Boy Killed by Neighborhood Watch

For discussion of politics, and what's going on in the world today.

Moderators: Blip, The_Metatron, Matt8819, Ironclad

Re: The message of Trayvon Martin

#1301  Postby Peter Brown » Jul 16, 2013 12:22 am

Byron wrote:
Peter Brown wrote:[...]
Stand your ground defined the evidence presented and the possible verdict.
Reasonable grounds is just a straw man media talking point, no witnesses so it was a forgone conclusion not guilty has to given when the accused pleads not guilty. All the accused has to say I was attacked, I was scared for my life, and without a witness you can not prove beyond doubt otherwise.
Stand your ground removes murder, manslaughter or any lesser finding when there are no witnesses. Its a bad law, and poorly framed even if you give the person who wrote it the benefit of the doubt it was written with good intents, ie the homeowner at home shooting the bugler.

Stand your ground is irrelevant to this case, as Zimmerman was unable to retreat.

Stand your ground also makes no difference to the fact that a person who kills in self-defense is often the only witness.

If the state had been able to discredit Zimmerman's account, he could have been convicted. Unfortunately for them, the forensics backed him, and their main witness was a rambling disaster on the stand, whose only accomplishment was to establish that Trayvon Martin liked to use racial slurs.

It's hard to think of any fair system that'd have allowed this pileup of a case to lead to a solid conviction.


the need to retreat is not even considered in the SYG law.
In the United States, stand-your-ground law states that a person may justifiably use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of an unlawful threat, without an obligation to retreat first.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law

SYG doesn't even need to be called by the defence, because it is a state rule, just like the 5th, you have it in play like it or not. A Judge will know this and if following SYG will allow evidence or deny it accordingly, and I gather a bit of that was going on by the Judge, like GZ had been profiling TM as a cause to pursue, detain, or ask questions and even sow the seed that GZ have reasonable expectation that TM was a gangster so GZ had already planned lethal intent as a possibility from the start. Profiling was not allowed to be even mentioned because under SYG it is irrelevant.

Yes I am writing this, but its based on opinions I've watch over the last few days about the case from Americans far better versed in the law than me.

My only interest in the case at the start was the police not even looking into the shooting until programs like TYT splashed it all over the place. The police still have a case to answer, but the verdict has exonerated them from even an investigation of institutional racism. ie not racist per sa, but letting the white man off is just the way we always done it that the police don't even think it odd.

anecdotally: I hear it said the jury asked about the possibility of manslaughter verdict, the defence made comment I forget the words, the jury made no further comment nor was the juror question answered. As I wrote earlier SYG made manslaughter irrelevant as a finding, and so they only rule in that court that was in force was reasonable doubt, and no witnesses makes reasonable doubt assured as no other witness can say GZ lied or over exaggerated in his favour about the events.
User avatar
Peter Brown
 
Posts: 2707
Age: 51
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: The message of Trayvon Martin

#1302  Postby CdesignProponentsist » Jul 16, 2013 12:42 am

Steve wrote:
If you’re ever in a heated argument with anyone, and you’re pretty sure there aren't any witnesses, it’s always best to kill the other person. They can’t testify, you don’t have to testify, no one else has any idea what happened; how can the state ever prove beyond a doubt is wasn't self-defense?


What is this "no witnesses" thing everybody keeps bringing up? There was a witness, and he testified that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and was the aggressor.

This witness seems to vanish from the scene dependent on opinion of guilt.
"Infinite loop?! I don't have time for that!" - Bender Bending Rodríguez
User avatar
CdesignProponentsist
 
Posts: 8825
Age: 47
Male

Country: U.S.A
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: The message of Trayvon Martin

#1303  Postby Blood » Jul 16, 2013 12:47 am

Steve wrote:If you’re ever in a heated argument with anyone, and you are white and he is black, and you’re pretty sure there aren't any witnesses, it’s always best to kill the other person. They can’t testify, you don’t have to testify, no one else has any idea what happened; how can the state ever prove beyond a doubt is wasn't self-defense?


Fixed.

White people are simply in a much better position of manipulating the system to their advantage in any legal situation. They have money, they have connections, they better understand the sham of a legal system we have and how to use it to their advantage.
A white person killing a white person is going to have a much tougher time.
"One absurdity having been granted, the rest follows. Nothing difficult about that."
- Aristotle, Physics I, 185a
User avatar
Blood
 
Posts: 1350
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: The message of Trayvon Martin

#1304  Postby Shrunk » Jul 16, 2013 12:57 am

Blood wrote:
Steve wrote:If you’re ever in a heated argument with anyone, and you are white and he is black, and you’re pretty sure there aren't any witnesses, it’s always best to kill the other person. They can’t testify, you don’t have to testify, no one else has any idea what happened; how can the state ever prove beyond a doubt is wasn't self-defense?


