Zimmerman's lawyers drop him

[JB Books]

GTG, you left out the part where Zimmerman cursed, "F$%^king coons" to the dispatcher.

 

[Glocktogo]

And I didn't say you did specifically, but:

I didn't state anything as a fact J.B....but I'll insert the following to what you posted.

Zimmerman and Martin were present.
Zimmerman is/was not a law enforcement officer
Martin was not observed or reported to be committing any crime or illegal act Irrelevant X2
Zimmerman called 911.
Zimmerman relayed the information to the 911 dispatcher.
Zimmerman got out of his vehicle and began following Martin, who again, was by all accounts not doing anything but walking through the neighborhood. Again, irrelevant
The 911 dispatcher asked him if he was, and told him "We don't need you to do that".
Zimmerman acknowledged what the dispatcher told him and apparently continued to follow him Fact not in evidence. "Apparently" isn't a legal standard, nor should it be when discussing the case.
We hear heavy breathing.
The call ends.
Eyewitnesses testify Zimmerman was on his back getting his ass kicked when he shot Martin A point I conceded, what we don't know is what transpired immediately prior to what the witness saw.

It has always been my position that if Zimmerman had stayed in his vehicle, he would have been less likely to end up on his back getting a whoopin' from a 17 year old. Which I'll readily stipulate to...he chose to play by big boy rules and he shouldn't be falling back on SYG as a defense, if that's even the angle his defense team will take. Why not? Nothing yet in evidence disqualifies him from using SYG as a legal defense.

Yes, we don't know what happened in between him hanging up on 911 and when he shot Martin. I'm not judging guilt or innocence...just engaging in the current angle of this conversation about the validity or applicability of SYG in this case. I don't need to read reams of court testimony to have the opinion that Zimmerman initiated this encounter as the aggressor and that SYG doesn't/shouldn't protect you if you are said aggressor.

How on earth is that a "contortion of logic"?

Because you have no basis for forming the "opinion" that Zimmerman EVER initiated contact with Martin, and certainly not that he was an actual aggressor, either verbally or physically. Simply following someone while on the telephone is not the basis for branding someone an aggressor. Martin's female friend on the phone is not a witness to the event. Her testimony is hearsay and should be struck as such. Could he have initiated some form of contact? Absolutely. However, the burden of proof that he initiated ANY contact remains on the prosecution. Something their slipshod affidavit does not do. As a matter of fact, the affidavit is VERY thin on facts.

 

[Glocktogo]

GTG, you left out the part where Zimmerman cursed, "F$%^king coons" to the dispatcher.

Fact not in evidence counselor. No one has been able to prove that it was an actual racial epithet. If it were provable, it would have been in the affidavit. It's not.

 

[Billybob]

Prosecutors: No racial slur heard on 911 tape

[The disputed words on the recording were "these f------ punks," prosecutors said in an affidavit filed Thursday in support of the murder charges brought against the neighborhood watch volunteer in the Feb. 26 slaying of the unarmed black teenager.]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/...11-tape?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|s

 

[JB Books]

Prosecutors: No racial slur heard on 911 tape

[The disputed words on the recording were "these f------ punks," prosecutors said in an affidavit filed Thursday in support of the murder charges brought against the neighborhood watch volunteer in the Feb. 26 slaying of the unarmed black teenager.]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/...11-tape?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|s

I stand corrected. You guys can go back to debating the intricate nuances of this case. Carry on.

 

[Billybob]

I stand corrected. You guys can go back to debating the intricate nuances of this case. Carry on.

I did not mean to "correct" you, only to point out that the issue is still being debated, a jury will decide, (probably with a lot of expert forensics testimony) right?

 

[farmerbyron]

I didn't state anything as a fact J.B....but I'll insert the following to what you posted.

Zimmerman and Martin were present.
Zimmerman is/was not a law enforcement officer
Martin was not observed or reported to be commiting any crime or illegal act
Zimmerman called 911.
Zimmerman relayed the information to the 911 dispatcher.
Zimmerman got out of his vehicle and began following Martin, who again, was by all accounts not doing anything but walking through the neighborhood.
The 911 dispatcher asked him if he was, and told him "We don't need you to do that".
Zimmerman acknowledged what the dispatcher told him and apparentely continued to follow him
We hear heavy breathing.
The call ends.
Eyewitnesses testify Zimmerman was on his back getting his ass kicked when he shot Martin

It has always been my position that if Zimmerman had stayed in his vehicle, he would have been less likely to end up on his back getting a whoopin' from a 17 year old...he chose to play by big boy rules and he shouldn't be falling back on SYG as a defense, if that's even the angle his defense team will take.

Yes, we don't know what happened in between him hanging up on 911 and when he shot Martin. I'm not judging guilt or innocence...just engaging in the current angle of this conversation about the validity or applicability of SYG in this case. I don't need to read reams of court testimony to have the opinion that Zimmerman initiated this encounter as the aggressor and that SYG doesn't/shouldn't protect you if you are said aggressor.

How on earth is that a "contortion of logic"?

Let's take the angle that Zimmerman had it coming by getting out and following Martin. Does that mean it is acceptable to assault someone that is following you? Seems like assaulting someone that is simply following you would be very over zealous and certainly would not qualify as self defense on martins part.

 

[elwoodtrix]

Let's take the angle that Zimmerman had it coming by getting out and following Martin. Does that mean it is acceptable to assault someone that is following you? Seems like assaulting someone that is simply following you would be very over zealous and certainly would not qualify as self defense on martins part.

following you with a gun... come on man.. here have some skittles, taste the rainbow..

corner a dog, see what happens

 

[farmerbyron]

following you with a gun... come on man.. here have some skittles, taste the rainbow..

corner a dog, see what happens

How does Martin know Zimmerman has a gun? The only way he would know is if Zimmerman had drawn down on him. I would believe if Martin had seen a gun, he would have fled rather than go fist fighting with a man that had a gun drawn.

I guess judging by your post it is acceptable to beat the **** out of anyone that is following you. I'm sure Martin would have been on the defensive about some dude following him but just because someone is tailing you does that give you the right to attack?

 

[soonerwings]

so, some dude follows you to your house or wherever you are staying... what do you do??

Stop and ask why?