General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFrom this photo of Zimmerman, is it credible that he was defending himself against Trayvon Martin?
How likely is it that Trayvon Martin initiated any attack against him?
It's been said that Zimmerman was mixed-martial arts practitioner and 40-pounds heavier than the unarmed 17-year-old.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Pelican
(1,156 posts)Response to Pelican (Reply #1)
allin99 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)
NutmegYankee
(16,478 posts)No doubt nervous of his future behind bars...
spin
(17,493 posts)George Zimmerman’s Weight Gain Due to Stress and Emotional Eating
Contributor: “Dr. J”
Dr. J offers his irreverent, slightly irrelevant, but possibly useful opinions on health and fitness. A Florida surgeon and fitness freak with a black belt in karate, he runs 50 miles a week and flies a Cherokee Arrow 200.
I don’t know how many of you are following the murder trial in Sanford, Florida, but irrespective of how it turns out for the defendant George Zimmerman, one thing we can all agree on is he sure has gotten fat since that terrible night and his shooting of Trayvon Martin.
In fact, he has gained over 120 pounds in the span of 16 months! At the time of his arrest according to police records, George Zimmerman weighed about 195 pounds (although I suspect, as this was self-reported, that he weighed less from looking at the before photo). Now he weighs in at more than 300 pounds. At 5 feet 8 inches, his BMI has gone from an overweight 29.6 to a morbidly obese 47.9.
That’s a gain of about 7.5 pounds per month, or almost two pounds a week and comes to a whopping 420,000 calories in with zero calories out. That’s equal to eating the equivalent of 617 Wendy’s 680 calorie, 1.100 mg sodium, pretzel bacon cheeseburgers, although I do not recommend eating even one of those.
http://calorielab.com/news/2013/07/03/george-zimmermans-weight-gain-due-to-stress-and-emotional-eating/
l
To be totally fair the pictures of Trayvon Martin that you see on the news are usually of a much younger teenager.
Are old photos of Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman deceptive?
31Mar 2012
5:59am, EDT
By The Associated Press
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. -- When he was shot, Trayvon Martin was not the baby-faced boy in the photo that has been on front pages across the country. And George Zimmerman wasn't the beefy-looking figure in the widely published mugshot.
Both photos are a few years old and no longer entirely accurate. Yet they may have helped shape initial public perceptions of the deadly shooting.
When you have such a lopsided visual comparison, it just stands to reason that people would rush to judgment," said Kenny Irby, who teaches visual journalism at the Poynter Institute, a journalism think tank in St. Petersburg, Fla.
The most widely seen picture of Martin, released by his family, was evidently taken a few years ago and shows a smiling, round-cheeked youngster in a red T-shirt. But at his death, Martin was 17 years old, around 6 feet tall and, according to his family's attorney, about 140 pounds.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/03/31/10952926-are-old-photos-of-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-deceptive?lite
I should point out that I am merely saying that the pictures you often see are misleading but have nothing to do with the facts in the case.
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)And every picture of Trayvon looks like a kid to me. He had a baby face and well, he was a kid because 17 is still a child. He had just turned 17-his birthday was 2/5 and he was killed on 2/26.
Response to Just Saying (Reply #31)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Response to Name removed (Reply #43)
NoGOPZone This message was self-deleted by its author.
spin
(17,493 posts)but I will point out that he could have joined the army with the consent of his parents at his age of 17.
That in no way means that I support what Zimmerman did that night. Had he followed the instructions of the police dispatcher, Martin would have been alive today.
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)He can't vote, sign a contract or do basically anything without parental consent including as you mentioned, joining the military. Although, I think kids attending high school have to be within so many month of graduation and if I'm not mistaken he was only a sophomore so I'm not even sure if he was able to join yet.
At any rate it's not that important since there's really no disputing he was legally a child.
spin
(17,493 posts)I personally know a 17 year old girl who is legally emancipated.
Emancipation of minors
An emancipated minor is a minor who is allowed to conduct a business or any other occupation on his or her own behalf or for their own account outside the influence of a parent or guardian. The minor will then have full contractual capacity to conclude contract with regard to the business. Whether parental consent is needed to achieve the "emancipated" status varies from case to case. In some cases, court permission is necessary. Protocols vary by jurisdiction.
Emancipation of minors is a legal mechanism by which a minor is freed from control by his or her parents or guardians, and the parents or guardians are freed from any and all responsibility toward the child. Until an emancipation is granted by a court, a minor is still subject to the rules of their parents or guardians. In some cases, emancipation can be granted without due court granting when the minor is bound to make a decision for themselves in the absence of their parents (who may be already dead or who may have abandoned the minor).
***snip***
Minors are under the control of their parents or legal guardians, until they attain the age of majority, at which point they become legal adults. In most states this is either 18 years old, or requires the person be either both 18 and out of high school or at least 20 years old. However, in special circumstances, minors can be freed from control by their guardian before turning 18.
