Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Straw Man on April 13, 2012, 10:41:48 AM
-
Anyone familiar with this case
http://www.salon.com/2012/04/11/when_stand_your_ground_fails/
Trayvon Martin's tragic murder has brought much-needed scrutiny to "Stand Your Ground" laws. If you read or hear about a local "Stand Your Ground" case that isn't getting much national press, blog about it on Open Salon.
As the shooting death of Trayvon Martin and the failure of authorities to arrest his killer, George Zimmerman, continues to grab headlines, many conservatives and gun rights advocates insist that race has nothing to do with it. Some have also rallied to the defense of Florida’s “stand your ground” law, the self-defense legislation under which Zimmerman was able to avoid arrest. Yet not all stand your ground claims are so successful. Not too far from Sanford, Fla., a black man named John McNeil is serving a life sentence for shooting Brian Epp, a white man who trespassed and attacked him at his home in Georgia, another stand your ground state.
It all began in early 2005, when McNeil and his wife, Anita, hired Brian Epp’s construction company to build a new house in Cobb County, Ga. The McNeils testified that Epp was difficult to work with, which led to heated confrontations. They eventually decided to close on the house early to rid their lives of Epp, whom they found increasingly threatening. At the closing, both parties agreed that Epp would have 10 days to complete the work, after which he would stay away from the property, but he failed to keep up his end of the bargain.
On Dec. 6, 2005, John McNeil’s 15-year-old son, La’Ron, notified his dad over the phone that a man he didn’t recognize was lurking in the backyard. When La’Ron told the man to leave, an argument broke out. McNeil was still on the phone and immediately recognized Epp’s voice. According to La’Ron’s testimony, Epp pointed a folding utility knife at La’Ron’s face and said, “[w]hy don’t you make me leave?” at which point McNeil told his son to go inside and wait while he called 911 and headed home.
According to McNeil’s testimony, when he pulled up to his house, Epp was next door grabbing something from his truck and stuffing it in his pocket. McNeil quickly grabbed his gun from the glove compartment in plain view of Epp who was coming at him “fast.” McNeil jumped out of the car and fired a warning shot at the ground insisting that Epp back off. Instead of retreating, Epp charged at McNeil while reaching for his pocket, so McNeil fired again, this time fatally striking Epp in the head. (Epp was found to have a folding knife in his pocket, although it was shut.)
The McNeils weren’t the only ones who felt threatened by Epp. David Samson and Libby Jones, a white couple who hired Epp to build their home in 2004, testified that they carried a gun as a “precaution” around Epp because of his threatening behavior. According to Jones, Epp nearly hit her when she expressed dissatisfaction with his work at a weekly meeting. The couple even had a lawyer write a letter warning Epp to stay away from their property. Samson testified that after they fired him, Epp would park his car across the street and watch their house, saying “it got to the point where my wife and I were in total fear of this man.”
After a neighbor across the street who witnessed the encounter corroborated McNeil’s account, police determined that it was a case of self-defense and did not charge him in the death. Nevertheless, almost a year later Cobb County District Attorney Patrick Head decided to prosecute McNeil for murder. In 2006, he was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.
McNeil’s attorney Mark Yurachek told Salon that “DAs throughout the country enjoy that kind of flexibility of deciding who to prosecute, but it’s curious that he took a year to do it.” While he said there’s no way to know what swayed the DA to prosecute, Yurachek revealed that letters, which he obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, were written to the DA’s office demanding that McNeil be charged. “They were mostly emails from people cajoling prosecutors to investigate,” says Yurachek. “One was from Epp’s widow. Others were written anonymously.”
In 2008, McNeil appealed his case to the Georgia Supreme Court with all but one of the seven justices upholding his conviction. The sole dissent came from Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears who argued, “the State failed to disprove John McNeil’s claim of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.” She went on to write:
Even viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence was overwhelming in showing that a reasonable person in McNeil’s shoes would have believed that he was subject to an imminent physical attack by an aggressor possessing a knife and that it was necessary to use deadly force to protect himself from serious bodily injury or a forcible felony. Under the facts of this case, it would be unreasonable to require McNeil to wait until Epp succeeded in attacking him, thereby potentially disarming him, getting control of the gun, or stabbing him before he could legally employ deadly force to defend himself. This is not what Georgia law requires.
As a leading gun rights state, Georgia has both a stand your ground law that permits citizens to use deadly force “only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury,” as well as a Castle Doctrine law, which justifies the use of deadly force in defense of one’s home.
Thus far, gun rights advocates such as the NRA and former Cobb County congressional Rep. Newt Gingrich have been silent on McNeil’s conviction, though it’s unclear whether they are aware of the case. The NRA did not immediately return a call seeking comment. Still, Rev. William Barber, president of the North Carolina NAACP State Conference, argues, “The NRA would be screaming about the injustice of his conviction if John had been white and shot a black assailant that came at him on his property armed with a knife.” (McNeil grew up in North Carolina, where the local NAACP chapter, led by Barber, was the first to pick up on his case in Georgia.)
Barber was clear that the NAACP remains firmly against stand your ground laws because “they give cover to those who may engage in racial profiling and racialized violence,” adding that “There is a history and legacy of discriminatory application of the law” that continues to this day. “African-Americans are caught in curious position. On one hand, we fight against stand your ground laws, but once the laws are on the books they aren’t applied to us.”
Civil rights activist Markel Hutchins agrees and has filed a federal lawsuit challenging Georgia’s stand your ground law because the law is not applied equally to African-Americans. He accuses the courts of accepting “the race of a victim as evidence to establish the reasonableness of an individual’s fear in cases of justifiable homicide.”
Meanwhile, Barber argues that McNeil’s treatment stands in stark contrast to that of George Zimmerman, who has been afforded the benefit of the doubt despite his victim being unarmed. “America’s always had a difficult issue dealing with race, so rather than face it when it’s exposed, the tendency by some is to try and dismiss it. But the reality is you do not see this kind of miscarriage of justice when it comes to whites.” He adds, “John’s whole life has been taken away from him. His wife is very ill with cancer and she has lost a husband, his sons have lost a father and society has lost a man that was contributing to his community.”
