It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Exclusive! First hand Witness: Trayvon Martin attacked Zimmerman Zimmerman Innocent Smoking Gun

page: 328
<< 325  326  327    329  330  331 >>

log in


posted on May, 10 2012 @ 03:05 PM

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by solarjetman

How often does real life work like in the movies?

You're absolutely right-- in real life people use common sense, observe their surroundings, recognize a potentially dangerous situation and then respond in a matter that results in their safety. But, if we didn't have that one guy trying to start a conversation with the serial killer then we wouldn't have a movie, now would we?
edit on 10-5-2012 by solarjetman because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 10 2012 @ 04:15 PM
reply to post by solarjetman

i'm no lawyer but wouldnt irresponsible actions leading to a death be considered....manslaughter?

lets not forget that the prosecutors said they have evidence and witnesses to back up the claim that zimmerman chased trayvon. if thats the case, and they can prove it in court, it will not be good for zimmerman. someone pointed out that this wasnt announced in the first court hearing, i have a sneaking suspicion that this new evidence came out after the first court hearing. we will find out soon enough in the discovery.

posted on May, 10 2012 @ 05:38 PM
Zimmerman was being attacked screaming for
help and was threatened for his life, he had every right
to stand his ground and shoot treyvon seeing how
treyvon was the aggressor as per say the witness accounts,
9-11 tapes, it was all self defense..

Do not believe the lies the MSM is feeding

posted on May, 10 2012 @ 06:11 PM

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
reply to post by solarjetman

i'm no lawyer but wouldnt irresponsible actions leading to a death be considered....manslaughter?

lets not forget that the prosecutors said they have evidence and witnesses to back up the claim that zimmerman chased trayvon. if thats the case, and they can prove it in court, it will not be good for zimmerman. someone pointed out that this wasnt announced in the first court hearing, i have a sneaking suspicion that this new evidence came out after the first court hearing. we will find out soon enough in the discovery.

There is a possible manslaughter conviction in Florida for Manslaughter by Culpable Negligence: Engaging in negligent conduct that resulted in the death of another person.People assume that action leading to someones death is manslaughter however its not.With manslaughter you have to prove whats called culpable negligence. To put it simply the state has to prove gross negligence, and must be a negligence of a degree so gross as to be tantamount to a wanton disregard of, or utter indifference to, the safety of human life. This isnt easy for the state to prove at all in this case they somehow would have to prove the act he committed was intended to cause harm to Treyvon. because there was obviously a confrontation between the two.Zimmermans basic defense is Justifiable Homicide,The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if done while resisting an attempt by someone to kill you or to commit a felony against you.

To be honest the state doesnt have a case and in truth this trial is being held to placate the masses nothing more. If i were on Zimmermans defense team after we won the case i would go back sue for wrongful prosecution and get a huge payment from the state.

To be honest the best i could see the family getting zimmerman on is wrongful death. And thats a civil matter involving payment to the family but thats what they did with OJ simpson.

edit on 5/10/12 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 01:59 AM

Originally posted by solarjetman
Thanks for the link on 776.041. I have a few questions:

You are welcome...

Originally posted by solarjetman
1. Why would the law rely solely on the user of force's observation/perception of the situation given that, as you and others implied, it can be very easy in high intensity situations to subjectively miscalculate it's severity?

A good question. Again it goes back to Floridas SYG law, and how other states adopted that law with their own modifications. Specifically those states removed / clarified the aggressors use of force to defend himself. In my state there is no duty to retreat. However our defense laws do not cover an aggressor. If you are an aggressor and attack a person who is more capable of defending themselves, the aggressor cannot argue he felt his life was in danger.

That section of the law reminds me of the line out of Liar Liar when Jim Carrey is speaking to one of his regular clients - "Stop breaking the law assshole".

meaning - dont break the law and then try to hide behind it to justify your action.

As far as perception / obervation it comes back to the US Supreme Court rulings on the topic. On the law enforcement side (and there is a difference between the LEO and Civilians) the standard is what did the officer perceive / see at the exact moment the force was used. For Civilians its what would a reasonable person believe.

In the case of Florida, because of how the law is worded, it allows an aggressor to use deadly force to defend himself if he feels his life is in danger. That wording is the cruxt of the issue... People dont understand it and when coupled with the fact we still do not know for sure what occured, its creating a mother of a cluster.

Originally posted by solarjetman
2. Part 2a is a bit mind-boggling to me. Please humor me while I attempt to make sense of this. Is this implying that, HYPOTHETICALLY, Zimmerman could've hunted Trayvon down, cornered him and said a bunch of threatening stuff to him, even attacked him, and if Trayvon fought back and knocked him to the ground, proceeds to bash his head in an attempt to knock him unconscious or whatever, Zimmerman entirely had the right to shoot him?

Essentially - correct.

Originally posted by solarjetman
If so, where do you draw the line for the other guy? It would seem like there can only be one aggressor and one fighting in self-defense in any given situation, but this section is giving both people in the situation the right to justify self-defense, in which case, all else equal, the guy with the superior "force" is going to win.

When this first hit the news there were stories about Floridas SYG law being invoked in gang related shootings and the courts upheld those defenses.

Again the vagueness and overly broad wording and intent of Floridas SYG law has created a mess.

Not to add confusion but I will point something out that may have been what the law was intended to do. The Supreme Court, in their many rulings when it comes to use of force / use of deadly force for civilians, has established the criteria of, for lack of a better term, proportionla response.

It means if you are being attacked, and you use force to defend yourself / another person, the force used must be proportional. A person can defend themselves up to the point the attacker is no longer a threat. If a person is attacked, and during the defense they manage to kick and break the attachers kneecap, resulting in the attacker going to the ground in agony and pain, and further use of force is prohibited.

By breaking the kneecap, resulting in the guy going to the ground, it opens the option for the victim to safely remove themselves from the situation. If the victim decides to continue their attack, they are no longer viewed as defending themselves - They are now assaulting the suspect. They are attacking an individual who cannot defend themselves.

The intent of self defense laws are to ensure that a person can be secure in their dailym lives. It allows a person to defend themself, however it is not intended to allow for summary judgement on the spot. Its up to the judicial system to determine if a crime took place and if so what the punishment should be.

Based on the above I can see the intent of Floridas SYG law. However, the way its worded, applied and the criteria in place in terms of who is covered, completely missed the mark - and by missed the mark im referring to light years.

Legaleze (slang for legal terms) is complex and can have unintended consequences. I will try to find the article but long story short a city council was updating their laws /ordinances. During the update they accidentally left a comma out. That action, leaving a comma out, inadvertetly wiped out over 6 chapters of city ordinances / laws and building codes.

How easy is to do and what do the consequences look like?
Example of missing punctuation -

Originally posted by solarjetman
Thanks again for the informative answers WITHOUT the needless name calling

Again you are welcome... This is a polarizing topic so emotions run high, moral standards come out and laws arent all that understood. We dont have to agree to debate the topic...

The world would be a boring place if there was no disent / differing views.

When we disagree, all parties involved can walk away with more knowledge and understanding than when they started.

That is how we advance as a society....
edit on 11-5-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 08:18 AM
Well, why would a man who has a gun
that was on the phone with 911
waiting for police to get there
start a fist fight with a guy he did not know
was armed or not? He wouldn't, most law abiding people smart
enough to conceal and carry is smart enough
to know you do not pick a fist fight with a armed person..
Treyvon was the only one that knew trayvon had no gun,
so if zimmerman knew he himself had a gun, but did not know if treyvon did or not

Why would zimmerman start a fist fight knowing if he throws a fist the other guy
might shoot him? He wouldn't. Treyvon not thinking, let his emotions get the best
of him and he started a fist fight. Had treyvon REALLY felt
threatened by zimmerman, he would of ran when his G/F told him too, he sized zimmerman
up, and thought he could take him in a fist fight. Zimmerman would of never caught up with
treyvon had treyvon not wanted him too...
Zimmerman knew what street he was down,
but he did not know what street TREYVON went down.