The exact laws and protocols for obtaining emancipation vary from state to state. In most states, minors must file a petition with the family court in the applicable jurisdiction, formally requesting emancipation and citing reasons it is in their best interest to be emancipated. Minors must prove financial self-sufficiency. In some states, free legal aid is available to minors seeking emancipation, through children's law centers. This can be a valuable resource for minors trying to create a convincing emancipation petition. Students are able to stay with a guardian if necessary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_of_minors
I will agree that legally Martin was a child. My point in reply #20 was that the media's use of pictures of Zimmerman and Martin that were several years old could be considered deceptive or misleading.
As I have stated I do not support Zimmerman's actions but the reality is that had he encountered the younger baby faced Martin shown in the older picture he might have approached the situation in a far different manner. Of course had he followed the advise of the police dispatcher we would not be discussing emancipated minors.
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)And yes while pictures can be deceptive I don't see Trayvons that way. He looks like a kid to me in all of them. That's my opinion and I have every right to it.
spin
(17,493 posts)Trayvon was a kid and I feel Zimmerman was largely at fault. I think we basically agree on that.
We are simply wasting electrons debating if a 17 year old can be emancipated in special circumstances.
FarPoint
(14,763 posts)is the best depiction. He is just a gangly, growing teenage looking every bit 16-17 years old. I re-read Z's 911 call and he himself identifies Trayvon as a teenager. He knew it was a kid. 
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)To make him look fat and out of shape.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)If this Zimmerman were following you, you'd likely think he was a just nosy neighborhood asshole. But the Z in the photos from that time - thinner, shaved head, mean ass look on his face - DO make him look threatening AND creepy.
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)It's something in his eyes. 
But I agree that he looks less like the vigilante that he is with the extra weight on him.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)
Crabby Appleton
(5,231 posts)He's gained a lot of weight.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)Trayvon Martin weighed 158 and was 4 inches taller. Z trained 3 days per week in MMA. We know all of this from police and medical records. Zimmerman wasn't just some pudgy guy who carried a gun and got waylaid, he was a martial arts enthusiast, who was armed, and regularly reported black people as suspicious to the police.
RedstDem
(1,239 posts)you don't "defend" yourself when you initiate contact. TM is the only one that could defend himself in that senario.
GZ was playing offense.
... he can initiate the contact.
There are even circumstances where he could initiate violence and the fight can transition to the other person being the aggressor.
RedstDem
(1,239 posts)but not logically
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)...you acknowledge this fact, surrender, and your surrender is refused.
Per the photos, which took weeks (IIRC) to emerge, the injuries visible "immediately after" the incident, do not warrant a deadly force COUNTER defence. I've done worse to myself straightening up under a luggage rack.
And,yes, those are air quotes. Photos WE DAMNED WELL KNOW were taken on the night of the event, DO NOT show injuries visible in photographs logged into evidence only when Zimmerman was formally charged.
I'm certainly not trying to make a direct comparison between situations, because there isn't one, but lets say you're out in a parking lot at night and someone walks up close to you holding a beer bottle and talking about how he is going to crack your skull open.
You'd be perfectly within your legal right to bust his nose wide open before even even laid a finger on you.
The person who initiates contact is not always the aggressor.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)Which means either independent witness, or recording(s) to confirm the offer of violence, OR your showing injury prior to any injury you deal out. You have to prove intent on your opponents behalf, else you only demonstrate it on your own.
Or, apparently in America, have a lower melanin level than them, in which case every standard of proof is reversed. Fortunately, that (and then some) is hopefully the case here. AND fucking sad it is that that requires a double qualifier.
JI7
(93,614 posts)that's the first thing i would do if i was in that situation. but i think he wanted to start something.
targetpractice
(4,919 posts)He's not as dumb as he seems. He didn't want to break the Neighborhood Watch rules. He wanted to nab a thug and be a hero.
He didn't identify himself to 911 as Neighborhood Watch either on that night, whereas he had done so on the dozens of other calls he made.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)He's made threats against coworkers. He's beaten up his fiancé, a strange woman at a bar, and an undercover cop. He's molested, allegedly but believably, a family member. He's gotten away with EVERYTHING.
You're right: he's not as dumb as he seems.
targetpractice
(4,919 posts)It's all about HIM and HIS suspicions, HIS judgements, HIS goals, HIS sorrow. He has no regrets, no accountability, no remorse.
For me two things reveal his depravity…
First, the interview with Sean Hannity… Zimmerman claimed his deeds were "God's plan", he would not have changed his actions, he had no regrets, and he "hoped it's [the killing Trayvon] the the most difficult thing I'll ever go through in my life."
Second, is the fact (from the Det. Serino interview) that he planned to go the beach with his wife five days after killing an innocent kid.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)The very next morning.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)I believe Martin was about 6' and 160#. Zimmerman was 5'8" and 185#.
anneboleyn
(5,626 posts)Martin weighed in the mid 140-150 range. Zimmerman had a fifty pound weight advantage then. He now weighs over 300 pounds. The p.a. who examined Zimmerman WHEN the incident happened stated that his weight was 204 pounds. She testified at the beginning of the trial.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)185 from somewhere, but I did not realize it was not the same as the night of the shooting.