Fixed.

White people are simply in a much better position of manipulating the system to their advantage in any legal situation. They have money, they have connections, they better understand the sham of a legal system we have and how to use it to their advantage.
A white person killing a white person is going to have a much tougher time.


This case didn't even look like it would go trial, until there was pressure from those who saw this as a racial crime. I'd call that "manipulating system."
"A community is infinitely more brutalised by the habitual employment of punishment than it is by the occasional occurrence of crime." -Oscar Wilde
User avatar
Shrunk
 
Posts: 19449
Age: 49
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: The message of Trayvon Martin

#1305  Postby Steve » Jul 16, 2013 1:02 am

Shrunk wrote:
Blood wrote:
Steve wrote:If you’re ever in a heated argument with anyone, and you are white and he is black, and you’re pretty sure there aren't any witnesses, it’s always best to kill the other person. They can’t testify, you don’t have to testify, no one else has any idea what happened; how can the state ever prove beyond a doubt is wasn't self-defense?


Fixed.

White people are simply in a much better position of manipulating the system to their advantage in any legal situation. They have money, they have connections, they better understand the sham of a legal system we have and how to use it to their advantage.
A white person killing a white person is going to have a much tougher time.


This case didn't even look like it would go trial, until there was pressure from those who saw this as a racial crime. I'd call that "manipulating system."

Would that be the case if a 17 year old white boy had been shot at point blank range? I don't think so. That was part of the foot dragging because Trayvon being black meant he got less attention.

It damn well deserved a trial from the beginning.
As your desire is, so is your will.
As your will is, so is your deed.
As your deed is, so is your destiny
Blue Mountain Center of Meditation
User avatar
Steve
RS Donator
 
Posts: 6246
Age: 59
Male

New Zealand (nz)
Print view this post

Re: The message of Trayvon Martin

#1306  Postby CdesignProponentsist » Jul 16, 2013 1:09 am

Steve wrote:
Shrunk wrote:
Blood wrote:
Steve wrote:If you’re ever in a heated argument with anyone, and you are white and he is black, and you’re pretty sure there aren't any witnesses, it’s always best to kill the other person. They can’t testify, you don’t have to testify, no one else has any idea what happened; how can the state ever prove beyond a doubt is wasn't self-defense?


Fixed.

White people are simply in a much better position of manipulating the system to their advantage in any legal situation. They have money, they have connections, they better understand the sham of a legal system we have and how to use it to their advantage.
A white person killing a white person is going to have a much tougher time.


This case didn't even look like it would go trial, until there was pressure from those who saw this as a racial crime. I'd call that "manipulating system."

Would that be the case if a 17 year old white boy had been shot at point blank range? I don't think so. That was part of the foot dragging because Trayvon being black meant he got less attention.

It damn well deserved a trial from the beginning.


If the racial roles were reversed it should not have gone to trial either. Whether it would have is speculation.

There is problem of racial, social and economic judicial inequity in this country, but using this trial as an example is hugely misguided and does not point to the real issues.
"Infinite loop?! I don't have time for that!" - Bender Bending Rodríguez
User avatar
CdesignProponentsist
 
Posts: 8825
Age: 47
Male

Country: U.S.A
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Boy Killed by Neighborhood Watch

#1307  Postby MarkP80 » Jul 16, 2013 1:19 am

I just want to say that it's been great reading this thread.
My opinion on this matter has changed so much.
I started thinking Zimmerman was guilty, I now think he was most likely justified in self defense.
I was holding on to the belief that he suspected Martin based on his color, but Byron's and Laklak's comments changed my views on this also.
That's why I love this forum, if I went solely by the media and personal friend's opinions, I would still be cussing at racist Florida and how fucked up or judicial system is.
Now I'll sit back in my corner, and return to lurking mode.

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 2
MarkP80
 
Name: Mark Pereira
Posts: 373
Age: 34
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: The message of Trayvon Martin

#1308  Postby MarkP80 » Jul 16, 2013 1:26 am

Blood wrote:
Steve wrote:If you’re ever in a heated argument with anyone, and you are white and he is black, and you’re pretty sure there aren't any witnesses, it’s always best to kill the other person. They can’t testify, you don’t have to testify, no one else has any idea what happened; how can the state ever prove beyond a doubt is wasn't self-defense?


Fixed.

