The concept of "proportionality" has long been a backbone and fundamental element of valid self-defense. If there is fear of DEADLY force, you can respond in kind with DEADLY force. If the force applied is minor in nature and the response is one of deadly force a crime has been committed. By your standard, if I am understanding you correctly, any victim of a fistfight or perhaps even a single punch would have the legal right to respond in kind by shooting their attacker and hide under the guise of "reasonable fear of life". This is completely contrary to the fundamental principles of common law self defense theory. It's not a reasonable fear or a proportional response. It's an unreasonable one or "superficial" one as you referred to it. Zimmerman was not remotely close to death or major damage that night. Had that been the case, undoubtedly you'd have seen more significant injuries. What further hurts his claim is that Trayvon's autopsy revealed no injuries to his hands or knuckles (aside from a small abrasion on his left hand, which isn't even his dominant hand). He didn't have any of Zimmerman's DNA under his fingernails, had no DNA on the weapon and I don't think he even had any blood of Zimmerman's on him. There simply is no evidence that a major life or death type of struggle occurred that night. The evidence points to a minor struggle, probably not different than a struggle that occurs routinely in high schools across America without anyone resorting to responding with gunfire. Not one witness has corroborated that Zimmerman's head was being bashed against the concrete. Trayvon's body was clearly found on the grass, several feet from the concrete, further calling into doubt how much of this struggle, if any, even occurred on concrete. Where is the evidence, exactly, of any major struggle (aside from Zimmerman's assertions)?
He is a black kid he had no control over his emotions just him walking towards you allows deadly force just him ands his skittles. now that is smart arsed sarcasm
Dude, that's a racist statement. I don't personally know what race everyone is in this thread. I certainly don't know what their position is on black kids in general. I'm not sure how you think you do. As far as me personally, I am not a racist. If I were I wouldn't care about Zimmerman either since he is of Hispanic decent. Unless you think I am a BOR (black only racist). For the record, the person who commited the criminal act against my son was Hispanic. I don't hold the rest of his race responsible for what he did. The young man (he was 22) did what he did. I don't hold every black kid accountable for what Trayvon Martin did that night which was to use extremely poor judgement that contributed to his death. The kid should have been in a world of trouble with his Dad at that time. Trayvon should have avoided confrontation and gone straight home. He had time to do that. The last thing Trayvon needed was more trouble even if that trouble was just the cops going to his Dad's place asking if he lived there. Instead this kid winds up throwing fists at an adult. Trayvon got kicked out of school for weed and had weed in his system at the time of his death. Trayvon was sent there to get his act together and he can't even respect his Dad enough to quit doing what he was sent there for. Trayvon was taking pictures of a gun in his hand, bragging about fighting and talking about weed. That's who was hiding in the bushes waiting to jump GZ not every black kid in america.
What's racist I'm not saying all white people and i know who is what for the mostpart. Did you have a problem wih bigtexxx asking my race?
Could have been lying on the ground behind the bushes. You did hear there was a Slim Jim found in the bushes, right? Could have just come from the direction of the bushes hiding behind the column by the bush or behind the white dividers. Could have been a figure of speech comment since it was so dark that it was difficult to say exactly where he came from. Care to comment on the other things that I wrote in that post? Or do you think Martin was a saint that night? I don't particularly like that GZ had a gun on him but there's nothing illegal about it and in fact it could have saved his own life. I'm not even sure why he had the gun on him. I don't think he was on patrol that night. He had gone to the store and back. I don't live there so I cant say how rough the area is. There are multiple places in Houston that I might consider carrying a gun if I was out at night.
I had no idea what your race was. You didn't seem offended by the question. I assumed it wasn't important to you.
It wasn't because i know he is biased and i can't change his opinion. i posted what i posted about ida lee Delaney to make the point that I've seen this already. but i did go into this unbiased that's why in the real world off the internet i didn't pay attention till the trial. i have seen nothing that says Zimmerman should have approached this kid. It stops there for me but i see the same old bashing of young black males that has been going on since my 76 year old dad was one so i don't care about the bashers's opinions
I agree that Trayvon should never have punched Zimmerman and he obviously made some mistakes on his last night. He was acting like a stupid teenager, but then again he was a teenager. He obviously did some dumb things that night. The reason I didn't comment on your other points was they really are completely irrelevant to this case. Throwing punches at an adult is stupid, but it's not even in the same stratosphere as robbing someone of their life. How does talking on the phone to a friend comport with the idea of ambushing someone from behind, whether that be hiding behind the bushes or hiding somewhere else? If you wanted to jump someone from behind, why the heck would you be on the phone talking to a friend just prior to doing so? Would that not alert your victim that a stranger was in the area? I have never in my life seen or heard of someone initiating a physical confrontation while on the phone talking to their friend. Have you?
You also admitted that you based some of your opinion of what the TV analysts said. They want to stir **** up so people will watch their show. Especially with the trial going the way it is, they hope for outrage so they can stoke this fire for even longer. All these latest "facts" aren't game changers especially since the defense will call rebuttal witnesses. At this stage, the defense should have to be worried more important things that slight nuances in testimony or doctors who looked at a photo to make a medical examination. I'm sure you are a good dude. Your dd is about my dad's age. You seem about my age since you are an OT fan. I have a photo of OT holding my oldest son from the late 80's. I don't know about you but if my son had been suspended 3 times in one year, he'd have my shoe coming out his ass. No phone, no internet, no priviledges....
If Zimmerman started the confrontation, something we will NEVER know, then Martin had every right to defend himself as well.
The standard that GZ is being held to is that he profiled TM. The same could be said of TM with the creepy ass Cracka comment because he already assumed the worst about GZ and that could have influenced his interaction with GZ later on. Dude.... Jails, hospitals and graveyards are full of guys who committed macho acts to impress a woman. In this case, I'm saying he hadn't seen her in a few years.
Rdsgozo is more articulate than me so ill let him (i assume he is a he) make the points. that there is nothing to show this kid deserved to lose his life. I don't care above the discussion of his character it is somewhat relevant but Zimmerman is gun holder the grown man and i think we can agree so far the instigator
Hilarious Skype Bombing Brings Halt To Witness Testimony In George Zimmerman Trial <iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/VfJ1tTGjyS0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/skype/zimmerman-trial-skype-bombing-756390
Your race baiting was right all along. It's truly amazing the despicable things you can continue today and then somehow claim victory after you've been exposed as a racist yet again. It's high comedy.
I'm not racist -- you've certainly never proven that I am, and I'm not. I was 100% correct from the beginning -- the media bias was my focus from the start. Check the early posts.