There is no reason for you to minimize Martin's weight. The 158 is from the M.E.
targetpractice
(4,919 posts)…according to the police and medical examiner reports. Also, Zimmerman's personal physician's assistant stated that he weighed 204 lbs. the day after the shooting.
http://media.miamiherald.com/smedia/2012/07/03/15/01/2uxIe.So.56.pdf
Zimmerman lost weight and weighed 185 lbs when he was arrested on April 11, 2012.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)targetpractice
(4,919 posts)But, as you wrote there is no need to minimize anyone's build. Let's be precise.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)minimizing. Martin's family described him as 6'. I am not defending Zimmerman but to describe Martin as 140# is not factual.0
targetpractice
(4,919 posts)The poster who described Trayvon as 140-150 lbs was wrong. And, you were also wrong when you claimed Zimmerman that was 185 lbs (minimizing his weight by 15-19 lbs).
Zimmerman was 5 inches shorter and 42-46 lbs heavier than Trayvon and armed with a single-action 9mm handgun, fully loaded with eight hollow point bullets. Trayvon was was 5 inches taller and 42-46 lbs lighter than Zimmerman and not armed.
What is your point now that you know the facts? Did Trayvon have some kind of lethal advantage by being taller and lighter than Zimmerman?
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)the incedent, just the part about body height and weight. I already acknowledged that Zimmerman lost weight between the night of the shooting and when he was weighed (which is curious since by all accounts he has gained a lot of weight since he apparently lost 19 pounds).
I had no point other than pointing out the facts, as I knew them.
Did you not read where I said I was not a Zimmerman supporter? I am on record on these Zimmerman/Martin threads as posting that I think Zimmerman should have only been armed with a cell phone and maybe some pepper spray. I am not a big fan of these kinds of neighborhood 'watch' groups going back to the Guardian Angels crap from years ago.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)...from that correction.
I won't call you a Zimmerman supporter. I might call you something else, given the apparent reluctance you show in admitting the black kid WAS NOT IN THE WRONG.
Try this on for a scenario, Fat boy Z (5'8", 204 lb IS a big boy) keeps up his training after the incident, because he was chuffed at his success at taking out "one of them" and buoyed by that "success" and then/apparent approval of the authorities, got his weight down to within shouting distance of a healthy BMI. AFTER he was charged, anxiety took over and he ballooned back out and then beyond to 300 plus and morbid obesity.
- Facts are simple:
- FACT: An ARMED ADULT chased down an UNARMED CHILD;
- FACT: That armed adult provoked a confrontation with the unarmed child;
- FACT: That armed adult shot and killed that unarmed child.
- FACT: Zimmerman was operating under a number of PREJUDICIAL misapprehensions, which "benefit of the doubters" excuse as legitimate.
- FACT: Zimmerman had multiple opportunities to modify his behaviour in a manner which ABSOLUTELY FUCKING GUARANTEED left a LIVE teenager to go home to watch the rest of the game with his dad.
Speculation repeatedly offered as an out for Zimmerman and in criticism of Trayvon. The BLACK KID DOING NOTHING WRONG, should have submitted to whatever demands the WHITER individual (WITH HIS SECOND AMENDMENT substitute for gonads) made and everything would have been copacetic.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)the black kid was not in the wrong. Where the do you get off preaching to me? I have written NOTHING in support of Zimmerman and I have written NOTHING negative about Martin. I try to keep objective while following this case and try to keep to the facts as we know them, not what we presume them to be.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)...just plain do not deserve "equal time".
The only possible way to put Trayvon Martin on equal footing with George Zimmerman is to allow Zimmerman his prejudices towards youth, blacks or both.
Whether you realise it or not, what you just now said is very close to the Faux News position of presenting "both sides" of what is a single sided argument.
Zimmerman made a multitude of bad decisions which lead to a dead kid. THIS WE KNOW OUT OF HIS OWN MOUTH. What he believed to be the case is totally fucking irrelevant, HE WAS WRONG IN HIS BELIEFS! A CHILD died because of Zimmerman prejudged Martin as a threat with no evidence, bar his own antipathy to youths, blacks or both.
The only decision we can be certain Martin made, is that he did not submit to whatever demands Zimmerman might have made of him. Right up to the point where he MIGHT have said words along the line of, "Fuck you charlie, you want some, here have some." Martin DID NOTHING WRONG! And we only have Zimmerman's word that Martin actually turned and confronted him.
At the point Martin MAY have said "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH" Zimmerman STILL HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISENGAGE. Zimmerman did not. He was so blindly convinced that he was in the right, he pushed the confrontation to the point of physical altercation.
HERE. Let me make things clear by first admitting of myself, that which I accuse you.
I AM A RACIST.