White people are simply in a much better position of manipulating the system to their advantage in any legal situation. They have money, they have connections, they better understand the sham of a legal system we have and how to use it to their advantage.
A white person killing a white person is going to have a much tougher time.

And that's not racist at all...

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 2
MarkP80
 
Name: Mark Pereira
Posts: 373
Age: 34
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: The message of Trayvon Martin

#1309  Postby GT2211 » Jul 16, 2013 3:52 am

Collector1337 wrote:
NineBerry wrote:
Collector1337 wrote:Nope. Martin could evade bullets because he was younger? That clearly didn't happen.

Martin wasn't shot in the back. The evidence supports that he was shot while on top of Zimmerman.

Your version of events isn't even plausible.


It's plausible. I don't mean attacked with a gun but a physical attack. Zimmerman storms at Martin. Martin evades the attack, puts Martin down on the ground. Kneels down over him, puts his fist in Zimmerman's face. Then gets up, standing over Zimmerman maybe asking him why he is attacking him. In that moment Zimmerman draws his gun and shoots.

Just because Martin was facing Zimmerman doesn't mean he was still a danger to him. Add to that that one of the forensic experts (the one that had actually done the autopsy) said it was possible that Zimmerman was several feet away when shooting.


And what evidence is there that Zimmerman attacked Martin? Zimmerman is the one with the documented injuries.

If there was evidence that Zimmerman had physically attacked Martin then it would have been in the trial, but there is no such evidence.
I don't believe Zimmerman needed to physically attack him first for him to be considered the initial aggressor.

CdesignProponentsist wrote:
Steve wrote:
Shrunk wrote:
Blood wrote:

Fixed.

White people are simply in a much better position of manipulating the system to their advantage in any legal situation. They have money, they have connections, they better understand the sham of a legal system we have and how to use it to their advantage.
A white person killing a white person is going to have a much tougher time.


This case didn't even look like it would go trial, until there was pressure from those who saw this as a racial crime. I'd call that "manipulating system."

Would that be the case if a 17 year old white boy had been shot at point blank range? I don't think so. That was part of the foot dragging because Trayvon being black meant he got less attention.

It damn well deserved a trial from the beginning.


If the racial roles were reversed it should not have gone to trial either. Whether it would have is speculation.

There is problem of racial, social and economic judicial inequity in this country, but using this trial as an example is hugely misguided and does not point to the real issues.
I don't know that I agree with this. One of the problems with racial inequality is that in cases like this where the victims are black the cases are more likely to result in acquittals.
#teammiley

Alaska Back to Russia. SIGN NOW!
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petiti ... a/SFG1ppfN
User avatar
GT2211
 
Posts: 2418

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: The message of Trayvon Martin

#1310  Postby Pebble » Jul 16, 2013 10:48 am

Warren Dew wrote:
Weaver wrote:
Pebble wrote:The reported interaction as recorded on Trayvor Martin's autopsy report suggests a rather different series of events when compared to Zimmerman's later account. Also shooting someone directly 'front to back' is more consistent with this initial account than some one on their back on the ground while shooting someone above them.

" At approximately 1910 hours on 02/26/2012, 911 dispatchers received a call from a resident of the complex. The resident advised of a B/M who was at the complex between the townhouses. The caller stated that the male should not have been in the area and he observed the male while walking his neighborhood watch. Shortly after the call the resident confronted the male and the two began to physically fight. Witnesses observed the two fighting in the yard and then the resident fired a handgun at the male striking him in the chest. The male fell to the ground. SPD and SPF arrived on the scene. The male was pronounced dead at 1930 hours."

The Medical Examiner who did the autopsy did very poorly on the stand, and was convincingly refuted by an expert witness brought in by the defense, who showed that in his professional opinion the wounds were consistent with Martin being on top of Zimmerman when the round was fired.

Really - you have to acknowledge everything that came out at trial, not just the prosecution side of things.

Not to mention that the paragraph quoted by Pebble talks about things that are clearly outside the expertise of a medical examiner. The medical examiner should be talking about the body, not about what happened during a fight he wasn't present for.

It makes it sound like the medical examiner started with hearsay reports on what happened, and did his examination on that basis - not very good practice.


