Trayvon Martin Case

Tamara Lave is an idiot. The facts are not malleable and gray. Facts are fucking facts. Her statement is one of someone who made a rush to judgment before any facts were in and now realizes they were so far off they can't possibly defend their initial position.
 
CDG said:
The facts are not malleable and gray. Facts are fucking facts.
Click to expand...
One of my father-in-law's favorite statements to use when talking politics is, "lets not cloud the matter with facts."
 
JBS said:
Yes, and that's what makes it bone-assed ridiculous.

There might not be a difference in what some mouth breathing committee typed on a piece of paper when the law was drafted, but there's a staggering difference in terms of loss of life or limb, the long term ramifications from a psychological perspective, the possibility of creating orphans in a moment of confrontation, and the impact on people's lives when deadly force is actually used. Compare actually using a firearm in self defense against another person, versus deliberately and carefully firing a single round into the deck which- no matter what Florida legislators say- is not deadly force. Classifying a responsible warning shot as "deadly force" is a trick of verbiage and lawyering.

And, just to be clear, I'm not even advocating the use of warning shots one way or the other. I'm just pointing out how asinine a law can be when someone is DELIBERATELY avoiding the taking of human life, and getting sentenced to 20 years for it. Maybe it should be illegal, but should someone get sentenced to 20 years for that?
Click to expand...
Sorry a bit late. Family stuff....

Yes and No. The issue isn't what mouth breathing committee typed up. It's the fact that there was a need for a legal definition of what deadly force constituted. The way it was written.. right or wrong.. is what's mostly worked for a long while. Discharging a firearm at someone (whether deadly or not; aimed or not) is an act of deadly force upon another person. That's how you get the justification for the crime of aggravated assault.

If she went back into the house and then came back out as stated above then she isn't a victim but now the criminal. Extenuating circumstances aside she was not in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm if she was able to disengage her attacker, go inside, retrieve a handgun, come back outside, and fire a warning shot. Not saying the guy prob didn't deserve it, but it is how the law views it. Deadly force is the same with a hit or miss. Remember if it wasn't there would need to be another long lengthy committee to define what a miss is and what a hit is and what would signify what the intent was. Gets was too complicated.
 
Interesting story with a nice tie-in to the Trayvan case and the woman sentenced to 20 years. Corrine Brown...we've discussed her ineptitude here before, and the NAACP are now protesting the conviction of Ms. Alexander and her 20 year sentencing.

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/...all-out-jacksonville-law-enforcement-agencies

The NAACP’s Jacksonville chapter held a vigil Tuesday morning in protest of Marissa Alexander’s 20-year prison sentence, but it was U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown’s voice that may have been the loudest.
Brown, chapter president Isaiah Rumlin and a handful of pastors joined together at Bethel Baptist Institutional Church, calling out area law enforcement agencies and justice systems over the application of Florida’s “10-20-Life” statute.
Click to expand...

While I think they have a bit of a point and the woman shouldn't have taken a sentence that heavy, here are some other gems from the story:
Meanwhile, Alexander’s trial attorney, Kevin Cobbin, said it was the discretion of the prosecutors to apply the “10-20-Life” statutes.
Click to expand...
Okay, who is the prosecutor?
State Attorney Angela Corey responded by saying the criticisms that she has taken over the case have come loaded with misinformation and inaccuracies.
Click to expand...
Oh...the same prosecutor in the Martin case. Alrighty then.

Corey offered Ms. Alexander a 3 year plea deal which Alexander declined. I have to wonder how much this case will effect State vs. Zimmerman, especially since Corey didn't have to apply the 10-20-Life statute but chose to do so.
 
Freefalling said:
Corey offered Ms. Alexander a 3 year plea deal which Alexander declined. I have to wonder how much this case will effect State vs. Zimmerman, especially since Corey didn't have to apply the 10-20-Life statute but chose to do so.
Click to expand...

I think the bigger issue from that case, that could impact Zimmerman, was the judge not allowing the stand your ground self defense argument because she went back into the house.

The second that the judge disallowed that defense Alexander was a fool not to make a plea deal.
 
Scotth said:
I think the bigger issue from that case, that could impact Zimmerman, was the judge not allowing the stand your ground self defense argument because she went back into the house.

The second that the judge disallowed that defense Alexander was a fool not to make a plea deal.
Click to expand...

not following your logic. Please expound? She could've stayed in the house after breaking contact. Z was on his back getting his head bashed in.
 
RB said:
not following your logic. Please expound? She could've stayed in the house after breaking contact. Z was on his back getting his head bashed in.
Click to expand...

The way I see the issue is how will the trial of Zimmerman be defined. Will the judge/jury only consider the end of the conflict or will they judge the entirety of the incident? If the judge/jury only looks the end of the incident then Zimmerman will walk because the case will be judge as self defense.

In the Alexander case the judge didn't allow the stand your ground defense because she had broken contact and could have avoided the contact that lead to the shooting. In a similar way Zimmerman could have avoid contact with Martin and if this judge takes a similar view and disallows a self defense argument because the confrontation could have been avoided, Zimmerman isn't going to have much of a defense. With the same lawyer in both cases you have to believe they are going to use a similar game plan and try to block the self defense argument.

If he is convicted, I doubt the Murder 2 charge will stick but it is my understanding that he can be convicted on a lessor charge. Of course I'm basing my opinion on what has been written and I certainly wouldn't argue that the public accounts are completely accurate. I think Zimmerman has a pretty decent lawyer now but there will be some hurdles that will need to be negotiated before the end of this trial.
 
383416_329358797123868_151385851587831_925361_610319618_n.jpg
 
Scotth said:
The way I see the issue is how will the trial of Zimmerman be defined. Will the judge/jury only consider the end of the conflict or will they judge the entirety of the incident? If the judge/jury only looks the end of the incident then Zimmerman will walk because the case will be judge as self defense.

In the Alexander case the judge didn't allow the stand your ground defense because she had broken contact and could have avoided the contact that lead to the shooting. In a similar way Zimmerman could have avoid contact with Martin and if this judge takes a similar view and disallows a self defense argument because the confrontation could have been avoided, Zimmerman isn't going to have much of a defense. With the same lawyer in both cases you have to believe they are going to use a similar game plan and try to block the self defense argument.

If he is convicted, I doubt the Murder 2 charge will stick but it is my understanding that he can be convicted on a lessor charge. Of course I'm basing my opinion on what has been written and I certainly wouldn't argue that the public accounts are completely accurate. I think Zimmerman has a pretty decent lawyer now but there will be some hurdles that will need to be negotiated before the end of this trial.
Click to expand...

Well, the thing is, as far as I understand things... the judge is the one who determines the validity of the necessity of self defense and if its applicable as an affirmative defense of the use of force. I don't think it goes to a jury until the point where that defense is rendered invalid by the judge. Basically, interpretation of the law falls to the judge, the jury determines innocence or guilt within the law and gets clarifications regarding law from the judge.
 
Saw that story on CNN. It was already reported back in April that he never report the $200k he raised on his website at the time of the bail hearing. The one thing that probably brought this on was:
Prosecutors argued that Zimmerman "misrepresented, misled and deceived the court" during an April bond hearing about whether he had a U.S. passport and about his family's financial circumstances.
Click to expand...
Not telling them about that is a big no go.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/01/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
 
The sad thing is if Zimmerman gets off this BS charge he's still going to face this bitch suing him in civi court to make her coin.
 
I love the media spin shit in the text. I watched the videos through his re-enactment and the interview before I read the text.

He saw a shady dude in an area that's been having problems with shady dudes doing shady shit.

He kept him in sight while on the phone, then went to link up with PD at his car, with no verbal contact or physical contact with now dead turd.

Dead turd initiates an assault. Dead turd sees, then attempts to go for Zim's pistol, Zim retains, draws, and engages after already having his head beat in on a concrete sidewalk and his face pummeled.

The internet style meme quote for this, in my opinion, should be

"problem, officer?"

Awesome that 2 people stuck their heads out and/or were present before, and after, the shooting.. and neither fucking helped. That right there would give me cause to move away from there, if nothing else.
 
Ranger Psych said:
Awesome that 2 people stuck their heads out and/or were present before, and after, the shooting.. and neither fucking helped. That right there would give me cause to move away from there, if nothing else.
Click to expand...

We (insert description of "our" group here) all need to pool our money and buy an island- maybe a couple islands, maybe in the Aleutians- and vet folks before they are allowed to move in.
 
Ranger Psych said:
Awesome that 2 people stuck their heads out and/or were present before, and after, the shooting.. and neither fucking helped. That right there would give me cause to move away from there, if nothing else.
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same thing. Probably the same "witnesses" who have changed their original story.
 
My neighborhood up in AK I only knew 3 of my neighbors. Across the street were 2 families with multiple kids, one stay at home dad in one, one stay at home mom at the other. Right side another family, stay at home mom, hubby worked, multiple kids. Everyone ate fresh moose meat pretty often. One family across the street had a German Shepherd and another dog, both outside dogs. Other family had an inside dog, and I had Xerxes (My German Shepherd).

If ANYONE in our "quad" of sorts heard odd shit, you'd see exterior floodlights getting turned on on all houses, spotlight from upstairs in one house panning, people peeking out windows with black straight objects visible as well...

At that point I'd let Xerxes out to go piss. Figure a big ass German Shepherd trotting around and getting in a barking contest with the dogs across the street would provide adequate reason for anyone who didn't live there to depart in a hasty manner...
 

Similar threads

RackMaster
Canadian Forces brass defying federal directive to boost reserves
Replies
5
Views
1K
pardus
pardus
Gypsy
AAR, Gen McCaffrey (Ret)
Replies
1
Views
2K
Paddlefoot
Paddlefoot
Back
Top