I'm saying it was wrong for Zimmerman to shoot a kid who was actively trying to get both of them out of that situation alive yes.
[News] The Trayvon Martin Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Charlie Don't Surf
- Start date
Necronic
Staff member
This to me is the real crux of the argument. Zimmerman wants to claim defense, but there's a lot of evidence that makes it look like Zimmerman was the initiator of the incident. Just because he got his ass beat doesn't mean he didn't start it, and you don't get to start claiming defense when a fight you started begins to go against you.
The real question is whether zimmerman started the fight. I don't mean "did he throw the first punch", but "did his actions preceding the first punch justify Martin to attack him".
And I don't get walking up to somebody and punching him just because he looked at me funny.
Announcing to the 911 operator that he was going to chase down the kid paints Zimmerman as the aggressor. Stand your ground works both ways. A self-appointed wannabe != law enforcement. Martin had every right to defend himself if he thought his life was in imminent danger.
How about somebody actively following you, refusing to identify himself and then showing that he had a gun/ possibly reaching for it? Do you get punching somebody who could be actively hunting you?
And none of that came up anywhere.
No we know that Zimmerman was actively following Trayvon and that he refused to identify himself. Only speculation is that he showed his gun to Trayvon/ reached for it.
Shoulda had a gun. Then it would have been legal.
And an awful lot of trust for a man who we know to be a liar from the Zimmermanlievers.
It's an internet debate WTF else do you expect?
all I want to know is who started the fight. if martin then he unfortunately got more than he bargained for. if zimmerman then I don't understand how it can be self-defense. what it feels like from hearsay in media reporting is that Zimmerman went looking for trouble, but honestly it is hearsay so it doesnt matter. The end result is someone died for what seems like nothing guilty or innocent aside. I guess thats reality though people are stupid, and do stupid things, then die for it.
BananaHands
Staff member
GasBandit
Staff member
Are you calling Zimmerman a liar, or the witness (John Good)? Or.. me? I'm not clear.
I reiterate, the one witness with no axe to grind says he saw Zimmerman down, on his back, with martin on top of him, hitting him. That is the evidence. Now comes my speculation-
Is that generally a situation one finds when the beatdown-ee has brandished a gun, when the beatdown-er is unarmed?
In that situation, who would be expected to be yelling for help, the guy on top raining down punches or the guy on his back getting his head hit on the pavement?
The evidence points to self defense. Sorry if you wanted otherwise.
I can think of several instances where a person picked a fight because they had a gun while the other guy was unarmed and received a decisive beating for their overconfidence. Seeing as how Zimmerman's MMA coach/ Personal trainer described Zimmerman as a 0.5 out of 10 in unarmed combat I wouldn't expect him to be doing too well in a fight.
Was he raining down punches or was he slamming the guys head against the concrete? And if he was "raining down punches" why is it that the ME tops the number of blows at three and the only damage to the back of Zimmerman's head was a single scratch?
It is entirely conceivable that Trayvon was the one calling for help because the guy underneath him was actively going for a gun. Because as it turns out that's exactly what Zimmerman was doing.
Where did I say that Zimmerman drew on Trayvon before the fight started? I mean I did say that I believed that Zimmerman showed the gun/ reached for it but never that he had the gun out prior to the fight.
GasBandit
Staff member
Well, I might have misread it, but when you said -
- I interpreted it as the beginning of the fight. Maybe it was just unclear.
Sorry if I was unclear in that response I was responding to a terribad question.
But my interpretation of the situation is and has always been,
Trayvon confronted Zimmerman over Zimmerman following him,
Zimmerman flashed his gun cause he wanted Trayvon to back down
Trayvon reacted in a way that Zimmerman didn't expect by tackling him to the ground where they scuffled.
It was Trayvon who called for help cause he was trying to keep the gun out of the fight
and finally that Zimmerman was in no danger of being killed or even suffering serious injury. The fight that he found himself in simply didn't rise to the level where I believe that lethal force was justified.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/07/s...ssaults-on-officials.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
It only takes one punch to kill someone. So since Zimmerman was being assaulted, his life was in danger.
It only takes one punch to kill someone. So since Zimmerman was being assaulted, his life was in danger.
If of course he was being repeatedly punched in the face.
That is the other thing that is not in dispute. Martin punched Zimmerman repeatedly and Zimmerman shot Martin once.
But actual evidence doesn't back up a brutal beating. Eye-witness testimony is terribly unreliable especially since the police didn't bother interviewing him the night of the events and only talked to her over a month after the shooting.
... And the mother claims that it was what's your point? Voice experts can't reliably say whether the voice is Trayvon's or Zimmerman's.
I don't know what happened, so I'm not going to comment on guilt. But witness testimony that Martin was straddling Zimmerman and punching him isn't indicative of anything except that at that point in the fight, Zimmerman was losing.
This does not establish or remove self-defense as justification. It could be that Martin attacked him, or it could be exactly as Dubyamn described, or some third thing.
The crying for help thing also doesn't really establish anything. If Martin was the attacker/instigator, he could still be calling for help when he saw the gun. If Zimmerman was the attacker/instigator, he could still have been calling for help because he was getting his ass-kicked in a fight he started.
This does not establish or remove self-defense as justification. It could be that Martin attacked him, or it could be exactly as Dubyamn described, or some third thing.
The crying for help thing also doesn't really establish anything. If Martin was the attacker/instigator, he could still be calling for help when he saw the gun. If Zimmerman was the attacker/instigator, he could still have been calling for help because he was getting his ass-kicked in a fight he started.
GasBandit
Staff member
I don't think a month is long enough to forget who was on top of whom when you witnessed the most famous alleged murder in recent memory.
Of course the mother says it is, she was his mother, she'd say anything to see the man who shot her baby hang. It is far more noteworthy that a parent would say it WASN'T. At least, until momma got a hold of him and smacked him with her purse full of buckles and then all of a sudden he toes the family line.
According to the ME Zimmermans injuries are consistent with being received from 1 punch. That is not "Martin punched Zimmerman repeatedly", or if it is then Martin was obviously doing a piss-poor job of beating Zimmerman if he was doing so little damage despite repeated punches.
So either 1 punch or repeated ineffectual punches. Neither of those situations sound like life threatening danger to Zimmerman.
More than enough for details to become embellished and media reports to color people's memories. I mean hell Zimmerman's story changed 3 times in the same amount of time. But no for some reason the eye witness is the only person who can remember things crystal clear after a month.
Noteworthy of course but in no way proof that Trayvon wasn't the one screaming.
GasBandit
Staff member
It does raise doubt however, and as this is a criminal trial, a simple preponderance of evidence isn't enough - it has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt that Zimmerman commited murder.
Well it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin but since he is claiming that he acted in self defense it is actually up to Zimmerman and his lawyers to prove that his use of lethal force was justifiable.
BananaHands
Staff member
Shouldn't this be in the politics section? All your jimmies are rustled and this rarely happens in General.
GasBandit
Staff member
Buddy, you have no idea what rustled jimmies looks like.
BananaHands
Staff member
Test after test after test has proven eye witness reports to be completely untrustworthy even immediately after the events. Letting time go by makes it even worse, and media and/or other "witnesses" contradicting your own observations will actively alter your memory to correlate more closely with what others claim to have seen.
Having people witness a staged robbery committed by 2 white women, having them read about it in a newspaper claiming it was 2 black men, and interviewing them 2 weeks later has more than half of the witnesses report the assailants as male and black. With more and more forensic evidence, eye witness reports for anything other than "I saw my brother shoot his wife" cases with clear individuals, seriously need to be brought down as far as their reliability is concerned. Unfortunately, jury members tend to trust "some guy who sort of saw what was happing from across the street" more than a scientist telling them that guy couldn't possibly have seen what he thingks he saw.
GasBandit
Staff member
I'm gonna need to see some links about "test after test" showing eyewitness reports are that inaccurate.
In other news, the judge has denied the defense's motion to introduce their CG reconstruction as evidence - which I think is the right call. Computer simulations are fabricated, even if they are supposedly constructed from facts, there's way too much authorship involved, and there's too much GIGO for them to be "evidence."