Trayvon Martin: What say y'all?
#206
And you don't think that that is an affront to your freedoms?
I think y'all are overreacting. The fact that there is a trial either points to some evidence that the media hasn't acquired (and distorted), or the pragmatic peeps in government don't want a race riot. I have a ton of family in Seminole County, I REALLY don't want a race riot there. If one dude who has dubious claims to innocence has to go through a trial; I can accept his suffering as fair payment for a lack of millions of dollars of damages.
And how else do you suppose everyone can agree that justice has been served? Should we let the court of public opinion decide? They already have. On distorted evidence that would be thrown out in a real court. If Zimmerman truly believes in his innocence, he won't plead out. A jury of carefully selected peers will decide based on legally admissible evidence if he is guilty. And ya'll know that if it starts looking bad, the prosecutor will drop the charges.
Are you pissed because public outrage caused this guy to be arrested? Public outrage has led to good things too, you know.
I think y'all are overreacting. The fact that there is a trial either points to some evidence that the media hasn't acquired (and distorted), or the pragmatic peeps in government don't want a race riot. I have a ton of family in Seminole County, I REALLY don't want a race riot there. If one dude who has dubious claims to innocence has to go through a trial; I can accept his suffering as fair payment for a lack of millions of dollars of damages.
And how else do you suppose everyone can agree that justice has been served? Should we let the court of public opinion decide? They already have. On distorted evidence that would be thrown out in a real court. If Zimmerman truly believes in his innocence, he won't plead out. A jury of carefully selected peers will decide based on legally admissible evidence if he is guilty. And ya'll know that if it starts looking bad, the prosecutor will drop the charges.
Are you pissed because public outrage caused this guy to be arrested? Public outrage has led to good things too, you know.
#207
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,733
Total Cats: 4,126
even suggesting, that by charging him it might be an effort to prevent a "race riot" causes me to ask you: And you don't think that that is an affront to your freedoms?
If one dude who has dubious claims to innocence has to go through a trial; I can accept his suffering as fair payment for a lack of millions of dollars of damages.
And how else do you suppose everyone can agree that justice has been served? Should we let the court of public opinion decide? They already have. On distorted evidence that would be thrown out in a real court. If Zimmerman truly believes in his innocence, he won't plead out. A jury of carefully selected peers will decide based on legally admissible evidence if he is guilty.
The Prosecuter now has to prove that Zimmerman intentionally went after Martin instead of shooting him in self-defense. There's zero evidence, to the public, that would suggest was even close to the truth. The courts are not to be used for fishing expiditions or show trials.
And ya'll know that if it starts looking bad, the prosecutor will drop the charges.
do you forget one of the most value things about being an american citizen? Innocent until proven guilty.
Public outrage has led to good things too, you know.
#208
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,085
Total Cats: 375
why not just pull Zimmerman out and gut him? That would really appease the Black Panthers and their class of individual. I mean, there are really two options here, we can either go after the Black Panther guy who advertised the bounty and violence against whites or we can cut off Zimmerman's head. Considering Eric Holder would never utilize the law as an instrument of oppresion against the oppressed, I guess we have to saw off Zimmerman's head.
#210
the fact that it took 45 days and a 2nd special prosecuter to bring "dubious" 2nd degree murder charges against him speaks nothing to the law, nor the job of a prosecuter.
Even suggesting, that by charging him it might be an effort to prevent a "race riot" causes me to ask you: And you don't think that that is an affront to your freedoms?
i think that there are a great many things that this country does that affronts my freedoms.
dubious? So you were there? You're smarter than the police that arrested him? So it's okay to bend the rules/laws for one person if it might appease a great number?
i was not there. Neither was anyone else. If you only had one side of a story, would you automatically assume that it was the truth? I don't think we'll ever hear martin's explanation of events, so what actually happened will probably always remain a mystery.
you think he's going to get a fair trial? I watched a freaking news story break come across my tv when he was arrested, like he's the fbi's #1 most wanted criminal. I dont even think i saw that when bin laden was killed.
i do think he'll get a fair trial, if he can get a decent laywer. In our legal system, there has to be evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. There isn't even a preponderance of the evidence against him. If the jury does convict him, i'm positive that there will be an appeal or the judge will declare a mistrial.
the prosecuter now has to prove that zimmerman intentionally went after martin instead of shooting him in self-defense. There's zero evidence, to the public, that would suggest was even close to the truth. The courts are not to be used for fishing expiditions or show trials.
"to the public"
what a joke. She has all the evidence. She shouldn't be charging anyone with anything unless she can prove that what she's charging them with is actually what can have evidence they can prove it with.
are you saying that she doesn't have evidence to charge him?
do you forget one of the most value things about being an american citizen? Innocent until proven guilty.
Ah! There's the strawman!
