With all the ridiculous back and forths I still have absolutely no idea what happened
[QUOTE=Jim_Riley;35693885]I never said that's what happened and whether it's conclusive in anyway. It's all assumption and I'm being objective based on current information.
With that said, then wouldn't Martin be more likely deemed the aggressor since he went out of his way to do a stupid "sneak attack"? Martin wasn't forced into fighting Zimmerman if he wanted to do a "sneak attack". Martin could have easily kept going and ignore the strange man that followed him and stopped (by Zimmerman's account of course). Martin had nothing on him and you'd think since he's so close to home that it'd be more realistic that he just lose the man he was one minute trying to keep his distance from rather than move in for an attack. That's blatant self-defense for Zimmerman then.
Honestly, I understand exactly what you're saying and I don't disagree with it because it's stupid or anything like that. It's a reasonable assumption to make and it can make sense. However, it can be trumped if what happened is exactly as Zimmerman described it, imo.
Ultimately, we don't know right?
I'm still waiting for some massive trump card that the public has yet to hear and that it'll be revealed in court.[/QUOTE]
Well yeah that's kind of what I was saying as well, either way can be reasonably argued, there's no doubt there. Like I said, with what we know, it can be reasonably argued that it was just an unfortunate accident. But do you disagree with me that Zimmerman should bear responsibility for putting both himself and Martin in that position? And this is entirely outside of fact, this is pure opinion.
Like I said, definitely a bad idea to turn around and attack your pursuer, I agree with that too, that's why it can be reasoned either way. Like say someone's getting mugged and they make the stupid, wrong, terrible decision to fight back and they picked the wrong guy on the wrong day and just turned a regular jacking into a murder. Both parties fucked up, but there is a clear line somewhere that someone fucked up first and I personally feel that person probably should bear some legal responsibility for it. That someone had to fuck up first is a fact that I'm sure we can agree on, but how you feel about that person's obligation to personal responsibility for that is the opinion part I'm asking you. If you care to indulge.
[QUOTE=Jim_Riley;35693885]I never said that's what happened and whether it's conclusive in anyway. It's all assumption and I'm being objective based on current information.[/QUOTE]
I apologize, I read your post way too fast.
The only way witness protection would work is if he had a private security team, and he movied to an extremely remote area.
[QUOTE=flamehead5;35694672]The only way witness protection would work is if he had a private security team, and he movied to an extremely remote area.[/QUOTE]
Meh, well no one really cares about Casey Anthony anymore, to use a comparison. People don't really have huge attention spans for these kinds of things. If the charges are dropped and he goes free there would probably be outrage for a short while, then after a few months no one would care.
[QUOTE=J Paul;35694287]I personally feel that person probably should bear some legal responsibility for it. That someone had to fuck up first is a fact that I'm sure we can agree on, but how you feel about that person's obligation to personal responsibility for that is the opinion part I'm asking you. If you care to indulge.[/QUOTE]
I don't entirely agree with such a an open-ended statement like "If he didn't follow him in the first place..." because that's hardly conclusive. That doesn't mean anything. 'Would've, Could've, Should've' (pardon the expression) can't realistically hold up in court. You could say that Martin shouldn't have assaulted Zimmerman from behind (in accordance to Zimmerman's story again, bare with me) and he'd still be alive.
Maybe there shouldn't have been so many break-ins in that neighborhood in the last two months then Zimmerman wouldn't feel like patrolling the streets (I'm not entirely sure how true all that was but I had heard on the radio that THAT was the reason Zimmerman was even out that night). You could even say something like Zimmerman should have never been born and Martin could be alive today because they'd never cross paths that day (a bit extreme but you understand where I'm going with it?).
With regards to personal responsibility, I look at it a little differently. It's definitely something that Zimmerman has to weigh on his own shoulders and I'm sure he feels the guilt on his end because not only did he kill someone but it was a teenager as well. At least I'd like to think he feels guilt. I don't actually know how he feels about it.
To a degree, Martin was put into a situation when Zimmerman began following him, sure. However, that situation would have ended if Zimmerman gave up chasing the kid and was walking back to his car, losing sight of the kid. No necessary action needs to be taken on Martin's side; Danger was avoided. And thus I feel the personal responsibility here is no longer just on Zimmerman, but on Martin as well. Since there's no law that says you can't actually follow somebody and since Zimmerman followed him for only a small amount of time, ultimately losing sight of him (so we hear him comment of course),--turns his back and heads for his car--that's why I can't say that it's at that moment Zimmerman would be the person who "fucked up" first. Now do I believe that Zimmerman should get off scot-free? Not necessarily. I believe he should lose his gun license or at least let the police make him reconsider the neighborhood watch business, regardless of his good intentions. He shouldn't be tried for Second Degree Murder though.
I initially said once that this was a case of two stubborn SOB's butting heads but one ended up dying. So you're right that both parties fucked up. Specifically where and when they fucked up...well, obviously we don't entirely agree on that.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.