To Kill A Kid

[asterism]

I think it is wrong to harm an innocent child.

I agree. If Zimmerman can't prove his affirmative defense he needs to go to jail for Manslaughter.

 

[king.solomon]

(Still waiting for our good friends to refute any of the solid points made by Asterism detailing "what Zimmerman did wrong")

Otherwise, it gives the appearance that they are unduly biased.
[MENTION=24388]asterism[/MENTION], have you "observed" TM doing any of those things you just slandered a dead kid about?

 

[koshergrl]

I think it is wrong to harm an innocent child.

I agree. If Zimmerman can't prove his affirmative defense he needs to go to jail for Manslaughter.

He's charged with 2nd degree murder. Not manslaughter. And I don't think he's going to plead.

 

[king.solomon]

Back to Point #1.

WHY didn't Florida charge Zim with MANSLAUGHTER, and just give him the max?

Noooooo, they chose to pick a charge that allows for Zim to wiggle his way out.

 

[koshergrl]

Whatever.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I have no idea what actually happened between Zimmerman and Martin. All I know is what I've read, heard, and seen via the media and the Internet.

That is right. None of us knows what actually happened.

Zimmerman said he followed Martin. He said at some point Martin angrily confronted him, struck him, knocked him to the ground and continued to batter him. If that's the truth it seems clear enough Zimmerman used his gun in self defense. Whether or not he should have followed Martin is a separate issue.

This breaks down into two distinct areas. One are the hard facts that are indisputable and the other is the testimony of GZ.

The hard facts establish that it was GZ who was following TM as per the 911 recordings. The minor injuries to GZ's head are documented although they were slight enough to not require any medical attention at the time. The gun that was used to kill TM belonged to GZ and TM was unarmed and essentially doing nothing more than taking a shortcut on his way back home from the store.

GZ's testimony is self serving for obvious reasons. He is only telling his side of the story and putting himself in the best possible light. He has every right to do exactly that in his own defense. The downside to his testimony is that he has damaged his own credibility by lying to the judge.

The jury will get to see all of the hard evidence and to hear his testimony as to what he says happened that night. It will be up to them to decide if his version of events is sufficient to give him the benefit of reasonable doubt or if the preponderance of hard evidence outweighs his story.

Whatever the jury decides is going to make one side or the other unhappy. Which side that will be is beyond knowing at this point in time. We are just going to have to wait and see.

 

[Sunshine]

Back to Point #1.

WHY didn't Florida charge Zim with MANSLAUGHTER, and just give him the max?

Noooooo, they chose to pick a charge that allows for Zim to wiggle his way out.

All of the 'lesser included' are usually in there. You just are too stupid to find them and figure it out.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Back to Point #1.

WHY didn't Florida charge Zim with MANSLAUGHTER, and just give him the max?

Noooooo, they chose to pick a charge that allows for Zim to wiggle his way out.

Charging the highest possible count consistent with the claimed "evidence" is now part of a consiracy in FAVOR of the person being charged?

You truly are one amazing idiot, Queenie.

Also, as Sunshine correctly informed you, if there is a view of the evidence consistent with the lesser included offense of manslaughter, the jury could be allowed to consider that charge (if they find the defendant not guilty of the top count). Of course, if they find him not guilty based on "justification," then they would have to be idiots approximating your level of stupid to go ahead and convict him of the lesser offense.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I think it is wrong to harm an innocent child.

You've determined that Trayvon was "innocent?"

Cool.

Fuck that messy evidence and trial shit, I guess.

 

[king.solomon]

One day Ilar, you will realize how you err in your discourse toward King Solomon.

Alas, today is not that day.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

One day Ilar, you will realize how you err in your discourse toward King Solomon.

Alas, today is not that day.

That day will never come queenie because it would require that I be mistaken about you.

Alas, I am not.

You really are a just a fraudulent pissant little fuckstick.

 

[koshergrl]

I have no idea what actually happened between Zimmerman and Martin. All I know is what I've read, heard, and seen via the media and the Internet.

That is right. None of us knows what actually happened.

Zimmerman said he followed Martin. He said at some point Martin angrily confronted him, struck him, knocked him to the ground and continued to batter him. If that's the truth it seems clear enough Zimmerman used his gun in self defense. Whether or not he should have followed Martin is a separate issue.

This breaks down into two distinct areas. One are the hard facts that are indisputable and the other is the testimony of GZ.

The hard facts establish that it was GZ who was following TM as per the 911 recordings. The minor injuries to GZ's head are documented although they were slight enough to not require any medical attention at the time. The gun that was used to kill TM belonged to GZ and TM was unarmed and essentially doing nothing more than taking a shortcut on his way back home from the store.

GZ's testimony is self serving for obvious reasons. He is only telling his side of the story and putting himself in the best possible light. He has every right to do exactly that in his own defense. The downside to his testimony is that he has damaged his own credibility by lying to the judge.

