Case against Zimmerman falling apart LMAO

Started May 15, 2012 | Discussions
TFergus
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,188
Like?
Re: report . .
In reply to mamallama, May 18, 2012

mamallama wrote:

Don't you think "Z. was trying to prevent yet another one from happening" is Z playing cop?

Why does that matter?

Trying to stop "yet another" burglary from happening... is bound to get to some members of the community. If he wanted to stop it because waiting for the police was useless... who would blame him ?
It is a "neighborhood watch" afterall.

Killing a kid or even touching him if the kid didn't deserve it, is a whole different story.

But "playing cop" isn't the insult that you were wanting it to be.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mamallama
Forum ProPosts: 28,454Gear list
Like?
Re: report . .
In reply to TFergus, May 18, 2012

TFergus wrote:

mamallama wrote:

Don't you think "Z. was trying to prevent yet another one from happening" is Z playing cop?

Why does that matter?

I was just responding to and refuting this BorisK1 statement, "Zimmerman did nothing that can be constituted as "playing cop". Nothing more.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Princess Leia
Senior MemberPosts: 6,956
Like?
Re: report . .
In reply to mamallama, May 18, 2012

When they drop the case or found him not guilty, I really hope Zimmerman will sue Jackson, Al Sharpton and Obama for defamation!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
TFergus
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,188
Like?
Re: report . .
In reply to mamallama, May 18, 2012

mamallama wrote:

TFergus wrote:

mamallama wrote:

Don't you think "Z. was trying to prevent yet another one from happening" is Z playing cop?

Why does that matter?

I was just responding to and refuting this BorisK1 statement, "Zimmerman did nothing that can be constituted as "playing cop". Nothing more.

I apologize, I missed that.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BorisK1
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,869Gear list
Like?
Re: Zimmerman and culpability
In reply to Chato, May 18, 2012

Chato wrote:

BorisK1 wrote:

Dave, you just called a lot of people racist for nothing more than disagreeing with your viewpoint.

No. I called them racist for saying that Martin is a felon who might have been casing the place.

Whoever claimed that the innocent child was a felon, or that he had been casing the place, was wrong.

On the other hand, Z. had cause to believe it at the time, because of the burglary that occurred three weeks prior to the shooting. Then, Z. called the police about the thief who was casing the place, and who happened to be of the same age and race as the innocent child, and so were the two robbers that the neighbors saw in the backyard during the burglary. A latest in a string of burglaries in that neighborhood.

That he was a drug user, high as a kite. That he was the one responsible for what happened.

Trace amounts of marijuana found in the innocent child's system, that's all. Whoever said "high as a kite", was wrong.

Plain and simple the question is not whether Zimmerman is culpable for the death of Martin. Zimmerman IS culpable for the death of Martin There is absolutely no doubt about that aspect of the question

No question that Zimmerman shot the innocent child. I take issue with the word "culpable". If (as it appears from the known evidence) Z. shot the innocent child to save his own life, because the innocent child was violently assaulting him at the time, Z. had both moral and legal right to do so.

The debate is not over his culpability but rather whether he is legally culpable.

But there's not much to debate, until some new evidence comes to light. The publicly known evidence indicates (not proves, mind you, indicates) that the innocent child assaulted Zimmerman, and Zimmerman defended himself. Which is why they didn't (and couldn't) charge Zimmerman with a crime at the time. The charges were brought up later, when all the political hooplah started.

If Zimmerman had obeyed the rules set for Neighborhood Watch members, there would have been no fight and no death. Whether violating those rules raises the stakes to legal culpibility is another story.

Zimmerman was not on neighborhood watch duty at the time of the incident. (And, since you've been interested in this subject for a while now, I'm surprised you did not know this. Or did you?)

 BorisK1's gear list:BorisK1's gear list
Olympus Tough TG-1 iHS Olympus E-3 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital 11-22mm 1:2.8-3.5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
knox
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,434
Like?
Re: report . .
In reply to Princess Leia, May 18, 2012

yea, and too bad Trayvon is too dead to sue all the right wing slanted BS sites (some of which you posted links to here) who accused him of being a drug dealer, bus driver assaulter, house burglar / and for posting photos that were not him shooting birds or you posting a photo of him with a grill alluding to his possibly being up to no good because he bought a grill (that can be had for $14)

Princess Leia wrote:

When they drop the case or found him not guilty, I really hope Zimmerman will sue Jackson, Al Sharpton and Obama for defamation!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BorisK1
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,869Gear list
Like?
Re: report . .
In reply to mamallama, May 18, 2012

mamallama wrote:

BorisK1 wrote:

rjjr wrote:

BorisK1 wrote:

This is pure speculation on my part, but there is a slight possibility that, if the innocent child didn't punch Zimmerman in the face, didn't bring him down, didn't straddle him on the ground, and didn't slam his head against the ground, things would've worked out differently.

If Zimmerman had taken the dispatchers statement that they didn't need him to follow Martin as the proper course of action it was

Again, three weeks prior to the incident, Zimmerman was in the same situation, and he held back. By the time police arrived, the burglar ran off, and the house was burglarised four days later.

A house burglary is a bad thing . It traumatizes people. Z. was trying to prevent yet another one from happening.

instead of playing cop

Zimmerman did nothing that can be constituted as "playing cop". He got out of his car - in his gated community - to look around.

Don't you think "Z. was trying to prevent yet another one from happening" is Z playing cop?

No.

If my neighbor sees my house is about to be burglarized, I very much hope he'll try to prevent it. I'd do the same for him. I'd certainly start by calling the police, but I doubt it would be all I'd do. If the situation calls for it, I'd certainly look around, so when they come, I can point the police in the direction where the bad guys went.

I believe that's what any reasonable man would do.

 BorisK1's gear list:BorisK1's gear list
Olympus Tough TG-1 iHS Olympus E-3 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital 11-22mm 1:2.8-3.5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BorisK1
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,869Gear list
Like?
Re: report . .
In reply to TFergus, May 18, 2012

TFergus wrote:

mamallama wrote:

Don't you think "Z. was trying to prevent yet another one from happening" is Z playing cop?

Why does that matter?

Perhaps this is a language issue. I thought by "playing cop" mamallama meant assuming autority of a policeman. I've seen no indication that Zimmerman did anything of the sort.

 BorisK1's gear list:BorisK1's gear list
Olympus Tough TG-1 iHS Olympus E-3 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4.0-5.6 Olympus Zuiko Digital 11-22mm 1:2.8-3.5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
knox
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,434
Like?
Re: report . .
In reply to BorisK1, May 18, 2012

Oh brother! You are reading BS into my post that is not there . . . In my world a Seven TEEN year old, about to be Eight TEEN year old, who now will never become a Nine TEEN year old . . . . . is in fact a "teen" . . . . . so I obviously used the word. No deep dark reason for me doing so.

As for all your other comments . . . all I did was post the report from the police investigation that confirms what seemed obvious all along, that he didn't ID himself and he should have stayed in the car etc . . . if you want to come up with more speculations and assumptions and more "perhaps" . . . feel free, but for now I will go with those who have the info and did the investigation (before arrest). For now at least.

BorisK1 wrote:

knox wrote:

yea, hindsight . . . . . . It just seemed all Zimmerman had to do was simply explain to the teen that he was 'neighborhood watch' when they spoke . . (most likely) none of this would have happened.

You and Chato call Travon Martin "Teen" and "innocent kid", so I'll use "innocent child" from now on, just to stay on the same page. Not sure what to call Zimmerman - "armed thug" is already taken - but I'm open to suggestions.

You are assuming Zimmerman had time for explanations, but it's an assumption that is not collaborated by the known evidence, and directly contradicts Zimmerman's story. According to Z., the innocent child first ran off (so Z. couldn't explain or ask anything), and then approached Z. According to Z., the innocent child gave him very little or no time for explanations before assaulting Z.

Just a series of errors on his part IMV that ended up in a tragedy.

"A series" of two errors: Getting out of the car (which is what Z. tried last time, and which failed to prevent a burglary of his neighbors house) and not explaining to the innocent child about neighborhood watch (which he might not have had a chance to do).

As a trained 'neighborhood watch' person and one who was going to school to be an officer (didn't I read that?) . . . seems he would have made better judgement calls.

Perhaps. Z. thought that the innocent child was a burglar, and burglars (in Z's recent experience) tended to avoid confrontations.

This is pure speculation on my part, but there is a slight possibility that, if the innocent child didn't punch Zimmerman in the face, didn't bring him down, didn't straddle him on the ground, and didn't slam his head against the ground, things would've worked out differently.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Chato
Forum ProPosts: 42,750Gear list
Like?
Re: Zimmerman and culpability
In reply to BorisK1, May 18, 2012

BorisK1 wrote:

Chato wrote:

BorisK1 wrote:

Dave, you just called a lot of people racist for nothing more than disagreeing with your viewpoint.

No. I called them racist for saying that Martin is a felon who might have been casing the place.

Whoever claimed that the innocent child was a felon, or that he had been casing the place, was wrong.

On the other hand, Z. had cause to believe it at the time, because of the burglary that occurred three weeks prior to the shooting. Then, Z. called the police about the thief who was casing the place, and who happened to be of the same age and race as the innocent child, and so were the two robbers that the neighbors saw in the backyard during the burglary. A latest in a string of burglaries in that neighborhood.

That he was a drug user, high as a kite. That he was the one responsible for what happened.

Trace amounts of marijuana found in the innocent child's system, that's all. Whoever said "high as a kite", was wrong.

Plain and simple the question is not whether Zimmerman is culpable for the death of Martin. Zimmerman IS culpable for the death of Martin There is absolutely no doubt about that aspect of the question

No question that Zimmerman shot the innocent child. I take issue with the word "culpable". If (as it appears from the known evidence) Z. shot the innocent child to save his own life, because the innocent child was violently assaulting him at the time, Z. had both moral and legal right to do so.

We are now discussing whether he was "guilty" of a crime, and not whether he killed Martin. To be culpable is to be "blame worthy," and Mr. Zimmerman by breaking the rules of members of Community watch groups is certainly worthy of "blame." I.e. he is culpable. Whether his is guilty of a crime is a debatable question - And I for one think that that will come out at trial.

The debate is not over his culpability but rather whether he is legally culpable.

But there's not much to debate, until some new evidence comes to light. The publicly known evidence indicates (not proves, mind you, indicates) that the innocent child assaulted Zimmerman, and Zimmerman defended himself. Which is why they didn't (and couldn't) charge Zimmerman with a crime at the time. The charges were brought up later, when all the political hooplah started.

If Zimmerman had obeyed the rules set for Neighborhood Watch members, there would have been no fight and no death. Whether violating those rules raises the stakes to legal culpibility is another story.

Zimmerman was not on neighborhood watch duty at the time of the incident. (And, since you've been interested in this subject for a while now, I'm surprised you did not know this. Or did you?)

Mr. Zimmerman was an active member of his localCommunity Watch group, whether he was "on duty" means absolutely nothing. These people aren't paid.

I was a member of an equivalent group in my neighborhood. I took pictures of crack dealers, I went to Community meettings - I was even on television and in newspapers. Oddly enough I didn't try to "apprehend" these people. A lose/lose scenario at best.

Dave

-- hide signature --

"Everyone who has ever lived, has lived in Modern Times"

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads