Is Manslaughter Likely for Zimmerman?

[Oceandan]

The part I highlighted is not true. There is no time a NW volunteer is on or off. They are taught to be aware of suspicious activities in their neighborhood and to call for police should they see something suspicious. That's exactly what Zimmerman did, therefore, he was acting as an official NW member. Being a member of a NW program doesn't mean you're on duty ... it means you can be in your home, you can be walking your dog, you can be driving to the store ... you are to be the eyes and ears of the police -- if you see something suspicious, call it in and let the police do their job.

And above all, observe from a safe location. Don't enter an area in the dark where you saw someone you think is a criminal on drugs flee to.

What legal obligation or imagined responsibility does GZ have to identify himself as NW or something else?

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

How did it turn out?? Probably a better idea would have been to go straight to his father's house. I sure hope young people don't listen to the adults saying it was a good idea to ensure a physical encounter took place.

Going straight to his father's [girlfriend's] house would have been a bad idea. Why lead a creepy-ass cracker to where you are staying? Especially when there's a 12 year old home alone there??

 

[Lutherf]

There's no evidence I'm aware of that he was "into fighting." The evidence shows he got into a couple of fights. I know of few guys who didn't get into fights in school. And there remains no evidence whatsoever beyond the word of the killer that Trayvon struck him first without Zimmerman laying a finger on him first.

The proffer testimony we are hearing now definitely ties Trayvon to fighting.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

I don't know...seems like good Neighborhood Watching...

"Good neighborhood watching" never places the "good neighborhood watchman" in the vicinity of the suspect they call police for.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

:lol: :doh "You gotta problem?" ... "You do now!" - such freindly non-threatening words, and followed by a punch no less. :roll:

I don't believe that was the exchange. I believe the girl friend's testimony which had Trayvon asking why he was being followed.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

I think you're correct that GZ had no right to kill Trayvon simply because he thought he might be a threat. The problem is that Trayvon was a threat after he pinned Zimmerman to the ground and beat him up.

A threat I believe Zimmerman produced by tailing him suspiciously throughout the neighborhood, in the rain, in the dark, first by car, then by foot. And then, when they come face-to-face, Zimmerman goes searching (for what he claims was his phone), but could be reasonably perceived to be reaching for a weapon.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I don't believe that was the exchange. I believe the girl friend's testimony which had Trayvon asking why he was being followed.

Which of the girlfriend's versions of GZ's alleged reply do you believe?

 

[Buck Ewer]

Again, under what LEGAL obligation/requirement/hallucinated reason is GZ bound to identify himself in said manner?

He wasn't under any LEGAL obligation/ requirement to follow and stalk him either now was he?

 

[What if...?]

Okay, so let's say that TM felt threatened and that's why he jumped GZ. At what point (if any) does GZ have the right to defend himself?

That's the rub.

If he did go.for his gun, M is within his rights to kill him unless.Z convinces him he's withdrawing in good faith. Simply yelling for help from others doesn't count, because M has no idea WHO he's calling to. He needs to stop trying to draw the gun and speak to M, "I give" or whatever. And he can't let go of the gun once he grabs it, because HE'S afraid M will shoot HIM if he does.

Hence the perfect storm Maggie describes.

 

[Josie]

A threat I believe Zimmerman produced by tailing him suspiciously throughout the neighborhood, in the rain, in the dark, first by car, then by foot. And then, when they come face-to-face, Zimmerman goes searching (for what he claims was his phone), but could be reasonably perceived to be reaching for a weapon.

Okay, so Martin knocks him to the ground, pins him to the ground, punches him repeatedly.......................... and GZ isn't allowed to defend himself?

 

[Josie]

That's the rub.

If he did go.for his gun, M is within his rights to kill him unless.Z convinces him he's withdrawing in good faith. Simply yelling for help from others doesn't count, because M has no idea WHO he's calling to. He needs to stop trying to draw the gun and speak to M, "I give" or whatever. And he can't let go of the gun once he grabs it, because HE'S afraid M will shoot HIM if he does.

Hence the perfect storm Maggie describes.

If he did go for his gun, Martin had every right to jump him and defend himself. The question is..... when is GZ allowed to defend himself?

 

[Buck Ewer]

What legal obligation or imagined responsibility does GZ have to identify himself as NW or something else?

What legal obligation or imagined responsibility does GZ have to follow every kid he sees walking in the rain when he isn't even on duty?
That mop wipes both ways.

 

[What if...?]

I'm sure he interpreted Martin's actions as agressive and feared the worse. Wouldn't you if someone was hiding in the dark and then suddenly sprang out at you the way Martin did?

Never mind... It's takes an objective person to answer that question.

I'm sure he did.

And what totally useful tool did Z have RIGHT THERE?

 

[What if...?]

I'm sure he asked it just as sweet and innocently as you imagine he did sharon.

And I'm sure bouncer Z meekly answered.

 

[Oceandan]

What legal obligation or imagined responsibility does GZ have to follow every kid he sees walking in the rain when he isn't even on duty?
That mop wipes both ways.

He has every right in the world to do so. So do you. So does anyone. It's NOT illegal.

Since you FAILED to answer the question. He's also under ZERO obligation legal or imagined to identify himself.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

There is no evidence at all that Zimmerman struck him at all. It's not about "who punched first". The ONLY one doing the punching was Martin.

I don't believe Zimmerman struck him first. That's not what I mean. I believe it's possible that Zimmerman grabbed Trayvon before being punched.

 

[Buck Ewer]

If he did go for his gun, Martin had every right to jump him and defend himself. The question is..... when is GZ allowed to defend himself?

According to Florida law, when and where he is not the initiator of the confrontation.
You can't pursue someone and then claim self defense when they react to your threatening bahavior.

 

[Oceandan]

According to Florida law, when and where he is not the initiator of the confrontation.
You can't pursue someone and then claim self defense when they react to your threatening bahavior.

You don't know the law.

 

[Josie]

I don't believe Zimmerman struck him first. That's not what I mean. I believe it's possible that Zimmerman grabbed Trayvon before being punched.

Why do you think that?

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

What legal obligation or imagined responsibility does GZ have to identify himself as NW or something else?

No legal obligation, but as a neighborhood watch member, he was instructed by Sanford police to "observe from a safe location." He did not do that. Instead, he placed himself into an unsafe location to observe. That could be negligent or reckless.

 

[What if...?]

I agree that assertion was made, but GZ did then allegedly reply with his own "adult" question; except that the same witness changed the words of the GZ reply in her sworn statements, one made in front of TM's mother (strange witness interviewing procedure?) and the other in open court - yet you seem to accept this assertion/allegation as a "fact". GZ's statement did not agree with that assertion, his version had a completly different "dialog" as I recall. Many pieces of this puzzle are far from clear, and will forever remain so. You have reasonable doubt about GZ's version, I have reasonable doubt as to the state's witness version - only the jury can make the legal call.

Zs version is actually more threatening.

"What are you doing around here" is at least a partial answer.

"You gotta problem homie?"

"No" (reaches for pockets) could mean he's got a weapon, so he has no problem.

 

[Buck Ewer]

He has every right in the world to do so. So do you. So does anyone. It's NOT illegal.

Since you FAILED to answer the question. He's also under ZERO obligation legal or imagined to identify himself.

I didn't ask about his rights . I asked : What legal obligation or imagined responsibility does GZ have to follow every kid he sees walking in the rain when he isn't even on duty?
I believe his obligation is zero there too.
But since he took the initiative he was under an implied moral obligation to at least let the kid know who he was and what he was doing.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

Which of the girlfriend's versions of GZ's alleged reply do you believe?

The one which is corroborated by another witness.

 

[Buck Ewer]

You don't know the law.

OK then Mr laywer... quote me the law.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

Okay, so Martin knocks him to the ground, pins him to the ground, punches him repeatedly.......................... and GZ isn't allowed to defend himself?

He had the right to defend himself and meet force with force, not lethal force.