 29, has kept his address under wraps for more than a year and worn a disguise whenever he left his four walls. He has often strapped on body armor, according to O'Mara."I think he has more reason now than ever to think that people are trying to kill him because they express they're trying to kill him, all the time, every day.
Sounds like he is a little concerned about his bro health to me.....Scro
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkPGl...layer_embedded
:bulb: :dozey: :bulb: :bulb: :dozey:
I agree that the jury delivered the only verdict that they could based on reasonable doubt. While I figured that OJ Simpson really did it, the jury delivered the proper verdict, as I have never seen such a circus. There are three levels of proof. In a civil case, preponderance of evidence. In some mixed type cases, it is clear and convincing. In the OJ case as well as Zimmerman, the prosecution did not even get to the clear and convincing level. Now in the OJ case, there was evidence that could have been clear and convincing, if properly presented, but they failed to do it to make it such. As to there being only two witnesses, that is incorrect as there is a third witness I spoke of in my first post. He did not see the beginning of the struggle, but heard the screaming and identified it as coming from the man on bottom who was being beaten by the man on top. He says Martin was delivering marital art style blows to Zimmerman. Based on clothing, the man on top was Martin. It is his phone call that contains the screaming that has been referenced repeatedly as to one of them screaming, help me. The shot is fired, but apparently not picked up in the recording. This case was tried based on the murder charge which requires an intent to kill or seriously injure without it being a planned premeditated killing (and some claim it should have been tried on a pure manslaughter type basis of negligence where it might have been more successful based on a lower level of intent). ----------------- The so-called castle doctrine had nothing to do with the trial, although under Florida law, there is a castle or stand your ground law, but it had nothing to do with the trial in this case, and was not even submitted to the jury. Only the self defense issue which in order to be answered, there must be a finding on the murder or manslaughter charge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo