Zimmerman to be charged

[S&W645]

I think they should call Al Sharpton and Jess Jackson to trial as they seem to have all the evidence. Again unless you were within 200' of this case when it took place your thoughts or opinions are a waste of time. Now is the Florida Attorney going to file on the Black Panthers for anything???

I would hope so. That was a death threat.

 

[NavyLCDR]

It's funny. I'll bet you a paycheck against a doughnut that if Martin had pulled a lawfully carried gun and shot Zimmerman, 3/4 of the members of gun forums like this would be squarely behind Martin. Seems like all it takes to garner support from a bunch of "us" is to shoot someone and throw up the hands and scream "SELF DEFENSE!"

 

[Caribou]

I don't see anything in Florida law that makes it legal for a person to provoke another person into a situation where they can kill the provoked person in self defense.

Let's say there is argument over a parking spot. I pull into a parking spot, you pull in behind me, blocking me in, get out of your car yelling at me what a ******* I am for "stealing" you parking spot. I exit my vehicle with a tire iron in my hand, you draw your gun and shoot me. Justified?

Zimmerman was told to not follow Martin by the 911 operator. Zimmerman pursued Martin even though there is no evidence that anything Martin was doing was even illegal, let alone to the level that a citizen would have to intervene to prevent a felony. What happened after Zimmerman caught up with Martin is pretty much speculation. The fact is Zimmerman started the whole encounter when he began pursuing Martin.

Somebody starts pursuing me the way Zimmerman was pursuing Martin - my hand is going to be resting on my gun.

You and I must have gotten our news from different sources. I saw nothing that would indicate that Zimmerman had done anything that could have aggravated Martin to the point where he could legally attack Zimmerman. Not only is following someone not a crime but at a distance it should not be threatening. If martin was concerned a simple 'Stop, why are you following me?' or 'May I help you?' would, I expect, cause Zimmerman to identify himself as Neighborhood Watch. If the reports are right that Zimmerman was attacked after turning to return to his car it would indicate that Zimmerman was not following close enough to keep track of Martin.

Martin may not have done anything illegal, before possibly attacking Zimmerman, but it was Zimmerman's job to identify things that were out of place. Certainly someone new to the neighborhood would seem out of place. The word pursuit indicates, to me, an intention to catch someone or something. I have heard no claim that Zimmerman intended to do anything but maintain surveillance till the police arrived.

If Zimmerman started this when he started following Martin then no rent-a-cop at the mall could follow a suspected shoplifter. If they did could the suspect then legally beat their head into the concrete?

If you go for your gun every time someone follows you in the mall, across a parking lot, or down the street I expect you must have your hand on your gun most of the time.

There are a lot of if's in this post because there are a lot of if's in this case. So let me drop one more. If you try to beat my head into the concrete I will draw my gun.

U.S. jurisprudence is based on the premise that A: You are innocent till proven guilty, and B: It is better that 100 guilty go free rather than one innocent go to jail. I still have reasonable doubt and I do not have all the evidence.

 

[NavyLCDR]

You and I must have gotten our news from different sources. I saw nothing that would indicate that Zimmerman had done anything that could have aggravated Martin to the point where he could legally attack Zimmerman. Not only is following someone not a crime but at a distance it should not be threatening. If martin was concerned a simple 'Stop, why are you following me?' or 'May I help you?' would, I expect, cause Zimmerman to identify himself as Neighborhood Watch. If the reports are right that Zimmerman was attacked after turning to return to his car it would indicate that Zimmerman was not following close enough to keep track of Martin.

Martin may not have done anything illegal, before possibly attacking Zimmerman, but it was Zimmerman's job to identify things that were out of place. Certainly someone new to the neighborhood would seem out of place. The word pursuit indicates, to me, an intention to catch someone or something. I have heard no claim that Zimmerman intended to do anything but maintain surveillance till the police arrived.

If Zimmerman started this when he started following Martin then no rent-a-cop at the mall could follow a suspected shoplifter. If they did could the suspect then legally beat their head into the concrete?

If you go for your gun every time someone follows you in the mall, across a parking lot, or down the street I expect you must have your hand on your gun most of the time.

There are a lot of if's in this post because there are a lot of if's in this case. So let me drop one more. If you try to beat my head into the concrete I will draw my gun.

U.S. jurisprudence is based on the premise that A: You are innocent till proven guilty, and B: It is better that 100 guilty go free rather than one innocent go to jail. I still have reasonable doubt and I do not have all the evidence.

Funny how everyone is so willing to believe what Zimmerman SAYS happened with no proof of what really did happen. Like I just posted, just cry "SELF DEFENSE!" and 3/4 of CCW holders will gather behind you. One person dead, one person holding the gun, no evidence of what happened, I don't think it is too outrageous to let a jury decide.

I think ricardo900 has probably made the most intelligent post in this whole thread, including more intelligent than mine.

 

[Zion]

If you are stalking, following our what ever you want to call it. Who was he to judge him as shady? Get real....if it was your love one you would probably understand with much more clarity!

 

[ricardo900]

Lady Justice!

The fact that it took this long to press charges probably means the prosecutor caved in to the media and rest of the angry people. He will prosecuted and convicted no matter what the evidence is. He has been labeled a racist and will be punished as one as the libs demand.

