Court of public opinion looms large in George Zimmerman murder trial

TXgolfer said:
So he can't shoot if he is getting his head smashed in at that point? That is the question here.
Click to expand...

the question is... who started it? Zimmerman.

but we've been through this several times already. why start again? :lol:
 
Jiro said:
the question is... who started it? Zimmerman.

but we've been through this several times already. why start again? :lol:
Click to expand...

That doesn't answer the question. If you don't want to answer, that is fine.
 
Jiro said:
the question is... who started it? Zimmerman.

but we've been through this several times already. why start again? :lol:
Click to expand...
Ok, I call 911 and stay in the car. When the police comes, they ask where the kid is. I don't ****ing know where. Maybe in one of those 100 houses. Go get him!
 
TXgolfer said:
In the given hypothetical....can GZ shoot? Simple question really.
Click to expand...

ah.... yep you didn't understand my answer.

sure Zimmerman can shoot and that's his choice but then he would be arrested for murder/manslaughter because he willfully put himself in danger "after the fact". that was extremely crucial part. he reported a hostile individual and described a hostile situation from his car. and somehow.... he ended up being in bed with him.... :hmm:
 
CrazyPaul said:
Ok, I call 911 and stay in the car. When the police comes, they ask where the kid is. I don't ****ing know where. Maybe in one of those 100 houses. Go get him!
Click to expand...

yep! that's exactly and precisely what he should have done.

and guess what? the kid wasn't even a crook! :eek3:
 
Jiro said:
ah.... yep you didn't understand my answer.

sure Zimmerman can shoot and that's his choice but then he would be arrested for murder/manslaughter because he willfully put himself in danger "after the fact". that was extremely crucial part. he reported a hostile individual and described a hostile situation from his car. and somehow.... he ended up being in bed with him....
Click to expand...

Ah, so once he follows the victim with a firearm he forfeits all rights to use that firearm in his defense?
 
TXgolfer said:
Ah, so once he follows the victim with a firearm he forfeit all rights to use that firearm in his defense?
Click to expand...
victim? Trayvon wasn't a victim to Zimmerman. Trayvon was a hostile suspicious suspect. Zimmerman automatically forfeited his legal rights once he put himself in danger.

again... and once again.... the Florida self-defense law is absolutely clear about this. you cannot put yourself in danger however you can get involved to aid a victim.

in this case - there was no victim and there was no crime in progress.... therefore he lost that right just by following him after the fact.
 
Jiro said:
victim? Trayvon wasn't a victim to Zimmerman. Trayvon was a hostile suspicious suspect. Zimmerman automatically forfeited his legal rights once he put himself in danger.

again... and once again.... the Florida self-defense law is absolutely clear about this. you cannot put yourself in danger however you can get involved to aid a victim.

in this case - there was no victim and there was no crime in progress.... therefore he lost that right just by following him after the fact.
Click to expand...

Right, so your claim is that GZ forfeited all rights to use his firearm once he started following Trayvon... If Trayvon attacked GZ at that point, GZ had no right to use his firearm.

:cool2:
 
TXgolfer said:
Right, so your claim is that GZ forfeited all rights to use his firearm once he started following Trayvon... If Trayvon attacked GZ at that point, GZ had no right to use his firearm.

:cool2:
Click to expand...

there you go! *clap clap clap* a progress! a very slight one though.

you've just demonstrated that there's a chance that Zimmerman would be attacked and yet.... he chose to put himself in danger by following him. therefore.... ILLEGAL! Charles Bronson!
 
Jiro said:
there you go! *clap clap clap* a progress! a very slight one though.

you've just demonstrated that there's a chance that Zimmerman would be attacked and yet.... he chose to put himself in danger by following him. therefore.... ILLEGAL! Charles Bronson!
Click to expand...

Of course....then there is this.... (H/T to my FL Judge golf buddy)

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.
Click to expand...

776.041 - - 2011 Florida Statutes - The Florida Senate
 
Jiro said:
there you go! *clap clap clap* a progress! a very slight one though.

you've just demonstrated that there's a chance that Zimmerman would be attacked and yet.... he chose to put himself in danger by following him. therefore.... ILLEGAL! Charles Bronson!
Click to expand...
I see no difference between a watchdog following someone or an innocent resident who has a concealed gun walking home on the same path as TM's.
 
CrazyPaul said:
I see no difference between a watchdog following someone
Click to expand...
a neighborhood watchdog is trained/instructed not to get involved. and neighborhood watchdog is strongly advised not to carry a gun.

CrazyPaul said:
or an innocent resident who has a concealed gun walking home on the same path as TM's?
Click to expand...
Zimmerman was not walking home.
 
Jiro said:
then neither of us is wrong :)
Click to expand...

:lol: Yeah right.

You are wrong on the Hypothetical and according the testimony so far you are wrong on the case. 2 witnesses testified that the saw Trayvon attacking GZ while GZ was pinned down. GZ's injuries combined with Trayvon's lack of injuries confirm that GZ was attacked. The law states clearly that even the AGGRESSOR can defend themselves at this point. So unless some amazing testimony comes to light in the weeks to come.....GZ was within his rights to fire the weapon.
 
Jiro said:
a neighborhood watchdog is trained/instructed not to get involved. and neighborhood watchdog is strongly advised not to carry a gun.
Click to expand...
You didn't know that GZ was coming home at the time he saw TM? I thought you said FLA allows concealed guns. So he happened to have a concealed gun at the time. Should he go back home and drop his gun there and go out again to observe TM?


Jiro said:
Zimmerman was not walking home.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't TM suspect that an innocent resident who would be walking home on the same path followed him? He was high and paranoid.
 
CrazyPaul said:
You didn't know that GZ was coming home at the time he saw TM? I thought you said FLA allows concealed guns. So he happened to have a conecealed gun at the time. Should he go back home and drop his gun there and go out again to observe TM?


Wouldn't TM suspect that an innocent resident who would be walking home on the same path followed him?
Click to expand...

GZ was driving home when he spotted Trayvon.
 
Back
Top