The law varies. A 17 can be tried as an adult for a number of offenses. An 18 year old can vote, but can't drink, etc. Point is that he was not a 90 pound 11 year old kid. He was a 17 year old high school football player (or ex-player).
There are different definitions of the word MURDER. You are using defintion #4. Others (such as myself) are using defintion #5. I see nothing wrong with using def #5 as we are not in court, this is a BBS.
Other than statutory rape, aren't you really talking about commission of crimes by minors? What other specifics are there? He could assume and in many cases he'd be the dead one. Why would he assume that the guy who came up behind him and struck him is unarmed? Would you do that? I bet in most cases, the one who responds to the display of a weapon gets shot trying to get out their own weapon. Context.
Says who? A police dispatcher? The police dispatcher did not even technically tell Zimmerman not to follow.
That's pretty funny but there are only 3 listed and two are entirely off-topic: mur·der [mur-der] Show IPA noun 1. Law . the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder). 2. Slang . something extremely difficult or perilous: That final exam was murder! 3. a group or flock of crows. I have no issue with saying GZ killed Trayvon; he's admitted that, of course. Fair to say that "murder" is typically a legal term; people say things like he's guilty of murder. In fact, I don't find that the seeming facts associated with the event even line up with any of your definitions. There was nothing barbarous; Zimmerman was apparently defending himself. He didn't riddle him with bullets or anything.
It was reported that Zimmerman called Corey. Perhaps he admitted something or changed his story. Absent that or some other info we don't know, it seems that mob rule works.
based on what? Just because a guy is charged after the weighing of the evidence doesn't mean mob rule works.
The operative word IN YOUR OWN WORDS is "can be". A judge would need to make that finding before that can happen. Until a judge makes an official ruling (aka on the record) to treat a minor as an adult, Trayvon is still a minor. GZ killed a kid. That is a legal FACT. If it makes you feel better that GZ killed an "almost adult", then just admit that. But the law will not have mercy on you. If you sell a car to a 17 1/2 year old kid, that contract is non-binding.
"We don't need you to do that" = DON'T FOLLOW Instead, he got out of his car and walked between the houses trying to follow Martin. What happens after that... we just don't know. Zimmerman had a history of some violence that is of public record. Anything related to Martin's past is leaked info and is still speculative at this point. Charges are coming and hopefully the truth will follow during the trial. Once charge, he's innocent until proven guilty. At least we can all put this saga behind us once charges are filed. Furthermore, those states who do prefer to have a Stand Your Ground Statute will have a chance to tweak the law in cases where following a person, even in a public place, will not be covered in the statute.
Based on the publicly available evidence, that's exactly what happened. Now, it's possible that there is some evidence that we do not know about which would alter things. Otherwise, it's clear that in Obamastan the mob rules.
Well first, you'd have to assume that Martin came up behind him and struck him in the head, despite evidence that points against this being the case. I understand there is evidence to support that being the case as well. But I'm not ready to make that judgement just yet. It saddens me that you are. As far as minors, you understand we have a juvenile court system, child endangerment laws, child abuse laws, child neglect laws, etc? The list goes on and on.
If GZ doesnt know what he's going up, against based on what you're saying, then he should've stayed in the care. He could have assumed the man was walking back to his house as well and just let the cops sort it out. Zimmerman put himself in a bad situation by following too closely. Close enough to get into a fight. For all those who lean GZ, what if Trey was 21 and had a legal gun on him and shot Zimmerman. How would yall feel then, HONESTLY
Based on the public evidence that I've seen, it would appear that Zimmerman should have been arrested long ago. It has nothing to do with a mob.
The dispatcher never explicitly said he should not follow. And even if he had, it did not have the force of law. And, please, the media's already found Zimmerman guilty. He lost the presumption of innocence long ago.
The dispatcher asked zimmerman was he following Martin the dispatcher clearly says we don't need you to do that.
Based on the evidence it leans against GZ so the public outcry just brought more needed attention to an event that has happened several times recently
The dispatcher did. The meaning was clear. It wasn't a direct order, but the intent of the dispatcher shouldn't have been doubted. We also have common sense, and hindsight to tell us it would have been much better if he'd not followed Martin.
1. So you are calling an insufficiently bloody scalp on GZ as a "lack of evidence?" 2. Who are you kidding? You make your own judgment by indicting Zimmerman of Murder. I'm actually just siding with the investigation thus far. 3. Of course there are all those systems but the question is this: do they apply in THIS case. What is the maximum penalty were GZ to be convicted of Murder 1 or 2 or Manslaughter? Now let's make Trayvon an adult... what is the maximum penalty for Murder 1 or 2 or Manslaughter? I've seen no evidence that it is any different but that is all beside the point. The age issue is brought up to elicit hostility towards GZ. As far as we know GZ defended himself from an attacker. It would seem that Trayvon was the aggressor here.
You quoted the noun. I quoted the verb ...which is how the term is being used in this thread. Do we need to go back to grade school? Nobody in this thread said he is guilty of murder. What we are saying is that he murdered Trayvon. By defintion #5 (a verb), there is absolutely nothing wrong with that statement. Whether something is "barbarous" or not is an opinion (since we are not usng the lawful term but the common term) and therefore you are in no position to tell how other people should feel about a given situation. I fully beleive this was a barbarous act. I feel GZ hunted down Trayvon like an animal and shot him (aka barbarous). You obviously feel differently. Feelings are irrelevant, however. I agree that GZ has not been found guilty of murder (LAW). But I will always beleive that GZ murdered TM in cold blood (common) regardless of the outcome of the case. If GZ gets off scott free then he did so by exploiting a loophole in the law. If GZ gets charged with manslaughter, then that validates to me that he murdered an innocent kid. Pissed you off, huh?
