4u2spoil
Posts: 211
Joined: 5/1/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DarqueMirror
quote:
ORIGINAL: 4u2spoil
Even if this teen (enough of a distinction from 'kid' for you?) was a professionally trained fighter who somehow managed to overcome the weight difference and land a blow, there's no evidence that it wasn't because HE feared for his safety. Since skittles aren't as effective a weapon as a gun, he couldn't shoot Zimmerman, but perhaps he sees some hulking oaf following him, doesn't know what his intentions are and is trying to protect himself by disabling the guy long enough to get away.
Thank you. That's what I was thinking too. But of course that would mean Martin initiated the physical confrontation, not Zimmerman.
No, it wouldn't mean that at all. If some guy grabbed me on the street and I punch him and knock him out, me winning or getting ahead in the fight is not conclusive proof that I was the aggressor. Since no one knows anything, you don't know that Zimmerman didn't follow this guy, and push him down before he fought back to defend himself or try to get away. Considering that there's plenty of evidence that Zimmerman followed Martin, I'd take a look at stalking laws because him just following the guy might be an aggressive act. If Martin had a gun and shot Zimmerman because he was being followed and feared for his safety, would you be arguing so strongly that no arrest should be made?
quote:
Not really, when you consider my original stance. I don't support his claim. I support the assertion by the police that, absent any concrete proof to dispute it, there's little they can do. Think about Casey Anthony. It's widely believed by many she caused, or at least hand a hand in her daughter's death. Yet she is free, found not guilty in a court of law. Reasonable doubt is a bitch. And Zimmermn's case reeks of it.
Huge difference. Although I strongly disagree with the verdict in the Casey Anthony case (Florida seems to be a great place to get away with killing someone), at least she was brought before a judge and jury. Zimmerman should at least have his claims tested before a judge and jury. At the very least, if the police really believed that this was a case of self defense, they should have collected evidence that would support that. Gunshot residue, trajectory information to show where Martin was when he was shot, where Zimmerman was - that could conclusively show if Martin was advancing towards Zimmerman. They could have tested the blood on Zimmerman, photographed his wounds, Martin's hands to back up his fight story. Tested Zimmerman for drugs and alcohol to prove that he was sober and had a clear mind when it came to interpreting a threat to his life.
They didn't do ANY of that, so for them to play judge and jury with NO evidence to support their conclusion is bullshit, not reasonable doubt.
quote:
Because the police, while knowing he could have bloodied himself up, also know there's no way to *prove* that he did. Remember what lawyers love to say -- "It's not what you know or what you believe, it's what you can *prove*." That is how ou beloved justice system works. You can't convict a guy just because you know he did something. You have to prove it....beyond a reasonable doubt.
Wrong again. It's not up to the police to draw those conclusions. Their job is to prevent violence and crimes from occurring, and if a crime does occur to investigate, collect evidence and turn that information over to the people who can decide whether or not to prosecute. I had a former roommate steal from me, and I'll never forget the police refusing to investigate because they gave my former roommate an out. "She'll say that those things were hers" Well, can you at least bring the bitch down for questioning to see what she says, and take a look at the receipts in my name to challenge that? Nope, just not worth investigating because nothing violent happened.
There are some good police officers, but there are also a lot of lazy bums who don't give a shit about victims. In that regard I can actually understand the reasoning behind the Stand Your Ground law to start with, but determining who that law applies to, and whether a murder is justifiable under that law is NOT up to the police.
|
RE: He was armed with skittles and ice tea... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread