It definitely matters if they want to charge him with murder 1. Doesn’t really matter if they charge him with manslaughter, which is most likely.
[/quote]
His intent was to stop the “criminal” from getting away.
he did that.
I would think intent was shown right there.
Bottom line, it does NOT look like he was beaten within an inch of his life so no, I do not believe for a second that he HAD to kill the kid to save his own life.[/quote]
You don’t have to be within an inch of your life. Nothing has changed.
[quote]Loudog75 wrote:
Zimmerman was essentially a self employed security guard.
99% of all security guards go to work with a flashlight and a notebook. Their job - Observe and Report.
Zimmerman decided to take his gun to work that day. Wrong decision!! Now he should be liable. If they don’t get him for manslaughter I believe they’ll take the rest of his life financially in civil court.
I can’t believe you guys are all still arguing for his innocense.
GUILTY!!![/quote]
This is a very complicated case, Louddog. You know, a lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what-have-you’s. And, uh, lotta strands to keep in mind, man.
But here’s a quick summary of the discussion over the last 3 threads:[/quote]
The Pink Panther has ties to the criminal underworld and has been linked to jewel theft, so if the Little Man decided to shoot him for painting a pillar pink, he’s perfectly at liberty to do so.[/quote]
I’d shoot him for painting my pillar pink.[/quote]
If owner of pillar you are not, choice of color is not yours to make…hmmm…[/quote]
What did I say?[/quote]
[quote]Loudog75 wrote:
Zimmerman was essentially a self employed security guard.
99% of all security guards go to work with a flashlight and a notebook. Their job - Observe and Report.
Zimmerman decided to take his gun to work that day. Wrong decision!! Now he should be liable. If they don’t get him for manslaughter I believe they’ll take the rest of his life financially in civil court.
I can’t believe you guys are all still arguing for his innocense.
GUILTY!!![/quote]
This is a very complicated case, Louddog. You know, a lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what-have-you’s. And, uh, lotta strands to keep in mind, man.
But here’s a quick summary of the discussion over the last 3 threads:[/quote]
The Pink Panther has ties to the criminal underworld and has been linked to jewel theft, so if the Little Man decided to shoot him for painting a pillar pink, he’s perfectly at liberty to do so.[/quote]
I’d shoot him for painting my pillar pink.[/quote]
If owner of pillar you are not, choice of color is not yours to make…hmmm…[/quote]
What did I say?[/quote]
“I’d shoot him for painting my pillar pink”.[/quote]
Yes.
I wouldn’t expect Martin to have been calm, and he wasn’t. I would, however, expect that Martin wouldn’t have run in the first place. I wouldn’t have. Dude wants to rob me? Got a gun? Fine. Not worth dying over.
I’m really not defending anyone, X. I will be happy if Zim is convicted and I will be happy if he is acquitted. The choice of the trial jury reigns supreme and we must honor that. The key take-away is that I want him to stand trial. I’ve said that he should have been arrested and indicted immediately from the very start. But it is not reasonable to cry GUILTY at this point. If he stands trial than “justice” is served, yes? I think it would be entirely unacceptable if he simply walked away or if some Black Panther dude assassinated him. Both would contravene American law and obstruct any application of justice.
This dosen’t sound like a kid who would provoke a fight…[/quote]
It doesn’t. It looks like a photo shopped picture, which it is just like many others floating around which are either photoshopped or of another kid all together.
the fact that guys like you are STILL posting the fake images without acknowledging this is harming to this kid’s image so the parents have every right to claim this as a smear of his character.[/quote]
EXACTLY. Lemme ask this, why is right and ok for mild mannered suburbian kids to flick off cameras and stuff but minorities can’t without them seeming like ingrates? Double Standard.
This dosen’t sound like a kid who would provoke a fight…[/quote]
It doesn’t. It looks like a photo shopped picture, which it is just like many others floating around which are either photoshopped or of another kid all together.
the fact that guys like you are STILL posting the fake images without acknowledging this is harming to this kid’s image so the parents have every right to claim this as a smear of his character.[/quote]
EXACTLY. Lemme ask this, why is right and ok for mild mannered suburbian kids to flick off cameras and stuff but minorities can’t without them seeming like ingrates? Double Standard.[/quote]
It’s moronic either way. I wasn’t aware that it was socially acceptable for suburban types to do it in the first place. All I’ve seen is those “kissy” face pictures that girls do. Which I hate.
[quote]njrusmc wrote:
I wouldn’t expect Martin to have been calm, and he wasn’t. I would, however, expect that Martin wouldn’t have run in the first place. I wouldn’t have. Dude wants to rob me? Got a gun? Fine. Not worth dying over.
I’m really not defending anyone, X. I will be happy if Zim is convicted and I will be happy if he is acquitted. The choice of the trial jury reigns supreme and we must honor that. The key take-away is that I want him to stand trial. I’ve said that he should have been arrested and indicted immediately from the very start. But it is not reasonable to cry GUILTY at this point. If he stands trial than “justice” is served, yes? I think it would be entirely unacceptable if he simply walked away or if some Black Panther dude assassinated him. Both would contravene American law and obstruct any application of justice.[/quote]
Yes and No. Plenty of people get away with shit they did and plenty get tossed on shit they didn’t do. IT’s not perfect…that’s for sure…but a Trial gives him a 50/50 shot.
[quote]Loudog75 wrote:
Zimmerman was essentially a self employed security guard.
99% of all security guards go to work with a flashlight and a notebook. Their job - Observe and Report.
Zimmerman decided to take his gun to work that day. Wrong decision!! Now he should be liable. If they don’t get him for manslaughter I believe they’ll take the rest of his life financially in civil court.
I can’t believe you guys are all still arguing for his innocense.
GUILTY!!![/quote]
This is a very complicated case, Louddog. You know, a lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what-have-you’s. And, uh, lotta strands to keep in mind, man.
But here’s a quick summary of the discussion over the last 3 threads:[/quote]
The Pink Panther has ties to the criminal underworld and has been linked to jewel theft, so if the Little Man decided to shoot him for painting a pillar pink, he’s perfectly at liberty to do so.[/quote]
I’d shoot him for painting my pillar pink.[/quote]
If owner of pillar you are not, choice of color is not yours to make…hmmm…[/quote]
What did I say?[/quote]
“I’d shoot him for painting my pillar pink”.[/quote]
Yes.[/quote]
This dosen’t sound like a kid who would provoke a fight…[/quote]
It doesn’t. It looks like a photo shopped picture, which it is just like many others floating around which are either photoshopped or of another kid all together.
the fact that guys like you are STILL posting the fake images without acknowledging this is harming to this kid’s image so the parents have every right to claim this as a smear of his character.[/quote]
EXACTLY. Lemme ask this, why is right and ok for mild mannered suburbian kids to flick off cameras and stuff but minorities can’t without them seeming like ingrates? Double Standard.[/quote]
It’s moronic either way. I wasn’t aware that it was socially acceptable for suburban types to do it in the first place. All I’ve seen is those “kissy” face pictures that girls do. Which I hate.[/quote]
It definitely matters if they want to charge him with murder 1. Doesn’t really matter if they charge him with manslaughter, which is most likely.
[/quote]
His intent was to stop the “criminal” from getting away.
he did that.
I would think intent was shown right there.
Bottom line, it does NOT look like he was beaten within an inch of his life so no, I do not believe for a second that he HAD to kill the kid to save his own life.[/quote]
It doesn’t matter if his intent was to chase a supposed criminal or whether he was being beat from an inch of his life for murder 1. They have to show premeditated intent to KILL (did he plan to kill trayvon a week before? day before? an hour before?). Unlikely he will be charged of that based on the facts that have come out. If so they will have a VERY diificult time proving it. Which is why they will probably charge him with manslaugher, which is pretty much an unlawful killing due to provocation or other circumstances, no need to prove premeditation.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
I do not see any damage to his nose.[/quote]
Looks broken to me.
Is there a pre-event profile pic?[/quote]
Why would a broken nose matter. That would show a fight not an assault.
