Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 07:37:57 pm
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
News: Brian Fein is now blogging weekly!  Make sure to check the homepage for his latest editorial.
+  The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums
|-+  TDMMC Forums
| |-+  Off-Topic Board
| | |-+  Trayvon Martin case
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 46 Print
Poll
Question: Do you think Zimmerman is
Guilty   -5 (25%)
Not Guilty   -2 (10%)
Self Defense   -1 (5%)
You don't know enough to decide   -12 (60%)
Total Voters: 17

Author Topic: Trayvon Martin case  (Read 148900 times)
Spider-Dan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15573


Bay Area Niner-Hater


« Reply #285 on: April 14, 2012, 02:51:05 pm »

If Zimmerman pursued Martin against the dispatchers orders, then he is guilty or a crime, but not of second degree murder. 
Put rather simply, if Zimmerman was the aggressor (which could be something as simple as attempting to physically detain Martin until the cops got there), he's probably guilty of murder.  As has been said, you can't start a fight and then claim self-defense when you're losing it.
Logged

Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15558



« Reply #286 on: April 14, 2012, 03:31:04 pm »

Remember, there are documented cases where there was a pursuit and the judge still granted the Stand Your Ground immunity. I think luck of the draw will determine which way this goes as much as anything.
Logged
EKnight
GameDay Trolls
Uber Member
*
Posts: 2955



« Reply #287 on: April 14, 2012, 03:45:30 pm »

What am I missing about this? Gun-toting idiot disregards specific instructions to stop pursuing the kid, not once but twice. If he would have kept his self-righteous meddling butt at home Martin would be alive. It really, truly is that simple. That's undeniable. How is he NOT legally responsible? -EK
Logged
Spider-Dan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15573


Bay Area Niner-Hater


« Reply #288 on: April 14, 2012, 05:06:49 pm »

Remember, there are documented cases where there was a pursuit and the judge still granted the Stand Your Ground immunity. I think luck of the draw will determine which way this goes as much as anything.
I'm not talking about whether or not Zimmerman was chasing Martin; I think Zimmerman would have a hard time convincing any jury that Martin ambushed him "on the way back to his vehicle," based on the location of his vehicle, the spot of the shooting, and Martin's most direct path home.  The shooting took place exactly where you would expect it to if someone with knowledge of the area was attempting to cut off someone that ran away from him.

I'm specifically talking about whether or not Zimmerman attempted to detain Martin by force.  (It goes without saying that if Zimmerman actually initiated a brawl, self-defense/SYG wouldn't apply, but I don't think that's likely.)  Other than the alleged assault on Zimmerman, Martin had committed no crime that night... and Zimmerman claims that the assault directly led to the shooting.  So we can effectively say that Zimmerman would have had no legal reason to attempt to detain Martin.

As I understand it, if someone attempts to physically detain you without having witnessed you actually committing a crime, that attempt would be classified as assault (by them, on you).  In the case of pursuit that you cited earlier, when Charles Podany pursued a speeder to get a license plate number and a passenger in the speeder's vehicle, Casey Landes, confronted him, it was determined that Landes started the fight.  It is also significant that it was a passenger and not the driver, which eliminates the credibility of a claim that Podany might have been trying to detain or otherwise apprehend him (as is the case here).

Furthermore, in this particular case, if it is determined that Zimmerman was pursuing Martin, the question must be asked: what were Zimmerman's intentions if he caught up to him?  It's hard to believe that Zimmerman was pursuing Martin on foot (after being specifically directed otherwise) with any intentions OTHER than detaining him for the police.  If the prosecution can convince the jury of that, then essentially they will be arguing that Zimmerman pursued Martin with the intent to commit assault.  That sounds like murder to me.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2012, 05:12:54 pm by Spider-Dan » Logged

Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15558



« Reply #289 on: April 14, 2012, 05:47:05 pm »

^^^ I understand. Landshark was specifically talking about pursuit.

And it would be very easy to explain why he would pursue him without trying to detain him. He was neighborhood watch and called the police afterall. A very simple explanation was that he wanted to see where Martin was going so he could direct the police there upon arrival.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2012, 05:50:10 pm by Phishfan » Logged
badger6
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 1218



« Reply #290 on: April 14, 2012, 09:32:40 pm »

^^^ I understand. Landshark was specifically talking about pursuit.

And it would be very easy to explain why he would pursue him without trying to detain him. He was neighborhood watch and called the police afterall. A very simple explanation was that he wanted to see where Martin was going so he could direct the police there upon arrival.

Yea, that's the first thing I do when I commit a racial hate murder. Call the cops before I do it. Makes plenty of sense to me.
Logged
Spider-Dan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15573


Bay Area Niner-Hater


« Reply #291 on: April 15, 2012, 02:22:50 am »

badger6, I agree; no one would call the cops right before they committed a "racial hate murder," because if the cops saw you standing with a smoking gun over your unarmed minor victim, they would most certainly arrest you on the spot... right?

Phishfan, I think that could be a plausible explanation for the first pursuit, but after he was explicitly told not to follow Martin and he apparently continued anyway, it becomes far less plausible... particularly given the distance Zimmerman traveled from his car and his (presumed) angle of pursuit, which was an "intercept" path, not a "follow" path.

As you implied earlier, I think this case will rest on several key determinations:

1) Did Zimmerman continue to pursue Martin after being explicitly instructed otherwise?
2) Did Zimmerman attempt to intercept and detain Martin?
3) Was Martin the person screaming for help on the 911 call?

If the answer to all three of these questions is "yes", I don't see how Zimmerman could avoid being convicted.
Logged

badger6
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 1218



« Reply #292 on: April 15, 2012, 12:43:48 pm »

badger6, I agree; no one would call the cops right before they committed a "racial hate murder," because if the cops saw you standing with a smoking gun over your unarmed minor victim, they would most certainly arrest you on the spot... right?

Absolutely correct. Unless of course you are defending yourself, then all bets are off.....
Logged
bsmooth
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 4633


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


« Reply #293 on: April 16, 2012, 04:37:22 am »

Absolutely correct. Unless of course you are defending yourself, then all bets are off.....

Except you cannot provoke a confrontation and then claim self defense because you feel you are losing. Remember that if he felt threatened, Martin had as much to defend himself as Zimmerman does.
If the witness on the phone is correct that Martin felt nervous are scared that a strange man was pursuing him to the house and finally caught him, then it is not unreasonable that he felt he had no choice but to fight, as Zimmerman removed his flight ability.
When both parties have the right to self defense, whom ever brought the situation to a confrontation by their actions loses that legal defense.
Logged
CF DolFan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 16870


cf_dolfan
« Reply #294 on: April 16, 2012, 07:37:53 am »

I'm not 100% postitive but I don't think that is correct bsmooth. I think it's easier to use deadly force as in shooting someone when "scared" than to commit battery on a person you "feel" threatened by. And yes I do see how ludicrous that is.
Logged

Getting offended by something you see on the internet is like choosing to step in dog shite instead of walking around it.
badger6
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 1218



« Reply #295 on: April 16, 2012, 03:24:54 pm »

Except you cannot provoke a confrontation and then claim self defense because you feel you are losing. Remember that if he felt threatened, Martin had as much to defend himself as Zimmerman does.
If the witness on the phone is correct that Martin felt nervous are scared that a strange man was pursuing him to the house and finally caught him, then it is not unreasonable that he felt he had no choice but to fight, as Zimmerman removed his flight ability.
When both parties have the right to self defense, whom ever brought the situation to a confrontation by their actions loses that legal defense.

I disagree. We were having a conversation at work about this type of thing about 6 months ago. Without going it to how the subject came up. I was making the point that if I was at a public park and was staring at someone that there is nothing anyone could do about it. A couple of the louder wanna be alpha males (think Floyd Mayweather Jr) that talk too much, said that if someone was staring at them that they would physically confront the person. You can't just commit battery or assault someone because you don't like what they are doing. And as far as I can tell following someone in public would be in the same category as staring at someone in public. If Zimmerman did something physically to Martin first then lock his ass up, but if it is the other way around then I see this as justified. There is a difference in observation and impeding someone's ability to move or function.
Logged
Spider-Dan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15573


Bay Area Niner-Hater


« Reply #296 on: April 16, 2012, 06:27:53 pm »

