RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option

RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Hillwilliam -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:17:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Aren't you the one who had no clue about HC, and LC? And in fact claimed that those were legally identical to pointing a gun straight at someone? Pardon me if I take my information from my actual colleagues. Aren't you the one with no reading comprehension? I never mentioned HC or LC, you did[8\|] I was working with them on advanced hand to hand. They were pretty crappy at the beginning of the summer. Now, back to my comments about portly police. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGIrIjeeNKk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niZP6WuGkq4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o4_iYl310g http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1EOHmqxCgQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qk3Qh9wml4 So much for law enforcement requiring their members to adhere to those guidelines. They got the Union going to bat for them.

Raiikun -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:18:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic He had no right to defend himself ? no gun, just iced tea and skittles and his own strength? Who gave george the right to kill him for trespass, who gave him the right to decide that because he wasnt a perfect kid, that he must be scum? how did george know his background? Yes people ARE saying he deserved to be killed. george isnt going to pay for his own bad decisions with his life. And his crime is far more heinous George didn't kill anyone for trespass, or suspicion. The only thing George did out of suspicion was call police. The gunshot came due to being pinned on the ground taking numerous head injuries until George feared imminent death or great bodily injury. Thus, it was justified by law. That Trayvon was the cause of his own death doesn't mean he deserved it. The analogy O'Mara used, is that it's like a kid driving way over the speed limit, and causing a wreck in which he dies. He caused his own death by that act, but speeding hardly makes you deserving of death.

Marc2b -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:23:14 AM)
quote: I don't think anyone here is saying Travon deserved to be killed. His death occurred as a series of poor decisions. He couldn't get along with his mother. He didn't do well in school and got in fights. He thought cutting across people yards was ok. Fighting was his go to response. At some point you pay for your choices. People may not be saying he deserved to be killed but I'm willing to bet that many are thinking it. Trayvon is responsible for his own death because he couldn't get along with his mother or didn't do well in school? This is classic "blame the victim" bullshit. "Well, honey, if you didn't want to get raped, why did you wear a short skirt."

Marc2b -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:30:44 AM)
A note on the side discussions about "polite reponses." I agree that in some circumstances a polite response is not only the civilized thing to do but the tactically sound thing (in that you don't piss somebody off) as well. What offends me about racerjim's post is his obvious belief that in similar circumstances (IE following somebody without justification and confronting them on somebody else's property) he is owed (mother fucking *owed*) a polite response. The fucking arrogance behind that mindset is both incomprehensible and offensive to me.

farglebargle -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:34:03 AM)
quote: The gunshot came due to being pinned on the ground taking numerous head injuries until George feared imminent death or great bodily injury. But, of course, facts inform belief. And thus facts matter. 2.0cm and 0.5 cm abrasions do not 'imminent death' make. Being checked out 5x5 by the paramedics for neurological function and absence of concussion do not 'imminent death' make. George may have had an UNREASONABLE fear, but that's not good enough under 776.012 or 776.041

Hillwilliam -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:35:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: The gunshot came due to being pinned on the ground taking numerous head injuries until George feared imminent death or great bodily injury. But, of course, facts inform belief. And thus facts matter. 2.0cm and 0.5 cm abrasions do not 'imminent death' make. Being checked out 5x5 by the paramedics for neurological function and absence of concussion do not 'imminent death' make. George may have had an UNREASONABLE fear, but that's not good enough under 776.012 or 776.041 Farg. For the umpteenth time. You do NOT have to be injured to be in fear of your imminent demise.

farglebargle -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:37:48 AM)
So, you're suggesting that Trayvon Martin attacking the UNIDENTIFIED PERSON CHASING HIM was legally justified, even if Zimmerman didn't attack first, given the fear induced in Martin by Zimmerman's troubling behaviour. Martin didn't have to wait to be injured before using deadly force, given the fear he was in for his life?

tazzygirl -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:37:49 AM)
Manslaughter and 3rd degree murder.....

farglebargle -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:39:34 AM)
That's better than I thought. Easier for the Jury, too. Manslaughter is a slam-dunk. The whole 'ill will' thing was a reach. There, but not the point. Manslaughter gets George off the streets. I wonder what prison gang will take care of him. Do the Latin Kings like guys named 'Zimmerman?" because although he killed a black kid, I don't think the Aryan Brotherhood does!

Raiikun -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:40:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: The gunshot came due to being pinned on the ground taking numerous head injuries until George feared imminent death or great bodily injury. But, of course, facts inform belief. And thus facts matter. 2.0cm and 0.5 cm abrasions do not 'imminent death' make. Being checked out 5x5 by the paramedics for neurological function and absence of concussion do not 'imminent death' make. George may have had an UNREASONABLE fear, but that's not good enough under 776.012 or 776.041 As testified by multiple people in court, no injuries at all are required to have a reasonable fear of imminent death.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:46:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle So, you're suggesting that Trayvon Martin attacking the UNIDENTIFIED PERSON CHASING HIM was legally justified, even if Zimmerman didn't attack first, given the fear induced in Martin by Zimmerman's troubling behaviour. Martin didn't have to wait to be injured before using deadly force, given the fear he was in for his life? I sure wish you'd make up your mind. One person only has to be followed by someone with troubling behavior to use deadly force but the other has to wait until he has more injuries? Double standard much? "All men are created equal" Remember that?

farglebargle -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:48:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle So, you're suggesting that Trayvon Martin attacking the UNIDENTIFIED PERSON CHASING HIM was legally justified, even if Zimmerman didn't attack first, given the fear induced in Martin by Zimmerman's troubling behaviour. Martin didn't have to wait to be injured before using deadly force, given the fear he was in for his life? I sure wish you'd make up your mind. One person only has to be followed by someone with troubling behavior to use deadly force but the other has to wait until he has more injuries? Double standard much? "All men are created equal" Remember that? You need to reread that thread. From the context, it should be intuitively obvious to even the most casual observer that by reversing the premise, I am eliciting clarification as to the inherent irrelevance of the statement being examined in the first instance.

farglebargle -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 7:50:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: The gunshot came due to being pinned on the ground taking numerous head injuries until George feared imminent death or great bodily injury. But, of course, facts inform belief. And thus facts matter. 2.0cm and 0.5 cm abrasions do not 'imminent death' make. Being checked out 5x5 by the paramedics for neurological function and absence of concussion do not 'imminent death' make. George may have had an UNREASONABLE fear, but that's not good enough under 776.012 or 776.041 As testified by multiple people in court, no injuries at all are required to have a reasonable fear of imminent death. And as everyone knows, it only matters what the JUROR thinks is reasonable. You know, they decide issues of fact and stuff, and the FACT that Zimmerman's injuries are less than they've seen from their own kids' skinned knees isn't going to help him on that point.

Raiikun -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 8:00:38 AM)
That is not a fact in evidence.

farglebargle -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 8:02:15 AM)
What, that Zimmerman's injuries were so minor they didn't require a visit to the ER? That's in evidence.

Lucylastic -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 8:06:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic He had no right to defend himself ? no gun, just iced tea and skittles and his own strength? Who gave george the right to kill him for trespass, who gave him the right to decide that because he wasnt a perfect kid, that he must be scum? how did george know his background? Yes people ARE saying he deserved to be killed. george isnt going to pay for his own bad decisions with his life. And his crime is far more heinous George didn't kill anyone for trespass, or suspicion. The only thing George did out of suspicion was call police. The gunshot came due to being pinned on the ground taking numerous head injuries until George feared imminent death or great bodily injury. Thus, it was justified by law. That Trayvon was the cause of his own death doesn't mean he deserved it. The analogy O'Mara used, is that it's like a kid driving way over the speed limit, and causing a wreck in which he dies. He caused his own death by that act, but speeding hardly makes you deserving of death. FFS I was responding to this quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Words are funny things. I don't think anyone here is saying Travon deserved to be killed. His death occurred as a series of poor decisions. He couldn't get along with his mother. He didn't do well in school and got in fights. He thought cutting across people yards was ok. Fighting was his go to response. At some point you pay for your choices. HIS assertions, HIS words. So Bugger off with the attempts to justify GZ. if he hadnt gone after TM TM would still be alive.GEORGE killed him He will not loose his life for HIS poor decisions like the teen did. Now back to reality and my decision not to in this clusterfuck of bullshit

DomKen -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 8:08:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux I don't think anyone here is saying Travon deserved to be killed. His death occurred as a series of poor decisions. He couldn't get along with his mother. He didn't do well in school and got in fights. He thought cutting across people yards was ok. Fighting was his go to response. At some point you pay for your choices. As a teenager that describes me and who knows how many other people. Should we have all paid with our lives for our choices? Why is losing a fistfight justification for killing someone?

Raiikun -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 8:09:26 AM)
Point for the defense...jury will not be given instruction on George provoking Trayvon. Good call, State provided no evidence of George provoking him.

DomKen -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 8:13:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam Farg. For the umpteenth time. You do NOT have to be injured to be in fear of your imminent demise. But there has to be something. Martin did not have a weapon, did not have Zimmerman in a position to actually kill him intentionally and was not using sufficient force to do any significant damage (this is according to the Zimmerman version of events which the prosecutor showed yesterday is a lie). So even if you believe Zimmerman, which at this point is ludicrous, what was the cause of his imminent fear of death or great bodily harm that would have elicited the same fear in a reasonable person?

tazzygirl -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 8:15:34 AM)
~FR Soon, this train wreck will be all over, then people can gather their discarded tissues (not for the tears), zip up their pants and go about their lives once again.

Page: << < prev 29 30 [31] 32 33 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625