I know you're not racist. Nobody here could find reams of your race baiting, racist posts in all of five minutes. Definitely no proof whatsoever.
Actually there is lisa faith and another one. wihite black and latina. See i have been watching and i love all races.
You are missing the point. If your objective is to hide in the bushes to ambush somebody, why on god's earth would you be on the phone talking at the same time? Your voice would obviously make it much harder to catch your victim by surprise. The phone records clearly show Martin was on the phone at the time the altercation ensued. All this talk about Martin's character, etc is noise that has nothing to do with the case. It seems like an effort to deflect attention from the fact that Zimmerman's case for a valid self-defense claim looks pretty weak right now.
He escalated nothing into an altercation by going in pursuit. He escalated a fight into a shooting by choosing to arm himself to go into pursuit.
No, I am against somebody thinking that "these assholes always get away," then taking said weapon with them to track the guy down. That sentiment is not indicative of somebody looking to avoid an altercation. Also, if you equate that with being against concealed carry, the you have never taken one minute of CHL training.
Now i know this is someone being truly objective. props to you refman. I'm impressed. yyou just summed it up
The prosecution has done a pretty good job of making GZ look completely untrustworthy. They've shown inconsistencies in what he said about the night and the incident. They've shown that he lied about stand your ground defense. The prosecution has shown that he had a beef against people who he felt was guilty getting away, and he obviously hates that. It's certainly possible that he would take the law into his own hands. More witnesses saw GZ on top and believe that TM was doing the yelling. But if I were juror, I don't know that showing that it could have happened that way, or that it's more likely than unlikely that it happened that way is enough. I'm not sure that the prosecution has met the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. Like I've said before a lot will depend on the instruction to the jurors. I'm not sure what the burden is on the defense as far having to show that deadly force was necessary for self defense to work. The defense still has to present their case so I'll wait for that before making a decision. As of now, the defense hasn't shown that deadly force was necessary.
The jury instruction on the burden of proof for self defense in Florida: In other words, the prosecution has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman was not lawfully defending himself when he shot Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman has no burden to prove his defense. If the jury thinks that it is unlikely but not totally unreasonable that Zimmerman was reasonably in fear of great bodily injury and that Martin was not when he took those actions that created the fear in Zimmerman, then they must acquit him. Based on the prosecution's case to this point, I don't see how they possibly meet their burden.
Protect it from what? Black kids in hooded sweaters? seriously what happened in that ares is built over an old seminole burial ground
This is your initial problem. You equate Zimmermans CCL privileges as an aggressive act. Here is a general consensus of those who i know and have a CCL; -You either carry 100% of the time (where legal) or you do not carry at all. -Shoot to kill. -.45 have more stopping power. -Carry a reliable weapon That said, knowing Zimmerman was an inspiring law enforcement officer, I would not be the least bit surprised knowing Zimmerman carried his weapon with him at all times. To imply that he armed himself for the specific mission of hunting down a "punk" is a far reach. Zimmerman used a Kel-Tec PF 9mm. If he was one of those CCL douches who liked to show off his gun and looking for an opportunity to get in a conflict, 1) He would not own a Kel-Tec and 2) He would be carrying something a little more powerful than a 9 mm. Nothing suggests Zimmerman was a gun enthusiast who liked to flaunt his arsenal. Everything points to him being a concerned citizen who was "tired of the punks getting away". My state doesn't require a training coarse, so no, i have not taken a single minute of training I have however, read up and fully understand the laws. I only carry when im going into the "hood". I live in a very low crime area so I do not feel the need to carry a weapon. But that said, if my neighborhood was a frequent to burglaries, I would carry all the time...and I wouldn't use a POS Kel-Tec.
