Yeah...you're still wrong. No matter how you slice it, if someone intends to steal something, they don't report that they found it. Yeah, you're safe for the moment. But what about 6 or 7 hours later when everyone in the house is asleep and vulnerable? Are you safe then? Based on Zimmerman's 911 call, Martin was looking around at the houses. It's possible he didn't know which house belonged to his fathers' fiancee. Remember, he didn't live there. He was only visiting.
I'm familiar with all of this. It may be that the facts are in Zimmerman's best interest; you don't allow for that. Otherwise you are just convicting him automatically. The kid saw nothing except aftermath. Heard some screams and a gunshot. Then saw a body on the ground. Frankly, he is hardly a credible witness to anything except what he heard and he has no way of verifying who screamed. I have no doubt that Trayvon might scream if he saw a gun pointed at him. Who wouldn't? Do you mean the grainy video at the police station? Yeah I saw it. If there is no injury why does the officer briefly inspect the back of Zimmerman's head? I saw the interview with the funeral director. Nothing convincing there. This was not a brawl; it was a scuffle lasting a few seconds. Not sure about the headset operation. With mine you would have to disconnect the call deliberately and not by just removing the headset.
So logical you are. Trust the words of the man who will do anything at this point to save his from being convicted of murder. Zimmerman should be at least convicted for man slaughter. Deadly force has a level of progression. Anyone who is in the military or in law enforcement knows this. "Shout, Show, Shove, Shoot". Let's play your game and just assume that it was Martin that confronted Zimmerman. I am also going to make an a assumption that the 17 year kid likes living and fears death and is not suicidal. If Zimmerman is packing heat and fears for his life... fine. If Zimmerman just presented his gun showing the kid he has the upper hand and can end his life easily I'm going to make the assumption that Martin would back off. This is where Zimmerman messed up. He went from shout straight to shoot.
If you mistakenly walk off with $1000 worth of someone else's property, how long can you sanely ignore inquiries about it's whereabouts and the return of them? I never thought she was trying to steal it; I was griped about her casual attitude about our valuable property. Would you take nearly a month to correct an error you had made with someone else's valuable property? Maybe you would but I would not.
...pinned underneath Martin who was slamming his head into the ground? Is that what you imagine? The irony here is that perhaps Zimmerman should have used the gun more aggressively as in the S sequence you suggest. I bet, though, that that is a mis-use of the weapon ironically. What does the law say about that, anyone?
If Zimmerman reached the point to Martin screaming for his life at gun point that means Zimmerman effectively controlled the situation. There was no reason for Zimmerman to pop a round into Martin. Shooting a screaming man fearing for his life is not self defense anymore. Its plain murder.
The scream of Martin before the gunshot suggests that Martin knew about the gun and was probably willing to back off if Zimmerman kept.on holding him at gun point.
I find it hilarious that Giddyup accepts the (divergent) testimony of Zimmerman/his attorney and his father at word value but then discredits all other sources of evidence.
What sources are those? A 13 YO who saw nothing pertinent and only heard something he can't identify. The GF of the deceased who is no less biased than family on the other side. Most of my "arguing" is with the conclusions of the keyboard warriors. A passionate rush to judgment is foolish. All guilty parties should be punished but they have to be found guilty by a count of law not the New Black Panther Party.
You mean doing that thing where you don't follow someone around even when instructed not to by said authorities? Hmmmm. Take about 10 seconds and think about what you are saying. Zimmerman followed Martin around in his car. You are yourself saying that Martin tried to get away and Zimmerman got out of his car and CHASED him. Now let that soak in and continue to follow me here. This guy has just chased Martin, let's say Martin was able to hide and get the jump on him, GOOD! You are passing yourself off as being reasonable so try not to be too dense and say that Zimmerman was almost back to his truck, then Martin went after him and that had a knock-down, drag out brawl which led them from Zimmermans car all the way to the back of an apartment complex? Get real. Nono, Martin is at fault for confronting Zimmerman. [/quote] What in the world does that have to do with the back and forth you, others and I were having? You brought racism into that conversation when you shouldn't have and don't want to admit it.
You bring these other elements to the discussion acting as if those that have an opinion that Zimmerman might be guilty support the new black panther party. Its a simple debate of weather Zimmerman is guilty or not. Hence why this is in the debate and discussion section.
I think the funeral director's statements were very telling. Remember, Zimmerman said that Martin was on top of him, punching him, and slamming his head into the ground. It would have been tough for Martin to do that without bruising his fists. And I'm curious why you think it was only a scuffle that lasted a few seconds? Who cares how your phone works? Are all phones identical? It's ridiculous that you think we're the ones making logical stretches....
First of all, I'm not putting forward a version so nothing is "my version". Everything I say is based on evidence and statements by witnesses, phone records to support the evidence etc. What you are saying is based on a witness, and Zimmerman's satement. There is conflicting evidence. Apparently you've made up your mind that one of the witnesses and Zimmerman are telling the truth. That doesn't make it so, especially with so much evidence going against their statements.
Not sure what authority a dispatcher has. Not much I would imagine. CHASE verb (used with object) 1. to pursue in order to seize, overtake, Are you saying that Zimmerman was trying to take Martin into custody? I brought it in? I'm the one trying to keep it out.
you are conveniently forgetting the police report. I'm trying to hold the middle ground from those who are convicting on selective evidence wrapped with hysteria of hate crime.
Until you return someone else's property, which you took under faulty pretense, and you don't make zealous effort to return it, you are "stealing" it as long as it remains in your posession. That's what my lawyer friend said. He said that there was a legal term for it... begins with a "C" I think. It's tantamount to "stealing." She knew that she could not ultimately get away with it because she let it be known that she had taken it. Why did that take a week? And then why wait another 3 weeks to return inquiries.... very selfish and lazy with regards to her own wrong-headed initiative.