-
morally, you kinda do have that obligation to avoid a gun battle.
Do I like the law? it sure helps my ass shoudl I ever fear for my life and cap someone.
But you gotta watch for the OTHER guy now.
33, if you and another dude in FL had words in a club about his obama t-shirt, you could raise your hand to flip him the bird and "oh, that big bald muscle guy raised his hand to strike me - I have a weak heart and knew it would have possibly ended my life. So I shot him 5 times in the torso until I felt the threat was gone"..
And his ass would WALK.
-
morally, you kinda do have that obligation to avoid a gun battle.
Do I like the law? it sure helps my ass shoudl I ever fear for my life and cap someone.
But you gotta watch for the OTHER guy now.
33, if you and another dude in FL had words in a club about his obama t-shirt, you could raise your hand to flip him the bird and "oh, that big bald muscle guy raised his hand to strike me - I have a weak heart and knew it would have possibly ended my life. So I shot him 5 times in the torso until I felt the threat was gone"..
And his ass would WALK.
what did you think about the story of the guy in Georgia
dude shot a man who was on his property and threatening him with a weapon and continued to advance after getting a warning shot
There was a witness who saw the entire thing and the guy that got shot had a history of stalking people
and this shooter is in jail for life
Hopefully Fox News and the rest of the MSM will pick up on this story and run with it
-
what did you think about the story of the guy in Georgia
dude shot a man who was on his property and threatening him with a weapon and continued to advance after getting a warning shot
There was a witness who saw the entire thing and the guy that got shot had a history of stalking people
and this shooter is in jail for life
Hopefully Fox News and the rest of the MSM will pick up on this story and run with it
I live in FL, where you can put a bullet in the head of a man sleeping on your couch if you claim you fear for your life.
that story sucks.
I am split on the stand-your-ground law. I love it cause I carry a gun and like to remain legal and it may keep me out of jail if I ever fear for my life and shoot someone.
But..................... ...
it's also a very easy defense for ANYONE to shoot ANYONE for ANY REASON and just deliver a smug "hey, I feared for my life and I have no duty to retreat".
Usually stepping back can diffuse most situations. It's essentially a law saying "stay in each others faces, guys, it's legal for whoever has the fastest trigger".
So I love the law but hate asssholes like ZImm who abuse it. When you're chasing a guy in the dark calling him a fcking a-hole, then he's got a bullet in his heart 30 seconds later, you're a c0cksucker, plain and simple.
-
More obama voters out of the picture for Nov - whats not to like?
-
More obama voters out of the picture for Nov - whats not to like?
so you're in favor of putting innocent men in jail for life
spoken like the communist you truly are
-
so you're in favor of putting innocent men in jail for life
spoken like the communist you truly are
not at all - i dont like stand your ground unless its limited to a home, office, or place where retreat is not an option.
-
not at all - i dont like stand your ground unless its limited to a home, office, or place where retreat is not an option.
and I asked you about the story I posted which is that situation exactly
a man on his own property being threatened by a man with a weapon, the shooter gives the guy a warning shot and he is still advancing and you've got an eyewitness who saw the entire thing
This guy is in jail for life and your only response was some stupid comment about Obama
-
More obama voters out of the picture for Nov - whats not to like?
You never miss a chance or fail to showcase just how bitter and unhappy you are with your own life do you?
No wonder mommy doesn't allow you outside.
-
and I asked you about the story I posted which is that situation exactly
a man on his own property being threatened by a man with a weapon, the shooter gives the guy a warning shot and he is still advancing and you've got an eyewitness who saw the entire thing
This guy is in jail for life and your only response was some stupid comment about Obama
Sounds ridiculous considering in most jurisdictions a third party is usually allowed to use lethal force to protect another persons' life if that persons' life is in imminent danger.
sounds like a out of control prosecutor to me. Nothing new - most prosecutors are zealots and pieces of shit.
-
This isn't a failure of stand your grand...this is jackass prosecutors and judges.
If the facts presented above are correct, the black guy should be a free man. Maybe the governor will issue a pardon.
-
This isn't a failure of stand your grand...this is jackass prosecutors and judges.
If the facts presented above are correct, the black guy should be a free man. Maybe the governor will issue a pardon.
they have virtually the same stand your ground law in Georgia that they have in Florida (all written or in large part modeled bill written by
American Legislative Exchange Council)
I wonder if the "failure" of stand your ground in this case had anything to do with the race of the shooter and his dead assailent
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/04/13/the-secretive-corporate-outfit-behind-stand-your-ground/
-
Could be racism. Don't like to make that type of call of just one case though.
To me...just going by the facts in the article...this is a justified shooting and a travesty of justice.
-
Could be racism. Don't like to make that type of call of just one case though.
To me...just going by the facts in the article...this is a justified shooting and a travesty of justice.
I agree, can't make that call either but this just seems like about as clear of a case of self defense even without a "stand your ground" law
how the heck is this guy in jail for life?
-
I agree, can't make that call either but this just seems like about as clear of a case of self defense even without a "stand your ground" law
how the heck is this guy in jail for life?
Agreed. It's disgusting.
-
Straw man is a gimmick that posts on here as part of a political agenda. Do not be fooled by this guy and ones like him. He is pushing a political point of view. There are gimmicks like this on all social media. They are propogandists with agenda driven messages in their posts. Dont be fooled by these people, use your own mind.
who are you ?
