If your head was forcefully and repeatedly pounded against concrete, it would be life threatening and at minimum put you in the hospital under the care of a neurologist and/or neurosurgeon.
Zim says Trayvon did not run from Zim in Fear, in his TV interview . Zim says he did not speak to Trayvon in a beligerant manner. Zim says he had no idea that Trayvon would be agitated with Zim until it was too late to continue back toward his truck. Do you believe that Zim really did intentionally not put Trayvon in fear?
I beleive Zim is a liar and was trying to jam Trayvon around from the start. At what point did Zim's beligerance become Assault? Zim had a duty to retreat, but did not.
The question of the situation when Zim shot Trayvon, ignores the reality of the start of the situation.
//
ACCOST
1.Approach and address (someone) boldly or aggressively.
2.Approach (someone) with hostility or harmful intent.
I would.
Now, may I ask, would you be afraid if an unknown person was following you?
I would.
Now, may I ask, would you be afraid if an unknown person was following you?
See! Sharon is one of those who claims that GZ, the police, GZ and the doctor all used stage make up to fake the injuries and that GZ was not hurt at all.
You posted dozens of messages that YOU would have directly confronted TM demanding he tell you what address he was going to - and criticize GZ for not doing so. You would be far more aggressive than GZ was.
Absolutely I would be afraid. And if Martin had attacked Zimmerman out of the blue and started pounding his head on the pavement, I doubt you'd hear any debate over it at all.Would you or would you not be afraid for your life if someone was pounding your head onto something hard? Its a simple yes or not question. I've asked it in a couple of threads and I have yet to recieve a reply. This way I can definitely rule out the "excuse" that they just didn't see it.
But if Martin is knocking my head on the ground because I was chasing him with gun drawn, that changes the circumstances significantly.
I would.
Now, may I ask, would you be afraid if an unknown person was following you?
That's absurd.. George's injuries and George's doctor examed his injuries.. They will testify to their "severity".
That is why Zimm's claim that he was returning to his truck is rather important. If he was returning to his truck, he did not instigate the confrontation. Sadly, for some, the investigator has already stated they can not disprove that he was returning to his truck.
I don't support either party, but in answer to your question:
Yeah, probably.
However...Z was not minding his own business, making good decisions, completely unaware of M prior to ending up on the ground. In fact, even his own statements don't corroborate the idea that M came out of nowhere and attacked him from behind w/o warning. Z made several bad decisions, directly ignored the safety-related suggestions of the 911 operator, and took an aggressive tone with M (from his own account/the account of the girl M was on the phone with). He invited a confrontation with M and took a huge risk in doing so. If he didn't anticipate the possibility of a physical confrontation after the decisions he made then he's either stupid or delusional.
That said: Z was probably justified in defending himself in the exact moment he had to do so. He wouldn't have ended up in that position had he not decided to seek out vigilante justice for previous crime in his neighborhood, choosing to track and scare a young man in the process.
Absolutely I would be afraid. And if Martin had attacked Zimmerman out of the blue and started pounding his head on the pavement, I doubt you'd hear any debate over it at all.
I don't support either party, but in answer to your question:
Yeah, probably.
However...Z was not minding his own business, making good decisions, completely unaware of M prior to ending up on the ground. In fact, even his own statements don't corroborate the idea that M came out of nowhere and attacked him from behind w/o warning. Z made several bad decisions, directly ignored the safety-related suggestions of the 911 operator, and took an aggressive tone with M (from his own account/the account of the girl M was on the phone with). He invited a confrontation with M and took a huge risk in doing so. If he didn't anticipate the possibility of a physical confrontation after the decisions he made then he's either stupid or delusional.
That said: Z was probably justified in defending himself in the exact moment he had to do so. He wouldn't have ended up in that position had he not decided to seek out vigilante justice for previous crime in his neighborhood, choosing to track and scare a young man in the process.
Yeah, a whole string of poor actions on Z's part, but that's all negated if he went back to his truck. :roll:
Just keep defending him at any cost, lil buckaroo.
Yeah, a whole string of poor actions on Z's part, but that's all negated if he went back to his truck. :roll:
It actually was kind of his buisness. It was his neighborhood after all and there had been lots of burglaries lately. As a concerned citizen aware of whats been going on I see no problem with a person trying to watch out for his/her neighbors.
Did Z make some bad decisions? Thats kind of subjective.
I actually agree with you on this. Had Z been chasing M with his gun drawn, then Z deserved what he got and should be found guilt yof m2. However, that is not what occured. Z did not have his gun out, as evidenced by all the information available, including witness statements.
Actually what negated the responsibility was when Martin hid from Z and Z had no idea where he was. From that point on the ball was in Martins court.
You are simply adopting in whole Z's version of events. The girlfriend has a story as well that conflicts significantly with the above. Witnesses have corroborated Z's version of who was on top and that Z was being attacked, and that is important, but I do not think it is the key issue of the case.Buck answered the rest of your post just fine for my taste but I wanted to address this.
This is basically what happened. From the evidence that is available Zimmerman lost sight of Martin during Z's 911 call. And during the re-enactment Z tells the story of him going back to his truck after getting the address. On his way back to his truck Martin came up to him and asked Z if he had a problem. After Z's answer Martin attacked him.
Now if Z had never lost sight of M I would agree with M's supporters that Z should be held responsible. But Z lost sight of M until the moment M came back and asked Z what his problem was, at that point it fell to M to who was at fault for M's resulting death. Martin should never have gone back and confronted Zimmerman. He should have remained hidden until Z was gone.
Buck answered the rest of your post just fine for my taste but I wanted to address this.
This is basically what happened. From the evidence that is available Zimmerman lost sight of Martin during Z's 911 call. And during the re-enactment Z tells the story of him going back to his truck after getting the address. On his way back to his truck Martin came up to him and asked Z if he had a problem. After Z's answer Martin attacked him.
Now if Z had never lost sight of M I would agree with M's supporters that Z should be held responsible. But Z lost sight of M until the moment M came back and asked Z what his problem was, at that point it fell to M to who was at fault for M's resulting death. Martin should never have gone back and confronted Zimmerman. He should have remained hidden until Z was gone.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?