The difference is, I reserve my racism for those individuals who voluntarily choose to live up to the worst stereotypes attributed to them. I am a racist who will attack my own, as soon as I would the likes of Chappelle.
You, you're just the common garden run of the mill xenophobe, and I have absolutely no expectation that you will have read this far. Nor do I have any great expectation of influencing your mode of thought. I simply hold to the faint hope that one or two others might stop and think before giving into baseless prejudice.
If I have wronged you and you have read this far, them please I implore you, go back and read past the point where you said you left off, and you truly might understand where I am coming from.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)I wrote a post about a couple facts of the case. That's all I did. I do not wish to engage you in this crap. If we were having this conversation in person, you'd be on the floor by now. I just saw you last paragraph as I write this. I do not wish to know where you are coming from.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)I WILL defend your right to spout bigotry in the guise of fairness, but I will be damned, before I allow it to stand unopposed.
The only possible way to put Trayvon Martin on equal footing with George Zimmerman is to allow Zimmerman his prejudices towards youth, blacks or both.
WHETHER OR NOT TRAYVON MARTIN COMMITTED A CRIME IN THE VERY LAST MOMENTS OF HIS LIFE, HE COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE COMMITTED THAT HYPOTHETICAL CRIME IF GEORGE ZIMMERMAN HAD NOT FORCED THE SITUATION.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)If person X conducts a legal act that results in person Y conducting an illegal act, it is really Xs fault?
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)...them because they won't surrender?
Trayvon went to the shops to buy some snacks. He was dead before he got home. Just let me point out at this point, in case you are somehow unaware, INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY is a foundation stone of US jurisprudence.
Zimmerman due to prejudicial thinking, demonstrated by a significant and extended pattern of behaviour, (need I specify MULTIPLE NEVER PROVEN reports against BLACK people(here in Australia we call that a vexatious complainant, to whom we apply the "cry wolf" test) ENTIRELY ON HIS OWN PART, misidentified the BLACK KID as a potential offender, and then behaved as if the BLACK KID was an offender in fact as well as potentia.
HE STALKED THE KID!
The kid has still not committed any crime.
All we have is one utterly unreliable eye witness who finally admitted to having no idea of what he was witnessing and George Zimmerman's allegations that Trayvon offered physical threat to his person.
Meow, we have two people in a clinch. One who seconds earlier was walking home to his father with a drink and some lollies in his pocket and another with a gun on his belt, who had pursued the first with (at best) an erroneous evaluation of his quarry. At worst a straight up assumption of guilt based upon skin colour, age and/or choice of apparel alone.
And then the kid is shot dead.
The BEST possible interpretation we can put on Zimmerman's actions is that HE forced the situation until it blew up in his face and he responded by shooting a kid dead.
So: 1) I do not accept your premise that Zimmerman was within his rights to hound Trayvon into a confrontation; and 2) Nor do I accept that a BLACK kid cannot be in fear of his life and legitimately (LEGALLY) defend himself in the face of a PALER stalker with a gun.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)anything on this post so that it will be hidden, but it might be worth it.
Probably at least 10 times I have written on these threads that Zimmerman should not have had a gun while on his neighborhood watch. He should have been armed with only a cell phone and pepper spray for self-defense.
Please do me a favor, please provide a link to any of my posts about the Zimmerman trial where I have "spouted bigotry in the guise of fairness".
I'm not even going to put an alert on your post. I want everyone to read how apparently you are unarmed in a battle of intelligence.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)And the reason why I have accused/labeled you with an appellation no one should welcome is the manner in which you have afforded Zimmerman the benefit of the doubt, whilst simultaneously allowing that Trayvon may have been the partial author of his own demise.
And in truth I have to thank you for forcing me into a re-evaluation of myself on another subject, that more than a couple of other DU'ers might thank you for.
LIVING WHILE BLACK is not a single whit different to PARTYING WHILE FEMALE.
I know that one of the reasons I can come across as so abrasive, is that I CAN AND WILL see both sides of an argument, but once I come down on one side of the other, I will become aggressively militant, even while I retain an intellectual appreciation of the dismissed viewpoint.
I've made a lot of enemies in feminist circles, because whilst I appreciate and fully support the rights of women to dress and do as they please, I also do understand the mindset of the males who prey upon them. I don't agree with or support in any way that mindset, I simply refuse to deny that I UNDERSTAND it.
I will apologise unreservedly on one proviso, that you apply a humanistic, rather than legalistic interpretation to the Martin - Zimmerman situation.
Yes, I can find the specious but fallacious argument that Trayvon could/might have saved his life by acceding to Zimmerman's demands, (this presuming he made any, and did not proceed straight to the physical) but I'll be damned to the hells I don't believe in before I will countenance it.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)keep your babbling to yourself. You have called me a bigot without any evidence.
You have just said I have afforded Zimmerman 'the benefit of the doubt' when in fact I did not. I have written nothing that could be construed to be in support of Zimmerman.
I have written nothing that says or implies that I believe Martin "may have been the partial author of his own demise."
