I Don't Think Many Of You Know What "Confronted" Means

[Si modo]

Well kosher, I know he was carrying a gun when the organization he was part of doesn't allow guns.
....

They don't allow guns while on watch. The cops say he was on his way to the grocery store when he called about Martin.

.... I know he had charges of domestic assault at least once.

....

And, it looks like both he and the other were charged.

.... I know he had a restraining order against him at least once.

....

Now, that I didn't know. Link, please.

.... He assaulted a police officer at least once.

....

And he was convicted?

.... I know he killed at least one person in his life so far. He has been characterized as a want-to-be cop. Enjoy the facts.

Yes.

 

[saveliberty]

According to a statement by prosecutor spokesperson, they took his clothes.

No kidding? You mean when koshergrl corrected that point a few posts back, I didn't understand? Try reading the post I was responding to and then comment okay?

Touchy, eh?

But, that does nothing to change the fact that the prosecutor's office says his clothing was taken.

Does nothing to change the fact you can't handle the information I presented in the post.

Sorry to hear about your broken nose. Hope it is a distant memory and set nice and straight.

 

[Si modo]

No kidding? You mean when koshergrl corrected that point a few posts back, I didn't understand? Try reading the post I was responding to and then comment okay?

Touchy, eh?

But, that does nothing to change the fact that the prosecutor's office says his clothing was taken.

Does nothing to change the fact you can't handle the information I presented in the post.

....

"Can't handle"? I don't give a shit whether you think Gadawg is a detective or not, so there is not much to "handle" in that post.

... Sorry to hear about your broken nose. Hope it is a distant memory and set nice and straight.

Thanks. Yes, it did - can't even tell. But, it hurt.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'm anti - death penalty. Period.

All this pissing and moaning about lynching is an effort at misdirection.

So those that want to wait for the evidence and go be the facts are engaged in "misdirection?"

Not like you clear-headed leftists who demand conviction based on emotion and racial prejudice......

 

[Uncensored2008]

No, you stay away, please. We have more than our fair share of idiots here.

You alone make more than a state's fair share of idiots, Rati.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

There's never been anything confirming he had a broken nose or a gash..or stitches. In any case..since the police report itself seems to have been tampered with..I don't think there's going to be much credibility in any documents surfacing from Sandford.

of course let's all go down to Florida and lynch the bastard.

No, you stay away, please. We have more than our fair share of idiots here.

I would be the best thing that happen to your state I would offset your stupidity with intelligence.

 

[Barb]

Within a stones' throw of the Traylon Martin rally at the Atlanta University campus yesterday a 3 year old black child was shot in the stomach and killed by a black man.
Where is the rally about this? Where is the public outrage in the black community about a 3 year old black child being killed?
They can not cry racism on that one. I am sure they are very upset about it but since ****** was not involved just another day.

How do you know there isn't outrage? The media shows what is sensational, not what is commonplace. Man bites dog is a headline, dog bites man...not so much.

Additionally, there is a response in poor communities (not black anymore, as these are the one commons that HAS been fully integrated). There are candle lit vigils, marches against community violence, community funded (for generations, mind you) recreation, arts, boys and girls centers, churches, et cetera.

What there isn't, is timely police response to the calls of VICTIMS, community resources in re police, fire, mass transit, hospitals, groceries, better roads, housing construction, schools, supplies, teachers,and ALL the infrastructure wealthier communities TAKE FOR GRANTED as their DUE.

You live one day, with any form of grace, in a poverty ridden neighborhood and get back to us poor slobs on how we should react to the abject want all around us, the blatant disregard of those who consider themselves our betters (when they're no better than reptiles themselves), and the result of public policy that not one of us had a voice in crafting, and that not one ounce of research was conducted in the formation of with our neighborhoods in mind.

In short, **** you. **** you running.

 

[saveliberty]

Touchy, eh?

But, that does nothing to change the fact that the prosecutor's office says his clothing was taken.

Does nothing to change the fact you can't handle the information I presented in the post.

....

"Can't handle"? I don't give a shit whether you think Gadawg is a detective or not, so there is not much to "handle" in that post.

... Sorry to hear about your broken nose. Hope it is a distant memory and set nice and straight.

Thanks. Yes, it did - can't even tell. But, it hurt.

Sort of hurts just thinking about it happening to YOUR nose. It is a good point that not all broken noses mean a blood bath. Its even possible that there was no blood spatter from the gun shot. All in all, the story looks and sounds like a homicide to me, so for now that's what I'm going with. Hopefully I'm wrong and the community can start to heal and no one else suffers.

 

[Gadawg73]

Within a stones' throw of the Traylon Martin rally at the Atlanta University campus yesterday a 3 year old black child was shot in the stomach and killed by a black man.
Where is the rally about this? Where is the public outrage in the black community about a 3 year old black child being killed?
They can not cry racism on that one. I am sure they are very upset about it but since ****** was not involved just another day.

How do you know there isn't outrage? The media shows what is sensational, not what is commonplace. Man bites dog is a headline, dog bites man...not so much.

Additionally, there is a response in poor communities (not black anymore, as these are the one commons that HAS been fully integrated). There are candle lit vigils, marches against community violence, community funded (for generations, mind you) recreation, arts, boys and girls centers, churches, et cetera.

What there isn't, is timely police response to the calls of VICTIMS, community resources in re police, fire, mass transit, hospitals, groceries, better roads, housing construction, schools, supplies, teachers,and ALL the infrastructure wealthier communities TAKE FOR GRANTED as their DUE.

You live one day, with any form of grace, in a poverty ridden neighborhood and get back to us poor slobs on how we should react to the abject want all around us, the blatant disregard of those who consider themselves our betters (when they're no better than reptiles themselves), and the result of public policy that not one of us had a voice in crafting, and that not one ounce of research was conducted in the formation of with our neighborhoods in mind.

In short, **** you. **** you running.

You sure have a lot of free time, you poor slob you.
There is no "public policy" that makes you post here instead of working.
YOU make your neighborhoods, the public policy doesn't.
But that would be a good thing to march for, a better neighborhood.
Why don't you advocate a community that helps each other, rebuilds the community and neighborhood and stands for justice for one and all.
Instead of the few that you may believe it is politically correct to stand for.
On any given day whenever the wind is blowing your direction only.
So go and march and demonstrate for a better neighborhood and community where you live and see how many folk you get behind you versus those that have the time to march for this poor kid and his family that have been led by those that have THEIR best interests in mind and foremost and DO NOT live in their neighborhoods.

 

[Gadawg73]

What this will end up as and I believe it to be correct and valid is:
Zimmerman has NO authority to pursue Martin even though Zimmerman was breaking NO law doing so.
Martin WAS NOT doing anything illegal that day.
A lot of gray area in between. I believe Zimmerman was a pain in the ass as he was known for making nusance calls to 911 all the time.
Having read the Florida statute 20 times I NOW have this take on it also: Martin ALSO HAS THE BENEFIT of this statute. Zimmerman pursues Martin and Martin STANDS HIS GROUND. He confronts his pursuer. He can LEGALLY do that under this statute sports fans is my take. Now how far can he do that is subject to interpretation and what the witnesses say.
The pursuit resulted in the death. Could have been in self defense BUT I see it as at most 2nd degree murder and most likely VOLUNTARY manslaughter.
Depends on the witnesses as to how far Martin went on top of Zimmerman.
If Zimmerman does not pursue this kid that was not doing anything criminal the kid is walking today.
This is not a planned killing, this is most likely involuntary or voluntary manslaughter, if that. I believe the pursuit most likely, as this is my opinion based on the fact this kid HAD NO CRIMINAL intent that day because IF HE DID we damn sure would have heard about it by now from the police, makes this a voluntary manslaughter case as voluntary manslaughter statute states "from a provacation of some kind" and I believe Martin was the one FIRST provoked..
Folks, a manslaughter conviction in Florida can carry 30 years under certain circumstance but the max is 15 years otherwise. I see this as voluntary manslaughter as Zimmerman PURSUED Martin, not illegal as there is no law against it BUT that pursuit caused the gun to be used and this kid is dead.
15 to do 5 minimum with the opening offer more like 15 to do 10.
As usual, I am the one in the middle and open to any and all facts and I call them as I see them.
For those that do not like it or can not take it, the hell with ya.

 

[MarcATL]

I hope he gets at least the max 30 years based on that analysis.

 

[koshergrl]

What makes you think we would have heard about criminal intent by now? What do you base that on?

The police are sitting tight and doing their investigation. I see no reason why they would tip their hand at this point...and I'm fairly certain they are very nervous about making any statements except the most vague until they know exactly where they're going with this, and can thoroughly defend their position.

Also there's nothing to prove anyone was pursuing anyone at the time of the altercation.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What this will end up as and I believe it to be correct and valid is:
Zimmerman has NO authority to pursue Martin even though Zimmerman was breaking NO law doing so.
Martin WAS NOT doing anything illegal that day.
A lot of gray area in between. I believe Zimmerman was a pain in the ass as he was known for making nusance calls to 911 all the time.
Having read the Florida statute 20 times I NOW have this take on it also: Martin ALSO HAS THE BENEFIT of this statute. Zimmerman pursues Martin and Martin STANDS HIS GROUND. He confronts his pursuer. He can LEGALLY do that under this statute sports fans is my take. Now how far can he do that is subject to interpretation and what the witnesses say.
The pursuit resulted in the death. Could have been in self defense BUT I see it as at most 2nd degree murder and most likely VOLUNTARY manslaughter.
Depends on the witnesses as to how far Martin went on top of Zimmerman.
If Zimmerman does not pursue this kid that was not doing anything criminal the kid is walking today.
This is not a planned killing, this is most likely involuntary or voluntary manslaughter, if that. I believe the pursuit most likely, as this is my opinion based on the fact this kid HAD NO CRIMINAL intent that day because IF HE DID we damn sure would have heard about it by now from the police, makes this a voluntary manslaughter case as voluntary manslaughter statute states "from a provacation of some kind" and I believe Martin was the one FIRST provoked..
Folks, a manslaughter conviction in Florida can carry 30 years under certain circumstance but the max is 15 years otherwise. I see this as voluntary manslaughter as Zimmerman PURSUED Martin, not illegal as there is no law against it BUT that pursuit caused the gun to be used and this kid is dead.
15 to do 5 minimum with the opening offer more like 15 to do 10.
As usual, I am the one in the middle and open to any and all facts and I call them as I see them.
For those that do not like it or can not take it, the hell with ya.

There's one thing that has been pointed numerous times. The dispatcher told Zimmerman that he did not need to follow Trayvon. Zimmerman said "OK" and headed back to his SUV to wait for the police. Now why would Zimmerman shoot somebody when he knew the police were in route unless Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman? What I just posted was submitted in the investigation.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I hope he gets at least the max 30 years based on that analysis.

Based solely on emotion.

 

[koshergrl]

And racism.

 

[Gadawg73]

I hope he gets at least the max 30 years based on that analysis.

Marc, what you or I "hope" is never the law and thank God for it.
When I was growing up the majority down here "hoped" blacks would stay in their place.
Thankfully I was raised to fight that and know that what others hoped for was not always right.
The 30 years is ONLY for habitual offenders with previous felony convictions of more than 3 times so that is out. Now there is a provision in Georgia law Marc and I believe it is also applicable under the Florida sentencing statute for manslaughter that if a child or an elderly person was killed where there were NO other circumstances such as a confrontation then this case is bumped up as a 1st degree felony with that maximum of 30 years.
But I oppose these mandatory sentencing guidelines anyway. They have sent more of your folk unfairly to prison on mandatory 10 years in the Federal system with NO parole or probation.
30 years for unpremedidated murder Marc. Since when have you been a hard core conservative right wing kook?

 

[Gadawg73]

What this will end up as and I believe it to be correct and valid is:
Zimmerman has NO authority to pursue Martin even though Zimmerman was breaking NO law doing so.
Martin WAS NOT doing anything illegal that day.
A lot of gray area in between. I believe Zimmerman was a pain in the ass as he was known for making nusance calls to 911 all the time.
Having read the Florida statute 20 times I NOW have this take on it also: Martin ALSO HAS THE BENEFIT of this statute. Zimmerman pursues Martin and Martin STANDS HIS GROUND. He confronts his pursuer. He can LEGALLY do that under this statute sports fans is my take. Now how far can he do that is subject to interpretation and what the witnesses say.
The pursuit resulted in the death. Could have been in self defense BUT I see it as at most 2nd degree murder and most likely VOLUNTARY manslaughter.
Depends on the witnesses as to how far Martin went on top of Zimmerman.
If Zimmerman does not pursue this kid that was not doing anything criminal the kid is walking today.
This is not a planned killing, this is most likely involuntary or voluntary manslaughter, if that. I believe the pursuit most likely, as this is my opinion based on the fact this kid HAD NO CRIMINAL intent that day because IF HE DID we damn sure would have heard about it by now from the police, makes this a voluntary manslaughter case as voluntary manslaughter statute states "from a provacation of some kind" and I believe Martin was the one FIRST provoked..
Folks, a manslaughter conviction in Florida can carry 30 years under certain circumstance but the max is 15 years otherwise. I see this as voluntary manslaughter as Zimmerman PURSUED Martin, not illegal as there is no law against it BUT that pursuit caused the gun to be used and this kid is dead.
15 to do 5 minimum with the opening offer more like 15 to do 10.
As usual, I am the one in the middle and open to any and all facts and I call them as I see them.
For those that do not like it or can not take it, the hell with ya.

