New Witness...TRAYVON was beating Zimmerman up!

[koshergrl]

The Last Tweets Of Obama’s ‘@NO_LIMIT_NIGGA’ Trayvon Martin

Here is another recent photo of TrayVon Martin

how much do grills like that cost?

I think they start at $50 and go up, sky's the limit.

But they do have cheap ones.

I wouldn't let my adolescent boy wear them, that's for sure. For one thing just from a health standpoint..I am looking to spend many thousands on dental work for my kids in teh next few years, and just getting them to brush is a flipping nightmare. There is no way I'd tolerate them putting metal over the teeth I sweat blood to fix. Besides which, it's just inviting decay and gum disease.

 

[KissMy]

 

[koshergrl]

I want to say, I don't want to demonize this kid...the fact that I'm willing to consider he might have brought this on himself isn't me saying I think he's worthless or got what he *deserved*. I like working with troubled youths this age, and my heart bleeds for him and even for his family, regardless of how dysfunctional it is...we all have dysfunction that we deal with.

But it's a warning to parents and to everybody...we have to stop excusing anti-social and criminal behavior. And all adults need to send a strong signal to children of all ages...it is not acceptable to imitate thug culture, it is not acceptable to behave disrespectfully or criminally, it is not acceptable to menace people.

A kid who was suspended for 10 days SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN wandering the streets at fucking night. His dad belongs in jail.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I want to say, I don't want to demonize this kid...the fact that I'm willing to consider he might have brought this on himself isn't me saying I think he's worthless or got what he *deserved*. I like working with troubled youths this age, and my heart bleeds for him and even for his family, regardless of how dysfunctional it is...we all have dysfunction that we deal with.

But it's a warning to parents and to everybody...we have to stop excusing anti-social and criminal behavior. And all adults need to send a strong signal to children of all ages...it is not acceptable to imitate thug culture, it is not acceptable to behave disrespectfully or criminally, it is not acceptable to menace people.

A kid who was suspended for 10 days SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN wandering the streets at fucking night. His dad belongs in jail.

You're right he wasn't worthless he was heading down the wrong path something his father could have helped with, but didn't.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Dude I must say that one picture is deceptive, not to many convenient stores give receipts unless you ask for them. I have left many stores without taking a receipt from the cashier.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I want to say, I don't want to demonize this kid...the fact that I'm willing to consider he might have brought this on himself isn't me saying I think he's worthless or got what he *deserved*. I like working with troubled youths this age, and my heart bleeds for him and even for his family, regardless of how dysfunctional it is...we all have dysfunction that we deal with.

But it's a warning to parents and to everybody...we have to stop excusing anti-social and criminal behavior. And all adults need to send a strong signal to children of all ages...it is not acceptable to imitate thug culture, it is not acceptable to behave disrespectfully or criminally, it is not acceptable to menace people.

A kid who was suspended for 10 days SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN wandering the streets at fucking night. His dad belongs in jail.

Indeed, regardless of who we may think might have been to blame, I'm sure we can all agree this is a tragedy for all involved, and I'm sure we're all glad to know that in her grief, Trayvon's mother will be somewhat consoled by the profits she will rake in from trademarking "I am Trayvon" and "Justice for Trayvon"

Google

 

[KissMy]

Dude I must say that one picture is deceptive, not to many convenient stores give receipts unless you ask for them. I have left many stores without taking a receipt from the cashier.

True - But it seems the Left Wing Media & Obama were engaged in painting a more deceptive image.

President Obama & his lying band of media whores are trying to paint the image of an evil racist KKK grand wizard trying to tie a noose around Obama's young black son's neck & wound up shooting the innocent child in the back as he was trying to escape. And please vote for Obama to right this horrible injustice.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Listen. The fucking phone dipshit at Nazi headquarters can't tell someone not to follow a fucking scumbag.Period.

The way the law is worded he doesn't get protection in light of the 911 call. If you feel I'm wrong quote the section of the law directly that disproves me please.

No protection because a 911 operator suggested he not follow? Please clarify if that's what you mean.

No protection because the law does not protect those who seek out an intiate contact.

There may be other laws that will legally protect zimmerman's actions but the stand your ground law's language does not protect his actions.

I've already explained this to you Si

 

[koshergrl]

The kid initiated contact, he started walking towards Zimmerman first. Then he ran, and Zimmerman followed. Then Zimmerman walked away, and the kid came back and beat the crap out of him.

 

[Katzndogz]

It's not quite that simple.

When Zimmerman pursued Martin after being told "you don't need to do that", Martin clearly had the right of self defense and to stand his ground if he felt threatend because Zimmerman initiated threatening contact.

Where it gets murky is that once Zimmerman abandoned pursuit and returned to his car to then have Martin attack him, did he regain the protection of the stand your ground law? Stand your ground isn't a license to kill once you get the protection of the law. The sole purpose of the stand your ground laws removes the prior duty to retreat until there is nowhere to go. Once Martin landed the first blow, Zimmerman could stand his ground whether or not there was a law. The second thing that stand your ground laws do is provide immunity so that the person under the protection of the law cannot be prosecuted criminally or civilly. If Zimmerman was standing his ground he cannot be arrested or tried, he cannot be sued in civil court.

Because this altercation happened in a public place and both people had a legal right to be where they were stand your ground protection can shift between the parties to the last person entitled to protection prior to the death.

Should there be a hearing of some kind to determine whether or not Zimmerman was entitled to the law's protection? Absolutely. But it isn't correct to have a blanket statement that the law doesn't apply.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

The kid initiated contact, he started walking towards Zimmerman first. Then he ran, and Zimmerman followed. Then Zimmerman walked away, and the kid came back and beat the crap out of him.

I only have the portions of the 911 call that have been released to the public and the myriad of different reports of what "witnesses" saw happening.

From that information it seems the initial interaction between zimmerman and martin was intiated by zimmerman. This is the specific reason why the stand your ground law does not and will not protect zimmerman, it does not protect those who initiate a situation.


However, once martin allegedly was on top of zimmerman beating the crap out of him zimmerman may have a defense for using deadly force as a "self defense" type of situation if he can convince a judge and/or jury that his life was in imminent danger from the altercation.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It's not quite that simple.

When Zimmerman pursued Martin after being told "you don't need to do that",...


...

myth posing as fact.

case closed

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

From that information it seems the initial interaction between zimmerman and martin was intiated by zimmerman. ...

...

another myth posing as a fact

 

[koshergrl]

He was sitting in his car watching the kid. That isn't initiating contact. When the kid started walking towards him, he got out of his car. At that point the kid ran and he followed. Then he stopped following, and the kid circled back and nailed him.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

It's not quite that simple.

When Zimmerman pursued Martin after being told "you don't need to do that", Martin clearly had the right of self defense and to stand his ground if he felt threatend because Zimmerman initiated threatening contact.

Where it gets murky is that once Zimmerman abandoned pursuit and returned to his car to then have Martin attack him, did he regain the protection of the stand your ground law? Stand your ground isn't a license to kill once you get the protection of the law. The sole purpose of the stand your ground laws removes the prior duty to retreat until there is nowhere to go. Once Martin landed the first blow, Zimmerman could stand his ground whether or not there was a law. The second thing that stand your ground laws do is provide immunity so that the person under the protection of the law cannot be prosecuted criminally or civilly. If Zimmerman was standing his ground he cannot be arrested or tried, he cannot be sued in civil court.

Because this altercation happened in a public place and both people had a legal right to be where they were stand your ground protection can shift between the parties to the last person entitled to protection prior to the death.

Should there be a hearing of some kind to determine whether or not Zimmerman was entitled to the law's protection? Absolutely. But it isn't correct to have a blanket statement that the law doesn't apply.

I'm not a judge or a lawyer although I did take several law classes in college.

My saying that the law does not apply to zimmerman in this situation is completely my opinion based off the actual language of the law itself and the scattered 2nd/3rd hand information (plus a recording of the 911 call) that I have.

I could be wrong but I think I'm right

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

it seems the Left Wing Media & Obama were engaged in painting a more deceptive image.

...

myth posing as fact

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

He was sitting in his car watching the kid. That isn't initiating contact. When the kid started walking towards him, he got out of his car. At that point the kid ran and he followed. Then he stopped following, and the kid circled back and nailed him.

You just showed me, through your explaination, that the stand your ground law will not protect zimmerman.

 

[Againsheila]

So I can go start a fight today, get my tail whooped, and then shoot the person I start a fight with and face absolutely no charges?

If no other witness saw you start the fight. If there is recorded proof & un-bias eye witness told responding officers the person on top of you continues to beat you after you are down & yelling for help. How could a jury not believe you feared for your life?

OH ABSOLUTELY.

I've said it time and time again. There are no witnesses that tell us who was the original aggressor here AT ALL. Which is why I've also said, there is no case here and it will be thrown out and rightfully so.

My question was IF THERE WERE EVIDENCE that I started the fight would no charges be filed in your opinion? I was under the impression that you weren't concerned about who started the fight and that even if it came forward that Zimmerman started it and there was significant evidence that he did there would be no case because Zimmerman was losing the fight and would STILL be able to claim self-defense. Which I don't personally believe is the case, but I could be wrong.

Well, if he's losing the fight, calling for help and having his head slammed against the sidewalk and the kid didn't let up, well, what would you do? Let the kid kill you because you stupidly started the fight?

 

[Sallow]

He was sitting in his car watching the kid. That isn't initiating contact. When the kid started walking towards him, he got out of his car. At that point the kid ran and he followed. Then he stopped following, and the kid circled back and nailed him.

You just showed me, through your explaination, that the stand your ground law will not protect zimmerman.

The author of the law..says it doesn't apply.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

If no other witness saw you start the fight. If there is recorded proof & un-bias eye witness told responding officers the person on top of you continues to beat you after you are down & yelling for help. How could a jury not believe you feared for your life?

OH ABSOLUTELY.

I've said it time and time again. There are no witnesses that tell us who was the original aggressor here AT ALL. Which is why I've also said, there is no case here and it will be thrown out and rightfully so.

My question was IF THERE WERE EVIDENCE that I started the fight would no charges be filed in your opinion? I was under the impression that you weren't concerned about who started the fight and that even if it came forward that Zimmerman started it and there was significant evidence that he did there would be no case because Zimmerman was losing the fight and would STILL be able to claim self-defense. Which I don't personally believe is the case, but I could be wrong.

Well, if he's losing the fight, calling for help and having his head slammed against the sidewalk and the kid didn't let up, well, what would you do? Let the kid kill you because you stupidly started the fight?

No you don't let him. However stand your ground doesn't protect zimmerman in that instance....other laws may but not stand your ground due to how the situation arose.

I just feel like I need to keep making that point since people don't seem to understand this.