I only post under one account and post on multiple boards
how exactly am I a gimmick ?
this is a political message board and everyone here is expressing their own personal political beliefs
btw - what "agenda" can I have by posting on an obscure message board
-
Why so defensive? You feel guilty? I need not respond to you, youre a joke, just so the people that read this know who you really are....joke gimmick. Ahahahahahahah
not defensive at all dipshit
you have ~ 500 posts and you're calling me a gimmick and your premise that I have some political agenda is absurd given the venue
-
Fucking propogandist. Shit gimmick at that. Your post count only means you have been up to this awhile. Doesnt mean shit. You are an old gimmick who needed to be outed. Go post on nyour other boards. Youve been outed here. We know your opinion. We know your political slant. You don pos on here to talk to friends. Only to bring up content that is slanted to your political point of view. Or to chime in with you political slant. Noone here likes you or cares to hear your opinion. We already know. Iwonder if you ever fucking post on bodybuilding o weightlifting? Shit gimmick propogandist. And you have other accounts. I know this.
dude - a whole paragraph and you said nothing
everyone on this board is expressing their political view - is that "news" to you?
check out this gimmick post by me on the G&O board
obviously I promoting my agenda for the local dairy industry
I would have agree with you as recently as a few months ago but that article is 6 years old and there are lot's of recent info about the benefit of full fat, non-homogenized dairy
I haven't yet found a good source or raw milk and not sure that I would even want to take the risk but I've been drinking full fat, non-homogenized, grass fed and low heat paturized milk and I really like it
Here's the stuff I buy: http://www.stbenoit.com/html/milk.html
This article by John Meadows is what got me thinking about it
http://www.t-nation.com/strength-training-topics/1284
-
from your post earlier today...
I'm not saying the parents aren't trying to profit but at this point I see no evidence of that and I'm not going to make any assumptions without proof
is there any proof in this case or the martin case that race is involved?
-
from your post earlier today...
is there any proof in this case or the martin case that race is envolved?
I dont' think race is an issue in Martin and I don't know enough about the case in Georgia to say whether race was motivation for why he was prosecuted (he wasn't charged until a year after the shooting)
IMO - race is irrelevent in Martin case.
what is relevent is an armed man stalking and ultimately shooting an unarmed teenager who was not commiting any crime
-
So defensive, huh gimmick. So so defensive. ;)
I guess if defensive meaning challenging your definition of "gimmick"
still no idea why you think someone posting on a political message board wouldn't naturally be expressing a personal political opinion
-
I dont' think race is an issue in Martin and I don't know enough about the case in Georgia to say whether race was motivation for why he was prosecuted (he wasn't charged until a year after the shooting)
IMO - race is irrelevent in Martin case.
what is relevent is an armed man stalking and ultimately shooting an unarmed teenager who was not commiting any crime
You mean a person who legally is carrying a concealed weapon, trying to keep an eye on a person who fits the description of people who had robbed multiple houses in the area, then getting in an altercation probaby due to the fault of both parties and protecting himself?
-
You mean a person who legally is carrying a concealed weapon, trying to keep an eye on a person who fits the description of people who had robbed multiple houses in the area, then getting in an altercation probaby due to the fault of both parties and protecting himself?
I can mostly agree with all except the fault of both parties
no proof of that at all as far as I'm aware
we do know a legally armed man, profiled ("fits the description of people who had robbed multiple houses" ), stalked and eventually shot and killed an unarmed teenager
we don't know how the confrontation occurred although we do know the outcome
-
I can mostly agree with all except the fault of both parties
no proof of that at all as far as I'm aware
we do know a legally armed man, profiled ("fits the description of people who had robbed multiple houses" ), stalked and eventually shot and killed an unarmed teenager
we don't know how the confrontation occurred although we do know the outcome
so in your mind its just as likely that trayvon attacked zimmerman and he was simply defending himself then?
LOL you can word it anyway you want to try and convey a negative connotation but trayvon fit the description of ppl who had reportedly committed many burglaries in the area.
-
so in your mind its just as likely that trayvon attacked zimmerman and he was simply defending himself then?
LOL you can word it anyway you want to try and convey a negative connotation but trayvon fit the description of ppl who had reportedly committed many burglaries in the area.
I'd say it' more likely that Zimmerman was the aggressor and certainly created the situation by choosing to follow this kid
but if you want to go with just as likely that's fine with me
we can have a long conversation about the "fit the description claim" if you want (I don't think it's relevent for a bunch of reasons)
-
I'd say it' more likely that Zimmerman was the aggressor and certainly created the situation by choosing to follow this kid
but if you want to go with just as likely that's fine with me
we can have a long conversation about the "fit the description claim" if you want (I don't think it's relevent for a bunch of reasons)
does being the "aggresor" include questioning trayvon on what he was doing or what business he had there?
-
sliding scale here.
what if zimmerman chased a 15 year old, the 15 year old swung on him, and zimm killed him?
what about a 10 year old?
FL law says there is no defined 'i feared for my life'. Zimm could say "i was passing out from the 10 year old choking me, i shot him"
Of course it wouldn't be credible - that's up to the jurors to decide.
-
sliding scale here.
what if zimmerman chased a 15 year old, the 15 year old swung on him, and zimm killed him?
what about a 10 year old?
FL law says there is no defined 'i feared for my life'. Zimm could say "i was passing out from the 10 year old choking me, i shot him"
Of course it wouldn't be credible - that's up to the jurors to decide.
What's with you and the "what ifs"? They are not relevant to the topic and are usually the mark of someone who can't argue a point on its merits.
-
What's with you and the "what ifs"? They are not relevant to the topic and are usually the mark of someone who can't argue a point on its merits.
the minute people say it's fine for zimm to angrily create a situation where he can legally claim self-defense, you open up a lot of 'what if's.
Cause I could walk up and down crack town all day insulting mothers until someone broke my nose, shoot their hearts out they back, and hey, it's legal mang.
-
the minute people say it's fine for zimm to angrily create a situation where he can legally claim self-defense, you open up a lot of 'what if's.
Cause I could walk up and down crack town all day insulting mothers until someone broke my nose, shoot their hearts out they back, and hey, it's legal mang.
You already did, scumbag. You were a second away from capping two men who had the audacity to look at you.
Again, your "what if" arguments are fucking pointless and the sign of a weak debater.
-
You already did, scumbag. You were a second away from capping two men who had the audacity to look at you.
Again, your "what if" arguments are fucking pointless and the sign of a weak debater.
If they had guns in their hards, I woudl have capped them. You betcha. If they would have fists, I woudl have gotten the hell back in my car (attempt to de-escalate/escape the situation).
Now, since my car was blocked in, i woudl have shot garage doors out the back of their heads once they grabbed that door handle.
But i had that duty to flee/retreat/de-escalate. Stand-your-ground removes that.