What the hell is the matter with you?
What do your feminist circles have to do with me or this thread?
These are rhetorical questions, please, please do not respond. I do not have the energy to read and/or respond to your nuttery.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)You merely danced around irrelevancies, and refused to look at certain stipulations of known demonstrable facts.
I may have read too much into that, and assigned you guilt more properly due others, but I was mad, a little drunk and you were there. For that I apologise.
However, I do not apologise for what I wrote, even if you were not the person it should have legitimately been directed at.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)supporting posts and you refuse to apologise?
I was dancing around nothing. You teplied with babbling posts about feminists you have pissed off and other crap I am not interested in. I do not need to toe whatever line it is that you seem to be dancing on. I have written NOTHING here that deserves the crap I have recieved from you.
I am being generous in not alerting on you. I neither alert nor do I ignore anyone, although you came close to being the first on my ignore list.
What the hell is the matter with you? How did you get damaged so badly? You seem to be carrying immense baggage which you seem to use to take verbal jabs at me. Again, hese questions are rhetorical. I wish no further responses or replies from you unless it is a mea culpa from you on how nutty and outlandish and extremly damning with no evidence (with intent?) have been your posts to me on this thread.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)I apologise again. I was mad, a bit drunk, and directed at you, things which should have been said to other people. Again I am sorry for that.
I am not sorry for the things that I said.
I AM SORRY THAT I SAID THEM TO YOU!
Is that clear enough?
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)You last paragraph seemed as if it was also directed at me.
"However, I do not apologise for what I wrote, even if you were not the person it should have legitimately been directed at."
There is no need for further explanation.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)9:37am. Unless you are on a continent other than North America and you were 'a little drunk' at that time of the day, I suggest a 12-step program is in order.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)let's not almost double the difference in height from what it actually was.
Martin was 3" taller than Zimmerman.
targetpractice
(4,919 posts)Math was never my strong point, especially after cocktails.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)it inevitably leads to embarrassment. 
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)targetpractice
(4,919 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Last edited Sun Jul 7, 2013, 01:37 PM - Edit history (1)
Their whole approach is down right disgusting, here and elsewhere.
yardwork
(69,360 posts)To Zimmerman defenders every black male is frightening and dangerous and they believe that they have a right to kill them. It's the same mentality as the KKK and it's disgusting.
brush
(61,033 posts)The killer, that would be zimmerman, has put on tons of weigh since the murder. Campaigning for money online, allegedly for attorney's fees, from gullible supporters has its benefits I guess.
I understand he also paid off his bills with the first influx of cash, and it looks like he never met a fast food joint he didn't try either.
He's put on some 90 pounds since the killing. Now that's what I call living high on the hog, by a hog.
targetpractice
(4,919 posts)… And, he gained 100 lbs to get sympathy from the jury.
TheMadMonk
(6,187 posts)...encouraged him to redouble his efforts at the gym.
And he stacked it on after he was charged, out of perfectly understandable (and deserving) anxiety.
rightsideout
(978 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)Bonx
(2,353 posts)
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)and since his eyes are not puffy from a back-up of blood tissue that routinely accompanies a broken nose, it looks like
1. His nose was broken in the past,
2. He hit himself on one side of the nose with an object which caused the small laceration, and
3. He took his finger and smeared blood on himself.
What object was used to hit the side of his nose to cause some redness and the small laceration? Probably the firearm that he was carrying. The laceration was probably caused by the contact made with the front sight of the gun.
Self-inflicted injuries after the fact do not excuse second-degree murder.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)Maybe they can show the scene from fight club for reference...
Ruby the Liberal
(26,664 posts)a self inflicted wound with the butt of the gun (or gun recoil from when he shot the unarmed child on top of him) - either could have caused that.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)When I'm minding my own business, you'll get a couple punches to the nose too.
Bonx
(2,353 posts)Do you mean physically assault ?
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)Do they have the right to defend themselves?
Bonx
(2,353 posts)If they don't physically assault you, you don't have the right to physically assault them either. It's pretty straightforward.
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)Psycho armed vigilantes that follow you in the dark. And as a female if some guy gets out of his car to follow me behind buildings in the dark, he's going to taste his own balls in his throat.
Self defense isn't just for racist gun nuts.
Enjoy your stay.
Oh and get a dictionary. I'm not going to keep explaining sentences to you.
Bonx
(2,353 posts)Sorry, but the law disagrees.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)I'm going to say it's a safe bet Z didn't approach Martin with an "Excuse me, sir, might I please have a moment of your time?"
spin
(17,493 posts)Technically you do not have a right to defend yourself unless you are attacked.
If you are walking through a strange neighborhood and someone walks up to you and asks why you are there, I would suggest it is wisest to reply in a polite manner. If he attempts to grab you or starts throwing punches, you have the right to resist his attack with appropriate force. If he flashes or draws a weapon, you have the right to fear for your life or health and use a higher level of force in self defense which might mean that you can use lethal force if you are legally carrying a weapon.
