Toggle sidebar

The Trayvon Martin Case

cbi1972 said:
Phone records confirm what, exactly? That they were on the phone before the time of death? Phone records aren't going to show how the fight occurred.
Click to expand...
No, but they confirm that she was, in fact, on the phone with him during the event. And they confirm that the kid was trying to get away from Zimmerman, but Zimmerman tracked him down and confronted him. Again, that Zimmerman was the aggressor from beginning to end. So, if the kid gets scared and hits Zimmerman at that point, it is all on Zimmerman. He created the fear and the confrontation.

According to his father, Zimmerman has said that he did not follow or confront Martin. Both have proven to be fiction.
 
SimplyTide said:
The phone records confirm her version of the story.
Click to expand...

The phone records are the evidence...anything further she'd have to say, other than confirming her identity as the person on the other end of the phone call, would be subjective.

And by the way, the definition of aggressor in this case is also subjective.
 
Tide1986 said:
The phone records are the evidence...anything further she'd have to say, other than confirming her identity as the person on the other end of the phone call, would be subjective.

And by the way, the definition of aggressor in this case is also subjective.
Click to expand...
This guy's actions were dangerous, and someone else paid the price for his dangerous behavior. Or maybe that is too subjective for you, too. :conf2:
 
SimplyTide said:
This guy's actions were dangerous, and someone else paid the price for his dangerous behavior. Or maybe that is too subjective for you, too. :conf2:
Click to expand...

In general, I have no issue with seeking to protect one's neighborhood and property, especially when there has been a pattern of criminal behavior in the area. Unfortunately, the actions of both Zimmerman and the kid likely contributed to the end result in this case.
 
Last edited:
SimplyTide said:
No, but they confirm that she was, in fact, on the phone with him during the event. And they confirm that the kid was trying to get away from Zimmerman, but Zimmerman tracked him down and confronted him. Again, that Zimmerman was the aggressor from beginning to end.
Click to expand...
Martin told her it was Zimmerman. She had no way of confirming for herself that Zimmerman was really there. That means her statement is hearsay which is not proof of anything. All it confirms is that she spoke to Martin.
 
Last edited:
Sigh...there's really no reason for the argument. Even if the kid attacked Zimmerman, a reasonable person would not have felt in danger of life or limb himself or for another person, and therefore, the right to self defense didn't exist.

Billy Bad Arse needs to spend the rest of his life in jail. Why race is being brought into this I have no idea, and why even if the guy did kill the teen because he was black is even relevant is almost as big of a tragedy as the case to begin with. Who cares about the motivation? It was murder, so shoot him up or let him rot...forget the rest.

I also heard Zimmerman was home schooled...so...
 
Last edited:
Hamilton said:
Sigh...there's really no reason for the argument. Even if the kid attacked Zimmerman, a reasonable person would not have felt in danger of life or limb homage self or another person, and therefore, the right to self defense didn't exist.
Click to expand...

That makes perfect sense but the law here says exactly the opposite. Had it never been passed in the first place he'd be looking at a guaranteed manslaughter conviction, at the very minimum, and more likely 2nd degree murder. What this law really means is that if no one sees you do it then you don't have to explain the dead body at your feet and the weapon in your hand.
 
Nate Harris said:
That makes perfect sense but the law here says exactly the opposite. Had it never been passed in the first place he'd be looking at a guaranteed manslaughter conviction, at the very minimum, and more likely 2nd degree murder. What this law really means is that if no one sees you do it then you don't have to explain the dead body at your feet and the weapon in your hand.
Click to expand...

No...no it doesn't. You still have to have a reason to shoot someone in Florida, regardless of how Liberals portray the state.
 
I've read the first two pages and to be honest with you I'm not sure how I feel. I know based on what I've heard that it sounds bad. However - I'm very skeptical the press tells us anything close to everything. My approach is to wait & see. The press ought to be shot for circulating the mother's "he killed him because of the color of his skin" claim. That is OPINION at this point, not established fact. The press WANTS to stir the pot on this, it's easy news.

Zimmerman might be guilty of murder.

And there might be more than we know, too.

The chanting mob needs to shut up. These are the same people who would demand a celebrity NOT be arrested and wouldn't know any more about the case. Demanding the arrest of a guy based on press reports shows what a reactive society we have.

Let them investigate and determine. They will make their findings known & we can go from there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back