Man claiming SYG in TX after initiating confrontation

[mikegideon]

I apologize if I derailed the thread. TMF 18B used Zimmerman’s name and made reference to the Florida case when he started the thread, so I thought it would be okay.

I don't know that it's a bad thing do compare the Zimmerman case, since the bedwetters certainly will.

[TMF]

I apologize if I derailed the thread. TMF 18B used Zimmerman’s name and made reference to the Florida case when he started the thread, so I thought it would be okay.

Yep, the similarity in these cases are that the prosecution will be centering their case over who instigated/initiated confrontation. The difference is that we don't know for sure if Zimmerman started it, but we all have our opinions on who did.

The purpose of the thread was to bring attention to that fact that you will most likely be charged if you SD shoot someone after starting a fight. It will happen; it just will. On the Zimmerman thread it seemed like many folks believed that justification eliminates culpability and prevents prosecution. It doesn't. I know that folks disagree on whether or not Zimmerman started it, but some folks believe that it doesn't matter if he did or not.

This case makes it pretty clear that if you go looking for a fight and end up shooting someone you will explaining your actions in front of a jury. It doesn't matter how many actors speak against/for you, the law will do its thing.

Edited June 10, 2012 by TMF 18B

[mikegideon]

A crime was committed and the victim and his family deserve a trial. I know very well we don’t have a justice system, but I hold out hope that justice is served in this case.

I agree, but the crime may have been assault and battery, or even attempted murder on the part of Martin. You can't say, and neither can I. The liberals have already decided, but as usual, it's based on all the wrong things. I'm not calling you one of them, BTW.

The victim ain't always the one that got shot. The tough part about the whole case is the fact that there's no evidence to decide the case conclusively. Who really started the violent confrontation?

[DaveTN]

I don't know that it's a bad thing do compare the Zimmerman case, since the bedwetters certainly will.

Other than the fact that the guy videoed what happened, I think that’s why it’s getting the media attention it is. If Zimmerman had videoed what happened we might all be in agreement.

Yep, the similarity in these cases are that the prosecution will be centering their case over who instigated/initiated confrontation. The difference is that we don't know for sure if Zimmerman started it, but we all have our opinions on who did.

The purpose of the thread was to bring attention to that fact that you will most likely be charged if you SD shoot someone after starting a fight. It will happen; it just will. On the Zimmerman thread it seemed like many folks believed that justification eliminates culpability and prevents prosecution. It doesn't. I know that folks disagree on whether or not Zimmerman started it, but some folks believe that it doesn't matter if he did or not.

This case makes it pretty clear that if you go looking for a fight and end up shooting someone you will explaining your actions in front of a jury. It doesn't matter how many actors speak against/for you, the law will do its thing.

I think the Texas case will test if SYG is absolute or if a reasonable person would believe he was in fear of death or great bodily harm will come into play. He was obviously standing his ground, now we will see if not retreating from a situation you started and had the ability to end is accepted by the jurors.

[TMF]

I think the Texas case will test if SYG is absolute or if a reasonable person would believe he was in fear of death or great bodily harm will come into play. He was obviously standing his ground, now we will see if not retreating from a situation you started and had the ability to end is accepted by the jurors.

Well if I had to bet..... he should puckering up right now, not that it will help.

[mikegideon]

Well if I had to bet..... he should puckering up right now, not that it will help.

Yep. Puckering is futile

[bubbiesdad]

Nope, I wasn’t there anymore than anyone else. Like everyone else I have made decisions based on what I have read in media accounts that were biased both ways.

I think Zimmerman deserves a fair trial, I don’t agree that the state revoked his bail, I think the state is responsible for his safety while in custody, and I am appalled that both the state and the Feds refused to act when outright criminal threats were made against his life. However… the cops wanted to arrest him when they first had him, they ask for an arrest warrant and it was refused by the DA. The Governor has seen fit to sit that DA in the corner and call one in that can handle the case. A crime was committed and the victim and his family deserve a trial. I know very well we don’t have a justice system, but I hold out hope that justice is served in this case.

I know my opinion on this case is not popular on this forum, but I can’t help from join in on the discussion. I am simply discussing the case as I see it; I respect the opinions of others and hope no one takes my comments as a personal attack, they certainly are not meant that way.

I agree with you on this post. Other I view what I have read on the FL case differently in regards to what happened.

[BigK]

"Bringing a gun to noise complaint" isn't the issue here, IMO. Brandishing that gun is. From what I could see/hear, I don't see any defense for him to have his gun "out" or confronting them at all.

According to the video, he'd been complaining to cops all evening. I didn't hear anything about the police responding to any of those calls, but they may have. So, I'm assuming that if they did respond, they partiers turned the music down before the cops arrived or after the cops told them to. Maybe they turned the music back up as soon as the cops left, who knows?

Regardless, you can't go take the law into your own hands, brandishing a weapon. Who does he think he is? John Wesley Hardin? I don't care how loud the party was, sane people shouldn't assume that warrants using a gun to get some music turned down.

[DaveTN]

I agree, but the crime may have been assault and battery, or even attempted murder on the part of Martin. You can't say, and neither can I. The liberals have already decided, but as usual, it's based on all the wrong things. I'm not calling you one of them, BTW.

The victim ain't always the one that got shot. The tough part about the whole case is the fact that there's no evidence to decide the case conclusively. Who really started the violent confrontation?

Do you not agree that Zimmerman screwed up when he got out of his truck and started chasing this kid, saying “They always get away� Do you agree that that was more than stopping him on the street and asking what he was doing? Do you think it’s possible that Martin was scared crapless? Do you think that it’s possible he saw the gun? Do you think it’s possible he was simply defending himself in the only way he had available to him?

I don’t think the state will get a conviction on murder charges, what he did was manslaughter, but I don’t know if they will have that option available to them. He acted in a reckless manner with willful disregard for the safety of others.

How many jurors will be used in the Zimmerman case? It is my understanding that because it is not a capital case it will be six? Six might reach a verdict, but I don’t see how as polarized as the two sides of this case are twelve jurors being able to reach a verdict. But who knows…. When they get to see all the evidence and listen to the witnesses in person, they may be able to reach a decision in an hour.

Edited June 10, 2012 by DaveTN

[mikegideon]

Do you not agree that Zimmerman screwed up when he got out of his truck and started chasing this kid, saying “They always get away� Do you agree that that was more than stopping him on the street and asking what he was doing? Do you think it’s possible that Martin was scared crapless? Do you think that it’s possible he saw the gun? Do you think it’s possible he was simply defending himself in the only way he had available to him?

I don’t think the state will get a conviction on murder charges, what he did was manslaughter, but I don’t know if they will have that option available to them. He acted in a reckless manner with willful disregard for the safety of others.

How many jurors will be used in the Zimmerman case? It is my understanding that because it is not a capital case it will be six? Six might reach a verdict, but I don’t see how as polarized as the two sides of this case are twelve jurors being able to reach a verdict. But who knows…. When they get to see all the evidence and listen to the witnesses in person, they may be able to reach a decision in an hour.

Yes, I agree he screwed up. He probably would too. "Chasing" is your word. "Following" was the word used on the tape.We don't even know that Zimmerman stopped him. It could have happened the way Zimmerman said, since there IS evidence that Martin was into street fighting, and other elements of thug culture. Martin scared crapless??? Nope, can't picture that. No, I don't think he saw the gun. Zimmerman may have been confused about some stuff, but not about that part of Florida law. Defending himself from what??? Zimmerman's face beating the hell out of his knuckles?

[DaveTN]

It could have happened the way Zimmerman said, since there IS evidence that Martin was into street fighting, and other elements of thug culture.

Zimmerman was charged with resisting arrest with violence and battery on a Police Officer. The two felony charges were dismissed when he agreed to enter an alcohol treatment program. His girlfriend accused him of Domestic Violence and had an order of protection against him. Is the jury going to be allowed to hear that? If the defense starts attacking the victim for past bad acts they will.

[mikegideon]

Zimmerman was charged with resisting arrest with violence and battery on a Police Officer. The two felony charges were dismissed when he agreed to enter an alcohol treatment program. His girlfriend accused him of Domestic Violence and had an order of protection against him. Is the jury going to be allowed to hear that? If the defense starts attacking the victim for past bad acts they will.

I'm not on the jury. I'm on TGO . Sure, I've looked at those two, and tried to speculate what happened. Scraps with girlfriends and off duty cops don't matter to me, especially since the charges were dismissed. Thugginess matters. I've seen lots of it. You see candy and iced tea. I see the crime scene picture where it wasn't tea at all (Crump and the media polishing the evidence again). I don't even care that Trayvon was catching a buzz. It is important to me that abuse of that particular drug can cause psychosis.

We'll just have to see how it shakes out when Angela Beefalo gets her reelection trial.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Even if the jury is instructed to ignore it, you know everyone on the planet already knows it. It's going to boil

down to which version of events took place after the last phone to the police.

[mikegideon]

Even if the jury is instructed to ignore it, you know everyone on the planet already knows it. It's going to boil

down to which version of events took place after the last phone to the police.

...and the presumption of innocence, which the MSM just totally ignored.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Exactly!

[mikegideon]

I have developed a deep hatred for those folks. I hope they all get herpes

[Guest 6.8 AR]

They've done a great injustice to the whole situation. Playing up an agenda with this SYG isn't nice.

I doubt it will get any traction. They can't prop Obama up with Bill chiming in against him, so they have

to move to something else in the commie media toolkit.

Edited June 10, 2012 by 6.8 AR

[mikegideon]

HERE'S what they've done. Read the comments...

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/10/us/alabama-university-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

[DaveTN]

HERE'S what they've done. Read the comments...

http://www.cnn.com/2....html?hpt=hp_t1

I don’t get what you mean? I saw some racist comments and some people being jerks, but I don’t see much information one way or the other in the story. They named a suspect, say they have a warrant for Capitol Murder, and are refusing to discuss motive. I’m not sure, but best I can tell everyone involved is black. So I'm not sure how the KKK and Southern Racist Rednecks remarks apply.... but whatever. You had to laugh a little bit at the scrabble and “Mexicant†comment. Is it racist for me to laugh at that?

3 dead 3 wounded at a party, I’m pretty sure this isn’t going to turn into a SYG case. But you never know. That story is the first, and only info I have seen about this.

Edited June 10, 2012 by DaveTN

[mikegideon]

I don’t get what you mean? I saw some racist comments and some people being jerks, but I don’t see much information one way or the other in the story. They named a suspect, say they have a warrant for Capitol Murder, and are refusing to discuss motive. I’m not sure, but best I can tell everyone involved is black. So I'm not sure how the KKK and Southern Racist Rednecks remarks apply.... but whatever. You had to laugh a little bit at the scrabble and “Mexicant†comment. Is it racist for me to laugh at that?

3 dead 3 wounded at a party, I’m pretty sure this isn’t going to turn into a SYG case. But you never know. That story is the first, and only info I have seen about this.

I was talking about all the racist comments. That's something that has been turned way up in the last few months. The bad news is that our society is in a lot worse shape as as result of this whole mess. The up side is that Crump, Sharpton, and the other baiters are helping get a blindingly white cracker elected as president.

I'm not gonna mourn over society's woes right now if it will help send Obammy's ass packin'.

Regarding the story... it's just another idiot thinking you can shoot somebody over nothing. I think it's bad news. It's also pretty common these days.

Edited June 10, 2012 by mikegideon

[DaveTN]

I was talking about all the racist comments. That's something that has been turned way up in the last few months. The bad news is that our society is in a lot worse shape as as result of this whole mess. The up side is that Crump, Sharpton, and the other baiters are helping get a blindingly white cracker elected as president.

I'm not gonna mourn over society's woes right now if it will help send Obammy's ass packin'.

Regarding the story... it's just another idiot thinking you can shoot somebody over nothing. I think it's bad news. It's also pretty common these days.

I can understand the racial tension in Florida. When this first came out it was being posted that the cops and the DA weren’t interested in this case and it was a cover up. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The cops wanted to arrest him, but the DA said no. I have no idea if racism was involved in the DA’s decision; unless someone that knows him personally came forward, we would have no way to know that. What I do know is that he made a bad decision; a homicide was committed against a person that was not involved in a crime, and a self-defense argument was being made. Based on the evidence and opinions of the investigating Officers a trial was warranted. Now I am fully aware that he is not required to file charges if he doesn’t want to. But it certainly makes no sense to me why he would do that unless he thought this kid was a thug that deserved killing.

However… he answers to the Attorney General of the state (who apparently was asleep somewhere while all this was going on), who answers to the Governor. The Governor gave him a no confidence vote and sent someone else in to do the job. For the Governor (or the Attorney General) to stand by and watch while this botched investigation unfolded would have been criminal. They did the right thing. Did they do it for the right reasons? Who knows, I would like to think they did? Was racial unrest a factor in his making his decision? Of course it was. Anyone that remembers what happened when the cops that beat Rodney King were acquitted has reason to make that a factor. Those cops were guilty. 53 people died and 2000 were injured because of those Officers and those trying to protect them. The Feds had to step in and try to make it right. Contrary to anyone’s belief that double jeopardy protects you from being charged twice in this country… that is exactly what happened. Two of those Officers were sent to prison.

Is this going to be the 92 LA Riots all over again? Well, the stage is certainly set. Will it be a factor in the juror’s decisions? In a perfect world it shouldn’t be, but I don’t see how it couldn’t be. I don’t think it would have gotten out of hand if it had been handled properly from the beginning. But then hindsight is 20/20.

This non-sense that SYG allows a person to commit murder because they are scared and that they have no responsibility or accountability as to why and how it started is going to be put on trial.

Edited June 10, 2012 by DaveTN

[mikegideon]

What botched investigation??? AFIK, all the core evidence came from the original investigation by the Sanford PD. The rest is ALL politics.

[DaveTN]

What botched investigation??? AFIK, all the core evidence came from the original investigation by the Sanford PD. The rest is ALL politics.

By botched investigation I was talking about the DA’s handling of it; not the PD’s investigation. The DA did not seek an arrest warrant or file charges against Zimmerman. The DA recused himself the same day the Chief stepped aside. Rumor is because he and the Chief met the night of the shooting and decided to override the investigators request and cut Zimmerman loose. The rest may be all politics, or it may be damage control for bad decisions.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

The original DA said no case was to be had here. I

think he got it right, the first time. This circus is going

to make things worse. Hell, it's already worse and

there hasn't been a trial.

Anything goes. You go, Auburn!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bubbiesdad]

I can understand the racial tension in Florida. When this first came out it was being posted that the cops and the DA weren’t interested in this case and it was a cover up. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The cops wanted to arrest him, but the DA said no. I have no idea if racism was involved in the DA’s decision; unless someone that knows him personally came forward, we would have no way to know that. What I do know is that he made a bad decision; a homicide was committed against a person that was not involved in a crime, and a self-defense argument was being made. Based on the evidence and opinions of the investigating Officers a trial was warranted. Now I am fully aware that he is not required to file charges if he doesn’t want to. But it certainly makes no sense to me why he would do that unless he thought this kid was a thug that deserved killing.

However… he answers to the Attorney General of the state (who apparently was asleep somewhere while all this was going on), who answers to the Governor. The Governor gave him a no confidence vote and sent someone else in to do the job. For the Governor (or the Attorney General) to stand by and watch while this botched investigation unfolded would have been criminal. They did the right thing. Did they do it for the right reasons? Who knows, I would like to think they did? Was racial unrest a factor in his making his decision? Of course it was. Anyone that remembers what happened when the cops that beat Rodney King were acquitted has reason to make that a factor. Those cops were guilty. 53 people died and 2000 were injured because of those Officers and those trying to protect them. The Feds had to step in and try to make it right. Contrary to anyone’s belief that double jeopardy protects you from being charged twice in this country… that is exactly what happened. Two of those Officers were sent to prison.

Is this going to be the 92 LA Riots all over again? Well, the stage is certainly set. Will it be a factor in the juror’s decisions? In a perfect world it shouldn’t be, but I don’t see how it couldn’t be. I don’t think it would have gotten out of hand if it had been handled properly from the beginning. But then hindsight is 20/20.

This non-sense that SYG allows a person to commit murder because they are scared and that they have no responsibility or accountability as to why and how it started is going to be put on trial.

Those people died and were injured because of animal behavior by animal citizens.