Zimmerman Bond hearing Results Part II

I dont care how big he is or what he looked like. Zimmerman ran after HIM, not the other way around. Whatever the altercation may have been, it did not warrant pulling a gun, especially since Zim initiated it. The fact remains that in my mind the fault lies with the person who instigated the confrontation, and there's no doubt that was Zimmerman. The so-called injuries Zim suffered, and thats a big if, were a direct result of his own actions. If someone chases you down the street, are you going to defend yourself? Are you most certainly in your right to defend yourself? Yes

 

Nope, Trayvon got back to his Dads girlfriends place then ran back and said, you got a problem and George said no, and Trayvon attacked him. Trayvon could have ran and locked the door to his dads girlfriends home and been alive, but he went back for more, so he got what he got due to his own actions. George had a right to defend himself, wheter you care to admit it or not.

 

But you obviously did or you wouldnt have quoted me...see how that works?

 

What proof do you have that Zimmerman "Ran" after Trayvon? Zimmerman went to see where Trayvon ran to after the dispatcher asked which way Trayvon was running. After that Zimmerman lost sight of Trayvon. Where is the running after or chasing?

 

Trayvon was definitely the aggressor. You can't get away from someone and then return to "defend yourself".

 

My post assumes nothing, my post addressed the general statement super made that any adult male who shots and kills any 17th year old who is beating on him and threatening him with serious bodily harm or his life is a scumbag.

 

Libs dont care.

 

Actually Martin ran away and lost sight of Zimmerman, an innocent man watching out for the neighborhood as the police had requested all residents do, and ran all the way back to the apartment where he was staying and had he then merely gone inside and sat on the couch and ate his Skittles there would not have been a scuffle and he'd be alive today. Martin choose to do differently. HE went back and confronted Zimmerman, an innocent man watching out for the neighborhood as the police had requested all residents do. And had he not assaulted Zimmerman, , an innocent man watching out for the neighborhood as the police had requested all residents do, then there would have been on scuffle and he'd be alive today. Martin chose to do differently.

 

You are late to the debate, and grossly misinformed. Post links to back up your assertions as to what happened. From what I see, you just made it up. It is such as you who are the problem with all this hysteria.

 

More hyperbole from a typical conservative who wets his pants as soon as someone stands up to him. I highly doubt you know the facts to this case...those are your facts, facts that havent come out. Conservatives are brilliant at speculating, horrible at defending the truth

 

Seriously though, you are late to the game and are not up to speed, or you are and you dont care, no worries here.

 

Your post still makes assumptions on the evidence at hand. The assumptions include:
1. TM was the aggressor even though there is no evidence
2. Your post assumes the injures that GZ received were "severe." Crime scene photos of his injuries as well as GZ's own physician make no such claim. Even GZ does not make the claim he was severely beaten.
3. Your attempts to place 17 year olds who are traided to fight, trained to take a breating, and trained to react to such is not TM. TM may have been a football player, but we do not know the extent of what TM can and cannot do. Assuming one alternatve of what TM might do is hypothetical at best.

The whole case is circumstantial whether one believes GZ is innocent or whether GZ is guilty. The only known facts is that there was a scuffle and a 17 year old was shot at close range while standing up. Everything in between will be interpreted as fact once this goes to a trial. There is not enough evidence to show that GZ was in fear of his life per Florida Statute 748.012.

 

Quote Originally Posted by Bluesguy View Post
My post assumes nothing, my post addressed the general statement super made that any adult male who shots and kills any 17th year old who is beating on him and threatening him with serious bodily harm or his life is a scumbag.

My response made no reference to nor was contingent on the Zimmerman/Martin case. It was in direct response to his general statement.

 

No doubt Trayvon was the aggressor. The crime scene clearly shows that and this is supported by evidence and witnesses. Unless the prosecution can prove otherwise they have no case.

 

Please post that statement again, because I don't quite remember stating those words.

 

So why did they arrest him and charge him with M2 again. Obviously there is something in this case that they are seeing that you are not. I am not sure if you are smarter than they are, but it has to be something that made them charge him for a crime or crimes.

 

Simple. Politics caused by the idiotic "Man Shoots Teen Armed With Skittles" headlines that popped up all over the liberal Obamedia newspapers just itching for a race war, as evidenced by the "white hispanic" tag given to Zimmerman along with the doctored MSNBC version of George's 911 call.

It's sad to note that the M2 charge, along with any hope of a manslaughter conviction, died the moment that it was confirmed in the medical report that George Zimmerman indeed suffered a broken nose in Martin's attack. You'll find out that the SYG defense will be bolstered by that horrifying revelation.

 

He wasn't arrested originally. Remember there had to be a special prosecutor who bypassed a grand jury to make an arrest.

Even so, I think there should have been at least a SYG hearing. Even though this case is a clear self defense case someone was killed. I understand saving someone from going through being put on trial and probably sued. In that respect the SYG law is good but even still there should be something more to investigating and making the decision not to prosecute. As it stands it seems to cheapen human life.

 

No reference, but inference. The whole "a 17 year old can beat up anyone" was the inference that TM did exactly that since it is your opinion and only your opinion that TM was the aggressor.

 

You do not need a grand jury to charge anyone in most state jurisdictions. The DA has the sole authority to determine whether a grand jury could investigate the alleged incident and charge GZ or the DA can charge them. It makes no difference under the law.

 

So how do you explain George's broken nose then? Are you saying that Martin struck George in the nose only after George drew his gun? That's awfully brave for a 17-year-old kid who was supposedly "in fear for his life".

 

A broken nose is generally not sufficient enough to warrant a self defense claim nor does the broken nose identify cause to make such a claim. There is more to this case than simply the inuries by GZ.

 

I love how you use the "Requirements of the law" to justify your silly posts.

 

LOL! Here we go again. Why do you assume the role of an expert to try and fool people. Your claims are worthless without sources to back up what you are saying.

 

If Z's head was split you must acquit!