Simply following someone is no more of a crime than "suspiciously" wearing a hoodie.  This case will turn on who initiated the actual confrontation/fight.
Logged

bsmooth
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 4633


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


« Reply #297 on: April 17, 2012, 02:30:19 am »

I disagree. We were having a conversation at work about this type of thing about 6 months ago. Without going it to how the subject came up. I was making the point that if I was at a public park and was staring at someone that there is nothing anyone could do about it. A couple of the louder wanna be alpha males (think Floyd Mayweather Jr) that talk too much, said that if someone was staring at them that they would physically confront the person. You can't just commit battery or assault someone because you don't like what they are doing. And as far as I can tell following someone in public would be in the same category as staring at someone in public. If Zimmerman did something physically to Martin first then lock his ass up, but if it is the other way around then I see this as justified. There is a difference in observation and impeding someone's ability to move or function.

It was night, and not in a public park. Some strange man was following him as he tried to elude him, and within 70yds of home, he caught up to him. This is behavior that a reasonable person could agree could put someone into the flight or fight mode. Martin had as much right to defend himself if he felt threatened as Zimmerman did...as do all of us. So now you must look at the situation and see who was the initial aggressor.
This is also previous history, to include criminal to see if there is a pattern of aggression or confrontation could come into play as basically it is still a he said case.
Logged
bsmooth
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 4633


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


« Reply #298 on: April 17, 2012, 03:36:51 am »

I'm not 100% postitive but I don't think that is correct bsmooth. I think it's easier to use deadly force as in shooting someone when "scared" than to commit battery on a person you "feel" threatened by. And yes I do see how ludicrous that is.

Lol, I am glad you said it and not me.
Logged
CF DolFan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 16870


cf_dolfan
« Reply #299 on: April 17, 2012, 09:16:03 am »

It was night, and not in a public park. Some strange man was following him as he tried to elude him, and within 70yds of home, he caught up to him. This is behavior that a reasonable person could agree could put someone into the flight or fight mode. Martin had as much right to defend himself if he felt threatened as Zimmerman did...as do all of us. So now you must look at the situation and see who was the initial aggressor.
This is also previous history, to include criminal to see if there is a pattern of aggression or confrontation could come into play as basically it is still a he said case.
You do realize this is mostly speculation don't you? Even his previous history was dropped so in a courtroom it doesn't even exist.

The facts we do know based on the actual police reports and 911 tapes.

Zimmerman called police and reported a black teenage male acting suspicious.
Zimmerman tried to follow but was informed he didn't need to do that.
Zimmerman appeared to have stopped pursuing as the wind stopped in the phone.
Zimmerman continued dialogue with operator for another minute and a half.
Two police officer arrive at scene a couple of minutes later.
One officer secures Zimmerman in handcuffs after Zimmerman admits to shooting him and places him in car.
Zimmerman's gun is secured by police.
The other officer works to try and revive Martin until furthur help arrives.
The area was secured with police ribbon and major crimes spent 6 hours processing the scene and wtinesses.
Zimmerman is reportedly saying several times that he kept calling for help but no one came (In the police report)
Martin was unarmed.
Zimmeran had a wet dirty back and had injuries to his face and back of his head
Zimmerman was taken into cusody and questioned by major crimes at the police station

There were at least 6 witnesses who were interviewed that night at the scene.

Specualtion begins here as no one has seen the witness reports so the speculation can go in many directions. My sources say that one witness saw Martin beating Zimmerman and as well heard and saw Zimmerman screaming for help. If this is true this was recorded in the report way before the 911 recording came out. I don't know how any profesiional after the fact can overule an eye witness with no affiliation to the supsect.

Zimmerman could have tackled Martin and threatened him with a gun but if no one can prove it the evidence seemingly points to innocence in my opinion.  If I had to guess I'd say he will walk but stranger things have happened.


« Last Edit: April 17, 2012, 09:19:52 am by CF DolFan » Logged

Getting offended by something you see on the internet is like choosing to step in dog shite instead of walking around it.
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21 22 ... 46 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

The Dolphins Make Me Cry - Copyright© 2008 - Designed and Marketed by Dave Gray


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines