George Zimmerman does not need to goto prison to appease me He needs to because what he did was wrong. As someone else stated . . . George is not even the most major thing about this case to me . . .the issue is the cops show up to a scene . . .sees a dead kid . . . the killer says self defense. . . and they go . .uhm .. ok I personally view George Zimmerman as a bit like a drunk driver who killed someone. Sure they are legitimately sorry Sure they wish they could take it back Sure they may not have meant to kill anyone but the reality is . . someone is dead Answer me this: If a drunk driver killed someone . . . Do you think a good defense is . . well he swirved into my lane? If a drunk driver were to attempt prove the other person was 'at fault' . . . mind you . . . the only two people on the road was the drunk driver and the other person . . . and the other person was dead. How well do you think that defense would be accepted? Rocket River
So, in your mind, a trial is not necessary? Did you understand my previous post? What if the trial brings to light that it was, in fact, self-defense? You did not answer that question.
Trial needs to happen . . . Folx need to see I maybe a bit 'closed minded' because I cannot see how self defense works in a situation he initiated. Just like I cannot see a drunk driver saying the other guy was at fault. . . IT is almost like someone picked a fight. . . found he was losing . . and then escalated and want to blame the person they picked a fight with . Rocket River
No, but that's not what I said. What does Serino say about the original decision not to press charges? Did he resign in protest? He had his mind made up when interviewing witnesses; he told one witness to her face what he thought had happened in one report. Smelled to me like overzealousness.
I'm with RR on this one. If 'self defense' works given what we know -- then the law is seriously flawed. Given the backstory -- Z following, police already on the way (and Z aware of this), no crime in progress, the extent of Z's injuries, etc etc if the law condones a killing, then the law is very wrong here. It's on trial as much as Z. (and the DA's office should also be trial for the length of time it took to address things).
As I said, it is unlikely, but not impossible. Just because he initiated the situation does not mean that he would not be allowed to defend himself if attacked. Now, whether the means used to defend himself were excessive (IF he was even attacked, I would consider it very likely that at the very least, the means he used to defend himself were excessive), that is a different question. The only case that I personally could see where he would be justified because of self-defense would be that even though he initiated the situation, Trayvon then attacked him, and the situation escalated to a point (e.g. Trayvon repeatedly banging Zimmerman's head into the concrete) that Zimmerman could reasonably believe his life was in danger. To me, that is a very unlikely scenario and not supported by the facts we know (he would have to have had more severe head injuries than we know of). I can imagine that Trayvon attacked him (because he might have felt attacked himself), although I consider even that unlikely, but in my mind, unless the attack was so severe as to threaten Zimmerman's life, he had no right to kill the kid. BUT - IF the evidence shows that Trayvon attacked first AND Zimmerman's life was under threat...you should accept an acquittal.
It's not a straw man argument. My point is that one should not already predict outrage based on a theoretical acquittal when there is still a possibility (even though a very remote one, in my mind) that an acquittal could be justified based on fact findings.
If he is aquitted of Murder can they still find him guilty of manslaughter? I think one would be easier to prove than the other.
Yes, they can (and should, imo, based on what I know now - aggravated manslaughter, actually). http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/782.07
It was me. Try civility next time and from now on... we should not have to stoop to your low standards of making unprovoked personal attacks. It's not my job to submit to your fantasies.
... douse the fire. There's no reason to hurl unnecessary insults. Does it make you feel powerful or something?
That is not what happened though... The police took him to the station that night and questioned him for 6 hours. Then the lead detective called the district attorney and suggested that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter... What more do you reasonably expect the police to do? The district attorney continued investigating the matter and were hamstrung by the statutory law of stand your ground.
i didn't insult you, i made a joke. and no, it doesn't make me feel powerful, it amuses me. quit whinging.
