• 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.

Florida Statutes "JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE"... Prove this doesn't apply to Z

Grim17 said:
What evidence do you have that proves Zimmerman was not in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm?

That's what you need to provide.
Click to expand...

R
E
A
S
O
N
A
B
L
E

fear of imminent death or great bodily harm. I like how you left out that key word grim. Not surprised in the least:lamo
 
hawke812 said:
There is no physical evidence in existence that proves GZ was in fear for his life, only in his mind.

In Florida, I can't walk down the street, bump someone, shoot him, then claim I was in fear for my life.

The physical evidence does not support Zimmerman's fantasy version of events.
Click to expand...

Totally ignorant post

The evidence shows M committed battery and aggravated assault on Z

Z's version is agreeing or accordant

Z's broken nose - with being hit hard in the face.

The cuts cuts on his head - with hitting something hard.

Z was on the bottom - common sense tells you Z is the one yelling for help. The 911 tapes confirm the yelling

Nobody came to help Z. The fight was not static. It was constantly moving.

Z and DeeDee both say that M spoke first. Z fired at close range, forensics supports that.

After one shot, the fight stopped....
 
hawke812 said:
R
E
A
S
O
N
A
B
L
E

fear of imminent death or great bodily harm. I like how you left out that key word grim. Not surprised in the least:lamo
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have disproving that?

The evidence supports that Zimmerman was in a position where self defense was warranted. We know Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating him up according to witnesses. Zimmerman's injuries and Martin's lack of injuries show that Zimmerman was definitely the one who was physically assaulted, not Martin. The audio evidence recorded Zimmerman screaming for help 14 times, which indicates both that he wanted the attack to stop, and that Martin did not stop the attack.
 
hawke812 said:
R
E
A
S
O
N
A
B
L
E

fear of imminent death or great bodily harm. I like how you left out that key word grim. Not surprised in the least:lamo
Click to expand...

Do you know what it means?

Do you have any idea on the significance of *fear of serious bodily harm*?
 
hawke812 said:
Actually they do not.

1-study in favor of Trayvon Martin

1-Study a wash

0-Studies in favor of Zimmerman

Trayvon Martin still a point up:lol:
Click to expand...

and putting further doubt in your source. The jury will see that the analysis you linked is questionalbe.

Seems besides the FBI, an independent expert finds faults in the findings.

Score is now 0 to 0. :lol: Like I said, inconclusive. That is what the jury will find if this evidence is used.
Dr. James Wayman, a San Jose State University expert in the field of speech science, told The Daily Caller that he questions the grounds on which Owen based his analysis.

Wayman also said he would be willing to testify against the admissibility of Owen’s findings on the grounds that they don’t meet the criteria required for evidence in federal courts.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/06/v...sis-of-trayvon-martin-911-tape/#ixzz2JWkvuXxw

http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/06/voice-forensics-experts-cast-doubt-on-orlando-sentinel-analysis-of-trayvon-martin-911-tape/
 
Last edited:
Grim17 said:
What evidence do you have disproving that?

The evidence supports that Zimmerman was in a position where self defense was warranted. We know Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating him up according to witnesses. Zimmerman's injuries and Martin's lack of injuries show that Zimmerman was definitely the one who was physically assaulted, not Martin. The audio evidence recorded Zimmerman screaming for help 14 times, which indicates both that he wanted the attack to stop, and that Martin did not stop the attack.
Click to expand...

Oh I don't know...just reason:lol:
 
hawke812 said:
Oh, but I do:lol:

You falsely believe the evidence supports Zimmerman. But it clearly does not.
Click to expand...

Look hawke, you either have evidence that proves Zimmerman didn't act in self defense according to Florida law, or you don't... Thus far, you haven't posted anything that accomplishes that, or for that matter, even addresses it.

So why don't you either show us what you've got, or admit you've got nothing?
 
Grim17 said:
Look hawke, you either have evidence that proves Zimmerman didn't act in self defense according to Florida law, or you don't
Click to expand...

All I can realistically do is present the state's evidence against the defendant, discuss it's strengths and make a prediction on whether he will be found guilty of all charges based upon Florida laws.

So your false claim that "I have" evidence is misleading.

Based upon the state's evidence against the defendant, as has been posted and discussed, I predict he will be found guilty.

You can disagree all you want, but we will both have to wait until the immunity hearing and/or trial.

It is kind of cute how you want to "win" one for Zimmerman here on the forums:lol:
 
hawke812 said:
All I can realistically do is present the state's evidence against the defendant, discuss it's strengths and make a prediction on whether he will be found guilty of all charges based upon Florida laws.

So your false claim that "I have" evidence is misleading.

Based upon the state's evidence against the defendant, as has been posted and discussed, I predict he will be found guilty.

You can disagree all you want, but we will both have to wait until the immunity hearing and/or trial.

It is kind of cute how you want to "win" one for Zimmerman here on the forums:lol:
Click to expand...

Now why couldn't you just admit from the start you didn't have any evidence that proves Zimmerman didn't act in self defense?

As I've stated before, I'm not trying to win anything for anyone. All I'm doing is showing how you, sharon and others have adopted a belief that has nothing to do with the known evidence in this case.
 
Grim17 said:
Now why couldn't you just admit from the start you didn't have any evidence that proves Zimmerman didn't act in self defense?

As I've stated before, I'm not trying to win anything for anyone. All I'm doing is showing how you, sharon and others have adopted a belief that has nothing to do with the known evidence in this case.
Click to expand...

All any of us do on here is discuss the known evidence from the state or defense. When has anyone on these forums presented evidence for or against either side?

Also, ALL I do is discuss the known evidence...what are you yapping about:lol:

Grim17 said:
As I've stated before, I'm not trying to win anything for anyone.
Click to expand...

Sure you are. You WANT this case to be decided here on the forums. I will not allow it:lol:
 
hawke812 said:
All any of us do on here is discuss the known evidence from the state or defense. When has anyone presented evidence for or against either side?
Click to expand...

Now you're back to nit-picking words again... Do you even stop?
 
Grim17 said:
Now you're back to nit-picking words again... Do you even stop?
Click to expand...

No I am not. I am taking the literal meaning of the words you have used. You don't want me doing that? Word it in a better way than:lol:

Grim17 said:
All I'm doing is showing how you, sharon and others have adopted a belief that has nothing to do with the known evidence in this case.
Click to expand...

Again, ALL I DO is discuss the known evidence. What in the world are you talking about:lol:
 
Grim17 said:
You ignore the significant, credible evidence and embrace the obscure, speculative BS.
Click to expand...

Grim17 said:
All I'm doing is showing how you, sharon and others have adopted a belief that has nothing to do with the known evidence in this case.
Click to expand...

Hmmm.....mmmhhmmm...so I have....ignored...nothing to do...significant....embrace the obscure...adopted a belief...speculative BS...known evidence in the case....zzzzzzzzzz.......

So which is it grim:lol:
 
Sorry hawke, I ain't playing your games.
 
hawke812 said:
Which is it? I ignore the "credible and embrace the obsure", or "I have adopted a belief that has nothing to do with the known evidence?"
Click to expand...

It is obvious that you do both.
 
Well Hawke
it has been shown that your "scream" evidence is not so sound. Yet, you posted as it was a definate fact. Why else would you post that vid.
 
mike2810 said:
Well Hawke
it has been shown that your "scream" evidence is not so sound. Yet, you posted as it was a definate fact. Why else would you post that vid.
Click to expand...

Nice one:lol:

Owen's Biometric technology has already assisted in convicting Davalloo of murder. He even states the 911 call was much better quality.

Trayvon Martin George Zimmerman 911 call analysis: Two forensic experts say it's not George Zimmerman crying out for help - Orlando Sentinel

Also in the article, another expert ruled out Zimmerman using another tech.

All you have is, "not used in FEDERAL courts":lol:

Well, this is not FEDERAL court now is it? It is the STATE of FLORIDA. Go ahead and have him testify, it has been used in a state court before:lol:

TM still up 1-2 points:lol:
 
hawke812 said:
Nice one:lol:

Owen's Biometric technology has already assisted in convicting Davalloo of murder. He even states the 911 call was much better quality.

Trayvon Martin George Zimmerman 911 call analysis: Two forensic experts say it's not George Zimmerman crying out for help - Orlando Sentinel

Also in the article, another expert ruled out Zimmerman using another tech.

All you have is, "not used in FEDERAL courts":lol:

Well, this is not FEDERAL court now is it? It is the STATE of FLORIDA. Go ahead and have him testify, it has been used in a state court before:lol:

TM still up 1-2 points:lol:
Click to expand...

as you have said in the past. This is a forum and not the courts. So your point is worthless.

TM 0-0.

So why is the FBI wrong?
 
mike2810 said:
as you have said in the past. This is a forum and not the courts. So your point is worthless.

TM 0-0.

So why is the FBI wrong?
Click to expand...

I countered your expert with saying Owen's tech is not admissable in FEDERAL courts by showing you his testimony was used at the STATE level. Nothing more, nothing less.

That is why I said TM was up 1-2 points. I will give you that, but I believe Owen's tech will be admissible, since this is a STATE matter.

TM still up 1.

And the FBI? Who cares. TM still up son:lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom