So wouldn't that mean by not picking it up that they aren't race baiting and pot stirring and that Fox News is?

 

I agree with you on a lot of things, but all the media is race baiting and pot stirring, not just FOX, all of them.

Medical records indicate Zimmerman had a broken nose and other crucial findings:

 

George Zimmerman Medical Report Sheds Light on Injuries After Trayvon Martin Shooting - ABC News

 

When he beats this charge there will be outrage that probably isn't justified

Medical records indicate Zimmerman had a broken nose and other crucial findings:

 

George Zimmerman Medical Report Sheds Light on Injuries After Trayvon Martin Shooting - ABC News

 

When he beats this charge there will be outrage that probably isn't justified

 

The outrage will not be justified. That is for sure. This has become a heart over head issue. I just wish that we could know what happened. I never doubted that there was a fight. I want to know how it started. Only then can we be outraged or not.

I think everyone familiar with this case knows there was an altercation of some sort. The autopsy proves it. It doesn't erase the fact that the dispatcher told Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle and wait for the cops and that Zimmerman didn't listen. I keep hearing about the Stand Your Ground law. Wasn't Trayvon 'standing his ground'?

I think everyone familiar with this case knows there was an altercation of some sort. The autopsy proves it. It doesn't erase the fact that the dispatcher told Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle and wait for the cops and that Zimmerman didn't listen. I keep hearing about the Stand Your Ground law. Wasn't Trayvon 'standing his ground'?

 

I think you are overstating what the dispatcher told Zimmerman. She never ordered or even told Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle. From the transcript of the call:

 

"911 dispatcher: Are you following him? [2:24]

 

Zimmerman: Yeah. [2:25]

 

911 dispatcher:OK.We don’t need you to do that. [2:26]"

I think everyone familiar with this case knows there was an altercation of some sort. The autopsy proves it. It doesn't erase the fact that the dispatcher told Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle and wait for the cops and that Zimmerman didn't listen. I keep hearing about the Stand Your Ground law. Wasn't Trayvon 'standing his ground'?

 

PP it also doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman didn't break the law by ignoring the dispatcher.

I think everyone familiar with this case knows there was an altercation of some sort. The autopsy proves it. It doesn't erase the fact that the dispatcher told Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle and wait for the cops and that Zimmerman didn't listen. I keep hearing about the Stand Your Ground law. Wasn't Trayvon 'standing his ground'?

 

In order for Martin to have been standing his ground, he would to have first been attacked by Zimmerman and reasonably believed Martin's use of force was necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself. If that's what the evidence ends up showing actually occured than yes, Martin could have been standing his ground. Zimmerman simply following Martin, if that's what the evidence shows, is not enough for Martin to have stood his ground and initiated an assault.

 

 

 

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

I think you are overstating what the dispatcher told Zimmerman. She never ordered or even told Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle. From the transcript of the call:

 

"911 dispatcher: Are you following him? [2:24]

 

Zimmerman: Yeah. [2:25]

 

911 dispatcher:OK.We don’t need you to do that. [2:26]"

 

 

I see my overstatement. He's still being overzealous, IMO. If a dispatcher tells me that they don't need me to do whatever it is I am doing I am going to stop.

PP it also doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman didn't break the law by ignoring the dispatcher.

 

Where did I say or imply that he broke the law? I overstated that he didn't stay in his vehicle. Looks like he was told he wasn't needed to follow Martin yet he still did.

In order for Martin to have been standing his ground, he would to have first been attacked by Zimmerman and reasonably believed Martin's use of force was necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself. If that's what the evidence ends up showing actually occured than yes, Martin could have been standing his ground. Zimmerman simply following Martin, if that's what the evidence shows, is not enough for Martin to have stood his ground and initiated an assault.

 

 

 

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

 

This is going to be very interesting to see how this plays out in court and what the evidence shows. By the wording of the law it seems like as long as Zimmerman wasn't breaking the law then he may have been in the right. Am I reading that correctly?

 

For me, it just seems pretty wild to think a man killed an unarmed kid and that there may be a law to justify that killing. I can't wrap my head around that logic.

 

Where did I say or imply that he broke the law? I overstated that he didn't stay in his vehicle. Looks like he was told he wasn't needed to follow Martin yet he still did.

 

And I'm saying that has no relevance to whether or not he broke the law. That isn't evidence against Zimmerman IMO.

And I'm saying that has no relevance to whether or not he broke the law. That isn't evidence against Zimmerman IMO.

 

I'm not saying it is. I do think that had he stayed in his vehicle or at the very least listened to the dispatcher that Martin would be alive and Zimmerman wouldn't be in jail. I can't ignore that.

I'm not saying it is. I do think that had he stayed in his vehicle or at the very least listened to the dispatcher that Martin would be alive and Zimmerman wouldn't be in jail. I can't ignore that.

 

92, I understand your thinking on that point and there is no doubt that it is true. It is definitely true.

 

My only "problem" with it is that it flies in the face of what I would have done and likely still do if that situation or something similar presented/presents itself to me.

 

I get the whole "thing" of allowing the police to do their job and I'm generally fine with that concept if it works. I'm sure not going to be driving around FT looking for crimes being committed. Having said that, I know that if my neighborhood had been robbed repeatedly, I'm going to have a watchful eye out for suspicious behavior (heck, isn't that the purpose of neighborhood watch programs?). I'm also going to report suspicious persons in my neighborhood to the police. And I'm also going to follow them if the suspicious persons had gotten away in the past because it took too long for the police to respond. I'm not going to confront them or pull the "citizen arrest" gig. But follow them to keep track of them until the police arrive? Yeah, I can see myself doing that easily. Which is why I don't think Zimmerman's decision to exit his vehicle to follow Martin was unreasonable. I really don't.

 

In the Martin case, the worse possible scenario resulted. A true tragedy. But being honest, I don't live my life considering the worst possible scenario. I fly on planes knowing the worst possible scenario is a crash and my death. I drive my vehicle knowing the worst possible scenario is a crash and my death. I use my tractor on hillsides knowing the worst possible scenario is the tractor rolls over causing my death. I hunt with others knowing the worst possible scenario is that someone accidently shoots me or I accidentally shoot one of them. In other words, I assess my intended actions, the worst possible scenario and the likelihood of that scenario happening. I wouldn't have thought that my leaving my vehicle or my house to simply follow a suspicious person until the police arrived would have likely resulted in my needing to shoot someone. I just wouldn't.

 

Maybe I'm wrong in that and a majority of people on here would have stayed in the car and let Martin possibly get away before the police arrived. But I can't honestly say that I would have done so.

92, I understand your thinking on that point and there is no doubt that it is true. It is definitely true.

 

My only "problem" with it is that it flies in the face of what I would have done and likely still do if that situation or something similar presented/presents itself to me.

 

I get the whole "thing" of allowing the police to do their job and I'm generally fine with that concept if it works. I'm sure not going to be driving around FT looking for crimes being committed. Having said that, I know that if my neighborhood had been robbed repeatedly, I'm going to have a watchful eye out for suspicious behavior (heck, isn't that the purpose of neighborhood watch programs?). I'm also going to report suspicious persons in my neighborhood to the police. And I'm also going to follow them if the suspicious persons had gotten away in the past because it took too long for the police to respond. I'm not going to confront them or pull the "citizen arrest" gig. But follow them to keep track of them until the police arrive? Yeah, I can see myself doing that easily. Which is why I don't think Zimmerman's decision to exit his vehicle to follow Martin was unreasonable. I really don't.

 

In the Martin case, the worse possible scenario resulted. A true tragedy. But being honest, I don't live my life considering the worst possible scenario. I fly on planes knowing the worst possible scenario is a crash and my death. I drive my vehicle knowing the worst possible scenario is a crash and my death. I use my tractor on hillsides knowing the worst possible scenario is the tractor rolls over causing my death. I hunt with others knowing the worst possible scenario is that someone accidently shoots me or I accidentally shoot one of them. In other words, I assess my intended actions, the worst possible scenario and the likelihood of that scenario happening. I wouldn't have thought that my leaving my vehicle or my house to simply follow a suspicious person until the police arrived would have likely resulted in my needing to shoot someone. I just wouldn't.

 

Maybe I'm wrong in that and a majority of people on here would have stayed in the car and let Martin possibly get away before the police arrived. But I can't honestly say that I would have done so.

 

 

I hear you and understand your thought process. I guess for me I know I would have stayed in my vehicle and waited on the cops. I don't normally think worst case scenario in any situation but I am wary of suspicious people and the actions that may result in the aggravation of suspicious people so I am certain I would have kept a close eye but waited on the cops before I left the friendly confines of my vehicle. I do understand your logic and how it relates to this case.

This is going to be very interesting to see how this plays out in court and what the evidence shows. By the wording of the law it seems like as long as Zimmerman wasn't breaking the law then he may have been in the right. Am I reading that correctly?

 

For me, it just seems pretty wild to think a man killed an unarmed kid and that there may be a law to justify that killing. I can't wrap my head around that logic.

 

 

That's what I've been saying from the beginning. If there is any issue here it is that people have a problem with the law.

 

One thing for sure that some people are missing. We have no idea who started the fight. If Martin felt threatened by someone following him and he initiated the fight would it be different to you than if Zimmerman ran him down and started the fight? To me a neighborhood watch captain following a "suspicious" person isn't starting a fight. However if I'm being followed I would feel totally different.