The jury will get to see all of the hard evidence and to hear his testimony as to what he says happened that night. It will be up to them to decide if his version of events is sufficient to give him the benefit of reasonable doubt or if the preponderance of hard evidence outweighs his story.

Whatever the jury decides is going to make one side or the other unhappy. Which side that will be is beyond knowing at this point in time. We are just going to have to wait and see.

Ok..so when do we get to the "hard facts" and the "indisputable evidence"?

 

[asterism]

(Still waiting for our good friends to refute any of the solid points made by Asterism detailing "what Zimmerman did wrong")

Otherwise, it gives the appearance that they are unduly biased.
[MENTION=24388]asterism[/MENTION], have you "observed" TM doing any of those things you just slandered a dead kid about?

No. He posted about "lean" on facebook and I know through my volunteer activities what teens do with skittles and fruit drink. He wasn't carrying a half-eaten bag of skittles and an open can of watermelon drink. Both were closed, and he had previously asked about where one can get some prescription cough syrup.

As I said, it's not relevant to the case unless the prosecution tries to paint Trayvon Martin as some sort of "angel." He certainly wasn't that but being an idiot thug doesn't mean he had to die. Zimmerman has to prove he acted in self-defense to avoid jail. So far, I haven't seen evidence that does it. In my opinion, he'll be correctly found guilty of Manslaughter.

 

[asterism]

I think it is wrong to harm an innocent child.

I agree. If Zimmerman can't prove his affirmative defense he needs to go to jail for Manslaughter.

He's charged with 2nd degree murder. Not manslaughter. And I don't think he's going to plead.

Manslaughter is an automatic charge in this case. He's charged with 2nd Degree Murder, but the jury can convict on Manslaughter (according to Richard Hornsby, a local lawyer and authority on the case).

 

[asterism]

Back to Point #1.

WHY didn't Florida charge Zim with MANSLAUGHTER, and just give him the max?

Noooooo, they chose to pick a charge that allows for Zim to wiggle his way out.

That's an excellent question. Florida prosecutors certainly overcharged Casey Anthony. It was a slam dunk for felony child neglect (she wasn't watching her daughter, the kid died). I think these prosecutors are idiots when high-profile cases come up.

 

[asterism]

I have no idea what actually happened between Zimmerman and Martin. All I know is what I've read, heard, and seen via the media and the Internet.

That is right. None of us knows what actually happened.

Zimmerman said he followed Martin. He said at some point Martin angrily confronted him, struck him, knocked him to the ground and continued to batter him. If that's the truth it seems clear enough Zimmerman used his gun in self defense. Whether or not he should have followed Martin is a separate issue.

This breaks down into two distinct areas. One are the hard facts that are indisputable and the other is the testimony of GZ.

The hard facts establish that it was GZ who was following TM as per the 911 recordings. The minor injuries to GZ's head are documented although they were slight enough to not require any medical attention at the time. The gun that was used to kill TM belonged to GZ and TM was unarmed and essentially doing nothing more than taking a shortcut on his way back home from the store.

GZ's testimony is self serving for obvious reasons. He is only telling his side of the story and putting himself in the best possible light. He has every right to do exactly that in his own defense. The downside to his testimony is that he has damaged his own credibility by lying to the judge.

The jury will get to see all of the hard evidence and to hear his testimony as to what he says happened that night. It will be up to them to decide if his version of events is sufficient to give him the benefit of reasonable doubt or if the preponderance of hard evidence outweighs his story.

Whatever the jury decides is going to make one side or the other unhappy. Which side that will be is beyond knowing at this point in time. We are just going to have to wait and see.

In a disoriented state, I too "refused medical assistance" when my head got hit with a beer bottle when I was mugged a few years ago. I didn't want to spend the next 24 hours in a hospital, I just wanted to go home. I had a small cut on my head, some lacerations on my ear (picked broken glass out of it for a week), and some small blood stains on my shirt. 3 days later, I saw my Physician and told him I still had a headache. After an exam he said I had a "grade 3 concussion."

You can't call his head injury "minor" on photographic evidence alone. That said, depending on the evidence even if Martin bashed his head into the sidewalk he might have been justified.

If I go to a city parking lot armed late at night and start a fight am I justified in shooting some drunk that kicks my ass? Probably not.

 

[king.solomon]

Ok, well I feel better. If Zim can be convicted of manslaughter, even if not Murder2.

Is that correct?

Again.

TM being a "thug" is purely opinion. I've already detailed why GZ PRECISELY fits the DEFINITION of "thug"!

Rappers talk about "lean" all the time. It is typical for teens to try to fit in. So talking about lean, is different from being a user. Teens, and many adults talk about things on the net THAT THEY HAVE NEVER REALLY DONE all the time. Thus, in the absence of evidence of his "lean" use, one would be slandering a person to levy that accusation.

I'll go one further.

EVEN IF, TM had "intentions" to make lean, this would mean that he would actually have to like Skittles. Isn't it possible that on this night, while planning to watch the NBA All-Star game with his little brother while he was already on punishment... isn't it possible that he was just gonna eat the candy?

Remember, this wasn't TM's normal neighborhood. He was on punishment, and on his best behavior.

The point is.... it is AT LEAST just as likely that TM was gonna just eat the candy, as he would make "lean". Yet, you have judged him to be doing the more negative thing, without any evidence or prior official documentation to support your charge... and have just outright called him a thug.

When we see that Zimmerman is officially documented as a thug several times over in his life.

Peace

 

[jon_berzerk]

I have no idea what actually happened between Zimmerman and Martin. All I know is what I've read, heard, and seen via the media and the Internet.

That is right. None of us knows what actually happened.

Zimmerman said he followed Martin. He said at some point Martin angrily confronted him, struck him, knocked him to the ground and continued to batter him. If that's the truth it seems clear enough Zimmerman used his gun in self defense. Whether or not he should have followed Martin is a separate issue.

This breaks down into two distinct areas. One are the hard facts that are indisputable and the other is the testimony of GZ.

The hard facts establish that it was GZ who was following TM as per the 911 recordings. The minor injuries to GZ's head are documented although they were slight enough to not require any medical attention at the time. The gun that was used to kill TM belonged to GZ and TM was unarmed and essentially doing nothing more than taking a shortcut on his way back home from the store.

GZ's testimony is self serving for obvious reasons. He is only telling his side of the story and putting himself in the best possible light. He has every right to do exactly that in his own defense. The downside to his testimony is that he has damaged his own credibility by lying to the judge.

The jury will get to see all of the hard evidence and to hear his testimony as to what he says happened that night. It will be up to them to decide if his version of events is sufficient to give him the benefit of reasonable doubt or if the preponderance of hard evidence outweighs his story.

Whatever the jury decides is going to make one side or the other unhappy. Which side that will be is beyond knowing at this point in time. We are just going to have to wait and see.

In a disoriented state, I too "refused medical assistance" when my head got hit with a beer bottle when I was mugged a few years ago. I didn't want to spend the next 24 hours in a hospital, I just wanted to go home. I had a small cut on my head, some lacerations on my ear (picked broken glass out of it for a week), and some small blood stains on my shirt. 3 days later, I saw my Physician and told him I still had a headache. After an exam he said I had a "grade 3 concussion."

You can't call his head injury "minor" on photographic evidence alone. That said, depending on the evidence even if Martin bashed his head into the sidewalk he might have been justified.

If I go to a city parking lot armed late at night and start a fight am I justified in shooting some drunk that kicks my ass? Probably not.

being pummeled around the head is very dangerous

more so when one can not defend against it

refs call it when this situation occurs because of the

future damages it may cause including death

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Ok, well I feel better. If Zim can be convicted of manslaughter, even if not Murder2.

Is that correct?

Again.

TM being a "thug" is purely opinion. I've already detailed why GZ PRECISELY fits the DEFINITION of "thug"!

Rappers talk about "lean" all the time. It is typical for teens to try to fit in. So talking about lean, is different from being a user. Teens, and many adults talk about things on the net THAT THEY HAVE NEVER REALLY DONE all the time. Thus, in the absence of evidence of his "lean" use, one would be slandering a person to levy that accusation.

I'll go one further.

EVEN IF, TM had "intentions" to make lean, this would mean that he would actually have to like Skittles. Isn't it possible that on this night, while planning to watch the NBA All-Star game with his little brother while he was already on punishment... isn't it possible that he was just gonna eat the candy?

Remember, this wasn't TM's normal neighborhood. He was on punishment, and on his best behavior.

The point is.... it is AT LEAST just as likely that TM was gonna just eat the candy, as he would make "lean". Yet, you have judged him to be doing the more negative thing, without any evidence or prior official documentation to support your charge... and have just outright called him a thug.

When we see that Zimmerman is officially documented as a thug several times over in his life.

Peace

He was on punishment, and on his best behavior.

Yeah, except for the beating the guy's head on the pavement and breaking his nose. Angelic.

 

[king.solomon]

How is it possible that Zimmerman was "getting his head bashed in"?

Isn't that remarkable?

Ok, just LOOK at the situation...

I'm an adult.

I have a gun on me.

I'm following you.

I strongly suspect that you are a dangerous criminal.

You run, yet I am pursuing you.

You are a minor.

Unarmed.

I'm not just some accountant or something, but I'm captain of a neighborhood watch, and trained in law enforcement.

Now.....

When we finally meet each other in the night, you bloody my nose, beat me up, jump on top of me, and begin to bash my head in???


Hmmmmmm??????


I tell you the truth, I know small females in law enforcement that would not let that happen to them.

If at night, you think you are about to confront a dangerous criminal that you are following...

How in the hell is it possible for them to get that close up on you without you drawing your weapon first, identifying yourself, and taking a defensive posture?

It's IMPOSSIBLE!


JUST THINK!

THAT'S RIDICULOUS!

What's more likely is that Zim ran up on Tm (as Witness #9 says she heard), was antagonistic, and then Zim tried to reach for his gun, and TM fought for his life.