Jump to content

523 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Thailand
Timeline
Posted

What happened to it?

I got in a pi$$ing match with another member and took my marbles and went home. Told them to delete it. They just de-activated it whatever that means.

You can click on the 'X' to the right to ignore this signature.

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Thailand
Timeline
Posted

okay, final warning. you guys either stay on topic or get thread banned. you might think you're being clever by deliberately killing a thread, but don't think it goes unnoticed by the powers that be. you've been warned.

Quit yer crying.

You can click on the 'X' to the right to ignore this signature.

Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted

He killed an unarmed teen. What would you call it?

If a person with a gun shoots a person with a gun, it isn't always a murder. Circumstances do count for something.

okay, final warning. you guys either stay on topic or get thread banned. you might think you're being clever by deliberately killing a thread, but don't think it goes unnoticed by the powers that be. you've been warned.

Really? Geez

Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: India
Timeline
Posted

GZ worked hard, against the advice of the 911 dispatcher, to create the confrontation. GZ clearly knew that he carried a gun yet got close enough to TM to get his lights punched.

If GZ had a right to defend himself so did TM, and to all but the feeble minded, a teen with Skittles and bottle of pop confronted by an armed adult would always be seen as the person with the best claim to self defense.

GZ caused the altercation. The death of TM is his responsibility. GZ is getting his day in court but the fact is that TM is dead due to GZ's piss poor judgment and actions.

GZ could have not followed the dispatchers instruction but it would depend on all who threw the punch first, it could very well be case of self-defense.

The circumstances are the victim was a teen and unarmed.

Teen does not mean he could not have attacked GZ.

Filed: Timeline
Posted

it would depend on all who threw the punch first, it could very well be case of self-defense.

:no:

If I throw the first punch and break your nose, that does not mean you can shoot me if I am unarmed. There is the concept of "reasonable force" that must be overcome in order for it to be justifiable homicide under a claim of self-defense.

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Thailand
Timeline
Posted

no0pb.gif

If I throw the first punch and break your nose, that does not mean you can shoot me if I am unarmed. There is the concept of "reasonable force" that must be overcome in order for it to be justifiable homicide under a claim of self-defense.

Is that the requirement under the "stand your ground" statute? I don't think it requires the other person to be armed before you use deadly force. I don't know for sure.

You can click on the 'X' to the right to ignore this signature.

Filed: AOS (apr) Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted

no0pb.gif

If I throw the first punch and break your nose, that does not mean you can shoot me if I am unarmed. There is the concept of "reasonable force" that must be overcome in order for it to be justifiable homicide under a claim of self-defense.

People have been beat to death. Just because a guy doesn't have a lethal weapon doesn't mean your life can't be in danger.

Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: India
Timeline
Posted

no0pb.gif

If I throw the first punch and break your nose, that does not mean you can shoot me if I am unarmed. There is the concept of "reasonable force" that must be overcome in order for it to be justifiable homicide under a claim of self-defense.

If you throw first punch and break my nose and if I fear for my life, yes I can shoot you.

Thats called self defense.

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Thailand
Timeline
Posted

Zimmerman already waived a judicial hearing based on stand your ground.

So is he just claiming straight self-defense now? You'd think I'd know this case inside and out by now, after reading pages and pages about it here on VJ.

You can click on the 'X' to the right to ignore this signature.

Filed: Timeline
Posted

So is he just claiming straight self-defense now? You'd think I'd know this case inside and out by now, after reading pages and pages about it here on VJ.

Yes, and that is an affirmative defense, which means Z has to testify, and can be cross-examined. In short, he doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell.

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...