If you succeed in stopping his attack, it is wise to discontinue your defense. Basically you do not have the right to beat the shit out of a guy you have defeated or to execute him with your gun after he has stopped trying to hurt or kill you.
Realize that I am not an attorney nor do I play one on TV. Feel free to take my advice or to ignore it.
Ruby the Liberal
(26,664 posts)There is a "reverse self defense" argument in your state - sorry if I am misstating the term for it. Basically, one can be the aggressor, get it handed to you, and STILL be innocent of murder because one bit it off more than they chewed and retaliated in "fear".
Question - I know why this case scares the living shit out of me as a divorced, white female. Why is it so important for you for this assclown to walk?
spin
(17,493 posts)I have stated in several posts in this discussion that I believe that Zimmerman is largely responsible for what happened that night. Had he simply followed the advise of the police dispatcher we would not be having this discussion.
Let's suppose I was in Zimmerman's shoes. I'm driving and I notice a guy wearing a hoodie on a rainy night and acting somewhat suspicious. I live in the neighborhood and I don't recognize him. No big deal, I would simply keep on driving.
But I am not involved in the neighborhood watch. Let's assume that I am and there has been a number of crimes in my neighborhood. I would call the police and support a suspicious individual. If the dispatcher told me to stop following this person, I would. Period!!!
Zimmerman argues that he left his vehicle to determine exactly what street he was on to better guide the police. If I was unsure of exactly where I was at and felt it was extremely important, I would drive my vehicle to nearest street sign and then advise the police. I then would continue on my way. I would not get out of my vehicle and walk to the sign. (For one thing I am a candidate for a hip replacement and I don't walk, I limp.)
But under Florida law as I understand it, Zimmerman had the right to follow and even confront Martin. If Zimmerman simply walked up to Martin and identified himself as a member of the neighborhood watch and asked what he was doing in the neighborhood, he was doing nothing illegal. Stupid possibly but not illegal.
The problem is that we have no way of knowing beyond a reasonable doubt what happened that night. Neither does the jury. Therefore it is quite possible that Zimmerman will get off.
I do wish to see justice. However since I believe in our legal system which requires the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, if I was on the jury I could (at this point) have a difficult time declaring Zimmerman guilty of second degree murder. I thank God that I am not on that jury.
Let's assume that Zimmerman is telling the absolute truth. While I doubt it, it is possible. Should he go to jail for simply defending his life?
On the other hand let's suppose Zimmerman is lying through his teeth which I suspect. Should he walk? Hell no. Unfortunately under our system this might happen.
Still I personally support the basic idea of our system of justice even if it has its faults. The fact that the prosecution has to prove quilt beyond a reasonable doubt seems fair to me. You may well disagree but perhaps you might agree that it is a far better system than trial by the media. Then again you might not agree. That's fine as we all have a right to our opinions.
Ruby the Liberal
(26,664 posts)I am a bleeding-heart liberal at heart after all.
That said - This case terrifies me. A single/divorced woman living in an urban area - the mere thought that this greenlights limp-dicked vigilantes with CCW to shoot at will? Sorry, but I am just not willing to live with that. I have no desire to be armed (believing it could hurt me more than help me - escalation, etc...) and I just can't bear giving these people this kind of green light.
Does that make sense?
spin
(17,493 posts)I have a far different viewpoint largely because of my background.
I have been target shooting handguns since 1970 and I live in Florida which has issued more concealed carry permits than any other state since "shall issue" passed in 1987. Florida has an unusually strong gun culture and firearm ownership is very common.
Before I retired I worked for a company that manufactured highly technical products and consequently most of my co-workers had either college educations or technical school backgrounds. I would estimate that 80% or more of my co-workers had a firearm in their house and 5 to 10% had concealed weapons permits. After work or on the weekends I often would go to the range with my co-workers to target shoot handguns.
You probably have encountered few people who you realize have carry permits as often those who do avoid telling casual acquaintances. You may well live in an urban area in a gun unfriendly state where a carry license is difficult to obtain and expensive.
Consequently you may have formed an opinion about those who do have carry permits based on movies and the media. You might be surprised how responsible and law abiding such people are. If Zimmerman is indeed guilty of pursuing, confronting and murdering Martin then he is an extreme aberration and not at all representative of 99.9% of those who legally carry. We realize that we are not cops and we don't play vigilantes.
Often we are accused of being cowards. I have a background in the martial arts, largely Jujutsu which is not a competitive sport like Judo. I was trained in dirty but very effective street fighting techniques to enable effective self defense against a person who has the intention of seriously injuring or killing his victim. Much time in the class was spent on how to disarm a person armed with a knife or a gun as frequently attackers are. Consequently I know how difficult these tactics can be.
Your chances of disarming an experienced knife fighter without suffering serious cuts are slim at best. The odds are much higher with an inexperienced person with a knife but still you probably will get cut.
