The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **AaronW** » Fri Jul 20, 2012 1:12 pm

habitual wrote:It seems that the bulk of Zimmerman's defense is made out of assumptions.

Hab

The bulk of everything is assumptions other than the physical evidence of the horrific beating George took and some eyewitness testimony which may be credible or not.

by **AaronW** » Fri Jul 20, 2012 1:19 pm

Zimmerman may be a hero but he is a moron in one regard. Giving interviews. The prosecution will use those.

by **GOSD** » Fri Jul 20, 2012 1:53 pm

AaronW wrote:Zimmerman may be a hero but he is a moron in one regard. Giving interviews. The prosecution will use those.

Yeah, he is one dumb motherfucker.

by **habitual** » Fri Jul 20, 2012 1:59 pm

AaronW wrote:
The bulk of everything is assumptions other than the physical evidence of the horrific beating George took and some eyewitness testimony which may be credible or not.

The horrific hole in a kids chest should be a big piece of evidence.

Hab

by **AaronW** » Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:19 pm

habitual wrote:
The horrific hole in a kids chest should be a big piece of evidence.

Hab

I'm sure it will come up at some point.

by **Psivage** » Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:24 pm

habitual wrote:If Zimmerman flashed his piece you could make an argument that the stand your ground law applies more to Martin than it does to GZ.

Hab

That is very interesting.

by **Ntikrst** » Sun Jul 22, 2012 6:37 pm

habitual wrote:If Zimmerman flashed his piece you could make an argument that the stand your ground law applies more to Martin than it does to GZ.

Hab

Right, because when people flash their piece they usually get a broken nose, thrown to the ground before the victim sits on their chest while they grab their attackers ears and repeatedly bang the back of the head into the pavement.

But ultimately your supposition is irrelevant, flashing your piece isn't grounds for felony assault. Even if Zimmerman did and Martin attacked him for it, then Martin sealed his own fate because Zimmerman knows it's do or die. Guilt and to what degree is determined by intent and the physical evidence doesn't paint a picture of Zimmerman intending to injure Martin, but not vice versa. Martin did injure Zimmerman and in doing so forced Zimmerman's hand.

by **habitual** » Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:06 pm

Ntikrst wrote:
Right, because when people flash their piece they usually get a broken nose, thrown to the ground before the victim sits on their chest while they grab their attackers ears and repeatedly bang the back of the head into the pavement.

But ultimately your supposition is irrelevant, flashing your piece isn't grounds for felony assault. Even if Zimmerman did and Martin attacked him for it, then Martin sealed his own fate because Zimmerman knows it's do or die. Guilt and to what degree is determined by intent and the physical evidence doesn't paint a picture of Zimmerman intending to injure Martin, but not vice versa. Martin did injure Zimmerman and in doing so forced Zimmerman's hand.

Florida law says you're wrong:

that a person may use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat

If Zimmerman threatened Martin by brandishing a firearm then it completely applies to the situation.

Hab

by **achilles** » Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:13 pm

habitual wrote:
Florida law says you're wrong:

If Zimmerman threatened Martin by brandishing a firearm then it completely applies to the situation.

Hab

You realized you just exonerated Zimmerman? Since he was getting the hell pounded out of him, "reasonable belief of a threat" seems to apply...

by **habitual** » Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:18 pm

achilles wrote:
You realized you just exonerated Zimmerman? Since he was getting the hell pounded out of him, "reasonable belief of a threat" seems to apply...

Only in your mind.

Zimmerman initiated the confrontation and there is no evidence that he didn't swing first at this point.

It's pretty much a text book case of 2nd degree murder.

After watching the Hannity interview for a second time and reading statements made by his former attorneys it's pretty clear that Zimmerman isn't of sound mind.

Hab

by **Thunderstorm** » Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:26 pm

habitual wrote:
Only in your mind.

Zimmerman initiated the confrontation and there is no evidence that he didn't swing first at this point.

It's pretty much a text book case of 2nd degree murder.

After watching the Hannity interview for a second time and reading statements made by his former attorneys it's pretty clear that Zimmerman isn't of sound mind.

Hab

There's more evidence that Martin was on drugs than that Zimmerman swung first. Lots more.

by **habitual** » Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:26 pm

Thunderstorm wrote:
There's more evidence that Martin was on drugs than that Zimmerman swung first. Lots more.

Weed?

Hab

by **Thunderstorm** » Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:28 pm

habitual wrote:
Weed?

Hab

No, that 'Lean' stuff. He was telling people how to make it over twitter, and had 2/3rds of the ingredients on him when he was shot.

by **achilles** » Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:42 pm

habitual wrote:
Only in your mind.

Zimmerman initiated the confrontation and there is no evidence that he didn't swing first at this point.

It's pretty much a text book case of 2nd degree murder.

After watching the Hannity interview for a second time and reading statements made by his former attorneys it's pretty clear that Zimmerman isn't of sound mind.

Hab

Actually, it's only in your mind. There's no evidence he initiated the confrontation, plenty he didn't, and none to support your contention that he "swung first". Which would be stupid, considering he was smaller than the other guy and had a gun on him. If he wanted to kill the guy, he would have just up and shot him, no questions asked.

Honestly, you're just ignoring ALL the physical evidence, and witness testimony in favor of the Martin family narrative.

I get that you don't like Zimmerman. I don't much either. Frankly, I don't care much for anyone involved. But the case is about what happened, not about what theory you can spin based on nothing at all except for you dislike of one of the parties.

by **habitual** » Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:44 pm

achilles wrote:
Actually, it's only in your mind. There's no evidence he initiated the confrontation, plenty he didn't, and none to support your contention that he "swung first". Which would be stupid, considering he was smaller than the other guy and had a gun on him. If he wanted to kill the guy, he would have just up and shot him, no questions asked.

Honestly, you're just ignoring ALL the physical evidence, and witness testimony in favor of the Martin family narrative.

I get that you don't like Zimmerman. I don't much either. Frankly, I don't care much for anyone involved. But the case is about what happened, not about what theory you can spin based on nothing at all except for you dislike of one of the parties.

Well my mind, a federal investigator, the district attorney, the lead homicide detective on the case, the legislators that drafted the Florida stand your ground law...

It's quite a list actually.

Hab