I can get in anyone's face, call their dead mothers whores, and when i get hit, start murdering MFers. All legal. Give my ass a trophy.
-
does being the "aggresor" include questioning trayvon on what he was doing or what business he had there?
depends on how he did it
btw -was Martin wearing anything that identifed him as a neighborhood watch person ?
the bottom line is that no one knows how the confrontation started or escalated.
the only story we have is from a guy trying (at the time) to keep his ass out of jail
again, the only facts we know are that an armed man stalked, confronted and ultimatey shot and killed an unarmed teenager who was not committing any crime at all (as far as we know)
I would think that forensic evidence (if the cops had bothered do preserve and investigate the scene) would easily be able to determine if Martin was shot while lying on his back on the ground or while he was sitting up (i.e. shot from someone lying beneath him).
Also very odd that the cops labeled Martin a John Doe even though he supposedly had ID
It doesn't prove or disprove any claims by Zimmerman but it does suggest that the cops didn't do a very good job at the scene of the crime
-
sliding scale here.
what if zimmerman chased a 15 year old, the 15 year old swung on him, and zimm killed him?
what about a 10 year old?
FL law says there is no defined 'i feared for my life'. Zimm could say "i was passing out from the 10 year old choking me, i shot him"
Of course it wouldn't be credible - that's up to the jurors to decide.
agreed, dont know what this post has to do with anything being discussed or the events as this wasnt a 10 year old kid. This was a 17 year old kid, at 17 I was a pretty stout kid and had the ability to do some real damage if I wanted to.
again I have no idea why you brought it up anyway...
-
depends on how he did it
btw -was Martin wearing anything that identifed him as a neighborhood watch person ?
the bottom line is that no one knows how the confrontation started or escalated.
the only story we have is from a guy trying (at the time) to keep his ass out of jail
again, the only facts we know are that an armed man stalked, confronted and ultimatey shot and killed an unarmed teenager who was not committing any crime at all (as far as we know)
I would think that forensic evidence (if the cops had bothered do preserve and investigate the scene) would easily be able to determine if Martin was shot while lying on his back on the ground or while he was sitting up (i.e. shot from someone lying beneath him).
Also very odd that the cops labeled Martin a John Doe even though he supposedly had ID
It doesn't prove or disprove any claims by Zimmerman but it does suggest that the cops didn't do a very good job at the scene of the crime
btw, a person doesnt need any ID to ask a question. Zimmerman didnt break any law either that we know of.
you say that its fact that zimmerman confronted trayvon I havent read that, can you post a link for me?
I agree on the forensics I would imagine that they could use the autopsy if one was done to verify.
P.S. When I lived with my folks we had ppl walk/drive down the street from time to time and if I was outside and they gave me the opportunity I would ask if they needed help.
We had a big fight go on across the street with some high school kids and I went out in our drive way and told them all to break it up and started asking questions.
Asking a question isnt illegal...
-
btw, a person doesnt need any ID to ask a question. Zimmerman didnt break any law either that we know of.
you say that its fact that zimmerman confronted trayvon I havent read that, can you post a link for me?
I agree on the forensics I would imagine that they could use the autopsy if one was done to verify.
P.S. When I lived with my folks we had ppl walk/drive down the street from time to time and if I was outside and they gave me the opportunity I would ask if they needed help.
We had a big fight go on across the street with some high school kids and I went out in our drive way and told them all to break it up and started asking questions.
Asking a question isnt illegal...
why would you feel the need to point out that asking a questions isn't illegal
did I ever say that it was ?
You certainly don't need an ID to ask anyone a question but if Martin was acting in the capacity of neighborhood watch then shoudn't he be identified as such in one way or another. If he was following me (we know he was following Martin) and then came up and asked who I was or what I was doing here I would have told him to fuck off. Why should I answer some strangers question, especially if I don't know him and he's been following me and I think he is the one acting weird and possibly threatening (just following someone in the dark could easily be construed as a threatening act)
Regarding "confrontation" I'm going by what Martin girlfriend said she heard on the phone. As I said before,
"no one knows how the confrontation started or escalated" except Martin who has huge motivation to lie about it
you and I and everyone one else can only speculate so here is my speculation
I have a problem with Zimmerman saying that Martin was running away from him and then somehow decided to turn around and run toward him and attack him. That claim makes no sense to me. If you're running away then why would you turn around and run back
Zimmerman most likely knew the complex better than Martin From and from the map (posted earlier on this site) it look like Zimmerman took a route that would allow him to circle around and wind up in front of Martin. Whether it was intentional or not he wound up in front of Martin. Given his statements on the phone and his seeming anger at people "getting away" and most likely feeling empowered by carrying a gun, it's not an unlikely scenario that he confronted Martin and that Martin felt threatened by him. It's also not unlikely that Martin tried to leave and get away from him and that Zimmerman tried to prevent him from leaving ( I think this is a strong possiblity as to how the confrontation escalated) Note - again this is all speculation on my part . Again, I have a hard time believing that kid who felt someone was following him and trying to walk fast and "get away" would suddenly turn around and become an attacker. That just makes no sense to me. I think it's more likely that Zimmerman confronted Martin and Martin felt threatened and tried to get away from this weird dude who had been following him and that's how it escalated
-
I wont quote as to save space but I agree I would probably be a little reserved when talking to someone who just approaches me, that being said there isnt anything wrong with what zimmerman did either.
you dont think that a kid who is questioned by some random guy wouldnt get an attitude and tell the guy to fuck off like you said you would do? escalating the situation and possibily starting a physical altercation?
kids these days go off at the drop of a hat, if he felt threatened which I would as well and he decided to hit zimmerman as a response or push him etc. that could have been what started it as well.
Even if it went exactly like you speculate it did, what law did zimmerman break? why charge him with anything when it was simply a shitty situation made worse by both parties?
-
I wont quote as to save space but I agree I would probably be a little reserved when talking to someone who just approaches me, that being said there isnt anything wrong with what zimmerman did either.
you dont think that a kid who is questioned by some random guy wouldnt get an attitude and tell the guy to fuck off like you said you would do? escalating the situation and possibily starting a physical altercation?
kids these days go off at the drop of a hat, if he felt threatened which I would as well and he decided to hit zimmerman as a response or push him etc. that could have been what started it as well.
Even if it went exactly like you speculate it did, what law did zimmerman break? why charge him with anything when it was simply a shitty situation made worse by both parties?
as I mentioned, we know that Zimmerman was following Martin which could easily be perceived as a threatening action all by itself. Per Martin's girlfriend he said a guy was following him and she told him to run and he said he wasn't going to run but walk fast (going from memory here)
If I were walking at night and someone was following me I wouldn't in any way feel compelled to answer his questions. If i were trying to "get away" and was stop/questioned etc.. I would want to "get away" even more than before. Given that Zimmerman made a comment to the effect that "these guys always get away" and that he pursued Martin even when told not to I think it's certainly plausible that he was confrontational, threatening (again just following someone in the dark is threatening) and could very easily have tried to detain Martin if he was tryign to get away and not answer his questions
That scenario (all speculation on my part) seems alot more plausible to me than a kid who is trying to get away suddenly doing a 180 and becoming an aggressor
-
suppose zimmerman and trayvon would have clashed, and trayvon would have broekn his tea bottle on the sidewalk, cut zimmermanbadly so he bled out in under a minute (before police arrived).
Would everyone saying "zimmerman winning" be celebrating trayvon? We'd only have the word of the pot selling kid that the mean neighborhood watch guy 'attacked him'. I think a lot of the people who believe zimmerman solely on the evidence of "um, cause zimmerman said so" woudl have a hard time applying that standard to trayvon".
Wait, so we're supposed to believe trayvon was really scared of a guy following him? No, he was clearly a murderer who killed someone just trying to keep the streets safe".
Epic dbl standard. I just don't see 333386 saying "Trayvon WINNING!"
-
suppose zimmerman and trayvon would have clashed, and trayvon would have broekn his tea bottle on the sidewalk, cut zimmermanbadly so he bled out in under a minute (before police arrived).
Would everyone saying "zimmerman winning" be celebrating trayvon? We'd only have the word of the pot selling kid that the mean neighborhood watch guy 'attacked him'. I think a lot of the people who believe zimmerman solely on the evidence of "um, cause zimmerman said so" woudl have a hard time applying that standard to trayvon".
Wait, so we're supposed to believe trayvon was really scared of a guy following him? No, he was clearly a murderer who killed someone just trying to keep the streets safe".
Epic dbl standard. I just don't see 333386 saying "Trayvon WINNING!"
has there been any explanation as to why Martin was tagged as a John Doe
was there any decent quarantine and investigation of the crime scene (I don't know which is why I'm asking)
Can you post that map of Zimmermans route again
-
has there been any explanation as to why Martin was tagged as a John Doe
was there any decent quarantine and investigation of the crime scene (I don't know which is why I'm asking)
Can you post that map of Zimmermans route again
in a town of 51k people.... 6 foot 3 kid reported missing that night... 6 foot 3 kid goes into morgue...
nobody makes that connection huh? ;) yet they have the ability to get a police chief and a prosecutor out of a bed on a sunday night to override the lead detective before his ass could formally charge zimmerman.
Then they let the body sit on ice for 3 days, killing all evidence. They didn't demand shirt from zimmerman. nothing. They took his word, and they hid the kid as long as they could.
You're telling me in such a small town, nobody connected the dead body (with ID?) with the mssing kid report? Oh sheesh. Smells bad like a coverup.
-
in a town of 51k people.... 6 foot 3 kid reported missing that night... 6 foot 3 kid goes into morgue...
nobody makes that connection huh? ;) yet they have the ability to get a police chief and a prosecutor out of a bed on a sunday night to override the lead detective before his ass could formally charge zimmerman.
Then they let the body sit on ice for 3 days, killing all evidence. They didn't demand shirt from zimmerman. nothing. They took his word, and they hid the kid as long as they could.
You're telling me in such a small town, nobody connected the dead body (with ID?) with the mssing kid report? Oh sheesh. Smells bad like a coverup.
at the very least unbelievably shoddy police work
and Martins body did have ID on it right?
-
as I mentioned, we know that Zimmerman was following Martin which could easily be perceived as a threatening action all by itself. Per Martin's girlfriend he said a guy was following him and she told him to run and he said he wasn't going to run but walk fast (going from memory here)
If I were walking at night and someone was following me I wouldn't in any way feel compelled to answer his questions. If i were trying to "get away" and was stop/questioned etc.. I would want to "get away" even more than before. Given that Zimmerman made a comment to the effect that "these guys always get away" and that he pursued Martin even when told not to I think it's certainly plausible that he was confrontational, threatening (again just following someone in the dark is threatening) and could very easily have tried to detain Martin if he was tryign to get away and not answer his questions
That scenario (all speculation on my part) seems alot more plausible to me than a kid who is trying to get away suddenly doing a 180 and becoming an aggressor
what if he didnt do a 180 but zimmerman went around somewhere and meet him per 240's map?
I agree with the threatening situation that trayvon may have felt that being said I think its perfectly plausible that he may have reacted violently to zimmermans questions, dont you?
Youre making alot of assumptions based on very little if any evidence.
-
suppose zimmerman and trayvon would have clashed, and trayvon would have broekn his tea bottle on the sidewalk, cut zimmermanbadly so he bled out in under a minute (before police arrived).
Would everyone saying "zimmerman winning" be celebrating trayvon? We'd only have the word of the pot selling kid that the mean neighborhood watch guy 'attacked him'. I think a lot of the people who believe zimmerman solely on the evidence of "um, cause zimmerman said so" woudl have a hard time applying that standard to trayvon".
Wait, so we're supposed to believe trayvon was really scared of a guy following him? No, he was clearly a murderer who killed someone just trying to keep the streets safe".
Epic dbl standard. I just don't see 333386 saying "Trayvon WINNING!"
LOL its not enough to just say a person may have done something wrong and make that into this guy was wrong like youre doing.
In this country he is innocent until proven guilty, you want to convict him based on basically nothing substantial...
this seems more and more like a shitty situation that went sour probably due to the fault of both individuals. Both to blame but nothing really illegal about the situation.
