The way I view this is from the trial basis, not the speculation or the bigger picture. The prosecution didn't successfully convince the jury that Zimmerman acted in a way that would be considered manslaughter or murder. Second degree murder was a huge stretch, manslaughter less so, but still, I think the prosecution reached for too much. They had high profile case and they went too far. I'm sure there's a lesser charge he could've been convicted of, but because of the high profile nature of the case, I think the state reached too far.
It goes back to stand your ground and castle doctrine. That's why it applies in the home or car, mostly. Basically, if you kill a bad guy in your home or injure a carjacker and you're justified in doing so, the bad guy or the family of the deceased can't try to take everything from you in civil court. Zimmerman's situation is different because he was not in his home or car, so he may not be protected at all. He probably isn't. The defense said they would seek some kind of immunity. Doubt that will happen.
How is it NOT aggression? See, that is where you and most people seem to disagree. If someone is following me all night, staring at me, watching me, while I am alone, walking in the dark, I am probably going to be scared and feel like the guy is acting in an aggressive/menacing manner. You don't seem to comprehend that, maybe, *gasp* Treyvon was scared for HIS life with some dude following him in the dark, and waiting til no one was around to approach him, so when the guy approaches, Treyvon goes to defend himself from what he (being a scared 17 year old walking alone in the dark) perceives a threat from a guy that has been slowly following him. Treyvon didn't know if that guy was there to mug him, fight him, or kill him. Treyvon had no idea who this guy was that was following him and, then, approaching him. Never mind that Zimmerman had a gun, maybe Treyvon noticed and thought "holy fuck this dude is going to mug me!" or he didn't see the gun but still thought "this dude has been following me and clearly he means to do me some kind of harm," and he took a swing. You're quick to put yourself in Zimmerman's shoes, but you seem completely incapable of putting yourself in Martin's.
So apparently this does apply to civil court, but Zimmerman would have a huge uphill battle in invoking it. He failed to invoke stand-your-ground during criminal trial, and to the best of my knowledge, he would have to show that a preponderance of evidence demonstrates that he did not initiate the fight or harass Martin. The law covers actions in public places, but does not cover the aggressor.
Child support and alimony payments aren't allowed to be discharged by the court so I'm fairly certain wrongful death suits aren't as well.
What are you talking about? I'm not putting myself in anyone's shoes. Read the law. Listen to the evidence. Apply the law. Simple.
Proper interpretation of the law in this instance requires putting yourself in someone's shoes, as it requires ascertaining a reasonable state of mind for both parties. So yes, you are when you state that George Zimmerman had reason to believe he was in danger. D26 is saying that as a black male being followed by a larger stranger (who likely appeared to be white) after dark with no witnesses, Martin also had some degree of cause to believe he was in danger.
Why does race play a part in this? Would his reaction be different if it were a large asian man or a large black man?
Oh come on. You can't possibly be confused as to why a black man would be worried about the threat of violence and harassment from white men in the South. Is there a long history of large asian men committing hate crimes against black men with little to no cause? If there were, then yes, it would be reasonable for a young black man to view the situation with trepidation.
On the west coast there are plenty of asian gangs who target black gangs. Remember the LA riots? The Koreans shot at black men who wandered into their community. Its there, but its not as publicized. Kind of like Mexican-black rivalry.
Was Trayvon Martin in an area frequented by Asian gangs who were likely to mistake him for a gang member? I imagine if he were, he would be wary of such an encounter, but he was not.
Re: Re: Friday Sober Thread: The George Zimmerman Trial First of all Florida is not the South. I hope I'm not being that naive, but you really think that is a justifiable fear to have in 2013?
A slightly different but good point. No one knows who started the fight, which falls in Zimmerman's favor.
I doubt they care whether the white people know the proper season for wearing seersucker. The usual nope-that-ain't-True-Dixie nitpicking is largely irrelevant here. Is fear of death reasonable? Probably not, but who knows. This one even occurred in the same town a few years earlier. But fear of bad shit happening (harassment, non-lethal assault, arrest, abuse by police officers, police violence, etc.)? Yeah. It's the sort of thing you come to expect after decades of the shit end of the stick. I'm not suggesting that it's cause to attack anyone. I'm merely suggesting that this is a scary-as-hell situation for someone in Martin's shoes, who knows damn well that historically bad things have happened to people that look like him because they "look suspicious" or otherwise offend someone's sensibilities. You already had one black man in this thread tell you that this sort of thing makes him "pretty terrified." His isn't some kind of freak, way-outside-the-norm reaction and he isn't terrified that this is going to give him indigestion. This is an actual, widespread fear.
There is absolutely no way he could have noticed a gun in the dark in the rain. Unless you're trained to look for firearms, the average person will never see one underneath someones clothes. It sucks a young man died and my heart goes out to his family, but it still doesn't make it right to start a fight with Zimmerman, even if he was being followed. I can certainly see why Martin would feel he was being followed in an aggressive manner, but again you don't just throw a punch based on a look or because you're being followed.
Zimmerman is acquitted. I've stayed quiet this whole time, but now I'll throw my .02 in: I think Zimmerman is a busybody. But the law was on his side. That is all.
Lots of hypotheticals in this thread. If your entire argument consists of comparing one situation to a bunch of completely different, unrelated and made up situations, you probably don't have a legitimate point to make. Zimmerman is a complete idiot who probably should not own a gun and possibly a murderer, but there was no way he should have gone to jail based on what is known. Anyways, where do I sign up for the riots?
I can't be the only one a little sick of the presumption of riots right? I mean you can post retard twitter post all you want but I never thought that black people would end up rioting and the presumption and push it has got from the media whores makes me sick.