Zimmerman verdict - Page 63 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

cmbdiesel · #**931** 07-23-2013, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dudesky

Professor Dave opines:

Justifiable homicide when in a self defense scenario hasn't changed one bit. What you attempt to infer is only when the defense attempts to qualify that under the states SYG statute to avoid any further legal action.
That didn't happen in Zimmerman.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

Stand Your Ground was not the defense mounted by the Zim and his team.
They successfully employed the older self-defense statutes.

Does anyone even read these threads?
This has been discussed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubyagee

We all know your opinion and dont care. I was talking to someone else

......

cmbdiesel · #**932** 07-23-2013, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neumann

That is funny!!! Not sure what angle you are taking tough. Are you in agreement with me or does DavidMash have any terra firma? Am I obligated to retreat?

Look up the laws in the states where you plan on having altercations.

Diesel911 · #**933** 07-23-2013, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

What was wrong with the self defense laws the way they were written?
Why did the standard for deadly force need to be lowered to the point where it protects more gang members and thugs than it does regular citizens?

The Zim effectively used the old self defense statutes to defend himself, they work.
No stand your ground needed.

Stand Your Ground is an unnecessary law.
You really need to start looking at the kinds of people who have been afforded protection by these laws, I think you would have a change of heart.

Lawyers have twisted the words of the Laws to defend their Criminal Clients as they are mandated to do; setting precedents that render laws impotent or favor the Criminal.

Then there is the simple fact that Laws only apply after the Crime Fact; too late to save the Victim.

cmbdiesel · #**934** 07-23-2013, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dudesky

Martin assaults Zimmerman Check. State Law Broken
Zimmerman kills Martin in self defense Check. No State Law Broken

However, had Trayvon succeeded in killing the Zim - No State Law Broken

cmbdiesel · #**935** 07-23-2013, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Air&Road

Yes, honestly I don't think I ever heard the SYG term before this circus. It is a bit ambiguous.

Fact remains though, in spite of our President who graduated from Harvard Law implying to the contrary, SYG had NOTHING to do with the Z court case.

Au contraire. mon frere....
SYG was the principal reason given for not arresting and charging the Zim immediately following the shooting.

Diesel911 · #**936** 07-23-2013, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Did Z take the law into his own hands?

Z is the only one that knows that.

If his actual claim of looking for a Street Number and He was attacked is true then He did not take the Law into His own hands. but, know one knows if that is true but Z.

The Participants Handbook is not the Law unless it is written into the Law.

Diesel911 · #**937** 07-23-2013, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by engatwork

quantitative easing?

I don't even know what that means and don't feel like looking it up right now.

cmbdiesel · #**938** 07-23-2013, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P.C.

"Ma'am" BTW.

Are you of the opinion that Zimmerman's behavior that evening (regarding following someone through the neighborhood) represented an anomaly?

It came as a huge surprise to the Zim that he would end up killing the first one of those *****ing ******s that he followed.....

cmbdiesel · #**939** 07-23-2013, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P.C.

Yes dammit! Yes! Yes! Yes! (breaks down on witness stand as Raymond Burr smugly walks back to the defense table)

So, you see no possibility that there are some folks out there who are anxious to get up close and personal with utilizing SYG. I applaud your sunny optimism about the nature of human nature.

cmbdiesel · #**940** 07-23-2013, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Did Z take the law into his own hands?

unknown, but he certainly forgot the part about -

Do not take any risks to prevent a crime or try to make an arrest.

and

The responsibility for apprehending criminals belongs to the police/sheriff

Botnst · #**941** 07-24-2013, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diesel911

Z is the only one that knows that.

If his actual claim of looking for a Street Number and He was attacked is true then He did not take the Law into His own hands. but, know one knows if that is true but Z.

The Participants Handbook is not the Law unless it is written into the Law.

Z "may" be the only one who has the answer, if he's lying. If he's telling the truth then the answer is before us.

Botnst · #**942** 07-24-2013, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

unknown, but he certainly forgot the part about -

Do not take any risks to prevent a crime or try to make an arrest.

and

The responsibility for apprehending criminals belongs to the police/sheriff

It was only a risk if M made it so.

Z was attempting to apprehend M, was he?

cmbdiesel · #**943** 07-24-2013, 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

It was only a risk if M made it so.

Z was attempting to apprehend M, was he?

Twist it however hard you need to in order to fit your personal bias.... it's OK.

I would call it a risk, especially in light of the Zim's call to the PD. He had every expectation that he was confronted with a criminal. Which part of that isn't taking a risk?
Is it not a risk because he knew he was packing iron, and could waste the guy if he had too?

Botnst · #**944** 07-24-2013, 08:13 AM

He was not confronted with a criminal. He saw somebody acting suspiciously.

"We don't need you to do that" is not the same as, "Don't do that". One is an implied suggestion, the other is a direct order.

cmbdiesel · #**945** 07-24-2013, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

He was not confronted with a criminal. He saw somebody acting suspiciously.

"We don't need you to do that" is not the same as, "Don't do that". One is an implied suggestion, the other is a direct order.

Wendy Dorival, who coordinated neighborhood watch programs for the Sanford, Florida, Police Department in 2012, testified Tuesday that George Zimmerman was specifically told not to pursue suspicious people in the gated community where he lived.
See Zimmerman's neighborhood watch guide: PDF | HLNtv.com

http://cnninsession.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/watchpart1_rotated.pdf

The police department official who worked with George Zimmerman on establishing a neighborhood watch program at a gated community in Sanford, Fla., testified Tuesday that members of such groups were not supposed to follow suspicious people and were told to stand aside and allow the police to do their jobs.
Rules for neighborhood watch discussed in George Zimmerman trial - Los Angeles Times