George Zimmerman's Lawyer Wants Jurors To See Photos Of Handgun, Pot Plants Found On Trayvon Martin's Cell Phone

[JohnR! 5,495]

No. Physical assault is only justified for defense. Physical assault is never justified because someone's being an idiot.

Neither is murder, which in this case was an asymmetrical response to assault which in turn was an asymmetrical response to harassment.

Edited May 31, 2013 by Gegel

[GandD 5,966]

Neither is murder, which in this case was an asymmetrical response to assault which in turn was an asymmetrical response to harassment.

It depends on if there was really a physical altercation (doesn't matter who started it in this case) where attempts by GZ to retreat/concede were not honored and it was starting to put GZ's life in danger to the point that his only recourse to continue living was to shoot. If someone throws a punch at you, (lets assume there are no guns involved) you do NOT have the right to defend yourself to the point of killing the aggressor after they have conceded. That's what all of this is about. None of the rest should matter in the murder/self defense consideration unless there wasn't really a physical altercation. If there wasn't, GZ is 100% a murderer.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

I think most people would have waited until the police got there. This wasn't talking place inside someone's home, it was out on a public street where, at least in my area, walking around isn't against the law. If I saw someone suspicious in the neighborhood, I'd call the cops and keep my eyes open. If they came on my property or entered my home without invitation, different story.

What exactly happened that night? I don't know, I wasn't there and neither were any of the blowhards here who proclaim to know all. And that is for both sides. As far as I know, a person is innocent until proven guilty no matter how overwhelming the evidence appears to be. And correct me if I'm wrong, the 6th Amendment states that juries must be impartial. The American justice system, innocent util proven guilty. Even the Boston Marathon bomber. A jury will decide the fate of GM based on the facts and evidence presented to them in a court of law.

[SMOKE 1,426]

so whats the fine for littering in florida? $50-$150? thats all zimmerman did, write the man ticket & save the money wasted on the circus trial.

[decocker 7,198]

well i'll be. ain't that something, littering is all

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Obvious troll is obvious.

[JohnR! 5,495]

I think most people would have waited until the police got there. This wasn't talking place inside someone's home, it was out on a public street where, at least in my area, walking around isn't against the law. If I saw someone suspicious in the neighborhood, I'd call the cops and keep my eyes open. If they came on my property or entered my home without invitation, different story.

What exactly happened that night? I don't know, I wasn't there and neither were any of the blowhards here who proclaim to know all. And that is for both sides. As far as I know, a person is innocent until proven guilty no matter how overwhelming the evidence appears to be. And correct me if I'm wrong, the 6th Amendment states that juries must be impartial. The American justice system, innocent util proven guilty. Even the Boston Marathon bomber. A jury will decide the fate of GM based on the facts and evidence presented to them in a court of law.

We will never be able to know for sure because the only other person present at the time is now deceased.

But then again, a trial is not about the truth and justice is not about fairness, unfortunately.

[JohnR! 5,495]

so whats the fine for littering in florida? $50-$150? thats all zimmerman did, write the man ticket & save the money wasted on the circus trial.

You can make the point that GZ's blood or even presence on the street should constitute littering but that would be the least of his concerns, when he is being charged with murder. (You may consider using a web search engine to learn more about the case)

[spookyturtle 9,466]

We will never be able to know for sure because the only other person present at the time is now deceased.

But then again, a trial is not about the truth and justice is not about fairness, unfortunately.

And if TM was still alive there'd be two versions of what happened with the truth lying somewhere in the middle.

[SMOKE 1,426]

You can make the point that GZ's blood or even presence on the street should constitute littering but that would be the least of his concerns, when he is being charged with murder. (You may consider using a web search engine to learn more about the case)

i know as much as you do. he was not charged with anything the night it happened, he was charged days later, after the media convicted him. the only littering he did was the empty shell case at the scene. this is a waste of florida's money. he will walk on this.

[JohnR! 5,495]

he was not charged with anything the night it happened, he was charged days later,

That is not out of character in a homicide case.

[SMOKE 1,426]

That is not out of character in a homicide case.

when that happens, there is an intial criminal filing on the date the police begin their investigation in those cases, if they suspect wrong doing by a suspect. not one here

Edited May 31, 2013 by SMOKE

[JohnR! 5,495]

when that happens, there is an intial criminal filing on the date the police begin their investigation in those cases. not here

There is no statute of limitations for murder. He could have been charged at any point and it is not uncommon for the police to take their time examining the evidence before filing charges and making an arrest. In cases where there are no witnesses there is always the presumption of wrongdoing.

Edited May 31, 2013 by Gegel

[SMOKE 1,426]

There is no statute of limitations for murder. He could have been charged at any point and it is not uncommon for the police to take their time looking at the evidence before filing charges.

yes there isn't a sol on murder. yes he could have been charged at any point. he wasn't the night of the event. yes, it is very uncommon for police to have a person in custody, release him w/o arresting or charging him. then days later arresting & charging him after the media convicts them.

[JohnR! 5,495]

it is very uncommon for police to have a person in custody, release him w/o arresting or charging him. then days later arresting & charging him

In fact it is not uncommon at all.

In a homicide case, where there are no witnesses the police will more often than not hold the other party in custody for initial questioning. It is not uncommon for this person to be released and then be arrested again if warranted, once the evidence is examined.

Edited May 31, 2013 by Gegel