If an attacker is armed with a handgun is foolish enough to stand within arm's reach, you have a fair chance of disarming him. If he is at 10 to 15 feet your odds of disarming him drop dramatically to perhaps 50% at the most.
Of course you never try to defend yourself unless absolutely necessary. If I am on the street and my situational awareness fails me and I find myself confronted by a individual who asks me to give him my wallet I will first appraise him. If he seems rational I will simply give him my wallet as I can replace my money, my ID and my credit cards far easier than I can replace my health or my life. But if I seriously believe he intends to put me in the hospital or six feet under no matter what I do, I will attempt to defend myself as I have nothing to loose.
Our environments and backgrounds differ considerably. I can understand why you formed your opinion and even though I have tried, I doubt if I can change it. That's fine. I have formed opinions on many subjects over the years and often they have been totally wrong. Perhaps you have a more realistic view of those who legally carry weapons than I do but I doubt it.
In passing I am not a person who recommends that everyone should run out and buy a gun for self defense or get a carry permit. Firearms are EXTREMELY dangerous and are definitely not for everybody.
"If you are walking through a strange neighborhood and someone walks up to you and asks why you are there, I would suggest it is wisest to reply in a polite manner. If he attempts to grab you or starts throwing punches, you have the right to resist his attack with appropriate force. If he flashes or draws a weapon, you have the right to fear for your life or health and use a higher level of force in self defense which might mean that you can use lethal force if you are legally carrying a weapon."
Exactly.
And, being female, I wouldn't wait til the "throwing punches" thing. If it's dark-ish outside and some creep is following me, and decides to approach me, he's going to get popped on the snout.
DeschutesRiver
(2,359 posts)And if I were a coward of Zimmerman's caliber, the first thing I would do after it turned out I'd killed a neighborhood boy after I freaked him out by stalking him would be to immediately slam my face into the nearest hard object available, unless my own fist in my face would be enough to make it look like that photo so i could say that the child had come after me.
And then I would wait for the cops calmly, hoping my story would hold together.
It is far more credible that Zimmerman did this to himself. He knew how to inflict such damage from his MMA courses, and he knew why it was important to do so from his criminal justice courses where they covered all aspects of the stand your ground law. Maybe he waited until the EMT reported that his injuries were minor, and slammed his face into the cage in the cop car, or something similar. Lots of possibilities with a guy who has his mentality.
All I know is that if I were in a situation like this child, with this freak coming after me and I had decided to use self defense against this criminal, he would look much worse than this. And I am a 55 year old woman. Hard to believe he doesn't look far worse with a strong young guy having supposedly attacked him.
When was this taken? I presume after the EMT checked him over?
spin
(17,493 posts)The problem is that the prosecution has to convince the members of the jury at Zimmerman's trial that this is what happened beyond a reasonable doubt.
It is quite possible that Zimmerman pursued Martin and confronted him in an aggressive manner without identifying himself as a member of the neighborhood watch. Zimmerman might have even flashed or drawn his handgun. If so, Martin would have had good reason to fear for his life and had every right to stand his ground under Florida law. Martin might have attempted to disarm Zimmerman using his martial arts skills.
Unfortunately there is no video or witnesses to verify that this is what happened. Martin can not tell his side of the story.
But still Zimmerman may be telling the truth. If he was actually on the ground with Martin punching him and driving his head into the ground and sidewalk, he might have had good reason to fear for his life. He states that he thought Martin discovered his concealed hand gun and was attempting to grab it. It is not unusual for police officers to get killed with their own weapon when a criminal manages to gain possession of it.
My personal opinion is that if Zimmerman had simply followed the instructions of the police dispatcher and went on his way, nothing would have happened. That's exactly what I would have done and I have a Florida concealed weapons permit and I carry on a regular basis. I realize that I am not a cop and I definitely am not a vigilante. Still it appears that Zimmerman was not obligated to follow the advise of the dispatcher.
All I can say is that I am damn glad I am not on the jury. I personally feel that Zimmerman was at fault but I would have a hard time ruling that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt after the prosecution's side was presented.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)'suggestions'. "...we don't need you to do that." if Florida law allowed the dispatchers more leeway, maybe things would have been different.
spin
(17,493 posts)Jenoch
(7,720 posts)point upthread (apparently I was wrong on Zimmerman's weight however) and I was called a bigot.
Sometimes I wonder who some of the people are who post on these threads, meaning their mental capacity and background and experiences that make them respond in the manner in which they do. I'm just an average guy not really looking for trouble or looking to get on a soapbox. Mostly I cringe when I see pepole making assumptions and/or making up facts as they wish them to be rather than as they actually are.
If Zimmerman is acquitted, he might have to change his name, lose the weight, and leave Florida.
spin
(17,493 posts)But that assumes that he can find a nation to live in.
It is my opinion that if he had a time machine, he would go back in time and drive off after he was advised not to follow by the dispatcher.
DeschutesRiver
(2,359 posts)anything differently. So I think he is quite okay with how he handled things. He does smile a lot about this incident, which I just don't get.
