Now It Makes Sense

[JB 2]

So as long as the word ends without the "er" all is right in the world. Sescriptive words such as ***ga or ****ka are now officialy acceptable.

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/07/15/jeantel_the_jury_they_old_thats_old_school_people_we_in_a_new_school_our_generation.html

 

Yeah, this generation really is different.

[YankeeDoodle]

No - it still depends on who says it. For example, Chris Tucker walked into the bar and greeted people by asking "what's up, my n***a". No problemo. But let Jackie Chan try to say it .....

 

 

[The Mole]

The usual players have once again proved their racism. Sharpton, Jackson, Holder and of course our white-black president Obama. These individuals have hit a new low in trying to racially divide this country and for the most part they will succeed. I have to admit I am surprised that the Zimmerman outcome was, what it was. Personally when Zimmerman was told to stay in his car and he decided to get out opened up a serious issue for me. He actually took the steps to "create" a possible confrontation. He decided to basically, pursue Martin. Some will say he was just walking and watching but I believe if properly presented, this could have changed the case outcome. Now, in Zimmermans mind, was his getting out of the car an act of premeditation by his hoping for confrontation ?

 

I don't know how many of you saw the "fantastic" footage of the scene at night. From what I saw it was darned dark.... In an apartment complex area??? It's no wonder they were having break ins.

 

The outcome is the outcome. That's what trials are about. The rule of law. Perhaps everything was presented, perhaps not. The media also tweaked this BIG TIME. I believe we are on the verge of social networks and media trying cases rather than the courts. After all, if you don't like the court outcome..... RIOT !

[Bingoloid]

 

I have to admit I am surprised that the Zimmerman outcome was, what it was. Personally when Zimmerman was told to stay in his car and he decided to get out opened up a serious issue for me. He actually took the steps to "create" a possible confrontation.

 

 

This was always my issue, too. Even if he hadn't been ordered to stay in his truck and advised to break off his little "chase", he had already admitted he believed there was something to be worried about with the guy. Not that you can't confront a criminal to stop a crime, but he clearly had no belief that a crime was actually in progress, he just wanted to play hide and seek with someone he knew was potentially dangerous. For the person being followed, what he was doing (following them around in the dark in a truck, and eventually jumping out to find them on foot) would be like a horror movie scene, guaranteed to make them think they're in real danger. Any sensible person would know what they're starting and how it may end.

 

For the most part, I believe Zimmerman's story, insofar as he got out of his truck and Martin eventually confronted him about being followed. (At 17, I might have done the same dumb thing.) Who took the first swing or who confronted who, we'll never really know, but if you choose to put yourself out in a situation where you may be in a fight for your life without any witnesses or evidence of what happened, even if you're the good guy and kill your attacker in self-defense, you have to be mature enough to accept what goes with that: you're probably going to be arrested and tried, and you might end up in prison because the jury just plain doesn't believe you. There was a fight, there's a dead body, you killed the guy, and those are the only facts that aren't open to speculation or misinterpretation. You're not in your home where it would be obvious that someone broke in or something like that, you're just two knuckleheads in the dark and one of you killed the other.

 

Taking that part of his story at face value, Zimmerman and Martin both handled it in nearly the worst way possible. Nothing about what happened there was admirable, and multiple lives are ruined because of it. Somebody is dead. Zimmerman really had no business hassling people, and Martin had a phone. He could have just called the police himself and told them there's some crazy guy in a truck stalking him, which, though he couldn't know this, might have shut the whole thing down since they were on the phone with Zimmerman at the time.

[OTR]

when Zimmerman was told to stay in his car

 

Even if he hadn't been ordered to stay in his truck

 

Order: "Stay in your vehicle" <-- never uttered

 

Suggestion: "We don't need you to do that right now." <-- actual words of the 911 operator

 

While I think it matters very little in terms of the legalities of this case, Zimmerman was not told or ordered to do anything. Trayvon supporters have done a great job at proliferating this falsehood.

[BuckedTooth]

He decided to basically, pursue Martin. Some will say he was just walking and watching but I believe if properly presented, this could have changed the case outcome. Now, in Zimmermans mind, was his getting out of the car an act of premeditation by his hoping for confrontation ?

 

 

The outcome is the outcome. That's what trials are about. The rule of law. Perhaps everything was presented, perhaps not. The media also tweaked this BIG TIME. I believe we are on the verge of social networks and media trying cases rather than the courts. After all, if you don't like the court outcome..... RIOT !

