The Black Panthers want Zimmerman Killed

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by montyw64, Jul 14, 2013.

  1. Row6
    Offline

    Row6 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    15,997
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +26
    Actually you're the first to try this argument.

    That's like saying it doesn't matter how GZ got on the ground because we have a dead teenager that he shot. We don't know how the physical confrontation began, and that is relevant as TM may have felt he was acting in self defense. It is very easy to imagine circumstances leading to that event, which does not make them true, but does make them reasonable possibilities only countered by the word of GZ.

    Get it?
  2. reformedgator
    Online

    reformedgator Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,971
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +281
    Insightful commentary in today's Orlando Sentinel by a forensic science & criminally consultant if anyone would like to post it.
  3. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,923
    Likes Received:
    817
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +3,609
    Amen. That's the reason that the prosecution ultimately didn't even bother to make it an issue at trial. First, they couldn't have proven up Zimmerman as the initial aggressor to get the instruction, but even if they had, they still couldn't have disproven self-defense over and above a) the same issue that cost them the trial, that at the time he fired, he had reasonable fear of life/SBH, and b) that the duty to retreat would have been satisfied by Good's testimony that he was pinned down.

    The only way through the weeds would have been to make it not matter if Zimmerman had that reasonable fear and the only way to make it not matter would be if Zimmerman had been the initial aggressor and using the deadly force himself. Not one shred of evidence, direct or circumstantial, supports that, though.

    The case was a farce, basically. I still am stunned by how weak it was, when I had sincerely thought "they are going to really change some minds here, we haven't seen the state's evidence" to instead learn over two weeks that "no, the state had no business even bringing this case".
  4. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,923
    Likes Received:
    817
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +3,609
    No, I know it's been explained several times because I have personally done so several times.

    Martin may well have been acting in self-defense, but his use of force must be reasonable. If he's using force that would put a reasonably cautious and prudent person in the same circumstances in fear for their life or serious bodily harm, that is unreasonable force, and it flips the self-defense see-saw back the other way -- so that even a person who started a fight can claim it again.

    Aggressor's "normal" force can be met with Victim's "normal" force; if it's met with deadly force, than Victim's deadly force can be met with deadly force. Whoever raises the stakes last, loses the self-defense right, basically.

    So unless you have some evidence that Zimmerman used deadly force from the jump (and, spoilers, you don't), Martin can't meet it with deadly force. And even if Zimmerman started the fight (which, again, spoilers, no actual evidence on point here) and had a duty to retreat before he could answer the escalating force with force, being pinned to the sidewalk satisfies that duty, which is why there was no point in the SAs trying to make it an issue at trial.
  5. Row6
    Offline

    Row6 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    15,997
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +26
    Without witnesses - the other guy is dead - no one could prove who started it, or even assuming TM did start it, what his frame of mind was. One could accept the statements of the accused, and some have tried to elevate them to proven facts. Of course it is also possible that GZ did not know TM's state of mind, even if TM was thinking self defense.
  6. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,923
    Likes Received:
    817
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +3,609
    The thing you think matters a great deal, though, ultimately doesn't matter that much. Because, again, merely being the initial aggressor doesn't get you where you want it to, because we're still left with evidence -- much better evidence than just Zimmerman's word (Good's eyewitness testimony, Di Miao's analysis) that Martin was on top and could land unguarded strikes to the head immediately before and when the shot was fired -- that the situation had escalated into a deadly altercation and the use of lethal force/self-defense ball was back in Zimmerman's court.

    It's a misleading analysis when people seem to think there is some great legal puzzle here around lethal self-defense (i.e. "we only have the shooter's word"). But that's not true. That's not all we have here. There is physical evidence and eyewitness testimony that aids Zimmerman's version more than it did the state's. There is not likely to be a rash of perfectly designed murders set up to look like self-defese because... well, it wouldn't work.
  7. Row6
    Offline

    Row6 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    15,997
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +26
    So, shooting someone in the heart is normal force while someone unarmed who landed one punch to the nose and then presumably could have been trying to disable his armed attacker is not normal?

    There is no evidence either way on this phase of the incident or TM's state of mind then. The inability to prove an alternative is not the same as proclaiming GZ's story as true. Reasonable doubt is the standard, and thankfully for GZ or any defendant.
  8. Row6
    Offline

    Row6 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    15,997
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +26
    I think you confuse my objection to people stating a version of unknown events as fact with objecting to the jury verdict. I am not doing the latter and have stated that several times over he last days. Except for the fact that the former is unfortunately the basis for much of the editorial comment about the parties involved and racial issues, it would not matter, but it is being used as ammunition in these arguments and those doing so are shooting blanks without knowing or caring.
  9. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,923
    Likes Received:
    817
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +3,609
    Okay, you can't seriously think that's any part of what I said.