He seems to be trying to mentally stand his ground on the rightousness of his decisions. Even the cops, during their interview with him, could not get him to quit calling this kid a "suspect".
spin
(17,493 posts)His comments didn't surprise me.
DeschutesRiver
(2,359 posts)have been more satisfactory, yet completely noncommittal and not gotten him into trouble, I find his chosen response to be baffling. Thinking through situations in advance is not his strong suit.
Problem solving on this level isn't rocket science, but Zimmerman certainly struggles with it. Had he been better at it, this kid wouldn't have been dead.
yardwork
(69,360 posts)Zimmerman said that he wouldn't do anything differently. He said it was God's plan.
spin
(17,493 posts)He probably will not follow my advise.
OwnedByCats
(805 posts)for not wanting to be judge, jury and executioner in this case.
Doesn't it make you wonder why MadMonk did not show up in court as a witness for the prosecution, seeing as how they were there and witnessed the whole thing? 
DeschutesRiver
(2,359 posts)cannot imagine any reason that one would end up in Zimmermans position.
That is unless we were delusional about our role in society, ie pretending to be law enforcement in a situation where it wasn't necessary in order to track a "suspect" who turned out to be a neighbor's child going home. Sure, police officers can get killed with their own weapon, but as a society, that is the job we hire them to do, ie with their training and authority, go take down people who they believe are suspects. Zimmerman was not law enforcement. He didn't need to go after anyone, for any reason. He was kind of a legend in his own mind about this cop wanna be thing, and it came to a predictable bad end. No matter how one cuts it, he is an unstable person who finally went over the edge.
The only question is whether there is a way to nail him under FL law for killing an innocent kid who was just in the wrong place at the wrong time when Zimmrman got carried away and went too far while living out his wanna be cop fantasy.
We are also both retired attys, though neither of us have a FL license. But I have been watching this from the perspective of both being lawyer and having a CCW out here, and I think the defense has made a mess of things, not that they had much to work with given some of the undisputed facts of what Zimmerman actually did do.
But we'll see what this jury has to say. From what I've heard so far, it would be a slam dunk for me as a juror to find him guilty. It is pretty straight forward, both from what I'm hearing and from my own experience. We will know how this is playing to the jurors soon enough.
spin
(17,493 posts)has messed up the case and will have a very difficult time getting the jury to vote that Zimmerman is guilty.
Time will tell.
DeschutesRiver
(2,359 posts)it has been quite the opposite. If the defense prevailed, it would be in spite of their tin ear, for sure.
Talking head opinions are formed more by what will increase ratings, rather than the need to state accurate facts or well formed thoughts, nothing new there. And stating the obvious isn't the makings of a good controversy. But the jury isn't hearing the talking heads teling them how they should perceive what is being said.
Haven't heard when the defense expects to rest yet. Should be interesting.
SaveAmerica
(5,342 posts)To Zimmerman as he was pacing the area immediately after. I read that in a minute by minute review I found online.
DeschutesRiver
(2,359 posts)The only person claiming they were bad injuries appears to be Zimmerman, or his friends and family, which are just self serving statements.
yardwork
(69,360 posts)That is not the head of somebody smashed 20-30 times on concrete as he told police. That's a scratched nose. So I question his entire story.
The offender is not defending. Zimmerman caused the conflict and is thoroughly responsible for the resulting death.
kudzu22
(1,273 posts)
displacedtexan
(15,696 posts)How did it get there unless GZ grabbed his clothing?
From FOX News, of all sources: Zimmerman's DNA was found on Martin's sweatshirt, beneath his hoodie.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/03/zimmerman-school-records-at-issue-in-wednesday-hearing/
Egalitariat
(1,631 posts)spin
(17,493 posts)even when carrying all their equipment. This has often amazed me.
Maybe this has something to do with eating donuts. Perhaps we need to do some research.
Humor aside Zimmerman is 120 to 130 pounds heavier then he was when he had his encounter with Martin. Stress (and possibly guilt) can do that. In my opinion Zimmerman is a walking heart attack.
Incitatus
(5,317 posts)I've heard a number of cops use them. Perhaps, the cop washout with anger issues doing MMA 3 times a week also did them. idk
spin
(17,493 posts)That might be a possibility.
Ruby the Liberal
(26,664 posts)5'8" at 300 pounds? If this is (as suggested) the defense's move to create a visual, gaining 120 pounds (almost 40% your body weight) in a year is BEYOND irresponsible. Hadn't thought about it, but just when I couldn't have any more distain for Don West - I hope this just is an issue of medication (and/or steroids/cortizone).
spin
(17,493 posts)for Zimmerman even if the jury lets him walk.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)Zimmerman's weight gain as a defense tactic. I think it makes him look more like a bully rather than the victim in this case. I think he has been eating out of control because of the stress.
yardwork
(69,360 posts)Last edited Mon Jul 8, 2013, 11:17 PM - Edit history (1)
They can cause weight gain.
Edited to fix typos