Justitia, a Roman goddess of justice, wore a blindfold. She had been depicted with sword and scales, she symbolizes the fair and equal administration of the law, without corruption, avarice, prejudice, or favor.
Link Removed

Judicial oath "I, XXX XXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as XXX under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/453

If this breaks down, it's over for our nation! If the media can influence and directly or indirectly control it? God help us!

 

[nogods]

yep, no chance the locals got it wrong. no chance they lifted that blindfold just enough to notice the color of Martin's skin. that never happens in this country.

 

[walt629]

If Zimmerman is prosecuted, how can he receive a fair trial anywhere in the United States?

He's supposed to get a jury of his peers. I wonder how many of the final jury picks (if there is a trial) will be gun owners?

 

[buddy]

Why does no one question the fact that martin was on top of zimmerman when he got shot? How did that happen? If Zimmerman was indeed following Martin (and there is no evidence he did after the request from 911 not to), how did martin get on top of him before GZ drew his gun? Unless, martin surprised him, which I doubt. Or, as was more likely, Zimmerman did not draw until martin was, in fact on top of him pounding his head into the ground?

 

[nogods]

Or Zimmerman drew his weapon and Martin fearing for his life attacked. Naw, that never happens.

 

[Rich M]

Care to elaborate on why you believe that?

I have, read prior posts. GZ was wrong!

 

[JimPage]

I have read thru this thread and noticed one thing. No one knows what happened! Everyone seems to have an opinion based on reporting that has been speculative at best. Facts should decide the case.

I am hopeful that a trial will bring out facts and not opinions and biases. I further hope that the jury can interpret these facts without bias. Certainly all the blather here and everywhere that I have seen or heard is biased conjecture based upon biased reporting.

I had expected better of gun owners. I should have realized that we are just people too.

 

[Bigcarlover]

Funny how everyone is so willing to believe what Zimmerman SAYS happened with no proof of what really did happen.

What proof to the contrary do you have since you've already convicted him.

Seems like you're so willing to believe his parents, who weren't there. His girlfriend, who also wasn't there. The parents lawyer, who wasn't there. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the New Black Panthers who weren't there.

It's not illegal to watch someone on public property. And it's not justifiable to attack somone who's simply watching you. And there's no proof he's did otherwise.


Hope no one stares at you too long, because you'll shoot them, then call them an aggressor and claim self defense.

 

[Pinnacle Safety]

Simple Instrictions

If I tell you I don't need you to do something means I don't want you to do it which means dont do it

 

[Bigcarlover]

Or Zimmerman drew his weapon and Martin fearing for his life attacked. Naw, that never happens.

Yes, because if someone draws a gun on you, the obvious move would be to run towards that person. Works in the movies.

 

[wooddoctor]

Dead man speaks no Lies! Hopfully Zimmerman servers no time. If your head is split you must aquit!

 

[BC1]

Lot's of good responses. I believe to claim any form of self-defense one must be entirely innocent and must not contribute to the escalation of the incident. When I teach defense of justification (NYS PL Article 35) I like to use a specific road-rage example.

Two drivers, one cuts off the other. Driver #2 flips the bird. Driver #1 returns the bird. Driver #2 pulls in front. Driver #1 tailgates. Driver #2 locks his brakes. Both pull over and begin argueing. The argument turns to a physical altercation. One driver pulls a knife, the other pulls a gun and fires. Neither of these huckaleros can claim defense of justigfication as they are equally culpable. There is no affirmative defense allowed. This was why I thought GZ sealed his own fate.

Question - if someone is following you in FL, would you run or turn and stand your ground? Does Martin have the same rights as GZ? If he's being followed by someone can he turn and fight?

 

[buddy]

Or Zimmerman drew his weapon and Martin fearing for his life attacked. Naw, that never happens.

Of course it happens. But your statement, absent a single source stating this happened, even as a remote possibility, is as irrelevant as my stating that "or a neighbor shot martin through a window".
Not one source I have read suggests what you state.

 

[Tripletap]

" A WHITE Hispanic neighborhood watch captain". Gotta get the WHITE in there! can't just be Hispanic . If I was charged they wouldn't say the " German , Dutch, Jewish, american!

 

[BIGJOHN621]

Is it totally wrong for an armed man to kill an unarmed man or group of men regardless of the situation?

Sometimes it is just fine to shoot an unarmed person or people. Now that everyone is reply and pounce with pontificate to the contrary, it depends on the law. In some states, you can use deadly force against an intruder in your home, armed or not. Here in NY, you can use deadly force to stop a forcible rape, forcible abduction, or an assault likely to cause great bodily harm or death, even of a third party [NYS Penal Code Section 400].

So, a blanket question of if it is ok to kill an unarmed man is both a legal and moral one. The answer, unfortunately, is that it depends on the situation, not regardless of the situation.

The most important part is to not be the aggressor, either causing the incident OR continuing it. Remember, non-LEOs have no duty to apprehend. You can turn into an aggressor under the law by continuing to pursue after the threat has ended, regardless of who the original aggressor was. This is the main part where most self defense claims fail under the law.