Travon Martin Trial

Sooooo, the only way we know someone is running is if they state they are?

Does it honestly and truly make sense to you that GZ would walk after TM was running away? Really?

The point he calls the cops and leaves his vehicle he is doing it under NWP, yes or no?

 

Nope. Chasing infers the attempt to catch. GZ never wanted to catch TM. If he had he wouldn't have called the police.

As was mentioned... GZ wasn't patrolling.

 

You do not know what GZ's intent was. Considering he was upset that the aholes always get away, and the person he was chasing ended up with a smoking bullet hole from GZ's gun, GZ's intent is not cut and dried. The verdict didn't prove his intent.

 

It wouldn't change my opinion at all as to what the verdict should have been. That's the point you're missing. There is no indication that GZ ever attacked TM. There isn't any evidence that GZ pulled the gun on TM first. If TM attacked GZ, he was in the wrong. The only report of the incident is from GZ who said he was struck by TM. The eyewitness said they saw TM on top of GZ. That would seem to corroborate GZ's version and at a minimum make his version plausible (far more than a reasonable doubt that it might have happened as he said).

 

Well you are stating that he ran. He made sworn statements to the police in which he said he walks. So yes it makes sense to me that he walked because he said he did. You're basically calling him a liar because it doesn't make sense to YOU.

Your 2nd question is pretty ridiculous.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Chasing someone while armed can be assault.

 

Very well written bro, and #5 I get so mad at.....I wear hoodies everyday in the fall and winter...it is so stupid...

But #6 is bothersome to me as well, this system is set-up to benefit everybody and the very people that are mad could benefit someday just like you or I in the event that we (god forbid) are ever on trial....

If the Justice system starts to convict on accusations without proof of guilty beyond reasonable doubt, you would see a major upswing in false arrests, and convictions. Quite frankly we would become like the very Countries that commit gross human rights crimes against their own people. It is far more dangerous than what happened the other night....

 

Ok, the defendant is always truthful. I'll remember you think that when AH's trial is going on.

Why is it ridiculous?

 

At no time did I state that the defendant is always truthful. So please don't put words in my mouth, as I know damn well you don't like others to do it to you.

It's a lot easier to not believe AH when there will be at least one other witness/person to give their detailed timeline of events that took place up there. In Sanford the only other person who could possibly testify to whether or not GZ Ran or walked is dead. So because it doesn't make sense to you, you choose to believe he ran, which equals he chased.

If we want to go by theories based off of common sense, than to ME it doesn't make sense for a person to walk in the rain to 7-11 at nighttime, only wearing a hoodie, just for candy and a soda. But I'm not making accusations based off what makes sense to me, I'd rather base my beliefs off of the trial evidence, which happens to include sworn statements.



And your other question was ridiculous because you're making it out to be like the moment GZ dials 911, his life as a regular civilian ceases and his NWP cape comes on. Like he might have a NWP uniform on under his going to Target clothes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Any reasonable person who looks at the evidence, like the jury, will know what Zimmermans intent was. He called the police. His intent was to stop break ins in his neighborhood. He called the police. If TM had did what the 40+ other people did when GZ called the police TM would still be alive. Instead, TM tried to act tough and punched the wrong guy.

GZ did nothing illegal. This is a fact. Period.

 

If TM had just went home instead of "keeping it real" we wouldn't know either if their names.

 

If Zimmerman's wife hadn't used all of the toilet paper then GZ wouldn't have had to go to Target, and we wouldn't know either of their names.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

No you didn't state that, but there's no reason to believe GZ's account of things either, especially when it doesn't jibe with common sense. Common sense dictates, GZ isn't going to walk after a person he trying to keep an eye on if that person was running away. It makes no sense on any level.

Which makes even more necessary to question everything GZ has said. He ran, him not running makes no sense under any circumstance.

We don't have a lot of facts, so what else can you base it on, other than what makes sense? It does not make sense that he didn't run after a person who was running away. It doesn't make sense that TM was scared enough to run, but then suddenly became overwhelmed with courage and the cunning to lure GZ into a trap. It doesn't make sense that GZ actually feared for his life by the *** beating he was getting, but didn't reach for his gun until TM supposedly went for it.

Its not ridiculous because you're assuming the things he's been told by the police prior to that night and the things put out by the national NWP were somehow meaningless even though he wasn't "on duty" that night. he was doing the job of the NWP that night, the rules he's supposed to follow don't just cease to be.

 

lol. That trial did not prove or disprove GZ's intent. That is fact. Period.

 

Yes it did. If he had an intent that you, and race baiters, think then manslaughter would have been the verdict.

 

Correct. We don't know whether there was a failure of proof of intent, or whether the jury had a reasonable doubt based on the affirmative defense of self-defense.

 

You can get convicted of simple assault up here with words....no bs...

 

But FinD knows what GZs intent was. And that is to chase and kill a black kid carrying skittles because he was tired of those aholes always getting away.

I have to disagree with you on saying FinD is correct. The intent was proven not to be what FinD, and the race baiters, think. His intent was not malicious or illegal. That is a fact proven in this case and the jury's acquittal.

 

It can be. If you know they have a gun or have some other reason to believe they intend to cause imminent bodily harm.

 

That was not GZ's burden at all. It was, however, part of the State's burden. The State had to prove their version of events was what in fact happened, beyond a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors. You just said they didn't prove part of their case. So, if you believe the statement you just made was fact, then you must also agree that the verdict had to be "not guilty".

 

I think everywhere that's the truth. If you threaten to hit someone with a bat and have a bat and are able to swing it that's assault. Telling a police dispatch the direction a suspicious person is going while legally carrying a concealed weapon is never assault. No matter how much some wish it was, it's not.

 

You could also say they shoulda kept the key ingredients to "grape drink" or "lean" in the pantry.......


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I blame Skittles for not sending this innocent, violence-free young man free skittles.

 

Don't even need to be armed. Any type of action - chasing included - that creates a well-founded fear is assault. The question in this case was whether Travon had a well-founded fear. The jury decided that he did not.

 

The most troubling part in all this is that GZ is still permitted to carry a firearm. There needs to be some standard for intelligence and judgement for carrying a firearm IMO. This guy is a certified idiot and a danger to the population.

 

Probably because GZ never chased TM.

 

Its pretty debatable, but probably a matter of semantics here. Following someone is essentially the same as chasing them. I don't think its debatable that GZ followed TM.

 

Lol... If you had your CWP and got jumped would you use the weapon? Why have a CWP if you won't use it to protect your life and safety?

I'm glad he can still carry. He was proven to needing to defend himself from a violent punk. He showed restraint in only firing once and hitting his target center mass shows he's taken training.

 

Nope. Chasing infers wanting to catch. GZ never wanted confrontation. He called the cops for that. His only mistake was allowing himself to be taken by surprise. He should have stayed in his truck. Not because it was wrong to get out, but because he was safer.

 

Ultimately it requires the person with he CWP to use their judgment to decide when their life is in danger. I don't believe Zimmerman has the mental capacity to make such judgments. I also don't believe people prescribed to amphetamines should be carrying firearms.

 

Chasing: Pursue in order to catch or catch up with

 

Again, your illegal use of adderall and anecdotal evidence from that use means nothing.

 

Lol... GZ neither wanted to catch or catch up ( who's playing semantics now?) with TM. A short, pudgy, 30 yr old is not going to catch, or catch up with, a 6', lean, 17yr old black boy. TM was never scared. He thought he was a badass and ended up punching the wrong guy.

 

lol. Actually Zimmerman thought he was a badass and ran up on the wrong boy. Then got served to the point where he feared for his life and had to pull the pistol because he realized he wasted his money on them MMA lessons. How you a grown man and get served by a 17 year old.

 

Nope. TM sucker punched GZ. GZ never ran up to him. Age, at least 16 or so and older, doesn't really mean anything when up against a nonviolent, most likely hardly ever, if at all, been in a fight person... Like GZ. TM was the violent, fighting all the time person. Remember? In fact, I know a 17 yr old that would take the majority of everyone here in a fight.

 

No it isn't.

Following: You're going 5 mph. I'm going 5 mph. I will never catch up to you. I'm keeping a safe distance. Analogy to law enforcement: Putting a tail on a subject.
Chasing: You're going 5 mph. I'm going 10 mph. You now go 10 mph so I don't catch up with you. Analogy to law enforcement: High speed chase.

There is a difference. GZ was definitely keeping an eye on TM. There is no doubt about that. He probably instilled fear in TM. No doubt about that. Did that fear rise to the level of assault? I don't think so. The elements of assault are very specific. I don't think they are met here. If there was assault, I bet you get a manslaughter conviction, or have a good chance at it.

Keep in mind, there is a chance TM didn't see GZ get out of the car to follow him. There is also a chance he did. We don't know because TM is dead and can't give his side of the story. We do know he booked while GZ was still in his car. How far he got before GZ opened the door and got out. We don't know.

 

He thought he was being followed by a diddler. You are right, he did punch the wrong guy. Not smart punching a mentally challenged person with a firearm.

 

I'd put money on TM over GZ 10 times out of 10 just by looking at their physique. But I believe he was 5'10"

Let's not forget the fight club TM was in.