Bollox - that will be the initial testimony of the duty officer. It is used as the starting senario and it is imperative that the postmortem accounts for the known 'facts' - thus for example if someone 'died' in a fire but no evidence of tissue reaction to heat or inhalation is found then those are relevant findings. Doing a PM is not something carried out in isolation from the background data. If that data is subsequently shown to be incorrect, then the medical examiner should be appraised of this and have the opportunity to reconsider whether his conclusions are still valid. It would appear that the defence did this but not the prosecution.
Pebble
 
Posts: 1814

Country: UK
Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Re: The message of Trayvon Martin

#1311  Postby CookieJon » Jul 16, 2013 11:11 am


!
GENERAL MODNOTE
Duplicate threads merged.
User avatar
CookieJon
Moderator
 
Posts: 8384
Male

Jolly Roger (arr)
Print view this post

Re: Boy Killed by Neighborhood Watch

#1312  Postby mcgruff » Jul 16, 2013 1:48 pm

I can only imagine that people making the accusations didn't see him. He spoke very slowly and at times appeared as if English did not come naturally to him (Chinese origin) but he also came across as being thoughtful and very careful with his choice of words. Several times he was at great pains to point out to the jury the difference between fact and opinion - for example powder burns were an observable fact but what that indicated about the range of the gun when fired was an opinion.

So the idea that Dr. Shiping Bao performed "poorly" is kind of stupid. Quite apart from anything else, he's not a "performer". We don't judge evidence based on charisma and empty rhetoric, but on factual content.
I'm not a c*nt!
mcgruff
 
Posts: 2186
Male

Scotland (ss)
Print view this post

Re: The message of Trayvon Martin

#1313  Postby CdesignProponentsist » Jul 16, 2013 2:33 pm

GT2211 wrote:
CdesignProponentsist wrote:
If the racial roles were reversed it should not have gone to trial either. Whether it would have is speculation.

There is problem of racial, social and economic judicial inequity in this country, but using this trial as an example is hugely misguided and does not point to the real issues.
I don't know that I agree with this. One of the problems with racial inequality is that in cases like this where the victims are black the cases are more likely to result in acquittals.


I think we need to work on a more fair system rather than trying to balance it out with more convictions of the white majority. How about we work on presumed innocence rather than equal opportunity lynchings for fucks sake?
"Infinite loop?! I don't have time for that!" - Bender Bending Rodríguez
User avatar
CdesignProponentsist
 
Posts: 8825
Age: 47
Male

Country: U.S.A
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Boy Killed by Neighborhood Watch

#1314  Postby Teague » Jul 16, 2013 2:54 pm

Shrunk wrote:
purplerat wrote:Given that narrative of events any person in Martin's situation - first being stalked by a stranger in a car then after running away being chased/followed - would be well reasoned to be in fear of their safety. Keeping in mind that Florida self defense law only requires that a person reasonably believe they are in danger (even if they are in fact mistaken) and there is no duty for Martin to retreat. Even had Martin actually been committing a crime I believe those standards would still have applied. Zimmerman should have been aware of that and known that he was setting up a situation that could very well end in bloodshed. The fact that he decided to go about as he did anyways while carrying a lethal weapon further adds to his culpability.


If we take all that as a given, then I don't see how Zimmerman could have been convicted. Even if he provoked a fight, he still has the right to defend himself once the fight has started. He may be "culpable", but that would only be relevant in a civil case, which may still happen. It's not enough to secure a criminal conviction.


And Martin had the right to defend himself from some nutter stalker, right. Zimmerman initiate the whole event and then killed the kid and got away scott free- that's fucking nuts.
Teague
 
Posts: 2589

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Boy Killed by Neighborhood Watch

#1315  Postby Teague » Jul 16, 2013 2:57 pm

purplerat wrote:
Shrunk wrote:
purplerat wrote:Given that narrative of events any person in Martin's situation - first being stalked by a stranger in a car then after running away being chased/followed - would be well reasoned to be in fear of their safety. Keeping in mind that Florida self defense law only requires that a person reasonably believe they are in danger (even if they are in fact mistaken) and there is no duty for Martin to retreat. Even had Martin actually been committing a crime I believe those standards would still have applied. Zimmerman should have been aware of that and known that he was setting up a situation that could very well end in bloodshed. The fact that he decided to go about as he did anyways while carrying a lethal weapon further adds to his culpability.


If we take all that as a given, then I don't see how Zimmerman could have been convicted. Even if he provoked a fight, he still has the right to defend himself once the fight has started. He may be "culpable", but that would only be relevant in a civil case, which may still happen. It's not enough to secure a criminal conviction.

I agree. I think the jury got it right given the evidence presented in the case.

It just really bothers me that the law as written appears to setup such situations in which it's kill or be killed because the legal system will reward the killer and of course the other person will be dead. It just seems like if under such a set of laws if you end up in a physical altercation you should do all you can to kill the other person because if you don't they might kill you and would be legally justified in doing so. That just seems really fucked up to me.