Even suggesting, that by charging him it might be an effort to prevent a "race riot" causes me to ask you: And you don't think that that is an affront to your freedoms?
i think that there are a great many things that this country does that affronts my freedoms.
dubious? So you were there? You're smarter than the police that arrested him? So it's okay to bend the rules/laws for one person if it might appease a great number?
i was not there. Neither was anyone else. If you only had one side of a story, would you automatically assume that it was the truth? I don't think we'll ever hear martin's explanation of events, so what actually happened will probably always remain a mystery.
you think he's going to get a fair trial? I watched a freaking news story break come across my tv when he was arrested, like he's the fbi's #1 most wanted criminal. I dont even think i saw that when bin laden was killed.
i do think he'll get a fair trial, if he can get a decent laywer. In our legal system, there has to be evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. There isn't even a preponderance of the evidence against him. If the jury does convict him, i'm positive that there will be an appeal or the judge will declare a mistrial.
the prosecuter now has to prove that zimmerman intentionally went after martin instead of shooting him in self-defense. There's zero evidence, to the public, that would suggest was even close to the truth. The courts are not to be used for fishing expiditions or show trials.
"to the public"
what a joke. She has all the evidence. She shouldn't be charging anyone with anything unless she can prove that what she's charging them with is actually what can have evidence they can prove it with.
are you saying that she doesn't have evidence to charge him?
do you forget one of the most value things about being an american citizen? Innocent until proven guilty.
Ah! There's the strawman!
#214
My completely amateur attempt at explaining a murder defense.
There are three ways to defend yourself against a murder charge:
IDDI - "I didn't do it"
TOGDI - "That other guy did it"
And
The Affirmative defense - "I did it, I was right to do it"
In the first two examples, the state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you did it. I don't believe you can argue that you were right to do it, only that you didn't do it. (the state will have an easy time proving that he did it)
In the affirmative defense, the burden of proof shifts to the defendant to prove that a reasonable person, knowing what the person did at the time of the shooting would have done the same thing.
If you would like, I can reference my notes from MAG-40 "Massad Ayoob Group, Armed Citizens Rules of engagement."
It is a 40 hour course on the subject. Based on what I know (which is honestly incomplete) I believe Zimmerman's biggest mistake was leaving his truck. However, based on the information I have heard, it would be a miscarriage of justice if he is found guilty. That said, this doesn't prevent him (or his lawyers) from doing or saying something stupid that puts his life in jeopardy.
It all depends on how well he can articulate to the jury what he knew and when he knew it. Also it depends on wither the evidence backs him up and how reliable it is.
There are three ways to defend yourself against a murder charge:
IDDI - "I didn't do it"
TOGDI - "That other guy did it"
And
The Affirmative defense - "I did it, I was right to do it"
In the first two examples, the state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you did it. I don't believe you can argue that you were right to do it, only that you didn't do it. (the state will have an easy time proving that he did it)
In the affirmative defense, the burden of proof shifts to the defendant to prove that a reasonable person, knowing what the person did at the time of the shooting would have done the same thing.
If you would like, I can reference my notes from MAG-40 "Massad Ayoob Group, Armed Citizens Rules of engagement."
It is a 40 hour course on the subject. Based on what I know (which is honestly incomplete) I believe Zimmerman's biggest mistake was leaving his truck. However, based on the information I have heard, it would be a miscarriage of justice if he is found guilty. That said, this doesn't prevent him (or his lawyers) from doing or saying something stupid that puts his life in jeopardy.
It all depends on how well he can articulate to the jury what he knew and when he knew it. Also it depends on wither the evidence backs him up and how reliable it is.
#217
I could care less about the race issue. But I do have a bias against cops end even more so of wannabe cops carrying guns. Personal experience tells me this type of work attracts psychopaths who are more interested in exerting authority over people than preserving the piece for citizens to peruse life liberty and happiness.
I also have an issue with cops not being easily identified as such. I would likely try to defend myself from some thug looking character trying to chase me down and corner me and I don’t want society set up where I always need to be packing a weapon to do it.
If a neighborhood watch guy shoots dead an unarmed teenager with no evidence the teen was breaking any laws He did something wrong.
Bob
I also have an issue with cops not being easily identified as such. I would likely try to defend myself from some thug looking character trying to chase me down and corner me and I don’t want society set up where I always need to be packing a weapon to do it.
If a neighborhood watch guy shoots dead an unarmed teenager with no evidence the teen was breaking any laws He did something wrong.
Bob
#218
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
I could care less about the race issue. But I do have a bias against cops end even more so of wannabe cops carrying guns. Personal experience tells me this type of work attracts psychopaths who are more interested in exerting authority over people than preserving the piece for citizens to peruse life liberty and happiness.
Agreed 100%, especially plain clothes cops snatching someone up on the street or drawing down on someone in public (like an undercover cop who fired on a student at a tailgate party at a local university).
That does not - so far - appear to be the story supported by the limited evidence we have seen so far. It certainly could be shown in court, though.
#219
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,733
Total Cats: 4,126
This is a good read: http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/04/zi...rtin-shooting/