If properly presented??

Too bad you weren't the lawyer to present it.

 

Facts were presented and then disputed.

He never had a chance to be convicted.

 

More importantly, who cares?

Two hood rats fight and one gets shot, it isn't news.

[The Wanker]

 

 

Order: "Stay in your vehicle" <-- never uttered

 

Suggestion: "We don't need you to do that right now." <-- actual words of the 911 operator

 

While I think it matters very little in terms of the legalities of this case, Zimmerman was not told or ordered to do anything. Trayvon supporters have done a great job at proliferating this falsehood.

 

There is a pretty clear distinction between those two statements. I think if he had been ordered to not get out of the car, the prosecution would have hammered that point over and over.

 

I don't get all the outrage. I get it that TM was only 17. I also get it that he smoked weed twice a week according to Rachel. Legally, that makes alone him a criminal. It's not like he's some innocent little 8 year old choirboy.

 

It's entirely possible that GZ simply followed him and said nothing. It's possible that TM got freaked out (just like Rachel said) and HE turned around and got confrontational first. It's possible that HE swung first, and, given that we know he ended up on top of GZ, more than likely that he DID swing first.

 

It's still not a crime to exit your vehicle, in your own neighborhood that's been recently beset by burglaries, and follow someone on foot for a few blocks. Doing that could send a message to strangers and potential criminals that "you're being watched closely."

 

What we do know: TM was on top of GZ. He bashed GZ's head into the sidewalk at least a few times. He also bloodied GZ's nose. He also had NO wounds from a fistfight on him anywhere. Whether he was starting to get up off GZ when he got shot is immaterial. Anyone in GZ's place would be thinking one thing only: "I gotta get this guy off me.....NOW!"

 

Any of these people who are all outraged would have done the exact same thing in the exact same circumstance.....do what you have to do to get the guy off you so your head doesn't get slammed into the concrete even one more time.

 

It really doesn't even matter who started the fight or who swung first. All that matters is that the head of the guy on the bottom had taken a few swings at the sidewalk and taken at least one shot to the face. GZ had about 1.5 seconds to figure out what to do. He may have even been reaching for his gun on his way to the ground after being hit or shoved down.

 

Who, in TM's position on TOP of GZ, would have started yelling for help? No one would do that. If you're winning a fight, you don't NEED help.

 

Who, after shooting and killing someone without provocation or justifiable reason (saving one's own life), would tell the cops to please find some video while being interrogated? Not a guilty person.

 

All this outrage is severely misplaced. I'd be willing to bet that most of the people out marching in protest aren't aware of the facts of the case as it was presented to the jury.

 

I, too, am disgusted by this whole ordeal. I'm outraged at all the outrage about the only verdict possible.

 

If TM had been a 38 year old junkie of ANY race, GZ would never have seen the inside of a courtroom.

[Bingoloid]

Order: "Stay in your vehicle" <-- never uttered

 

Suggestion: "We don't need you to do that right now." <-- actual words of the 911 operator

 

While I think it matters very little in terms of the legalities of this case, Zimmerman was not told or ordered to do anything. Trayvon supporters have done a great job at proliferating this falsehood.

 

You're absolutely right, I was careless about how I phrased that, but my point was that it just doesn't matter whether it happened or not. This was two people with incredibly bad judgment meeting in the dark, and I'd like to think most of us on here are smarter than that.

[Bingoloid]

It really doesn't even matter who started the fight or who swung first. All that matters is that the head of the guy on the bottom had taken a few swings at the sidewalk and taken at least one shot to the face.

 

Depending on the exact nature of the state statute, escalation can be a tricky thing. It can matter, because at a certain point, you're provoking it and can end up screwing yourself over, even if you're really protecting yourself, because you caused the attack that you were protecting yourself from.

 

Say during an argument, maybe a mild shoving match, he went for the gun and Martin believed he was about to be murdered by some guy who had been following him in the dark. Suddenly, Martin is the one who's got a good reason to do everything he can to subdue Zimmerman, up to lethal force.

 

I don't know that that happened or even think it did, but a lot of people seem to think it went down more that way than in a way favorable to Zimmerman. Personally, I think we just can't know, and it doesn't matter. Both of them were doing something profoundly ill-considered and, surprise, as a result, something terrible happened to both of them. A lot worse for one of them than the other. Beyond their lives serving as a warning to others, personally, I'm inclined to say this is almost as much a matter of genuine national interest as the Casey Anthony trial, that is to say, not at all.

