It is currently Mon May 19, 2025 6:24 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1006 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 ... 51  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 1:07 am 
Offline
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
I don't know why you yanks put up with him... he is taking away the job of some poor home grown Ass-clown.

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 1:42 am 
Offline
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
Image

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 8:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:35 pm
Posts: 1056
kbp wrote:
If, just after the confrontation started…

…George saw Trayvon reach for a gun and shot him in response, what would his defense be?
or
…Trayvon saw George reach for a gun and shot him in response, what would his defense be?

Is it possible for Bernie to somehow point out that George might not be correct in his guess at when Trayvon first saw his gun, it might have happened before the attack?


LandauMurphyFan wrote:
AFAICS, these are non-issues. (Or maybe I'm misunderstanding you...)

[...]

That was more in response to what Chip had posted:
chipbennett wrote:
Reaching for one's pocket simply does not constitute imminent use of unlawful force. Thus, regardless of what Martin thought regarding such action, the belief that Zimmerman was reaching for a gun would not be a reasonable fear.

The great irony there is that for BDLR to attempt such an argument would concede Zimmerman's self-defense claim by default, since there is no logical way to claim that reaching for one's pocket constitutes imminent use of unlawful force, while simultaneously claiming that Zimmerman did not have reasonable fear of imminent risk of life or great bodily harm at the time he used deadly force.

Chip is not, IMO, correct in his second sentence. What he points out in the second paragraph goes to a point I've considered here; that Bernie's strategy may be to just put on a show trial to give the appearance he had some sort of case, the verdict is not his objective, and he hopes to possibly keep the Scheme Team civil case alive.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 8:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2012 8:46 am
Posts: 617
I see that 28 yr old Chicago woman still is on the list of potentional jurors. I have a bad feeling about this gal. She claims to have an 18 yr old son...odd.Yes I realize he could be a step child, but she seems to have too many stories that set my hinky meter off.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 8:41 am 
Offline
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
I have missed quite a bit... but I have a bad feeling about all I have heard.

So much of the IMPRINTING is now "folk lore" The general Scheme Team Myth is established.

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 9:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:35 pm
Posts: 1056
Rumpole wrote:
I have missed quite a bit... but I have a bad feeling about all I have heard.

So much of the IMPRINTING is now "folk lore" The general Scheme Team Myth is established.

EXACTLTY! And I suspect Bernie would love to toss in a few points for consideration that add to the fairy tale, little details which keep that tale alive.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
chipbennett wrote:
Reaching for one's pocket simply does not constitute imminent use of unlawful force.

The great irony there is that for BDLR to attempt such an argument would concede Zimmerman's self-defense claim by default, since there is no logical way to claim that reaching for one's pocket constitutes imminent use of unlawful force, while simultaneously claiming that Zimmerman did not have reasonable fear of imminent risk of life or great bodily harm at the time he used deadly force.

kbp wrote:
Chip is not, IMO, correct in his second sentence. What he points out in the second paragraph goes to a point I've considered here; that Bernie's strategy may be to just put on a show trial to give the appearance he had some sort of case, the verdict is not his objective, and he hopes to possibly keep the Scheme Team civil case alive.


This sentence?

Quote:
Thus, regardless of what Martin thought regarding such action, the belief that Zimmerman was reaching for a gun would not be a reasonable fear.


Reaching for one's pocket does not imply that one is reaching for a weapon. In order for such a belief to be reasonable, it must be accompanied by some mitigating factors, such as physically aggressive behavior, or actually seeing a weapon.

There is no evidence that Zimmerman exhibited any physically aggressive behavior. There is no evidence of pursuit. There is no evidence of approach. There is no evidence that Zimmerman initiated the verbal confrontation.

There is no evidence that Martin knew Zimmerman had a gun. Even if Martin did know, then he would also have known the location of the concealed holster, and that said location was not the pocket for which Zimmerman reached.

Further, Martin's responses to that action refute that he was reacting to a reasonable fear of imminent use of unlawful force. He downed Zimmerman with a single punch, and then instead of escaping, screaming for help, etc., he escalated the physical aggression to the point that Zimmerman reasonably feared imminent risk of death or great bodily harm. And when confronted by Witness 6, Martin didn't do the logical and reasonable thing - tell the witness, "he's got a gun!" - instead, opting to ignore the witness, and to continue to assault Zimmerman.

The State would bear the burden to prove that Martin's initial physical aggression was justified as self-defense in response to a reasonable fear of imminent use of unlawful force. No such evidence exists. And further: the State would bear the burden to prove that Martin's escalation of force was fully justified, and did not result in Zimmerman reasonably fearing imminent risk of life or great bodily harm, after ending his own participation in the physical altercation (where "ending" means "never participating to begin with").

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
See also: Jeralyn's take:

Jeralyn wrote:
An aggressor is someone who initially provokes the use of physical force. Provoking fear is not the test. And the provocation has to be contemporaneous with the victim's use of force against him. The statute explicitly refers to an aggressor as someone who “initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself.”
...
The state may try to show GZ did something that legally justified TM's punching him in the nose and then smacking him in the head. Even if they were able to show GZ did something that justified TM's reaction of punching him in the nose and beating his head, GZ should still prevail on self-defense unless he had some other, lesser means to stop Trayvon's assault or reaching for his gun. See Martinez v. State and Johnson v. State:

"Specifically, section 776.041 "[s]ubsection (2) precludes the initial aggressor from asserting self-defense where he or she is the individual who provoked the use of force" contemporaneously to the actions of the victim to which the defendant claims self-defense."

Also, in order for Trayvon to have been justified in his use of non-deadly force against GZ, he had to reasonably fear an imminent attack by Zimmerman. He can't just have been afraid because he was unsure what Zimmerman up to. Section 776.012

"A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force."

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:35 pm
Posts: 1056
Always remember that I am searching for what to anticipate in the fairy tale Bernie is hoping to tell the public, by way of telling it to the jurors. :)

chipbennett wrote:
Thus, regardless of what Martin thought regarding such action, the belief that Zimmerman was reaching for a gun would not be a reasonable fear.

That was the sentence.

chipbennett wrote:
Reaching for one's pocket does not imply that one is reaching for a weapon. In order for such a belief to be reasonable, it must be accompanied by some mitigating factors, such as physically aggressive behavior, or actually seeing a weapon.

Mitigating factors is somewhat open ended. Bernie's factors will be followed in a vehicle, scoped out from vehicle, left vehicle to track, reached for ____ and George could not know when Trayvon saw the gun. So Bernie has to add the possibility that Trayvon saw the gun before or as George reached for _____.

chipbennett wrote:
There is no evidence that Martin knew Zimmerman had a gun. Even if Martin did know, then he would also have known the location of the concealed holster, and that said location was not the pocket for which Zimmerman reached.

Bernie's tale could be that Martin saw it at or near the instance George reached for _____. Geore EVER actually says he reached into his pocket, more like he is feeling and looking for it in various locations.

Link from YT search: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... kGZgJxTi4#!
George @ 7:50+/-: "…and I went to go grab my cell phone, but my, I had left it in a different pocket, I went, I looked down at my pant pocket (rt side)."
To one observing, had that person seen the holstered gun, what was he to conclude George was reaching AND looking for?

chipbennett wrote:
Further, Martin's responses to that action refute that he was reacting to a reasonable fear of imminent use of unlawful force. He downed Zimmerman with a single punch, and then instead of escaping, screaming for help, etc., he escalated the physical aggression to the point that Zimmerman reasonably feared imminent risk of death or great bodily harm.

Not 100% accurate, but about as close as we can get going off what George said: "I >THINK< I stumbled, I fell down, he pushed me down, somehow he got on top of me." Also, recall that it is difficult to outrun a bullet.

chipbennett wrote:
And when confronted by Witness 6, Martin didn't do the logical and reasonable thing - tell the witness, "he's got a gun!" - instead, opting to ignore the witness, and to continue to assault Zimmerman.

Great point! Bernie has a few bumps in telling the tale as he'd like to, but it has not slowed him down yet. But, there's that issue of the FDLE interviewing #6 and, IIRC, he said he could not be certain which who was yelling for help.


chipbennett wrote:
The State would bear the burden to prove that Martin's initial physical aggression was justified as self-defense in response to a reasonable fear of imminent use of unlawful force. No such evidence exists. And further: the State would bear the burden to prove that Martin's escalation of force was fully justified, and did not result in Zimmerman reasonably fearing imminent risk of life or great bodily harm, after ending his own participation in the physical altercation (where "ending" means "never participating to begin with").

If Bernie's goal is a show trial - reasonable doubt of Trayvon's guilt - this is not a problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 12:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
kbp wrote:
Always remember that I am searching for what to anticipate in the fairy tale Bernie is hoping to tell the public, by way of telling it to the jurors. :)


Yes, and I fully understand that I may merely be discussing the case for acquittal on appeal.

Quote:
Mitigating factors is somewhat open ended. Bernie's factors will be followed in a vehicle, scoped out from vehicle, left vehicle to track, reached for ____ and George could not know when Trayvon saw the gun. So Bernie has to add the possibility that Trayvon saw the gun before or as George reached for _____.


Followed in a vehicle: fact not in evidence
Scoped out from vehicle: how can making a phone call from inside one's vehicle be an act of physical aggression?
Left vehicle to track: not in evidence when/if Martin even knew of Zimmerman's actions. (Opens door to "why wasn't Martin safely at home after 4 minutes" reasonable doubt question.)
Possibility Martin saw gun early: the gun was concealed; no evidence that he saw it. Martin's actions belie early sight of concealed gun.

Quote:
Bernie's tale could be that Martin saw it at or near the instance George reached for _____. Geore EVER actually says he reached into his pocket, more like he is feeling and looking for it in various locations.


Tales != evidence. At some point, the State will have to present evidence to support such tales.

Quote:
Link from YT search: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... kGZgJxTi4#!
George @ 7:50+/-: "…and I went to go grab my cell phone, but my, I had left it in a different pocket, I went, I looked down at my pant pocket (rt side)."
To one observing, had that person seen the holstered gun, what was he to conclude George was reaching AND looking for?


Not logical. The gun was holstered at about 5:00 - i.e. on the back side of the waist circumference. Feeling a hip pocket would not look anything like reaching for an IWB-holstered gun at 5:00.

Quote:
Not 100% accurate, but about as close as we can get going off what George said: "I >THINK< I stumbled, I fell down, he pushed me down, somehow he got on top of me." Also, recall that it is difficult to outrun a bullet.


Given the disparity of physical condition, the darkness, the weather conditions, and a stunned Zimmerman who just endured a broken nose, and stumbled to the ground, Martin could have easily run away.

Quote:
Great point! Bernie has a few bumps in telling the tale as he'd like to, but it has not slowed him down yet. But, there's that issue of the FDLE interviewing #6 and, IIRC, he said he could not be certain which who was yelling for help.


No, Witness 6 always maintained that he believed that it was Zimmerman who was screaming for help. He just said that he couldn't see his mouth moving.

But of more importance, he did not hear the person screaming saying anything like "he's got a gun".

Quote:
If Bernie's goal is a show trial - reasonable doubt of Trayvon's guilt - this is not a problem.


I assume you meant, reasonable doubt of Zimmerman's guilt?

That's why there is an appeals court, because without overcoming all reasonable doubt, the DCA will acquit. (I don't think they'll even order a new trial; they'll just reverse.)

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 2:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 6:48 pm
Posts: 691
Location: SW Scotland
Perhaps if circumstances were different, as has been said, George Zimmerman may have been the one found dead.

I'll be honest, I've always thought this was a straight forward case of Self-Defense. I can't honestly understand why GZ has been described as 'the most hated man in America' given the circumstances of this case, and my belief that it was self defense.

It is very easy for anyone who was not there on the night in question to point the finger. I wonder what others may have done in similar circumstances, therefore, I find myself feeling sad that a life was lost, but equally sorry for George Zimmerman.

_________________
ImageSince we are destined to live out our lives in the prison of our minds, our one duty is to furnish it well~Peter Ustinov

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 2:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:54 pm
Posts: 194
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/judge-george-zimmerman-trial-doesn-t-play-games-131543025.html

Not sure if this author has watched any of the proceedings... :doh


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
Just watched the Martin press conference!!!

I can hardly stand it!! After thanking the jurors for their "honesty" :roll Crump gets up there to talk about a police officer's comment on some program last night about TM. Wants to "implore the media" to not make this about Trayvon or allow these kind of characterizations. TM is not on trial.

Then he proceeds (para) with the narrative saying TM was an "unarmed child that bought skittles and iced-tea" the "KILLER" is the man on trial and "he shot TM in the heart."

Tracy, quite inarticulately, mumbles out another thank you to the honest jurors. :roll

I truly, truly despise CRUMP!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
Rene Stutzman renestutzman 5m
Tracy Martin: "We are encouraged that we as a family can get justice.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Moved
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 5:19 pm
Posts: 366
Remember this tweet below; however, TM's mom is speaking to the press this afternoon.

Charles M. Blow

. @attorneycrump to me: After Trayvon's mother appears on tv today (Thursday) he doesn't expect her to speak to press again until verdict.
1:08 AM - 6 Jun 2013

_________________
Puzzler - that which puzzles or perplexes; anything that arouses curiosity or perplexes because it is unexplained, inexplicable or secret.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
They are a bunch of LIARS.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:28 am
Posts: 3672
Well, I think I'll go work off my angry energy about Crump on the elliptical!

Later, all! :27


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 5:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2012 8:46 am
Posts: 617
I wish there was a gag order .


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:05 pm 
Offline
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:05 pm 
Offline
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 57118
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
George Zimmerman: Prelude to a shooting

By Chris Francescani
SANFORD, Florida | Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:20pm EDT

(Reuters) - A pit bull named Big Boi began menacing George and Shellie Zimmerman in the fall of 2009.

The first time the dog ran free and cornered Shellie in their gated community in Sanford, Florida, George called the owner to complain. The second time, Big Boi frightened his mother-in-law's dog. Zimmerman called Seminole County Animal Services and bought pepper spray. The third time he saw the dog on the loose, he called again. An officer came to the house, county records show.

"Don't use pepper spray," he told the Zimmermans, according to a friend. "It'll take two or three seconds to take effect, but a quarter second for the dog to jump you," he said.

"Get a gun."

That November, the Zimmermans completed firearms training at a local lodge and received concealed-weapons gun permits. In early December, another source close to them told Reuters, the couple bought a pair of guns. George picked a Kel-Tec PF-9 9mm handgun, a popular, lightweight weapon.

By June 2011, Zimmerman's attention had shifted from a loose pit bull to a wave of robberies that rattled the community, called the Retreat at Twin Lakes. The homeowners association asked him to launch a neighborhood watch, and Zimmerman would begin to carry the Kel-Tec on his regular, dog-walking patrol - a violation of neighborhood watch guidelines but not a crime.

....more at link
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/ ... 8H20120425

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1006 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 ... 51  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group