Yet another turn in the Zimmerman/Martin Case!

[PredFan]

And Trayvon had the right to stand his ground huh?

IF he was the one attacked then yes. You cannot attack and physically assault someone simply for following you.

If Martin stood his ground and Zimmerman layed even a finger on him then Martin woud be in the right. There is absolutely zero evidence that that happened.

Trayvon did not stock Zimmerman, Zimmerman stocked Trayvon by his own admission

You mean "stalked" dumbass?

One still has no legal right to attack someone who is following you. None what-so-ever.

 

[Liability]

And Trayvon had the right to stand his ground huh?

IF he was the one attacked then yes. You cannot attack and physically assault someone simply for following you.

If Martin stood his ground and Zimmerman layed even a finger on him then Martin woud be in the right. There is absolutely zero evidence that that happened.

Trayvon did not stock Zimmerman, Zimmerman stocked Trayvon by his own admission

Stock.

Idiot.

All literate folk know you MEANT to refer to "stalk." But you are such a massive imbecile, you don't even know the meaning of the words you use, so you can't hope to correct such errors.

And following is not the same as stalking, you dishonest idiot.

 

[California Girl]

And Trayvon had the right to stand his ground huh?

IF he was the one attacked then yes. You cannot attack and physically assault someone simply for following you.

If Martin stood his ground and Zimmerman layed even a finger on him then Martin woud be in the right. There is absolutely zero evidence that that happened.

Trayvon did not stock Zimmerman, Zimmerman stocked Trayvon by his own admission

Stocked? Idiot.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

How old would this child have to be before you would think he had any right to be worried and or try to protect himself?


If he was ten would Zimmerman still be able to threaten a child and stock them in hopes he could shoot them?

How old does a person have to be before you stop calling them a child? 26? 40?

17 year olds are considered adults in a court of law in some states.

Medically a persons brain is not mature until the mid 20s.

Legally a child is someone who does not have adult rights.

So you lose that argument

Well, legally, Missouri says a 17 year old has adult rights...

Statutory rape, second degree, penalty.

566.034. 1. A person commits the crime of statutory rape in the second degree if being twenty-one years of age or older, he has sexual intercourse with another person who is less than seventeen years of age.

Missouri -- Age of Consent

So, YOU lose that argument.

 

[Truthmatters]

He had a gun and was admitting to following the boy.

Pretending that is not a fact in evidence is pure stupidity

 

[BlindBoo]

I think anything you see in the press means very little at this by point.

What's in the EMS report from the scene? What were the extent of Zimmermans injuries?

What's in the autospy report. What did Martins hands look like?

What was the reason cited by the DA for not charging Zimmerman immediately, but allowing him to go free?

 

[California Girl]

IF he was the one attacked then yes. You cannot attack and physically assault someone simply for following you.

If Martin stood his ground and Zimmerman layed even a finger on him then Martin woud be in the right. There is absolutely zero evidence that that happened.

Trayvon did not stock Zimmerman, Zimmerman stocked Trayvon by his own admission

Stock.

Idiot.

All literate folk know you MEANT to refer to "stalk." But you are such a massive imbecile, you don't even know the meaning of the words you use, so you can't hope to correct such errors.

And following is not the same as stalking, you dishonest idiot.

Oops. My bad.... I repeated your 'stocked'. But... it's funny so it's worth saying twice.

 

[PredFan]

And Trayvon had the right to stand his ground huh?

IF he was the one attacked then yes. You cannot attack and physically assault someone simply for following you.

If Martin stood his ground and Zimmerman layed even a finger on him then Martin woud be in the right. There is absolutely zero evidence that that happened.

um he shot him him you fool

Do you have even ONE functioning brain cell?

He shot him because Martin was on top of him beating him. THAT was witnessed.

How do you live in a brain that small?

 

[Truthmatters]

How old does a person have to be before you stop calling them a child? 26? 40?

17 year olds are considered adults in a court of law in some states.

Medically a persons brain is not mature until the mid 20s.

Legally a child is someone who does not have adult rights.

So you lose that argument

Well, legally, Missouri says a 17 year old has adult rights...

Statutory rape, second degree, penalty.

566.034. 1. A person commits the crime of statutory rape in the second degree if being twenty-one years of age or older, he has sexual intercourse with another person who is less than seventeen years of age.

Missouri -- Age of Consent

So, YOU lose that argument.

he was killed in florida

 

[Truthmatters]

Florida Legal Ages Laws - FindLaw

 

[Rat in the Hat]

And Trayvon had the right to stand his ground huh?

IF he was the one attacked then yes. You cannot attack and physically assault someone simply for following you.

If Martin stood his ground and Zimmerman layed even a finger on him then Martin woud be in the right. There is absolutely zero evidence that that happened.

Trayvon did not stock Zimmerman, Zimmerman stocked Trayvon by his own admission

Zimmerman put Trayvon in one of these?!?!?

 

[California Girl]

IF he was the one attacked then yes. You cannot attack and physically assault someone simply for following you.

If Martin stood his ground and Zimmerman layed even a finger on him then Martin woud be in the right. There is absolutely zero evidence that that happened.

um he shot him him you fool

Do you have even ONE functioning brain cell?

He shot him because Martin was on top of him beating him. THAT was witnessed.

How do you live in a brain that small?

And that, if true, let's Zimmerman off with self defense. If someone was beating me up, and I had a gun, I'd probably shoot him too.

 

[imbalance]

Dante supports the law, and has been on record as such. Dante is decidedly left wing.

You stupid stupid fuck.

And Trayvon had the right to stand his ground huh?

IF he was the one attacked then yes. You cannot attack and physically assault someone simply for following you.

If Martin stood his ground and Zimmerman layed even a finger on him then Martin woud be in the right. There is absolutely zero evidence that that happened.

It doesn't have to be a physical assault. If Martin reasonably believed the armed man pursuing him threatened imminent bodily harm then Martin was justified in attacking Zimmerman.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Poor Teabaggers.

It appears their little story is experiencing a......

.....SERIOUS MELTDOWN!!!!!!

 

[Peach]

I think hardly anything you see in the press means very little at this by point.

What's in the EMS report from the scene? What were the extent of Zimmermans injuries?

What's in the autospy report. What did Martins hands look like?

What was the reason cited by the DA for not charging Zimmerman immediately, but allowing him to go free?

The funeral director stated he saw no evidence of fighting on the victim's body, the SA will determine if there is evidence to go forward. Where the two were at the time of the shooting means a lot to me, at least.

 

[PredFan]

I think hardly anything you see in the press means very little at this by point.

True dat.

What's in the EMS report from the scene? What were the extent of Zimmermans injuries?

Would help to know.

What's in the autospy report. What did Martins hands look like?

According to the "undertaker" (not the coroner), Martin's hands were undamaged.

What was the reason cited by the DA for not charging Zimmerman immediately, but allowing him to go free?

My guess at this point is that there was lack of evidence to dispute Zimmerman's story and evidence, including eyewtness reports, to support it.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Florida Legal Ages Laws - FindLaw

You REALLY should learn to read your own links before you post them.

Eligibility for Emancipation If legal marriage occurs (§743.01); upon petition if 16 or older (§743.015)
Contracts by Minors May contract for higher education financing if 16 or over (§743.05); may contract generally if married (§743.01)

Florida considers 17 year olds adults concerning Emancipation and Contracts.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Frankly, I don't care whether Zimmerman had any marks or bruises on him or not. He was told not to follow Trayvon and kept going anyway. To me, the "stand your ground" law no longer applies and he was the one who made the entire incident possible. At this point, I think he's guilty of some form or murder/manslaughter; I also think there are a lot of facts that we don't know yet. And I also think the local police dept are a bunch of racist bastards, and the case against Zimmerman has already been compromised by their failure to apply police procedures equally when the homicide occured.

I agree that continuing to follow AFTER being told by authorities to stop removes his protections under the stand your ground law.

However he may be protected under some self defense laws.

Either way it should be in court, in a trial, with real solid evidence and not heresey and media speculation.

Except.... there remains NO evidence to suggest that he continued to follow Martin after he was advised not to. In fact, he acknowledged that request with 'ok'... and, according to Zimmerman, he stopped following and headed back to his vehicle.

Your response to me is the EXACT reason why I said It should be in court, in a trial, with real solid evidence.....

 

[PredFan]

And Trayvon had the right to stand his ground huh?

IF he was the one attacked then yes. You cannot attack and physically assault someone simply for following you.

If Martin stood his ground and Zimmerman layed even a finger on him then Martin woud be in the right. There is absolutely zero evidence that that happened.

It doesn't have to be a physical assault. If Martin reasonably believed the armed man pursuing him threatened imminent bodily harm then Martin was justified in attacking Zimmerman.

Possibly true, but Martin had no idea that Zimmerman had a gun. If he did he was pretty stupid to attack and armed man with a can of tea and a bag of skittles.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

I agree that continuing to follow AFTER being told by authorities to stop removes his protections under the stand your ground law.

Jeez people. He wasn't told to stop. they said "We don't need you to do that". And that doesn't matter. Stand your ground doesn't apply in this case because Zimmerman, according to stories I've heard, was attacked from behind. That is cut and dried self defense. I don't know if that's what happened because I haven'ttalked to Zimmerman, but Zimmerman's Lawyer himself said that Stand Your ground doesn't apply in this case. His statement,combined with what I've heard, seems to support my stance that it doesn't aply.

However he may be protected under some self defense laws.

Either way it should be in court, in a trial, with real solid evidence and not heresey and media speculation.

The police do not have to bring the case to trial. The (black) interum police chief has said that he will not allow this case to be influenced by the media and public opinion. If they do not have sufficient evidence then they should not take it to court period. There may be more evidence that we don't know of, but so far there has been nothing at all to dispute Zimmerman's claim of self-defense and a whole lot, including eye-witnesses, that support him.

A young dead man is evidence of someone being killed by someone else. Do we need more evidence than a dead body to have a trial to decide if it was a justfied killing or if it was some level of homocide?