[The Wanker]

 

Depending on the exact nature of the state statute, escalation can be a tricky thing. It can matter, because at a certain point, you're provoking it and can end up screwing yourself over, even if you're really protecting yourself, because you caused the attack that you were protecting yourself from.

 

Say during an argument, maybe a mild shoving match, he went for the gun and Martin believed he was about to be murdered by some guy who had been following him in the dark. Suddenly, Martin is the one who's got a good reason to do everything he can to subdue Zimmerman, up to lethal force.

 

I don't know that that happened or even think it did, but a lot of people seem to think it went down more that way than in a way favorable to Zimmerman. Personally, I think we just can't know, and it doesn't matter. Both of them were doing something profoundly ill-considered and, surprise, as a result, something terrible happened to both of them. A lot worse for one of them than the other. Beyond their lives serving as a warning to others, personally, I'm inclined to say this is almost as much a matter of genuine national interest as the Casey Anthony trial, that is to say, not at all.

 

Point taken about the "who started it" and that it may matter in the eyes of the law. In this case, to me it doesn't matter only because there's only two people who know, and one of them isn't talking.

 

Theoretically it could happen as you said. It could have happened a few dozen different ways. My problem with your scenario is that if both parties are still standing (wild or not-so-wild shoving match) and one guy pulls a gun, the other guy is going to do one of two things.....and ONLY one of two things:

 

1. Go for control of the gun. TM's hands would have grabbed frantically at GZ's gun hand. GZ's hand would have sustained scratches and they would have found significant amounts of DNA under TM's fingernails. It's rather unlikely that, in such a struggle, TM would have landed squarely on top of GZ, let go of the gun hand, grabbed his head, slammed it a few times and punched GZ in the nose at least once. TM risked getting shot multiple times by letting go of GZ's gun.

 

2. Run. Stop and just........RUN!!! This would be the more instinctive behavior, based on innate fight or flight impulses. And probably the action 99 out of 100 people would choose. Even logic would dictate that we can't outrun a bullet, but when the human mind is fighting, the Logic Center/cortex shuts down and survival instincts rule our behavior. Only trained fighters/soldiers can exert control over instinct, especially when there is an immediate threat of death staring one in the face.

 

We know there wasn't any sort of wrestling match on the ground in which GZ first got the upper hand and lost control of the scuffle to TM. TM had grass stains on his knees, Zim did not. Zim had grass particles on the back of his shirt/jacket, TM did not.

 

The most likely scenario is the longer-armed TM took a swing at GZ, got lucky and connected right on the nose. GZ went down, straight back, landed on his ass, and TM jumped on him and started slamming his dome on the sidewalk. He most likely did not know or even suspect that GZ was packing.

 

At that very moment, GZ was well within his rights to pull his firearm and end the threat by shooting at close range. TM's shirt being 2 to 4 inches away from his chest was very strong evidence that he was leaning over GZ and his shirt was drooping away from him. This was clearly a case of justifiable homicide/self-defense, even without Florida's Stand Your Ground law.

 

How many times do you think you'd need to feel your head bashed into the sidewalk by a kid who's taller than you before you just grab whatever's on you and wield it to get the kid off? Even if you had a ball point pen in your pocket, you'd grab it and start stabbing. I would imagine getting your head battered like that could even render you a bit woozy: hence the alleged holes in GZ's story. It might be a bit difficult to remember word for word and blow for blow when you're close to being concussed.

 

Black America is stone-cold lock, ironclad WRONG on this one. They don't seem to care. Facts be damned.

[Bingoloid]

 

Black America is stone-cold lock, ironclad WRONG on this one. They don't seem to care. Facts be damned.

 

Well, in fairness, my black friends have a rather different point of view about this than the one making the news, but I guess that's why they're my friends.

 

Those are all valid points that you're making, but I think it goes to emphasize just how much speculation and assumption is required to arrive at any conclusion at all. Like you said, dozens of things could have happened.

 

We're never going to know, and the burden of proof in a self-defense claim moves around a little bit from state to state. Personally, I feel like this is what juries are really for and I should trust them to interpret their own laws. Somebody is dead, we can't know what happened, but the dead guy deserved to have the circumstances of his death heard in court. I think it was just a terrible, unfortunate situation where some guy who wished he was a cop ran into a teenager who thought confrontation is always the answer, when neither one of them really should have gotten involved the way they did, and once it happened, there was no solution that would not have pissed off a whole lot of people.