George Zimmerman in custody

[MaggieD]

Except it wasn't like that. First of all, despite being early evening, it was already dark out. So Trayvon, who had done nothing wrong, was being followed by a stranger in a car at night for no apparent reason. When he discovered he was being followed, he ran to get away from Zimmerman, at which point, Zimmerman got out of his car, in the cold and rain, to chase Trayvon by foot.

If that isn't suspicious behavior enough, when the two encountered each other and exchanged words, Zimmerman reached for something. All that together, IMO, is reasonable fear of imminent danger to warrant a pre-emptive strike on Martin's part.

That's the sticky wicket, of course. Because of Zimmerman had turned his back and was walking away from "however they met face-to-face," and then Martin sucker-punched him . . . Zimmerman wasn't guilty of anything except bad judgement when he exited his car.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

That's the sticky wicket, of course. Because of Zimmerman had turned his back and was walking away from "however they met face-to-face," and then Martin sucker-punched him . . . Zimmerman wasn't guilty of anything except bad judgement when he exited his car.

Zimmerman turned his back because he didn't see Trayvon. Trayvon didn't punch him until after Zimmerman reached for his phone. How is that a sucker punch?

 

[Kreton]

I disagree. Someone chases you, first by car, then by foot, in the dark and in the rain, for no apparent reason, and then reaches for something -- you'd be foolish not to assume you were being attacked.

Possibly, but if you get away and decide to go back and approach that person you can't say that you feared for you safety.

Also, even if you imagined story were accurate, Martins SD claim would have ended when Zimmerman fell. You cannot in any state get on top of someone who is laying on the ground and continue to pummell them.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

Possibly, but if you get away and decide to go back and approach that person you can't say that you feared for you safety.

Also, even if you imagined story were accurate, Martins SD claim would have ended when Zimmerman fell. You cannot in any state get on top of someone who is laying on the ground and continue to pummell them.

Here's the self defense law ...

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—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. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

... other than not allowing deadly force, kindly explain where it sets the limits to what constitutes excessive force when resorting to self defense.

 

[sharon]

Here's the self defense law ...

776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—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. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

... other than not allowing deadly force, kindly explain where it sets the limits to what constitutes excessive force when resorting to self defense.

I don't think Trayvon was bashing Zimmenman's head against the sidewalk at all.. His injuries would have been more severe.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

I don't think Trayvon was bashing Zimmenman's head against the sidewalk at all.. His injuries would have been more severe.

It seems to me that at least early in their fight, his head could have hit the concrete, possibly when he fell, possibly because his description of Trayvon banging his head on the concrete is accurate.

... his real problem, I believe, stems from their position at the time of the shooting, which according to a witness, 4 feet away from the concrete; and according to the location of Trayvon's body, at least that far.

He's gonna have to explain to a jury why he took Trayvon's life while they were on grass and his head was not being bashed in.

 

[Kreton]

other than not allowing deadly force, kindly explain where it sets the limits to what constitutes excessive force when resorting to self defense.

From your own post

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.

A person laying on the ground is not a threat. NO law in our country gives you the right beat a person who is down.

 

[sharon]

It seems to me that at least early in their fight, his head could have hit the concrete, possibly when he fell, possibly because his description of Trayvon banging his head on the concrete is accurate.

... his real problem, I believe, stems from their position at the time of the shooting, which according to a witness, 4 feet away from the concrete; and according to the location of Trayvon's body, at least that far.

He's gonna have to explain to a jury why he took Trayvon's life while they were on grass and his head was not being bashed in.

Well the EMT report will go a long way towards resolving the issue of "severe injuries".

Could George have reached for his phone or his gun.. and Travon launched at him?

 

[Kreton]

It seems to me that at least early in their fight, his head could have hit the concrete, possibly when he fell, possibly because his description of Trayvon banging his head on the concrete is accurate.

... his real problem, I believe, stems from their position at the time of the shooting, which according to a witness, 4 feet away from the concrete; and according to the location of Trayvon's body, at least that far.

He's gonna have to explain to a jury why he took Trayvon's life while they were on grass and his head was not being bashed in.

And 3 others (one being Zimmerman) back Zimmermans story. The eye witness stories dont have to match for Zimmerman to be found not guilty. Only need one. The prosecution bears the burden. If it is uncertain or questionable, Z walks.

 

[MaggieD]

Zimmerman turned his back because he didn't see Trayvon. Trayvon didn't punch him until after Zimmerman reached for his phone. How is that a sucker punch?

Well, that's interesting. Neither of those facts is in evidence, counsellor.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

From your own post



A person laying on the ground is not a threat. NO law in our country gives you the right beat a person who is down.

That a person could be lying down and yet still fire a gun is enough to show how wrong you are about a person lying on the ground not being a threat.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

And 3 others (one being Zimmerman) back Zimmermans story. The eye witness stories dont have to match for Zimmerman to be found not guilty. Only need one. The prosecution bears the burden. If it is uncertain or questionable, Z walks.

No witness saw the initial confrontation and I don't believe any of the witnesses reported Zimmerman's head on the concrete (though I wouldn't swear to it).

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

Zimmerman turned his back because he didn't see Trayvon. Trayvon didn't punch him until after Zimmerman reached for his phone. How is that a sucker punch?

Well, that's interesting. Neither of those facts is in evidence, counsellor.

Yes, they both are, according to Zimmerman's account according to the police according to the Orlando Sentinel ...

Here it describes Zimmerman turning his back to where ever Trayvon was, he didn't see him ...

• In his version of events, Zimmerman had turned around and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from behind, the two exchanged words and then Trayvon punched him in the nose, sending him to the ground, and began beating him.
• Zimmerman told them he lost sight of Trayvon and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from the left rear, and they exchanged words.

... and here is where Zimmerman says he was reaching for his phone when Trayvon punched him in the nose ...

• Trayvon asked Zimmerman if he had a problem. Zimmerman said no and reached for his cell phone, he told police. Trayvon then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar and punched Zimmerman in the nose, according to the account he gave police.

Trayvon Martin: George Zimmerman's account to police of the Trayvon Martin shooting. - Orlando Sentinel

 

[Excon]

That say it was pitch black before 7:15 on Feb. 26th.

And again you are wrong.
They do not say it is pitch black before 7:15pm on Feb. 26th.

Look. I am really happy that you have become more educated about this specific subject. That is great.
Unfortunately you are still wrong.
It was Dusk, and not "pitch black".

My link says the following.

Nautical dusk
Is when the sun is 12 degrees below the horizon in the evening. At this time, objects are no longer distinguishable, and the horizon is no longer visible to the naked eye.

Astronomical dusk
The time at which the sun is 18 degrees below the horizon in the evening. At this time the sun no longer illuminates the sky, and thus no longer interferes with astronomical observations.
Dusk - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Not only that but you are wrong about the above, but also about which is who's link.

Previously you chose to use a link that defined Dusk as Twilight and I then used your previous source to the N.O. to give a more accurate description of Twilight, and then supplemented with my own link to Wiki about Dusk.
I definitely did not include nautical Dusk because, one, as we all know, we are not at sea, and two, because it really has no bearing on, and does not change my position.

It was dusk. Get that through your head.
Dusk.
D, U, S, K, Dusk.

It spanned a time period in which Zimmerman was able to describe Trayvon to the call taker, and other 911 callers were able to offer their descriptions. Does that sound like "pitch black"?
Nope.
Does it sound like the following that you provided? "objects are no longer distinguishable"
Nope!
You are simply wrong.
You have been trying to take this argument from where it was in the beginning, and tried to make it fit what you want it to say.
That ain't gonna happen.
You are wrong.
It was Dusk.
Get over it.

You say is it's still light out at 8:16 in April.

Check yourself. I said it was Dusk.

You don't even realize that by April, the sun sets later than it does in February. That's why there was still light in the sky when you checked the other day at 8:16.

I do know that dude.
It was still Dusk.


You provide the following data from the Navel Observatory.

Sun and Moon Data for One Day

The following information is provided for Sanford, Seminole County, Florida (longitude W81.3, latitude N28.8):

Sunday 26 February 2012 Eastern Standard Time SUN
Begin civil twilight 6:30 a.m.
Sunrise 6:54 a.m.
Sun transit 12:38 p.m.
Sunset 6:23 p.m.
End civil twilight 6:46 p.m.

MOON Moonset 9:56 p.m. on preceding day Moonrise 9:16 a.m.
Moon transit 4:00 p.m.
Moonset 10:49 p.m.
Moonrise 9:53 a.m. on following day

Phase of the Moon on 26 February: waxing crescent with 20% of the Moon's visible disk illuminated.

First quarter Moon on 29 February 2012 at 8:22 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.​

I keep insisting that it was Dusk, and you keep insisting that I am wrong.
I told you to look up twilight because I believe that is what you think I am referring to, when I am not.
And you didn't let me down. You didn't catch on at all.


Anyways let me break it down for you.
The sun moves one degree every 4 minutes.

Twilight is over and Dusk begins when the sun is 6° below the local horizon.
Based on the Sunset time you provided, Dusk began at 6:47pm in Sanford Fl.

Nautical dusk begins when the sun is 12° below the local horizon.
Based on the Sunset time you provided, Nautical dusk began at 7:13pm in Sanford Fl.

Astronomical dusk begins when the sun is 18° below the local horizon.
Based on the Sunset time you provided, Nautical dusk began at 7:37pm in Sanford Fl.

No matter how you break it down it was still Dusk.
D, U, S, K, Dusk!

Earlier I stated the following:

So, it is now 8:16.

It is Dusk.
There is enough ambient light to see just fine.​

You want to make it out like I said it was light outside, when all I said was there was enough ambient light to see just fine.

You are wrong, were wrong, and still will be wrong.
It was Dusk.


What we have is a period of time that has constantly evolving, to the more dark, lighting conditions. Dusk.
It starts with Zimmerman being able to clearly describe Trayvon, continues throughout in which 911 callers were able to give their descriptions, some better than others, and finally comes to a close before the sun is 18 degrees below the horizon in the evening, at which time the sun no longer illuminates the sky. Which I suppose would be "pitch black", if the moon and stars were not present, and there is no artificial light.

It was Dusk.

You were wrong.
Get over it.

When you're a law-abiding minor, walking back to your residence from buying candy, and you're being followed in that manner, I believe you do have reason to believe that person poses an imminent threat to your safety and I would accept self defense as a genuine response to attacking Zimmerman.

Especially given that Zimmerman was reaching for something and it would have been reasonable for Trayvon to think he could be reaching for a weapon.

From Trayvon's perspective, there was absolutely no reason to be followed like that unless Zimmerman was the one who was up to no good. He had every right to defend himself.

Unless Trayvon had seen his firearm beforehand, he had no reason to believe he was reaching for one.
And by the choice of words used, Trayvon was clearly attacking out of annoyance, not self defense.


And since, as you say, it was "pitch black", there is no way he could have seen a gun.
Heck, being "pitch black" Zimmerman wouldn't have been able to see who he was shooting.
"Pitch black" my ass.

 

[Excon]

Zimmerman was chasing down a teenager for no apparent reason, in the dark, in the rain, first by car, then by foot.

That seems like provocation to me.

Spin! You have nothing but spin here. There was no chasing going on.

When you're a law-abiding minor, walking back to your residence from buying candy, and you're being followed in that manner, I believe you do have reason to believe that person poses an imminent threat to your safety and I would accept self defense as a genuine response to attacking Zimmerman.

Especially given that Zimmerman was reaching for something and it would have been reasonable for Trayvon to think he could be reaching for a weapon.

From Trayvon's perspective, there was absolutely no reason to be followed like that unless Zimmerman was the one who was up to no good. He had every right to defend himself.

Get it through your head that Trayvon is not on trial here, Zimmerman is.

And during that time, a couple of witnesses said they saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman, but looked away before the shooting. Another witness said she was watching at the time of the shooting and by that time, Zimmerman had gotten on top of Trayvon and then shot him.

She was the only one to see the actual shooting.

What she actually saw and what she believed she saw are two different things.
As the police said, there is no evidence that disputes Zimmerman's account.
Explain her actual account by that.

The former NW captain had quite a lot of say about "low life renters" and he was very clearly racist.

I won't post it here, but the guy's name was ..... Taaffe.

Heck, start a thread about it. He was not "very clearly" racist. You are reading way too much into things.

Wasn't a very successful program, was it?

Apparently it was.

This is shaping up to be definitely racist.. and I, for one, am sorry about that.

You making it racist does not mean it is racist. That is why I feel sorry for you.

It means that except for this rainy night it was a busy area.........

Again speaking about things as if you know.

You do not know if it would be busy.
All you know is that there may have been people there at that time.

Only fools pull guns and don't shoot.

Really? Is that so?
Police draw their weapons all the time without firing? Want to change your tune.

[highlight]I don't think[/highlight] Trayvon was bashing Zimmenman's head against the sidewalk at all..

Finally you said something that is believable.

Yes, they both are, according to Zimmerman's account according to the police according to the Orlando Sentinel ...

Here it describes Zimmerman turning his back to where ever Trayvon was, he didn't see him ...

• In his version of events, Zimmerman had turned around and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from behind, the two exchanged words and then Trayvon punched him in the nose, sending him to the ground, and began beating him.
• Zimmerman told them he lost sight of Trayvon and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from the left rear, and they exchanged words.

... and here is where Zimmerman says he was reaching for his phone when Trayvon punched him in the nose ...

• Trayvon asked Zimmerman if he had a problem. Zimmerman said no and reached for his cell phone, he told police. Trayvon then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar and punched Zimmerman in the nose, according to the account he gave police.

Trayvon Martin: George Zimmerman's account to police of the Trayvon Martin shooting. - Orlando Sentinel

And thereby establishing that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman first.

 

[Excon]

Again, I can't help you can't understand the implications that 776.041 has on 776.013 but maybe this professor in criminal law can explain it so you can understand ...

The Interplay of Sections 776.041 (Use of Force by Aggressor) and 776.013(3) (Stand Your Ground) in Zimmerman Case

However, another Florida law overrides 776.013. This other law is a later section of the same chapter of the Florida laws, Section 776.041 entitled "Use of Force by Aggressor." This section of the law explicitly states that the rules of self-defense that are "described in the preceding sections of this chapter" do not apply if the defendant was attempting to commit a forcible felony OR if the defendant initially provoked the attack against him. Section 776.041 provides:

This statute allows an aggressor to claim self-defense only if the person "has exhausted every reasonable means to escape" or if "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."

Under Section 776.041 the prosecution need not prove that Zimmerman swung the first blow when they finally came together. It need only prove that Zimmerman "initially provoked" the attack. As noted in yesterday's post, in their probable cause affidavit the prosecutor's investigators repeatedly emphasized Zimmerman's state of mind – his unfounded belief that Martin was committing a crime. The prosecution will attempt to prove that because of his irrational suspicion and against the advice of the police dispatcher Zimmerman unreasonably followed Martin armed with a gun, thus provoking the confrontation that led to Martin's death. If Martin had confronted Zimmerman when they first encountered each other Zimmerman would have had no duty to retreat. However, if the jury finds that Zimmerman provoked the attack, the jury may not find that Zimmerman acted in self-defense unless they also find that Zimmerman either tried to escape from Martin or that he withdrew from Martin and clearly indicated his desire to withdraw.

lol
Which has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Trayvon's state of mind is irrelevant to the legality of Zimmerman's actions.
:doh
It isn't even addressing Trayvon's state of mind.
The above addresses Zimmerman's actions and Trayvon's actions and is about Zimmerman's actions
Sorry you can't see it.

 

[Caine]

Just that it wasn't what you would traditionally think of as an alley .. rather a broad, grassy common back yard... and the shortest distance .. the most direct route to Trayvon's house.

This is shaping up to be definitely racist.. and I, for one, am sorry about that.

How is it definitely racist because someone said kids may have been playing in that area during that time?

How does it make this racist?

 

[Caine]

If someone pulls a gun and points it at you, assume they mean to shoot.. Only fools pull guns and don't shoot.

You are alleging something even the Prosecution in this case is not.

Please provide your evidence other than "because I said so."

Thanks in advance... :roll:

 

[sharon]

And again you are wrong.
They do not say it is pitch black before 7:15pm on Feb. 26th.

Look. I am really happy that you have become more educated about this specific subject. That is great.
Unfortunately you are still wrong.
It was Dusk, and not "pitch black".

My link says the following.

Nautical dusk
Is when the sun is 12 degrees below the horizon in the evening. At this time, objects are no longer distinguishable, and the horizon is no longer visible to the naked eye.

Astronomical dusk
The time at which the sun is 18 degrees below the horizon in the evening. At this time the sun no longer illuminates the sky, and thus no longer interferes with astronomical observations.
Dusk - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

Not only that but you are wrong about the above, but also about which is who's link.

Previously you chose to use a link that defined Dusk as Twilight and I then used your previous source to the N.O. to give a more accurate description of Twilight, and then supplemented with my own link to Wiki about Dusk.
I definitely did not include nautical Dusk because, one, as we all know, we are not at sea, and two, because it really has no bearing on, and does not change my position.

It was dusk. Get that through your head.
Dusk.
D, U, S, K, Dusk.

It spanned a time period in which Zimmerman was able to describe Trayvon to the call taker, and other 911 callers were able to offer their descriptions. Does that sound like "pitch black"?
Nope.
Does it sound like the following that you provided? "objects are no longer distinguishable"
Nope!
You are simply wrong.
You have been trying to take this argument from where it was in the beginning, and tried to make it fit what you want it to say.
That ain't gonna happen.
You are wrong.
It was Dusk.
Get over it.



Check yourself. I said it was Dusk.



I do know that dude.
It was still Dusk.


You provide the following data from the Navel Observatory.

Sun and Moon Data for One Day

The following information is provided for Sanford, Seminole County, Florida (longitude W81.3, latitude N28.8):

Sunday 26 February 2012 Eastern Standard Time SUN
Begin civil twilight 6:30 a.m.
Sunrise 6:54 a.m.
Sun transit 12:38 p.m.
Sunset 6:23 p.m.
End civil twilight 6:46 p.m.

MOON Moonset 9:56 p.m. on preceding day Moonrise 9:16 a.m.
Moon transit 4:00 p.m.
Moonset 10:49 p.m.
Moonrise 9:53 a.m. on following day

Phase of the Moon on 26 February: waxing crescent with 20% of the Moon's visible disk illuminated.

First quarter Moon on 29 February 2012 at 8:22 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.​

I keep insisting that it was Dusk, and you keep insisting that I am wrong.
I told you to look up twilight because I believe that is what you think I am referring to, when I am not.
And you didn't let me down. You didn't catch on at all.


Anyways let me break it down for you.
The sun moves one degree every 4 minutes.

Twilight is over and Dusk begins when the sun is 6° below the local horizon.
Based on the Sunset time you provided, Dusk began at 6:47pm in Sanford Fl.

Nautical dusk begins when the sun is 12° below the local horizon.
Based on the Sunset time you provided, Nautical dusk began at 7:13pm in Sanford Fl.

Astronomical dusk begins when the sun is 18° below the local horizon.
Based on the Sunset time you provided, Nautical dusk began at 7:37pm in Sanford Fl.

No matter how you break it down it was still Dusk.
D, U, S, K, Dusk!

Earlier I stated the following:

So, it is now 8:16.

It is Dusk.
There is enough ambient light to see just fine.​

You want to make it out like I said it was light outside, when all I said was there was enough ambient light to see just fine.

You are wrong, were wrong, and still will be wrong.
It was Dusk.


What we have is a period of time that has constantly evolving, to the more dark, lighting conditions. Dusk.
It starts with Zimmerman being able to clearly describe Trayvon, continues throughout in which 911 callers were able to give their descriptions, some better than others, and finally comes to a close before the sun is 18 degrees below the horizon in the evening, at which time the sun no longer illuminates the sky. Which I suppose would be "pitch black", if the moon and stars were not present, and there is no artificial light.

It was Dusk.

You were wrong.
Get over it.



Unless Trayvon had seen his firearm beforehand, he had no reason to believe he was reaching for one.
And by the choice of words used, Trayvon was clearly attacking out of annoyance, not self defense.


And since, as you say, it was "pitch black", there is no way he could have seen a gun.
Heck, being "pitch black" Zimmerman wouldn't have been able to see who he was shooting.
"Pitch black" my ass.

Not quite.. one of the resident said the neighbor lesves her porch light on ALL the time... and that provided some light.

 

[Caine]

Perhaps they did. Or did you give them your email address so they could notify you?

6 years of heavy DWI enforcement as a job has taught me one thing.

Alcohol isn't the easiest thing to cover up. If he were drunk, they wouldn't need a special test to be done without something to raise their suspicions first.

 

[sharon]

You are alleging something even the Prosecution in this case is not.

Please provide your evidence other than "because I said so."

Thanks in advance... :roll:

Why don't you actually read the thread and what I was saying.. We were talking about "pulling guns" and waving them at people NOT the evidence in the case.. I was taught NOT to pull a gun unless you plan to shoot.

 

[Caine]

I don't think Trayvon was bashing Zimmenman's head against the sidewalk at all.. His injuries would have been more severe.

Really?

Just how DO you have all these answers?

 

[Caine]

Could George have reached for his phone or his gun.. and Travon launched at him?

Could anybody testify to that in court?????

 

[sharon]

Really?

Just how DO you have all these answers?

I think his injuries would be more serious if his head had been bashed on pavement.. and the EMT records will be in evidence. Do you ever read a thread before you jump in with belligerence?

 

[Caine]

I think his injuries would be more serious if his head had been bashed on pavement.. and the EMT records will be in evidence. Do you ever read a thread before you jump in with belligerence?

How do you know that his injuries would be more severe?