    Shooting someone in the heart is deadly force, in answer to deadly force -- where the phrase "deadly force" is a term of art and means force that would make a reasonable person fear they were in imminent danger of death <<<<<(((((!!!!!or serious bodily harm!!!!!)))))>>>>>

    In case there was any mistaking that that phrase is actually relevant. So, yes, in legal terms, a straddled beatdown with risk of unguarded blows to the head and secondary impact against the pavement is the very soul of imminent danger of serious bodily harm.

    What "normal" force (not a term of art, it's just an unwieldy thing to describe) preceded that scenario becomes moot. Zimmerman and Martin could have had a dukes-up fist fight, or a slap fight, or a tickle fight, doesn't matter once it escalates into a deadly altercation (i.e. one in which a reasonable person would so fear).

    The only evidence for the moments immediately before and of the shooting itself we have supports Zimmerman's version above the state's. I think it would even win on the lighter civil standard (i.e. more likely than not that Zimmerman's version is correct). What happened from the time they encountered each other until then, your guess might be as good as mine, but it really just doesn't matter all that much. Hell, even the testimony about Zimmerman's "what are you doing here" encounter doesn't support any conclusion that he opened up with a show of deadly force, like the gun being out.
  10. rpmGator
    Offline

    rpmGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    13,044
    Likes Received:
    224
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +950
    Unknown events don't make your nose bleed and the back of your head injured.

    If you ignore the only eye witness, you are just talking without fact.

    It doesn't matter who said what, how they got in the same space, or any race. Once your head is being pounded into concrete, it is now a life and death situation and it is LEGAL to use any method possible, to keep from dying.

    In thirty states no less. In the others you have to die to be legal.

    When you don't count the numbers of the victims and make this about one person, you have already failed society as a whole.
  11. Row6
    Offline

    Row6 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    15,997
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +26
    No one is ignoring the only eye witness, but it is germaine to evaluating his comments that he killed the only other possible witness. His version of events is a fact but it doesn't necessarily represent the facts of what happened.
  12. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,923
    Likes Received:
    817
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +3,609
    The eyewitness in question is Good.
  13. Row6
    Offline

    Row6 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    15,997
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +26
    Good did not see the events leading up to and the beginning of the physical portion of the confrontation.
  14. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,923
    Likes Received:
    817
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +3,609
    No, he saw the parts that were ultimately relevant, though.

    Again, the only thing you gain from deciding Zimmerman was the initial aggressor here is him having a duty to retreat before he could use force in self-defense. Do you not see that? And there is no jurisdiction in the world in which a reasonable retreat hasn't been satisfied by someone who an eyewitness has pinned to the ground. You are hung up on a detail that ultimately means nothing.

    If Zimmerman had shown up, gun out and threatening (i.e. not merely Martin noticing he has a holstered gun, for instance), that changes the landscape, but the only evidence we have pertaining to the beginning of their encounter suggests that wasn't the case, either.

    I have yet to see a piece of evidence that makes the state's version of any element more likely to be true than the defense's -- and again, that's the civil standard, not the criminal one. I think the evidence in the criminal trial could have prevailed before a civil jury, for the defense.
  15. rpmGator
    Offline

    rpmGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    13,044
    Likes Received:
    224
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +950
    So the eyewitness didn't know the facts he saw, but you do...

    Ignoring the injuries you saw yourself means you can listen to Jessie and ignore your own lying eyes.
  16. neisgator
    Offline

    neisgator Belligerent Gator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    10,618
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Quincy IL
    Ratings Received:
    +106
    Row is as stunning as ever in this thread.
  17. The_Graygator
    Online

    The_Graygator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Messages:
    36,254
    Likes Received:
    850
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +3,015
    This is the second time the Black Panthers have put out a hit warrant on Zimmerman.

    When is our Atty. General going to do something about it?

    Oh, wait, he won't, because they're black.

    As another poster said in another thread, black racism is just as ugly as white racism.
  18. jimgata
    Online

    jimgata Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    9,138
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,335
    Good may not have seen what led to the fight, but there is one thing for sure. NOBODY on this site did either. Anything said is mere speculation and when the hell did we start legally convictng on speculation? Reasonable doubt is the key and the state did not convict because they could not overcome reasonable doubt. All these wildass scenarios are nothing more than chatter and they have not a shred of evidence that zimmerman did not react the way he did because he was scared as hell he might die.
  19. Row6
    Offline

    Row6 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    15,997
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +26
    I think you are ignoring my post above where I differentiated between questioning the verdict - I'm not - and passing judgement on the motivations and moral position of the parties involved. There is plenty of comment on TH about the latter and it is based on unknown, unknowable, or tainted evidence. I will continue to correct those who rely on this to make false statements about the case and it's parties. Your comments above are relevant to the verdict - no problem - but irrelevant to the latter.
  20. rpmGator
    Offline

    rpmGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    13,044
    Likes Received:
    224
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +950
    Z has been tried and found innocent. Anyone who continues to persecute, has lynch mob mentality which can be a crime in itself when someone acts because they don't agree with the legal system.

    So much ado, for one person that ignores the many.

    The legal system let him go. Other's made such a show that it went to trial where he was let go a second time. Yet those from afar, still want revenge on the innocent.

Share This Page