There's no "seeming" it is fucked up. Period.
Teague
 
Posts: 2589

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Boy Killed by Neighborhood Watch

#1316  Postby Teague » Jul 16, 2013 3:07 pm

Byron wrote:
Did he? He saw a person acting suspiciously and phoned it in.


That's an assertion - we don't know how Martin was acting and I'm sure not going to believe the testimony of the guy who has everything to gain by lying.
Teague
 
Posts: 2589

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Boy Killed by Neighborhood Watch

#1317  Postby CdesignProponentsist » Jul 16, 2013 3:10 pm

Teague wrote:
Shrunk wrote:
purplerat wrote:Given that narrative of events any person in Martin's situation - first being stalked by a stranger in a car then after running away being chased/followed - would be well reasoned to be in fear of their safety. Keeping in mind that Florida self defense law only requires that a person reasonably believe they are in danger (even if they are in fact mistaken) and there is no duty for Martin to retreat. Even had Martin actually been committing a crime I believe those standards would still have applied. Zimmerman should have been aware of that and known that he was setting up a situation that could very well end in bloodshed. The fact that he decided to go about as he did anyways while carrying a lethal weapon further adds to his culpability.


If we take all that as a given, then I don't see how Zimmerman could have been convicted. Even if he provoked a fight, he still has the right to defend himself once the fight has started. He may be "culpable", but that would only be relevant in a civil case, which may still happen. It's not enough to secure a criminal conviction.


And Martin had the right to defend himself from some nutter stalker, right. Zimmerman initiate the whole event and then killed the kid and got away scott free- that's fucking nuts.


Zimmerman didn't "initiate" it with physical assault. Martin did.

Did you actually watch any of the trial?
"Infinite loop?! I don't have time for that!" - Bender Bending Rodríguez
User avatar
CdesignProponentsist
 
Posts: 8825
Age: 47
Male

Country: U.S.A
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Boy Killed by Neighborhood Watch

#1318  Postby CdesignProponentsist » Jul 16, 2013 3:12 pm

Teague wrote:
Byron wrote:
Did he? He saw a person acting suspiciously and phoned it in.


That's an assertion - we don't know how Martin was acting and I'm sure not going to believe the testimony of the guy who has everything to gain by lying.


Yeah, who needs evidence when you can lynch someone in the name of social justice.
"Infinite loop?! I don't have time for that!" - Bender Bending Rodríguez
User avatar
CdesignProponentsist
 
Posts: 8825
Age: 47
Male

Country: U.S.A
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Boy Killed by Neighborhood Watch

#1319  Postby purplerat » Jul 16, 2013 3:22 pm

CdesignProponentsist wrote:
Teague wrote:
Shrunk wrote:
purplerat wrote:Given that narrative of events any person in Martin's situation - first being stalked by a stranger in a car then after running away being chased/followed - would be well reasoned to be in fear of their safety. Keeping in mind that Florida self defense law only requires that a person reasonably believe they are in danger (even if they are in fact mistaken) and there is no duty for Martin to retreat. Even had Martin actually been committing a crime I believe those standards would still have applied. Zimmerman should have been aware of that and known that he was setting up a situation that could very well end in bloodshed. The fact that he decided to go about as he did anyways while carrying a lethal weapon further adds to his culpability.


If we take all that as a given, then I don't see how Zimmerman could have been convicted. Even if he provoked a fight, he still has the right to defend himself once the fight has started. He may be "culpable", but that would only be relevant in a civil case, which may still happen. It's not enough to secure a criminal conviction.


And Martin had the right to defend himself from some nutter stalker, right. Zimmerman initiate the whole event and then killed the kid and got away scott free- that's fucking nuts.


Zimmerman didn't "initiate" it with physical assault. Martin did.

Did you actually watch any of the trial?

But the law does not require that Zimmerman initiate with a physical assault before Martin would have been justified in defending himself. This would be particularly true in a case where the person one is defending themselves against is carrying a lethal weapon.
That being said, with Martin dead and no other witnesses, it would be virtually impossible to prove such a justification on Martin's behalf.
User avatar
purplerat
 
Posts: 6872
Male

Country: Only in America
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Boy Killed by Neighborhood Watch

#1320  Postby Teague » Jul 16, 2013 3:32 pm

Warren Dew wrote:
Steve wrote:The "does not have a duty to retreat" is the SYG part. There has always been acceptance of deadly force for self defense. But deadly force from a skinny kid with no training in hand to hand fighting?

6'0" and 160 pounds is a "skinny kid"? I don't think so.


Really? Yes that is skinny for that height.
Teague
 
Posts: 2589

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to News, Politics & Current Affairs

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest