• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is Zimmerman Guilty W/O The Stand Your Ground Law?[W: 217, 225]

Pinkie

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
12,316
Reaction score
3,220
Location
Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
If there were no "stand your ground" law, would Zimmerman be guilty on the facts as you understand them?

IMO, no: I'm still not clear on what happened between them. It's possible that self-defense would exonerate Zimmerman even though he clearly (unreasonably, possibly even illegally) provoked Martin.

What say you?
 

His attorney doesn't even know if he's going to ask for dismissal based on SYG. That's still under consideration, as I understand it. In my opinion, Zimmerman will be judged based on regular old self-defense laws. Since they are pushing for Murder 2, unless the jury is allowed to reduce the charge to Manslaughter or something less, I think he'll be found not guilty. But. If it weren't for his actions, Trayvon Martin would still be alive.

He should have stayed in his car.
 
Thunder said:
SYG defends Trayvon Martin's actions, not Zimm's.
Click to expand...

I rather agree with this, actually...if one thing can be proven by the state:

If I were walking home alone in the dark and noticed, first, a car following me and then a person leaving that car and following me, I would be frightened. Of course, I, OTOH, would have hung up with my boyfriend and called 911. If it could be proven that Zimmerman actually caught up with Martin, you have a good point. But I don't think the state is going to be able to prove that that's what happened.
 

According to Florida law, Zimmerman had every right to defend himself with deadly force based on his account of what took place. Since there is no evidence that has yet surfaced, which contradicts his account of what happened that night, I would say the prosecution is going to have one hell of a hard time convincing a jury it wasn't self defense.
 

GZ stalked TM in a car and on foot.

The, TM lost GZ by running away.

Then apparently, TM came back to GZ to find out why he was being stalked in a car and on foot.

He asked GZ this honest question, and GZ refused to answer. He instead said "what are you doing here!" and reached into his pocket.

Having been stalked by this strange guy on foot & in a car, in a state where MANY folks carry handguns, Martin could have easily assumed that GZ was reaching for a weapon...so he struck first in self-defense.

and it turns out GZ did have a gun, and used it to kill Martin.

was GZ's action in self-defense? we don't know.
 
I think SYG is irrelevant - he's guilty regardless. He pursued Martin and instigated the entire incident.

Case closed in my view.

He should have stayed his punk ass in his ****ing car like a good little boy
 
Aunt Spiker said:
I think SYG is irrelevant - he's guilty regardless. He pursued Martin and instigated the entire incident.

Case closed in my view.

He should have stayed his punk ass in his ****ing car like a good little boy
Click to expand...

Yea. People need to stay in their houses, mind their own business, stop caring about their neighbors and stop trying to be a community. It is making things tough on the criminals when people pay attention to the things going on in their neighborhoods. Bunch of jerks for trying to watch out of their communities if you ask me.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
I think SYG is irrelevant - he's guilty regardless. He pursued Martin and instigated the entire incident.

Case closed in my view.

He should have stayed his punk ass in his ****ing car like a good little boy
Click to expand...


I imagine no one agrees with you more today than Zimmerman himself. This is why I asked the question: because I strongly suspect I have neighbors who behave just as he did, and it's a nine days' wonder to me that no one has been killed here yet. (There are many senior citizens in my neighborhood and some of their homes have been robbed lately.)

Does a fear -- reasonable or not -- justify vigilatism?
 
Thunder said:
SYG defends Trayvon Martin's actions, not Zimm's.
Click to expand...



No, it is Stand YOUR Ground, not go take the other person's ground. TM approaching GZ eliminated "stand your ground."
 

Like I haven't heard it all before about this case - obviously I have my view and you have yours and we won't be changing anytime soon.
 
Pinkie said:
Does a fear -- reasonable or not -- justify vigilatism?
Click to expand...

Depends on what it's a fear of.....

If it's a fear of immediate personal harm and possible death, yes.
If it's fear of robbery in your own home (not outside id), I'd say Yes (though most state's laws would disagree)
 

Too many facts make that a very tough sell Maggie. The 911 call makes it clear that for several minutes Zimmerman had no idea where Martin was, and during that time Martin had a clear path to his fathers home, but chose not to go there. The fact he could have either called police, called his father, or had his girlfriend call police, but never did so, or expressed any interest in doing so, tells me Martin wasn't frightened and wasn't fearful of Zimmerman... Remember, his girlfriend even recommended that he run, to which he replied, he was not going to run.

That's a pretty clear indication that Martin either made the conscience decision to confront Zimmerman (as testified to by Zimmerman), or at the very least, welcomed the idea of a confrontation.

Watch now as the usual crowd jumps in to argue against this post, and does so with a pile of irrelevant information, baseless speculation, and not one damned thing to directly contradict anything I wrote... Enter sharon and thunder.
 
Thunder said:
that's only if GZ was standing still and TM approached him.
Click to expand...

It takes two people to have an altercation. At the moment TM "lost" GZ, he should have simply headed to his destination by the most expedient route, or left the area in search of a means to contact the authorities. The moment he goes looking for GZ he loses a lot of the ability to claim "self defense"
 
Pinkie said:
Does a fear -- reasonable or not -- justify vigilatism?
Click to expand...

Of course not, but there's nothing to suggest that was the case here. Vigilanteism is the premeditated act of taking the law into your own hands for the purpose of vengance... Calling the police as Zimmerman did, is a direct contradiction to someone involved in Vigilanteism.
 
Last edited:

If all he had done was call the police there would never have been a death. Don't be coy, Grim. We have a long series of case law on "stop and frisk" laws for the conduct of police officers -- why should any private citizen get MORE rights to act against their fellow citizen than the cops do?
 

Trayvon ASKED George, Why are you following me?

George was too stupid to answer a civil question.
 
sharon said:
Trayvon ASKED George, Why are you following me?

George was too stupid to answer a civil question.
Click to expand...

Chances are, Zimmerman was over-excited. This is why I object to untrained but armed citizens "patrolling" my neighborhood.
 

So, if a man follows me home and I avoid him, that is fine. But if I try and find him so I can report him to the cops, that should be grounds for killing me?
 
Pinkie said:
Chances are, Zimmerman was over-excited. This is why I object to untrained but armed citizens "patrolling" my neighborhood.
Click to expand...

Yeah.. I think GZ was very much "over-excited".
 

First, I'm not being coy, just stating the facts. Second, what evidence did you come across that indicates that Zimmerman was the aggressor and attempted to take the law into his own hands, as you seem to be indicating?
 
Pinkie said:
So, if a man follows me home and I avoid him, that is fine. But if I try and find him so I can report him to the cops, that should be grounds for killing me?
Click to expand...

It is if you decide to attempt to beat him to death. If you want to equate parts of the story, try to equate them all.
 
Pinkie said:
So, if a man follows me home and I avoid him, that is fine. But if I try and find him so I can report him to the cops, that should be grounds for killing me?
Click to expand...

Where did you get the idea that's what he was saying?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…