I can cause those injuries if I’m fighting for my life.
Martins people can call any wounds on Zimmerman as Defense wounds as Martin was trying to get away from this stranger following.
I don’t really understand the focus in injuries form Zimmerman or Martin.
If a woman being raped fucks up her attacker and still gets raped it does not change anything.[/quote]
Reposted for emphasis. Zimmerman has a broken nose, a cut on the head…alledgedly. Martin is DEAD.[/quote]
Which is why he shouldn’t have attacked Zimmerman. And like I’ve been saying, nothing has changed.
[quote]Loudog75 wrote:
Zimmerman was essentially a self employed security guard.
99% of all security guards go to work with a flashlight and a notebook. Their job - Observe and Report.
Zimmerman decided to take his gun to work that day. Wrong decision!! Now he should be liable. If they don’t get him for manslaughter I believe they’ll take the rest of his life financially in civil court.
I can’t believe you guys are all still arguing for his innocense.
GUILTY!!![/quote]
This is a very complicated case, Louddog. You know, a lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what-have-you’s. And, uh, lotta strands to keep in mind, man.
But here’s a quick summary of the discussion over the last 3 threads:[/quote]
The Pink Panther has ties to the criminal underworld and has been linked to jewel theft, so if the Little Man decided to shoot him for painting a pillar pink, he’s perfectly at liberty to do so.[/quote]
I’d shoot him for painting my pillar pink.[/quote]
If owner of pillar you are not, choice of color is not yours to make…hmmm…[/quote]
What did I say?[/quote]
“I’d shoot him for painting my pillar pink”.[/quote]
Yes.[/quote]
Glad you remembered. [/quote]
Glad you have a grasp on context.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
I do not see any damage to his nose.[/quote]
Looks broken to me.
Is there a pre-event profile pic?[/quote]
Why would a broken nose matter. That would show a fight not an assault.
I can cause those injuries if I’m fighting for my life.
Martins people can call any wounds on Zimmerman as Defense wounds as Martin was trying to get away from this stranger following.
I don’t really understand the focus in injuries form Zimmerman or Martin.
If a woman being raped fucks up her attacker and still gets raped it does not change anything.[/quote]
Reposted for emphasis. Zimmerman has a broken nose, a cut on the head…alledgedly. Martin is DEAD.[/quote]
Ofcoarse tt matters because it helps corroborate Zimmermans story, that trayvon attacked first. If it is proven that zimmmerman provoked the attack then the broken nose wouldn’t matter.
I thought they arrested him last week? WTF. Good point by four60 about injuries, as usual. I don’t think there is much relevance to:
-Zimmerman’s injuries
-Martin’s alleged, drug dealing, bad attitude, suspension, school grades, favorite basketball team, etc
-Stand Your Ground law. Even the NRA says it doesn’t apply here. Roland from CNN needs to chill.
-Martin’s skittles. If Martin had an gun (illegal or not) but still died, would it make the situation any less important? No. So what’s the point in pressing all this Skittles Vs Gun bullshit? It’s the worst factoid ever. Even if Martin was a felon, Zimmerman still must stand trial.
[quote]therajraj wrote:
I do not see any damage to his nose.[/quote]
Looks broken to me.
Is there a pre-event profile pic?[/quote]
Why would a broken nose matter. That would show a fight not an assault.
I can cause those injuries if I’m fighting for my life.
Martins people can call any wounds on Zimmerman as Defense wounds as Martin was trying to get away from this stranger following.
I don’t really understand the focus in injuries form Zimmerman or Martin.
If a woman being raped fucks up her attacker and still gets raped it does not change anything.[/quote]
Reposted for emphasis. Zimmerman has a broken nose, a cut on the head…alledgedly. Martin is DEAD.[/quote]
Ofcoarse tt matters because it helps corroborate Zimmermans story, that trayvon attacked first. If it is proven that zimmmerman provoked the attack then the broken nose wouldn’t matter. [/quote]
I’m not sure it proves a First strike but it does help show a struggle went down. I’m not sure anyone can prove an unprovoked attack. But he can show a struggle that he feared losing because of his gun