I suspect Martin was smashing his head against a curb as a means of defending himself from an armed assailant.
based on what?
In this case, the only reason Zimmerman was found “not guilty” is because of a “Stand Your Ground” law which many people think is a stupid law.
“Stand Your Ground” was irrelevant here (since GZ was unable to flee his assailant a the time of the killing) and was never invoked by the defense.
GZ should have been found innocent(of murder) in any of the 50 states regardless of SYG.
Are you at all familiar with the facts of the case or just your suspicions?
[quote=“wysinwyg, post:50, topic:16927, full:true”]
I suspect Martin was smashing his head against a curb as a means of defending himself from an armed assailant. Not many people seem to want to grant him that.[/quote]
Yes, because your suspicion and conjecture is what is important here. Why use facts and evidence when we can tell a lot about someone just by looking at them?
So some guy is following you and you think he is armed. While you no longer see this person, you decide to seek them out and assault them. That’s defending yourself? I think we call that foolhardy.
One of two things happened. Either Trayvon, knowing Zimmerman was armed or not, surprised and assaulted him - or Zimmerman stalked and killed Trayvon. If one has their gun out and is stalking someone, they aren’t going to let that person get close enough to lay hands on them.
[quote=“wysinwyg, post:50, topic:16927, full:true”]
Sometimes murderers get “not guilty” verdicts in court. It happens. It doesn’t make them not murderers. [/quote]
One is entitled to their opinion on whether a verdict is justified. In this specific case I would disagree with anyone still willing to label Zimmerman as a murderer. Especially when in many cases their opinions seemed based on emotion and conjecture (which may or may not be in your case.)
I don’t find the spin and omission of key facts to be “honest”. More accurate - “killed an unarmed teenager who was currently assaulting him.”
Do some searches online and see how many people literally die from one punch. It happens. Nothing Zimmerman did justified an assault. What Treyvon did certainly justified defending oneself.
There is something to be said about the fact that this painting would fit perfectly over some right-winger’s couch. It’s got it all: The dead black kid in the trigger-happy artist’s backstory; the saccharine patriotic symbol lifted straight from a commercial stock site…
Martin was approached by an armed man. We don’t know any details about that confrontation except as relayed after the fact by Zimmerman as part of his criminal defense. What we do know is that in court self defense is justified if the person making the self defense plea was in reasonable fear for his or her life. Being approached by an armed assailant would seem to me to qualify. I think it’s at the very least plausible that Martin was reasonably in fear for his life and that any assault on Zimmerman at that point was undertaken in self defense.
Notice I said “plausible” whereas you simply state as flat fact “nothing Zimmerman did justified an assault.” We don’t actually know that; even going by the circumstantial details we do have it’s not necessarily true.
Who ever Google uses for their results: “the deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another; murder.”
I guess, like many things, it depends what spin you want to put on it.[quote=“kpkpkp, post:62, topic:16927”]
Remind me how Martin’s dark skin magnetically attracted Zimmerman
[/quote]
Wow. Do they give some sort of Emmy like award for that sort of race card playing poetry? Zimmerman’s interactions with black neighbors and friends would suggest that his motivations for following Trayvon had little to do with his skin color.
i know the image, but I’ve never really looked closely at it. It’s not very good, is it? not even technically. There’s weird geometries. It looks like the world just when the ketamine kicks in.
I love how you start out talking about “facts and evidence” and then spend the next two paragraphs plumbing the conjecture bucket even more deeply than I have.
At least I properly disclaim my conjecture as conjecture.
He plagiarized the image and claims it’s an original piece of work in direct violation of eBay seller rules. Most of the bidders are new to eBay (shills, it appears which is also against sellers’ rules). Complain to eBay and tell them what you think. The man is a compulsive liar as well as a murder and should not profit from his “fame”.
If we are talking plausibility, which seems more likely?
Zimmerman confronts Trayvon with his weapon, and Trayvon reacts by assaulting Zimmerman in self defense. While Trayvon’s actions would be justified in this case, how much sense/plausibility is there that Zimmerman would just stand there and let himself be assaulted when he already had the weapon out threatening Treyvon?
Or
Zimmerman had been following Treyvon, but had not confront him or threatened him with a weapon. Treyvon manages to get close enough and assault Zimmerman without Zimmerman having time to draw and prevent the assault.
While it is true that no one can say with 100% certainty what happened, I haven’t seen any one defending Trayvon/condemning Zimmerman suggest scenarios that were very likely. Occam’s razor and all.
And here it is again. Public opinion must not condemn Zimmerman, since he was found innocent in a court of law; and yet you are apparently ok with it condemning Martin, who was shot with no trial. Nice indeed.