Again I ask you guys if the situation went down like straw says it may have what laws did he break?
-
if i ever met zimm, i woudl call him every name in the book.
not because he shot a kid - but because he so irresponsibly gave ammo to the anti-gun pricks out there.
Dude was so thirsty for a confrontation that he charged into a dark yard with a person he was chasing and acted so surprised he got jumped.
And really, did you hear him on the 911 tape? Dude was probably 80 IQ or sporting a buzz. "I think he's on druuuugs or sumthin'
-
if i ever met zimm, i woudl call him every name in the book.
not because he shot a kid - but because he so irresponsibly gave ammo to the anti-gun pricks out there.
Dude was so thirsty for a confrontation that he charged into a dark yard with a person he was chasing and acted so surprised he got jumped.
And really, did you hear him on the 911 tape? Dude was probably 80 IQ or sporting a buzz. "I think he's on druuuugs or sumthin'
Im sure you would big hoss, Im sure you would...
now can you tell me what laws he broke?
-
Im sure you would big hoss, Im sure you would...
now can you tell me what laws he broke?
i believe he lied to police.
I guess we'll see when the discrepencies in the report come out. Something changed when the lead investigator wanted to arrest zimmer for his own statements... then when daddy the judge and the police chief and prosecutor show up... suddenly it's textbook legal shoot speak.
Sorry, but i carry and have spent 15 years carrying, and reading forums filled with guys who carry. Too many angry wannbe heroes. He lied, i'm sure of it, and we'll see at trial. Nobody runs INTO a drak battle if they believe the guy is on drugs and armed with something in his hand he pulled from wastband. He exaggerated on his 911 call, lied to police.
-
what if he didnt do a 180 but zimmerman went around somewhere and meet him per 240's map?
I agree with the threatening situation that trayvon may have felt that being said I think its perfectly plausible that he may have reacted violently to zimmermans questions, dont you?
Youre making alot of assumptions based on very little if any evidence.
I know. I brought this up as one of the reasons I'm not inclined to believe Zimmermans story
I'm going to assume he knew the complex very good given that he lived there and was doing a neighborhood watch.
He was intent on following him and angry about people that always got away
He could well have intended to circle around in an attempt to cut Martin off
I've said at least a couple times know that only Zimmerman and Martin know how the confrontation played out
-
i believe he lied to police.
I guess we'll see when the discrepencies in the report come out. Something changed when the lead investigator wanted to arrest zimmer for his own statements... then when daddy the judge and the police chief and prosecutor show up... suddenly it's textbook legal shoot speak.
Sorry, but i carry and have spent 15 years carrying, and reading forums filled with guys who carry. Too many angry wannbe heroes. He lied, i'm sure of it, and we'll see at trial. Nobody runs INTO a drak battle if they believe the guy is on drugs and armed with something in his hand he pulled from wastband. He exaggerated on his 911 call, lied to police.
perhaps he wasnt running into battle only trying to keep an eye on him and trayvon confronted him, have you given that any thought?
-
I know. I brought this up as one of the reasons I'm not inclined to believe Zimmermans story
I'm going to assume he knew the complex very good given that he lived there and was doing a neighborhood watch.
He was intent on following him and angry about people that always got away
He could well have intended to circle around in an attempt to cut Martin off
I've said at least a couple times know that only Zimmerman and Martin know how the confrontation played out
agreed, but the thing is he didnt do anything wrong in either scenario...
stupid, yes...illegal, NOOOOOO
-
perhaps he wasnt running into battle only trying to keep an eye on him and trayvon confronted him, have you given that any thought?
he seemed sqfully angry. I bet trayvon did swing first. I bet zimmy had never taken an ass whooping in his life and figured "halt and explain yourself!" would work. Sure didn't.
And he is a real cawk for citing 'stand your ground' instead of legal defense by forcible felony with inability to flee.
-
he seemed sqfully angry. I bet trayvon did swing first. I bet zimmy had never taken an ass whooping in his life and figured "halt and explain yourself!" would work. Sure didn't.
And he is a real cawk for citing 'stand your ground' instead of legal defense by forcible felony with inability to flee.
Oh look, Pravda boy making things up as he goes again. Here I was thinking you'd shut up after your claims were summarily destroyed by the same MSM sources you got them from when they were forced to eat crow.
Oh well, carry on with propagandizing from your trailer, oracle.
-
agreed, but the thing is he didnt do anything wrong in either scenario...
stupid, yes...illegal, NOOOOOO
you have no way to know that statement is true
if he confronted, challenged and instigated a confrontation then I don't see how "stand your ground" applies
as I've said for I think the 4th time now no one knows how their "meeting" ended in Martin being shot to death
-
you have no way to know that statement is true
if he confronted, challenged and instigated a confrontation then I don't see how "stand your ground" applies
as I've said for I think the 4th time now no one knows how their "meeting" ended in Martin being shot to death
I dont really believe anyone thinks "stand your ground" itself applies here... this is more self-defense. The "stand your ground" law doesnt apply here. JMHO.
-
he seemed sqfully angry. I bet trayvon did swing first. I bet zimmy had never taken an ass whooping in his life and figured "halt and explain yourself!" would work. Sure didn't.
And he is a real cawk for citing 'stand your ground' instead of legal defense by forcible felony with inability to flee.
Seemed angry? WTF are you talking about!!!!
Why do you keep lying?
The phone conversation to me seemed like he was very calm and matter of fact.
-
Seemed angry? WTF are you talking about!!!!
Why do you keep lying?
The phone conversation to me seemed like he was very calm and matter of fact.
Zimmerman stated "these assholes, they always get away" and also said "these fucking punks."...
Does that seem calm to you? bwahahahahaha stop sucking zimmerdick and just admit he's an angry prick, legal shoot, he's a big liar, and he's giftwrapping an obama distraction and bloomy anti-gun campaign.
"winning" = you wish.
-
Zimmerman stated "these assholes, they always get away" and also said "these fucking punks."...
Does that seem calm to you? bwahahahahaha stop sucking zimmerdick and just admit he's an angry prick, legal shoot, he's a big liar, and he's giftwrapping an obama distraction and bloomy anti-gun campaign.
"winning" = you wish.
AGAIN WITH THE LIES YOU FUCKING IDIOT!
They examined the tape, he said "Fucking cold" you dumb fuck, why do you keep ignoring when called out on it yet run to another thread and post your lies? You think no one will notice!?
You stop sucking your own cock you motherfucking dolt.
Its like youre getting further and further distanced from reality trying to justify letting the MSM form your opinions for you when this started.
Now its "its a legal shoot but he's a liar", yeah, its a legal shoot once everyone bombarded you with the facts, in the begining your were a fucking parrot of MSNBC, every fucking word out of your mouth was "Vigilante asshole just wanted to kill this poor innocent kid".
GTFO, you have no credibility on this issue anymore, over and over youve shown yourself to have no grasp on what happened and you take what youve read off whatever MSM shithole you read and twist it to try and make yourself feel less like the fucking sheep you were.
-
AGAIN LIES YOUR FUCKING IDIOT!
They examined the tape, he said "Fucking cold" you dumb fuck, why do you keep ignoring when called out on it yet run to another thread and post your lies? You think no one will notice!?
You stop sucking your own cock you motherfucking dolt.
okay, who is "they"? Cause Fury posted a clip showing it was "punks" and not the c-word. now it's cold? Tell me the video he posted - very high quality and clear - was wrong?
Okay, i'll conceded that, what about calling them assholes. It's dark and he's on foot chasing a person he believes to be on drugs with something in his hand from his waistband.... merging the person he's chasing with "those assholes" who always get away...
Yeah, if that's calm, what's angry? Hitting cops and beating wife? LOL wait, maybe this does fit zimm rather well...
-
Zimmerman stated "these assholes, they always get away" and also said "these fucking punks."...
Does that seem calm to you? bwahahahahaha stop sucking zimmerdick and just admit he's an angry prick, legal shoot, he's a big liar, and he's giftwrapping an obama distraction and bloomy anti-gun campaign.
"winning" = you wish.
You are a dishonest liar. He said 'cold" not punks and the tape did noty sound angry.
Now that his negihbors completely destroyed your faux narrative that holder. jesse. obama, and the msm tried to create is collapsing you are even more desperate.
-
You are a dishonest liar. He said 'cold" not punks and the tape did noty sound angry.
Now that his negihbors completely destroyed your faux narrative that holder. jesse. obama, and the msm tried to create is collapsing you are even more desperate.
Fury posted a great video showing it was "punks" - a pro sound engineer isolated it and it was pretty clear. Now it's something else? I thought it was a slur, and i was wrong. that video made it clear. 33, please post the evidence where "they" show it was "COLD" and not punks?
I love it that you're at the point where you're defending a guy who beats his wife, pushes cops, votes obama, and overall acts like a whiny bitch... cause it's like libya... it's a position you have committed to, and now it's tough to step back and say "wow, maybe zimm did kinda cause the whole mess"
-
okay, who is "they"? Cause Fury posted a clip showing it was "punks" and not the c-word. now it's cold? Tell me the video he posted - very high quality and clear - was wrong?
Okay, i'll conceded that, what about calling them assholes. It's dark and he's on foot chasing a person he believes to be on drugs with something in his hand from his waistband.... merging the person he's chasing with "those assholes" who always get away...
Yeah, if that's calm, what's angry? Hitting cops and beating wife? LOL wait, maybe this does fit zimm rather well...
Video!?
It was analyzed by audio experts and posted all over the news sites you fucking dolt!
-
Here you go moron
FYI Its CNN that analyzed the Audio. Eat crow you fuckstick.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/04/05/CNN-####-Cold-Zimmerman (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/04/05/CNN-####-Cold-Zimmerman)
http://cnn.com/video/?/video/crime/2012/04/05/ac-tuchman-zimmerman-audio-enhanced.cnn
-
240 - you really should be ashamed of yourself.
-
Video!?
It was analyzed by audio experts and posted all over the news sites you fucking dolt!
link? cause "all the news sites" have put out a lot of bad info lately.
Please link the evidence that it was "cold" and not "punks".
Aside from that, we're arging about word #2 when there's no doubt he called them assholes when he said "these assholes always get away with it".
So to me, he's not exactly calm there. Maybe yall consider that calm - pursuing a person he believes on drugs with something in hand form waistband... into the darkness... calling him profanity... and he's "calm".
hahahahahahhahaha doesn't sound calm to me dude.
-
Fury posted a great video showing it was "punks" - a pro sound engineer isolated it and it was pretty clear. Now it's something else? I thought it was a slur, and i was wrong. that video made it clear. 33, please post the evidence where "they" show it was "COLD" and not punks?
I love it that you're at the point where you're defending a guy who beats his wife, pushes cops, votes obama, and overall acts like a whiny bitch... cause it's like libya... it's a position you have committed to, and now it's tough to step back and say "wow, maybe zimm did kinda cause the whole mess"
Backpedal and deflect, backpedal and deflect...
Dont you ever get tired of looking like a jackass? You need to learn when to bow out and STFU.
-
link? cause "all the news sites" have put out a lot of bad info lately.
Please link the evidence that it was "cold" and not "punks".
Aside from that, we're arging about word #2 when there's no doubt he called them assholes when he said "these assholes always get away with it".
So to me, he's not exactly calm there. Maybe yall consider that calm - pursuing a person he believes on drugs with something in hand form waistband... into the darkness... calling him profanity... and he's "calm".
hahahahahahhahaha doesn't sound calm to me dude.
Theres a link right below it moron.
Guess what, it was CN fucking N. (You know, the news agency you claim is the most unbiased yet "boring") ::)
Yet again, lies from you.
-
240 - you really should be ashamed of yourself.
I've watched this clip many times. I don't hear "cold". The word sounds plural to me. Hell, that CNn call sounds like it definitely has the "oooo" sounds in it. And it sounds plural. Ends in "S". Maybe he's saying "Fcking colds..." That doesn't make sense to me.
It ends in an S, whatever he's saying. I mean, "punks" is a lot more credible than "colds". Colds doesn't make sense. It's plural.
-
Fuck off. You are blatantly lying now.
-
I've watched this clip many times. I don't hear "cold". The word sounds plural to me. Hell, that CNn call sounds like it definitely has the "oooo" sounds in it. And it sounds plural. Ends in "S". Maybe he's saying "Fcking colds..." That doesn't make sense to me.
It ends in an S, whatever he's saying. I mean, "punks" is a lot more credible than "colds". Colds doesn't make sense. It's plural.
It was fucking storming the night it happened. They had high end audiophyles analyze it. And this is CNN, your admitted unbiased news agency. And youre goign to sit there from your trailer pretending to know listening on your shitty low quality laptop?
Pathetic 240. You just dont know when to quit.
Epic. Lulz.
-
Fuck off. You are blatantly lying now.
Hahaha, this mothefucker, he's so far off into Zimmerman hate land that he's literally writing his own reality.
Poor sad bastard.
-
okay - the 2nd word is in dispute. The 1st word is not.
He clearly called trayvon an asshole. He told the 911 operator he was on drugs. he referred to something coming from waistband into hand - most ppl with common sense might think he was hinting to the cop there might be a gun there. He was drama queening it up for the 911 operator, and ppl often do.
Which is fine - but that makes him instantly non credible. You have a kid with skittles suddenly transformed into a stoned dude with "something" in his hand from waistband.
Then he 'calmly" calls him an asshole and pursures him into the darkness.
I just don't even know what we're arging about now. We agree the shoot was legal - we're just arging about if zimm was calm or not? lol.
-
okay - the 2nd word is in dispute. The 1st word is not.
He clearly called trayvon an asshole. He told the 911 operator he was on drugs. he referred to something coming from waistband into hand - most ppl with common sense might think he was hinting to the cop there might be a gun there. He was drama queening it up for the 911 operator, and ppl often do.
Which is fine - but that makes him instantly non credible. You have a kid with skittles suddenly transformed into a stoned dude with "something" in his hand from waistband.
Then he 'calmly" calls him an asshole and pursures him into the darkness.
I just don't even know what we're arging about now. We agree the shoot was legal - we're just arging about if zimm was calm or not? lol.
speechless. Just stop.
-
If trayvon had called Zimm an asshole, jumped out of his truck, followed him home, and shot him dead within sight of his home...
would you be calling him 'calm', 333386?
lol I just can't help but think if everything was flipped 100%, you'd be saying "Trayvon winning!"
if trayvon had a record for hitting a cop and beating his wife... alcohol counseling.... would you really be saying he was stable and reliable as a witness?
-
okay - the 2nd word is in dispute. The 1st word is not.
He clearly called trayvon an asshole. He told the 911 operator he was on drugs. he referred to something coming from waistband into hand - most ppl with common sense might think he was hinting to the cop there might be a gun there. He was drama queening it up for the 911 operator, and ppl often do.
Which is fine - but that makes him instantly non credible. You have a kid with skittles suddenly transformed into a stoned dude with "something" in his hand from waistband.
Then he 'calmly" calls him an asshole and pursures him into the darkness.
I just don't even know what we're arging about now. We agree the shoot was legal - we're just arging about if zimm was calm or not? lol.
Dude... just give it up already. Youre hinging youre entire judgment of a mans character on the fact that he called someone an asshole, and that he described a kid to the operator. Thats your only fact. Everything else youre simply twisting and projecting your opinion onto him. He said "he has something in his waistband". To you thats "He has a gun". Its pathetic dude.
-
If trayvon had called Zimm an asshole, jumped out of his truck, followed him home, and shot him dead within sight of his home...
would you be calling him 'calm', 333386?
lol I just can't help but think if everything was flipped 100%, you'd be saying "Trayvon winning!"
if trayvon had a record for hitting a cop and beating his wife... alcohol counseling.... would you really be saying he was stable and reliable as a witness?
Youre an idiot. You base your whole argument on lies and half-truths, and assumptions, because deep in your heart, you believe hes "that guy". Youre just like a religious fanatic grasping at straws to validate your belief. Its sad.
-
I dont really believe anyone thinks "stand your ground" itself applies here... this is more self-defense. The "stand your ground" law doesnt apply here. JMHO.
self defense is Zimmermans claim but we really dont' know if that is true either
how do we know that Zimmerman didn't try to detain Martin (who was supposedly trying to get away from Zimmerman prior to their confrontation)
just because Zimmerman has a scrape on his head doesn't prove his life was in danger or that he wasn't the agressor or that he was justified in using deadly force
hopefully a trial will answer all of those questions
-
self defense is Zimmermans claim but we really dont' know if that is true either
how do we know that Zimmerman didn't try to detain Martin (who was supposedly trying to get away from Zimmerman prior to their confrontation)
just because Zimmerman has a scrape on his head doesn't prove his life was in danger or that he wasn't the agressor or that he was justified in using deadly force
hopefully a trial will answer all of those questions
Thats of course the trials job to answer those questions.
I was simply stating that the "stand your ground law" doesnt apply in the situation that Zimmerman described.
-
Thats of course the trials job to answer those questions.
I was simply stating that the "stand your ground law" doesnt apply in the situation that Zimmerman described.
I hope you're right about that
-
I hope you're right about that
By definition, it does not apply. Thats not to say that a general self defense law may apply, but the specific "stand your ground law" is inapplicable I believe.
-
you have no way to know that statement is true
if he confronted, challenged and instigated a confrontation then I don't see how "stand your ground" applies
as I've said for I think the 4th time now no one knows how their "meeting" ended in Martin being shot to death
agreed and neither do you, all i am doing is making assumptions same as you ;)
Is the defense using the stand your ground law?
-
agreed and neither do you, all i am doing is making assumptions same as you ;)
Is the defense using the stand your ground law?
Are guns natural?
-
Are guns natural?
LOL slow night tonight bottom bear?
dont bro Im sure some nice guys will see your craigslist ad and youll be back on top in no time ;)
-
LOL slow night tonight bottom bear?
dont bro Im sure some nice guys will see your craigslist ad and youll be back on top in no time ;)
Is craigslits natural?
-
Is craigslits natural?
KITTEN MITTENS!!!