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 09:23 AM
reply to post by spacedog1973

I would disagree there.. but even if you were right you know what I meant.

Ok say in his neighborhood there were fifteen crimes committed and all the criminals had a similar manner of dress then you can say that within the confines of that neighborhood there was a specific dress to look for when patrolling for possible criminals.

Seeing someone dress "thug/gangster/hiphop" ( all interchangeable words for a specific form of dress ) is no different then saying someone is dressed punk or goth.

No sense in playing dumb to avoid the point.

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 09:24 AM
reply to post by spacedog1973

We will see who between us is the "sherlock" when this case closes.

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 09:29 AM
reply to post by solarjetman

I said at a distance.. I woudn't walk up and say hello.
Then again this isn't a horror movie it's real life. You would be the guy that acts suspiciously, hides, tries to attack the person you incorrectly thought was out to get you, and then dies. You would be the guy that dies in the first five minutes of any situation you find yourself in in real life.

I have talked to many people about this.. most sensible people have agreed that they would yell to the guy and try to explain if they thought he was keeping and eye on them. I guarantee if trayvon would have just said something even yelled it from 50 feet away it would have dissipated the suspicion and he would be alive.. instead he ran and made himself more suspicious.

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 09:41 AM
reply to post by Xcathdra

The Florida law draws the line at breaking the law.

If Zimmerman attacked Martin then he can't claim self defense since he committed a crime.

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 10:02 AM

Originally posted by conspiracy nut
reply to post by solarjetman

I'm no lawyer but wouldn't irresponsible actions leading to a death be considered....manslaughter?

That's exactly where I stand on this case.

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 02:42 PM

Originally posted by Logmafia
The Florida law draws the line at breaking the law.

In this case no it does not.

Originally posted by Logmafia
If Zimmerman attacked Martin then he can't claim self defense since he committed a crime.

Actually he can claim self defense under the stand alone self defense statute as well as the section in the SYG law.

Florida Statutes - CH 776 - Justifiable Force

776.041 Use of force by aggressor

Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.

Hence the reason this case is so jacked up.

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 03:53 PM
super jacked up indeed and it will fall on the prosecutors to prove their case, because all we have is zimmermans testimony and of course he is gonna say whatever he can to save his own butt. there is a witness that seems to corroborate part of zimmermans side but then there is also the new evidence the prosecutors have saying that zimmerman chased trayvon so we will see where that leads. does anyone know when the discovery will be released?

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 05:36 PM


"The first round of discovery documents in the George Zimmerman Case are most likely to be provided to O’Mara Law Group on Monday, May 14. Public release of the of the discovery may be delayed as we may be filing a motion to further redact information, and an opportunity to review the discovery is necessary to determine the applicability of that motion. While we understand the frustration of those who want to view the information as soon as possible, we believe that Mr. Zimmerman’s right to a fair trial, decided by an impartial, unbiased jury is paramount."

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 05:41 PM
Apparently the prosecutor will reveal evidence on Monday but it will remain in court: Zimmerman's lawyer expects to get evidence Monday; special prosecutor says the rest of us won't

It will include crime scene photos, Trayvon's autopsy, Zimmerman's five statements to authorities, witness statements, and crime lab work — if it's been completed — on clothing and Zimmerman's handgun.

Seems like we'll have an idea what the prosecutor is talking about soon enough...

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 07:10 PM
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

I'm only talking about the known events up until Zimmerman hung up the phone... The next few minutes following that--who attacked or confronted who, etc-- is all speculation at this point in time, so let's not even go there.

Where are you from? I don't know if this is a social context thing, but I disagree strongly here dude. Maybe we'll simply have to agree to disagree here, but I mean try to look at the context from HIS point of view, not our objective third person perspective? Imagine you're in an entirely UNKNOWN neighborhood in the south, in the cuts, you're a minority, you're by yourself and it's already after dark and it's heavily raining at night. If someone rolls up in a truck who you come to suspect is following you, what is the first thing that crosses your mind? Bear in mind you have to process all of this with the mind of a 17 year old-- the age doesn't let you off the hook, but it certainly puts you in a completely different mental space altogether-- size and height aside, you were still born in 1995, you are a damn kid!

I guarantee you won't immediately ask yourself "Uh oh, what am I doing that's making ME look suspicious?" You're going to expect the worst, plain and simple-- in your eyes, this guy could be an axe murderer, a child rapist, a kidnapper, a robber who likes your hoodie, a violent racist, a drunk prick looking to start a fight, a gangbanger who thought you were someone else, or any number of other things. These people exist in real life. Sure, they don't roll around every day, but then again you don't get followed home every day either, you don't know this neighborhood, and in your limited life experience as a teenager this caution only amplifies. Furthermore, what would be the point of engaging this kind of person at ALL? I mean, if he weren't out to get you, then leaving him alone would result in nothing, but if he WERE, then engaging him in 90% of the possibilities I mentioned above would more than likely aggravate the situation, would it not?

I feel silly that I even have to explain this, but like I said maybe where you live this is a normal thing. This case completely aside, I seriously hope because I respect you as a fellow member of ATS that you at least consider this point of view in LIFE that there are entirely legit social situations in the world where the best course of action is simply to mind your own business. I really wish it weren't that way--in fact it sucks--and part of my reason for joining ATS was to figure out ways to be part of a catalyst for ushering in the spiritual revolution/illumination that is on the immediate horizon for all of humanity. But unfortunately until then, while the balance of tyranny and oppression continues to be way off for the human race, occasionally we are forced to heed Thomas Fuller's words: "It is madness for sheep to talk peace with a wolf."

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 08:14 PM
reply to post by solarjetman

That doesn't fly man. His family is black and they live in this neighborhood, a gated community, it is a diverse community. I know you want to believe that Florida is this rough southern state and we are living in the 1940's, but no, he had absolutely no fear of some sort of racially motivated intentions we are talking about Orlando 2012 not Favela Rio De Jeneiro, look up the statistics on white on black crime. Yeah in his mind Zimmerman could have been any one of those things, but if your mind goes to axe murderer everytime someone stops and checks you out you are crazy. I have been in similar situations dozens of times with dangerous people, i've even been attacked. It doesn't matter I never said walk up to him, you can determine alot about someone by getting an answer out of them. You think the correct response, what you would have done, if someone gets out of the truck watching you on the phone, is to run?

I am having a hard time believing that you guys would seriously react with such paranoia. If the kid just shouted to Zimmerman that his parents lived there and he's just walking home and asked him what he wanted it would of allayed suspicion and been over. Or did he somehow think that half a second response would deduct the amount of time he needed to properly run away? He ran and got away he really couldn't take a second to try to explain himself? He acted suspiciuously. You guys can make all the arguments you want but this case is really open and shut. Zimmerman acted stupid but he committed no crime, the kid also acted stupid, but he did commit a crime and it cost him his life. That's it. Then the media came in needing a distraction and twisted the facts and has dragged an innocent guy through the mud.

You can't gaurantee me those things btw, because I have been in similar situations. There are ways of guaging a situation. Also.. if the kid would have just kept running he would have gotten away scott free, it was his decision to wait on ZImmerman and then most likely jump out on him and attack that cost his life.
edit on 11-5-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 10:05 PM
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

Your right the biggest problem the state has to overcome is Treyvon lost zimmerman he could have been at home drinking his tea and eating skittles. But he didnt go straight home in fact appears he started watching zimmerman .Though im not sure if when zimmerman backtracked he planned that happening i think Treyvon expected him to continue on.But even then if he hid the first time he still could have ran off again which he didnt.

This seems to show Treyvon wanted to know why he was following him.Unfortunately he didnt go home and we wouldnt be having this conversation.I know as a teenager i did some down right dumb thing luckily for me none of them got me killed but i came close a couple of times.

posted on May, 12 2012 @ 12:37 AM
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

1. The second half of this incident is completely irrelevant in what I am talking about here, so quit bringing that up. Look, if Trayvon really did suddenly turn around and attack Zimmerman, then yes that is his fault and I don't condone that action at all. All I am talking about is the point up to the end of Zimmerman's call-- Trayvon saw the man and bounced. Are we discussing the same timeframe here?

2. I didn't paint this like it was a KKK Jim Crow era racist town-- the possibility that this strange guy was a racist was one of SEVEN scenarios I mentioned. In fact, the majority of the scenarios mentioned could apply to a number of races-- if the stranger is sitting in his truck down the road in the rain, maybe you can't even tell what race he is? If you want to believe that racism ceased to exist after the 60's then that's fine and for another thread, but if you want to talk statistics then you should at least know that in some areas there is actually a LOT of tension between Hispanics and blacks, and I think many of us would agree that Zimmerman looks more Hispanic than anything else.

3. Trayvon's dad lived there but he didn't, so from his perspective this neighborhood is UNKNOWN. He didn't sit there and browse the internet to find out how many blacks live in Sanford or what the crime statistics were like. By the way, gated community means little if anything at all, and actually criminals from out of town take advantage of precisely this bubble mentality. It is a lot easier to get into a gated community than people think, and I'd be curious to know how many of the recent burglars actually lived in that gated area. In any event, the kid has no idea about his surroundings, and as such a number of possibilities ran through his head, including many of negative things. Is that so hard to understand?

4. This is hilarious to me, because you don't even flinch at the fact that Zimmerman spotted and Trayvon and immediately started following him and calling the police, and yet you're acting like Trayvon was way out of pocket for reacting to this aggressive action passively. You use all of the same reasons to exonerate Zimmerman for judging Trayvon who was doing nothing at all except "looking the part"-- but all of a sudden if he responds by judging Zimmerman for both looking AND acting the part, HE was out of line. What gives?
edit on 12-5-2012 by solarjetman because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 12 2012 @ 12:44 AM
reply to post by solarjetman

Yeah, but we can take the info we have and make educated guesses. When Zimmerman hung up the phone some time had already elapsed since the teen started running and Zimmerman had lost sight and we could tell Zimmerman wasn't running. Then it was several more minutes until the struggle. The boy was shot only 70 yards from his house. He was likely a good runner since he played football. It was like a 15 second run to his door but minutes had elapsed. So we can conclude that rather than running to the safety of his home he hid somewhere and then he initiated the confrontation.

What gives is that I have looked at both sides of this case objectively and everything lends toward Trayvon jumping Zimmerman as he walked past rather than Trayvon just running home. I argued on behalf of Trayvon earlier in this thread (i was the first comment on this entire thread and I was support Trayvon) but the fact is the media was manipulating the case. Zimmerman is most likely innocent and he didn't commit any crime. He acted stupidly when he continued to look for the teen, but he wasn't acting criminally. However the teen did act criminally if he did (and he most likely did) attack Zimmerman. You guys are the ones bringing up irrelevant details like whether or not Zimmerman suspected the kid due to profiling or even racism. That doesn't matter. What matters is who comitted the crime and whether or not Zimmerman was justified in using deadly force. Everything indicates that Trayvon attacked and Zimmerman was justified. We don't need any detours in this case.
edit on 12-5-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 325  326  327    329  330  331 >>

log in