there is no right way
― twittering spinster (k3vin k.), Friday, 18 May 2012 01:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
My takeaway of this is that Captain Crime Watch reported the kid to the police, they told him they would handle it and to stand down but he decided to take more intiative. He followed the kid in his car and either he exited the vehicle to confront the kid or the kid confronted him about why he was being followed. The confrontation got physical, the kid was giving it to him good and in the midst of the melee he pulls out his gun shoots the kid. Does that jibe with the facts? Anything I'm missing.
― All kinds of heinous things, Friday, 18 May 2012 01:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
really good summation All kinds of heinous things, thanks for the post.
― J0rdan S., Friday, 18 May 2012 01:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
What frustrates me is, if Z gets away with this law why don't women who kill their partners in self defense after years of beatings, threats etc? How many times must a woman go to the authorities and say "I am in fear of my fucking LIFE here" and be ignored til shes forced to take matters into her own hands, but when she does, it seems mostly she goes to jail as a result? But one white guy chases down one black kid ONCE, kills him because hes being attacked (if true) and thats ok? FFS.
― Pureed Moods (Trayce), Friday, 18 May 2012 11:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
That happens all the time, in Hollywood.
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 18 May 2012 12:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 18 May 2012 12:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 18 May 2012 12:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
Jordan when you were in preschool what sort of grade did you get in the "plays well with others" category?
― a parker full of poseys (Stevie D(eux)), Friday, 18 May 2012 12:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
What frustrates me is, if Z gets away with this law why don't women who kill their partners in self defense after years of beatings, threats etc? How many times must a woman go to the authorities and say "I am in fear of my fucking LIFE here" and be ignored til shes forced to take matters into her own hands, but when she does, it seems mostly she goes to jail as a result? But one white guy chases down one black kid ONCE, kills him because hes being attacked (if true) and thats ok? FFS. --Pureed Moods (Trayce)
Just happened last week in FL as a matter of fact, woman sentenced to years for firing a warning shot.
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Friday, 18 May 2012 14:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
This is fucked up. Way to be assholes.
http://www.egotripland.com/trayvoning-internet-fad/
― EZ Snappin, Friday, 25 May 2012 21:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
ugh
― The Reverend, Friday, 25 May 2012 22:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
someone should stomp on that motherfucker's head.
― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Friday, 25 May 2012 22:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
or how about not
― The Reverend, Saturday, 26 May 2012 06:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
oh that Marissa Alexander case is maddening. Fuck Florida forever. (sorry Alfred)
― thillrer (loves laboured breathing), Sunday, 27 May 2012 21:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
how do we know trayvon wasn't on bath salts? and where's your liberal outrage and your al sharpton when a black man eats an innocent man's face?
― the late great, Tuesday, 29 May 2012 16:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
putting on a bib iirc
― jump them into a gang - into the absurd (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 29 May 2012 16:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
is there a South Park episode about this yet
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 29 May 2012 16:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
Shockingly, no.
― Quiet Desperation, LLC (Deric W. Haircare), Tuesday, 29 May 2012 16:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
George Zimmerman: The Most Likely Scenario
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/5/27/44552/1872
The state is unlikely to prevail in arguing Zimmerman was the aggressor because to be the aggressor, Zimmerman had to contemporaneously provoke the force Martin used against him. Zimmerman's profiling of Martin and call to the non-emergency number were not contemporaneous with Martin's attack. Even if the state could convince a judge or jury that Zimmerman was following Martin, rather than walking back to his car, rendering his pursuit a contemporaneous act, it is not an act that provokes Martin's use of force against him. Demanding someone account for their presence does not provoke the use of force. Even if it could be construed to be provocation for using force, all it means is Zimmerman had to attempt reasonable means to extricate himself before using deadly force in response. W-6's steadfast insistence that Zimmerman was struggling to get up and out from under Trayvon, right before the shot went off, fulfills that requirement. Zimmerman will say the same. And no witnesses saw anything different.
Zimmerman should prevail on classic self-defense at trial regardless of stand your ground. Raising stand your ground before trial gives him the possibility of a quicker win, and the opportunity to preview the state's strategy before it gets to a jury.
― goole, Wednesday, 30 May 2012 16:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
think it's important to remember that the big issue was that there even be a trial, not a conviction.
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 16:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
yes i agree
― goole, Wednesday, 30 May 2012 16:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
otoh hand, it's likely the main reason there was no trial in the first place is that no one thought charges against zimmerman would actually lead to conviction
― spextor vs bextor (contenderizer), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 17:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
cops don't think that way
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 17:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
and they didn't arrest him
can't charge somebody who hasn't been arrested
true, but i assume the cops would have arrested him if it had read as anything other than self-defense to them.
― spextor vs bextor (contenderizer), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 17:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
^ acknowledge that's a major goalpoast-shift, and that the cops might have been motivated by racism, laziness, whatever.
― spextor vs bextor (contenderizer), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 17:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
just maybe
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 17:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
also, regardless of the actions of cops on the scene, prosecutors could have encouraged the police to arrest zimmerman at any point, and might have done so if they imagined that charges would result in a conviction (still not discounting racism, laziness, ignorance, etc).
― spextor vs bextor (contenderizer), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 18:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
The sad upshot of this is that, clearly, "I am getting my ass pwned by a black teenager" is going to be considered a legitimate stand your ground/self defense situation for shooting someone dead, but "I am getting followed around and challenged by some dude I've never seen who is not a cop" is NOT a legitimate stand your ground/self defense situation for beating someone's ass. RIP America.
― Brony! Broni! Broné! (Phil D.), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 18:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
yes, being physically attacked provides better legal justification for a violent response than being followed and verbally challenged
― spextor vs bextor (contenderizer), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 18:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, May 30, 2012 12:59 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
^^^^^^
― twittering spinster (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 18:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
Ground is either standable, or it's not.
― Brony! Broni! Broné! (Phil D.), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 18:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
Swamp!
― StanM, Wednesday, 30 May 2012 18:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
thought this was funny, in any event
― twittering spinster (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 30 May 2012 18:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
Talkleft blogpost is the worst kind of idiot lawyer-roleplaying commentary and should be ignored completely. Zimmerman will still be acquitted.
― Three Word Username, Wednesday, 30 May 2012 22:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
well maybe, but it's the only thing i've seen that walks through all the available evidence
― goole, Wednesday, 30 May 2012 23:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
It makes my head spin to think that in the US, there are legitimate situations where a person can shoot and KILL another person, and that lead to not even being *arrrested* let alone charged/jailed. It just... I can't process that.
― Pureed Moods (Trayce), Thursday, 31 May 2012 01:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
It's worse than that. You can be shot and injured after making a drunken mistake, then charged with felony trespass, while the person who shot you goes uncharged thanks to a law charmingly called the "Make My Day" law.
― Brony! Broni! Broné! (Phil D.), Thursday, 31 May 2012 09:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
How is that worse
― that is a weird thing to bring up over lean cuisine (DJP), Thursday, 31 May 2012 12:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
I thought it was kind of a given you could shoot some stranger who broke into your bedroom in the middle of the night.
― Hauntingly Unemployed American (President Keyes), Thursday, 31 May 2012 12:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
Fuck, I would-no questions asked
― One Way Ticket on the 1277 Express (Bill Magill), Thursday, 31 May 2012 13:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
ha this reads to me as a wonky negative version about the story of the burglar who broke into someone's house, stole all his/her belongings, slipped on ice as he was leaving, and sued the homeowner for injuries.
― thillrer (loves laboured breathing), Thursday, 31 May 2012 13:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
yo if you get fucked up and start wandering into people's houses you forego the right to complain about what happens. in a perfect world your drunk ass finds a compassionate person who tries to point you on your way. in this world if a stranger wanders into my house I will beat that stranger's ass real bad, gtfo w/"it's even worse, you can't actually trespass into people's houses & not get charged"
― cosi fan whitford (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Thursday, 31 May 2012 15:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
how is this so bad?
― go down on you in a thyatrr (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 31 May 2012 15:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
people should not be allowed to have guns
― max, Thursday, 31 May 2012 15:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm not even debating that point max, I'm wondering why it's worse to get shot and charged with a crime than it is to get killed
― that is a weird thing to bring up over lean cuisine (DJP), Thursday, 31 May 2012 15:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm not touching that point.
xpost
― go down on you in a thyatrr (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 31 May 2012 15:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
"oh my god, my daughter is dead""well you know it could be worse, she could be alive but injured and charged with a crime""too true, too true..."
― that is a weird thing to bring up over lean cuisine (DJP), Thursday, 31 May 2012 15:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
OK, "worse" was a shitty choice of words and outright wrong. I'm just sick of seeing the endpoint of all conflict resolution in this country being "Git yer gun!" and the rhetorical strategy of naming these laws "stand your ground," "make my day" and so forth that let morons feel like heroes.
Should drunk people be able to just wander into your house? No. Should it be a potentially lethal offense? No.
― Brony! Broni! Broné! (Phil D.), Thursday, 31 May 2012 15:13 (1 year ago) Permalink