There's one thing that has been pointed numerous times. The dispatcher told Zimmerman that he did not need to follow Trayvon. Zimmerman said "OK" and headed back to his SUV to wait for the police. Now why would Zimmerman shoot somebody when he knew the police were in route unless Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman? What I just posted was submitted in the investigation.

First we heard from media and all the circus promoters: "He was ORDERED not to pursue"
Then we hear another made up version "Well, they meant to tell him not to do it"
At least you got it right.
You do not have to means you do not have to which means they were telling him he does not have to possibly put himself in danger.
And 911 operators have no authority to tell someone what they can do or can not do if what they are doing is legal.
But I agree that possibly Zimmerman was walking back to his vehicle but we DO NOT know if that was after the preliminary confrontation.
Witnesses folks, witnesses. This case boils down to the witnesses and what happened after the first confrontation.
But he can not get away from HE pursued this kid and the kid HAD NO criminal intent that day. I believe that to be fact.

 

[Gadawg73]

What makes you think we would have heard about criminal intent by now? What do you base that on?

The police are sitting tight and doing their investigation. I see no reason why they would tip their hand at this point...and I'm fairly certain they are very nervous about making any statements except the most vague until they know exactly where they're going with this, and can thoroughly defend their position.

Also there's nothing to prove anyone was pursuing anyone at the time of the altercation.

Zimmerman admits he was pursuing Martin in the call but I do see your point that at the time of the altercation before the shooting we do not know.
But under Florida law and their criminal code is as hard core conservative as it gets manslaughter can be a "homocide committed while in the midst of a provacation"
Not very specific there and gives a lot of room for a prosecutor.
And the fact that he was pursuing him earlier and the kid was apparently not doing anything criminal can be used as evidence to show the provacation later.
All under the Florida statute.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What this will end up as and I believe it to be correct and valid is:
Zimmerman has NO authority to pursue Martin even though Zimmerman was breaking NO law doing so.
Martin WAS NOT doing anything illegal that day.
A lot of gray area in between. I believe Zimmerman was a pain in the ass as he was known for making nusance calls to 911 all the time.
Having read the Florida statute 20 times I NOW have this take on it also: Martin ALSO HAS THE BENEFIT of this statute. Zimmerman pursues Martin and Martin STANDS HIS GROUND. He confronts his pursuer. He can LEGALLY do that under this statute sports fans is my take. Now how far can he do that is subject to interpretation and what the witnesses say.
The pursuit resulted in the death. Could have been in self defense BUT I see it as at most 2nd degree murder and most likely VOLUNTARY manslaughter.
Depends on the witnesses as to how far Martin went on top of Zimmerman.
If Zimmerman does not pursue this kid that was not doing anything criminal the kid is walking today.
This is not a planned killing, this is most likely involuntary or voluntary manslaughter, if that. I believe the pursuit most likely, as this is my opinion based on the fact this kid HAD NO CRIMINAL intent that day because IF HE DID we damn sure would have heard about it by now from the police, makes this a voluntary manslaughter case as voluntary manslaughter statute states "from a provacation of some kind" and I believe Martin was the one FIRST provoked..
Folks, a manslaughter conviction in Florida can carry 30 years under certain circumstance but the max is 15 years otherwise. I see this as voluntary manslaughter as Zimmerman PURSUED Martin, not illegal as there is no law against it BUT that pursuit caused the gun to be used and this kid is dead.
15 to do 5 minimum with the opening offer more like 15 to do 10.
As usual, I am the one in the middle and open to any and all facts and I call them as I see them.
For those that do not like it or can not take it, the hell with ya.

There's one thing that has been pointed numerous times. The dispatcher told Zimmerman that he did not need to follow Trayvon. Zimmerman said "OK" and headed back to his SUV to wait for the police. Now why would Zimmerman shoot somebody when he knew the police were in route unless Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman? What I just posted was submitted in the investigation.

First we heard from media and all the circus promoters: "He was ORDERED not to pursue"
Then we hear another made up version "Well, they meant to tell him not to do it"
At least you got it right.
You do not have to means you do not have to which means they were telling him he does not have to possibly put himself in danger.
And 911 operators have no authority to tell someone what they can do or can not do if what they are doing is legal.
But I agree that possibly Zimmerman was walking back to his vehicle but we DO NOT know if that was after the preliminary confrontation.
Witnesses folks, witnesses. This case boils down to the witnesses and what happened after the first confrontation.
But he can not get away from HE pursued this kid and the kid HAD NO criminal intent that day. I believe that to be fact.

Yes the witness that what it boils down too. And what have the witnesses thus far stated?
I will add that we do know according to the 911 tapes Zimmerman was waiting on the police to arrive. Now why would he shoot Trayvon without due cause?

 

[Uncensored2008]

And racism.

Exactly.