State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman

Status
Not open for further replies.
Motorhead, I am surprised they didn't claim he was also armed with two vicious fists as well... And fists have been shown many times to be able to be lethal weapons...

Brent
 
Disparity of force isn't really going to be easy to prove is it ?
Click to expand...
I disagree here, too, Hogdogs. It is self evident that a disparity of force existed at the time of the gunshot because the eyewitness to the attack, John Good, observed Martin assaulting Zimmerman with what he described as an MMA style "ground and pound technique". Martin was pinned and unable to retreat.

Zimmerman was being subjected to an unrelenting attack wherein he was unable to defend himself without the use of lethal force. This is definitively a disparity of force.
 
And to be clear, I feel that no matter how it went down, there was one point where Zimmerman no longer had a chance to retreat if he wanted to and was in fear of death or GBH... I just wasn't so quick to see it as Zimmerman having done things right from the git go...

We already know words were exchanged before the first blow... We only have Zimmermans testimony, as credible as it is, that he didn't begin with catching up with Martin...

And he states he went for his phone to call the police back once he found Martin.... This says the fight did not start immediately and he still wouldn't be able to give the cops a good address to get to him since he was still in the "back of the homes" where house numbers were not present...

I hope this case does shed some knowledge on those who feel compelled to stop and question citizens just walking down the street... Cops are limited here and citizens are even less authorized to engage others who may wish not entertain such contact...

Brent
 
There is plenty of proof he planned to follow or he wouldn't have left his vehicle... There is further evidence he planned to stop and confront him since he didn't continue following from the vehicle and left on foot...
Click to expand...
Nope. You really should watch the police video reenactment from the following day. He agreed not to follow Martin, believed that he was gone, and was looking for an address to give the dispatcher. There were no visible street signes at that location. But even if he WAS hoping to observe Martin's direction of travel while looking for an address, that would be reasonable, legal, and would have no bearing on culpability in the shooting.
I think Zimmerman once stated he planned to ask where he was going or some such...
Click to expand...
Nope, again. He never said any such thing.

While there is no law that says you cannot have a chat with someone in public, there are equally no laws compelling the otherone to entertain this interaction...

Me I would just tell the guy to bug off and if they chose to make it a confrontation, they had that option...
Click to expand...
True. Martin was as free to ignore Zimmerman as Zimmerman would have been to question Martin. But again, no contact was ever attempted by GZ, and no evidence of it yet exists.
 
One might consider and we cannot know that Zimmerman flashed the gun at Martin. If he did, Martin had self-defense on his side. A strange man following you and flashing a gun is a threat.

I wouldn't say that it was out of the question that he postured that way.
 
Zimmerman was being subjected to an unrelenting attack wherein he was unable to defend himself without the use of lethal force. This is definitively a disparity of force.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and it does not matter the age of either subject involved.

Martin, being a minor, automatically has a certain level of fear of adults, does he not?
Click to expand...

Not in my experience. Kids used to have a level of respect for their elders, sadly, that seems to be less and less the case. Usually they are more apt to react violently against adults, since they feel they are somehow "protected" by the laws of which you speak.
 
And to be clear, I feel that no matter how it went down, there was one point where Zimmerman no longer had a chance to retreat if he wanted to and was in fear of death or GBH... I just wasn't so quick to see it as Zimmerman having done things right from the git go...
Click to expand...
I agree completely.

I know this isn't a thread about tactics, so I'll limit my opinion to the following: There were at least two tactical errors from Zimmerman that could have avoided the outcome. 1, Having a gun and no pepper spray, and 2, Fumbling for his phone instead of maintaining focus on Martin once Martin announced his presence "yo, you got a problem?". Zimmerman never noticed Martin closing distance to punch him until it was too late. A shot of OC at that point might have bought him at least a few seconds to escape.

Back to the subject at hand. Neither of those errors have bearing on whether Zimmerman feared for life or limb at the time of the shot.
 
Last edited:
hogdogs said:
First of all, just because you own a home in a HOA controlled subdivision doesn't give you a right to "stop and confront" folks that are on the "Common Ground" or "Public right of Way" areas...
Click to expand...

If this were true there could be no gated communities, so since there are many, I disagree with this assumption.
 
Martin likely stopped the phone call when he knew he would be confronted or when he hid, whichever way it went...

Maestro, I am not arguing that Zimmerman didn't at some point have the right to self defense with lethal force...

Just that I was not immediately looking at this as a "good shoot" as so many did...

As for minors fearing adults, I mean fear of crime being committed against them...
Abduction, robbery etc...

Brent
 
Interesting autopsy report. So the bullet never exited Trayon Martin's body!

This is a media circus, of course the media generated hysteria it is all about profits, and it shows just how badly things can turn out after a shooting.

I hope the jurors are not watching the television because the talking heads are taking the position the defendant has to prove himself innocent, and I thought it was the burden of the state to prove the defendant guilty.
 
So just because it is "gated" you don't see the "public" nature of the common areas ans public rights of way???

Sorry but I have knowledge to the this...

While the general public is limited access, it doesn't mean the residents have different allowances afforded...

If some goon hops a fence and is prowling around they can sure call the cops... If they wish to get in their car or go for a stroll while communicating with the cops they sure can...

And if they want to ask the person to stop and chat, well... that is where things may not go well...

But in this case, Zimmerman had no reason to suspect this person of hopping the wall... He just didn't know that Martin was a resident and did, in fact, "belong" and was doing nothing wrong...

A person walking down the street with earbuds talking on the phone might look like "he is high or something" to some but I see that as a statement made by a guy trying to speed up police response...

Brent
 
I hope the jurors are not watching the television because the talking heads are taking the position the defendant has to prove himself innocent, and I thought it was the burden of the state to prove the defendant guilty.
Click to expand...
The jurors are sequestered, and prohibited from using any electronic devices such as TV, social media, radio, tweets, emails, or discussing the case amongst themselves or with anyone else. And they were picked specifically for their presumably unbiased and unaffected view of this case.
 
the talking heads are taking the position the defendant has to prove himself innocent,
Click to expand...

Self defense is usually an "affirmative defense" meaning that the burden of proof does shift dramatically toward the defendant having to, in essence, prove he was not "innocent" but, justified.

The presumption of "innocence" is gone when you claim self defense, you have admitted you committed the homicide. The question is: Were you justified in doing so. ( if I understand correctly )
 
Last edited:
hogdogs said:
So just because it is "gated" you don't see the "public" nature of the common areas ans public rights of way???
Click to expand...


Certainly Martin had the right to tell Zimmerman to buzz off. He did not however have the right to physically attack Zimmerman and zero evidence has been produced to suggest Zimmerman was the attacker.

Yes, I know that Martin isn't here to tell his side but that's no reason to discount Zimmerman's account.

If challenged by Zimmerman, I would have said "my name is and I'm staying at, thanks for keeping a watch out for us" as most reasonable people would have. Not attack Zimmerman, even if I was insulted by his suspicions.

I believe the unreasonable behavior was on the part of Martin and I believe Zimmerman truly feared for his life.

Hey, it's hard to ask for someone's ID to make sure they're 18, not 17, while they're beating your brains out.
 
Quote-Glenn E. Meyer - One might consider and we cannot know that Zimmerman flashed the gun at Martin. If he did, Martin had self-defense on his side. A strange man following you and flashing a gun is a threat.
Click to expand...

“we cannot know” if space aliens made him do it but this is a court case not imaginary make up time.
 
Hey, it's hard to ask for someone's ID to make sure they're 18, not 17, while they're beating your brains out.
Click to expand...
His ID had no reason to be asked for? Was he buying ciggs? It ain't just any Joe Citizen that is going to see my ID... Zimmerman would never have a reason to expect anyone to present their ID to him...

He was a SELF APPOINTED neighborhood watch "captain" and so far we have no reason to think any other neighbors even participated...

Since Joe Citizen has no idea of the person's age is even more reason to leave the interviews to the cops...

If challenged by Zimmerman, I would have said "my name is and I'm staying at, thanks for keeping a watch out for us" as most reasonable people would have. Not attack Zimmerman, even if I was insulted by his suspicions.
Click to expand...
And that is your choice... I personally choose to consider nosy people to be offensive from the beginning...

Brent
 
But in this case, Zimmerman had no reason to suspect this person of hopping the wall... He just didn't know that Martin was a resident and did, in fact, "belong" and was doing nothing wrong...

A person walking down the street with earbuds talking on the phone might look like "he is high or something" to some but I see that as a statement made by a guy trying to speed up police response...
Click to expand...

Martin was not just walking down the sidewalk, but going off the sidewalk into front yards and the like. It looked suspicious to Zimmerman, and his description of the behavior was enough for the police to send a squad car to check it out. I expect Martin was not up to "no good", but given the weather conditions it is somewhat suspicious if someone is not walking down the sidewalk trying to get somewhere but is wondering about.
 
hogdogs said:
His ID had no reason to be asked for? Was he buying ciggs? It ain't just any Joe Citizen that is going to see my ID... Zimmerman would never have a reason to expect anyone to present their ID to him...
Click to expand...

You didn't take that literally did you?

I was pointing out the absurdity in assuming that Martin was a minor.
I can't tell the difference between a 17 and an 18 year old?

I know you're saying that Martin was a minor and Martin knew that he was a minor so his behavior can be somewhat justified by the fact that he was a minor being confronted by an adult, but, how would Zimmerman know that?

I can't tell the difference between a 17 and an 18 year old, can you?

So the whole minor thing is a moot point to me.


hogdogs said:
And that is your choice... I personally choose to consider nosy people to be offensive from the beginning...
Click to expand...

And so offense is justification for physical attack? If not then your point makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top