This message was self-deleted by its author

[Mojo Electro]

159. Geat post.

Thank you.

"On its face, i.e. on a prima facie basis, that's illegal, for one person to kill another person."

This is true for the most part, although one could make the semantic distinction that it is illegal to *murder* somebody, not necessarily to kill somebody. The vast majority of the time these are the same, not always. (Self defense, legitimate police use of force, etc)

Interesting point about the affirmative defense. As I understand it, the standard for that is by the preponderance of the evidence, or "clear and convincing evidence". I think the defense easily met that standard.

You said "I honestly believe that Zimmerman's defense team failed to put forward any plausible theory of self-defense."

You and I disagree on that point. For one thing, I think the combination of Zimmy's injuries, Good's testimony, the forensics related to to the gunshot, and the grass stains on Zimmy make clear that Trayvon was on top of him kicking his ass.

Did Trayvon double back, or in some other way take action that indicated he chose to confront Zimmy? For me the phone calls and the timeline say he did. The call ends with Jeantel about the same time that Zimmy tells the operator "He's running" and Zimmy lost sight of him, what looks like about 1 minute later. If you look at the map and overhead view, you can see that had Trayvon just continued heading home, he would have been there in like 30 seconds, if that, even at a brisk walk. He had lost Zimmy and had a huge head start. How did they get into the final altercation if he did not either stop and wait for him or come back? Who hit Zimmerman in the face?

And in fact, several people on DU and other forums have claimed that Zimmy was armed and out roaming just waiting to shoot a black kid. The hyperbole surrounding this case has been outrageous.

"And yes, I honestly believe it was Trayvon screaming and not Zimmerman."

I don't agree. Ask yourself this question: If this were a different case that was not so emotionally heated, when you have 2 people, one is on his back, relatively bloodied and beat up, and another person is straddling him and beating him up, and one of those two was screaming for help, which one is it more likely to be? It makes no sense that somebody on top of another person pounding on them would be also screaming for help, and the other person wouldn't. This is what I mean, if there weren't the supposed racial component to this, no clear-thinking person would even give that a second thought.

I'm not familiar with the term "PPR"... does that mean reported? Why would that happen?

Regards,
Mojo