If you think great bodily harm is imminent (and if there was blood on the back of Zimmerman's head, that would be the case) then screaming for help is not a reasonable means to escape danger. The statute is talking about running away, which is not really possible with someone on top of you. Of course, that has nothing to do with my point, which was the Zimmerman following/chasing/insert your favorite synonym here Martin doesn't preclude him from claiming self-defense.
Blood on the back of Zimmerman's head indicates great bodily harm is imminent? Out of curiosity, what do you think "great bodily harm" mean? Actually, it is.....especially in a residential neighborhood. And you didn't respond to my last question. As far as we know, the screams for help came from someone other than Zimmerman... And if those screams came from Martin, wouldn't that indicate that Zimmerman was no longer in danger and undermine his self-defense argument?
CNN is very biased. Just look how long they kept running the picture of Zimmerman's mug shot and "11 year old Hollister Trayvon" You are wrong to use CNN as some objective standard.
I have already posted about this. No, it isn't. There is no reasonable expectation that simply yelling for help will stop your attacker, and if harm is imminent, waiting for help to arrive is not a reasonable option, even assuming help will arrive (notice that there were several reports of calls for help and NO ONE WENT TO HELP). If someone is beating you to the point where you fear death or great bodily harm is imminent, calling for help and waiting for a neighbor to call the police, and then for the police to arrive, is not a reasonable means of escape. Assuming, arguendo, that it was Trayvon screaming, that does not prove that Zimmerman was no longer in danger. If Trayvon was attacking him, Zimmerman went for his gun, and Trayvon screamed but didn't stop attacking him, the screaming does not remove the danger of the attack. Any discussion of what happened during the actual altercation is irrelevant to the point I was making, which was that pursuit does not eliminate the right of self-defense.
How about you post it again? B/c there's no way that the mere presence of blood on the back of Zimmerman's head indicates "great bodily harm". They were in a residential neighborhood. Screams for help would've brought out the neighbors, and that would've ended the fight. You may not think it would've been effective, but screaming out for help is absolutely a reasonable means to escape danger. That's b/c the calls for help were immediately followed by GUNSHOTS. No offense, but use some common sense.... I think that if there were no gunshots, the neighbors themselves would've tried to help. So your theory is that Martin was screaming for help as he was attacking Zimmerman?
bigtexxx has no credibility. preeeeeeeety sure he would have a completely different viewpoint if trayvon was the shooter and zimmerman was the one who was shot. i wish people would just ignore him. he hates the blacks. ignore him
What exactly is my viewpoint? Wanting more facts? lol you're just trying to hurl insults. I'll be the bigger man and not respond in kind.
The jist of it is that great bodily harm is determined on a case by case basis, but such injuries such as a broken nose, cuts requiring stitches, severe black eyes, and concussions have been held to be great bodily harm in the past (at least in CA). If Zimmerman had blood on the back of his head, it is not unreasonable that he feared a concussion, or cuts that required stitches. If Zimmerman was punched in the face, it is not unreasonable that he feared a broken nose. There are several reports that someone was heard screaming. No one came and broke up anything. It doesn't appear that screaming was an effective means of escape for whoever it was that was screaming. If he had not fired, who is to say that the calls for help would not have immediately been followed by Zimmerman's skull being cracked? The only one who can say with any reasonable certainty is Zimmerman. He has stated that he was in fear for his life. You are assuming that he had time to wait for people to come and help. There have been situations over and over again where people walk right past victims in plain sight, let alone just ignoring cries for help. It is called the bystander effect. I think you are severely overestimating the effectiveness of crying for help. I have no theory. I was merely outlining a scenario in which Martin could be screaming and Zimmerman could be in danger at the same time.
Cuts requiring stitches and broken noses are pretty easy to get without much effort: see Kobe Bryant. Neither of which warrants deadly force
California is not Florida. Like I said in my previous response to you, using your logic, California terminology, and Florida law, if you commanded your chihuahua to attack me, I'd be within my rights to shoot you to death. Don't you think there's a disconnect somewhere? Like I said, those screams for help were followed by gunshots. Who in their right might goes to intervene when they hear gunshots? Use some common sense... How can Zimmerman say what would happen with reasonable certainty? Can he see the future? If he doesn't say that, then he has no basis for self-defense and would've been charged with murder. It's in his best interest to say that. How long does it take for people to go outside their houses? 30 seconds? 20? No to mention the police were already on their way. First of all, these are Zimmerman's neighbors, and he's on the neighborhood watch. You don't think they would've intervened? I'm just showing that Zimmerman didn't exhaust every reasonable means of escape. In fact, he skipped over the most basic one. But I guess you're never in any real danger when you bring a gun to a fistfight.
Wow this thread is still going strong. The players are slightly different (cep for bigtex) but there's still point by point rebuttal going on at page 157. RIP Trayvon. May you find peace in the afterlife that has eluded many here after your death.