Why isn't this murder?

[Hauldren Collider]

I am honestly surprised to learn that Zimmerman's prosecutors read the Apolyton off-topic forum

Congratulations for being a fool, anyway, even if you weren't directly or indirectly involved in ruining the life of a guy who appears to have basically done nothing wrong.

EDIT: Nice DanS. I decided to make my post slightly more polite in response. But, given your limited knowledge of the US legal system, you may be surprised to learn that being a cunt is not actually a crime.

[Hauldren Collider]

None of the quotes you posted claimed that there were no alternatives. The closest was Loinburger's quote, but he only said that he couldn't think of any alternatives.

People should be more skeptical of themselves, particularly when it pertains to the justice system and anything you hear from CNN.

[giblets]

I think HC is making some very good points. I will definitely think further on them. Keep up the good work, HC!

Very good post! Thanks for sharing.

[loinburger]

People should be more skeptical of themselves

This is the funniest thing you have ever posted

[Hauldren Collider]

They say hypocrites give the best advice. Feel free to point out to me in the future when I'm being a little too certain of my own beliefs.

[giblets]

People should be more skeptical of themselves,

Are you sure about this?

[The Mad Monk]

It looked like murder. Now it doesn't look so much like murder. That's why we have trials.

[The Mad Monk]

Congratulations for being a fool, anyway, even if you weren't directly or indirectly involved in ruining the life of a guy who appears to have basically done nothing wrong.

Hey now, don't you think you're overstating that just a tad?

[Hauldren Collider]

It looked like murder. Now it doesn't look so much like murder. That's why we have trials.

They never had the evidence to convict, and if they don't have that, they shouldn't bring it to trial in the first place. You don't prosecute someone unless you have a reasonable chance of victory. It's very clear that this was what the Sanford DA did, appropriately, until political pressure forced a state prosecutor into the picture.

[Lonestar]

Zimmerman is at least guilty of manslaughter thanks to the sequence of events.

- Martin had a right to be there
- Zimmerman pursued Martin, against advice of the police
- Zimmerman confronted Martin(alternatively, Martin rounded on him and popped him one)
- Martin defended himself, likely with legal justification
- Zimmerman defended himself, perhaps likely with legal justification.

But Zimmerman was the principal choreographer of events that lead to the death of an innocent, un-armed minor.

Zimmerman was in a position of responsibility by a) being an adult b) being a watch captain and c) being a CHP holder. Martin would not have been killed if Zimmerman hadn't acted like a irresponsible vigilante.

If I had a swimming pool in my backyard, left the fence gate open, and a kid drowned in it, I would be liable for his death because I irresponsibly set the conditions for that death. So did Zimmerman.

But the DA is clearly going through the motions and doesn't care.

[regexcellent]

If he didn't start the fight, he's not guilty of manslaughter. From a hearing a year ago:

"Any evidence that conflicts, eyewitnesses anything, that conflicts with the contention that Mr. Martin assaulted first?" O'Mara asked.
"As to who threw the first blow? No," Gilbreath responded.
"Do you know who started the fight?"
"Do I know? No."
"Do you have any evidence that supports who may have started the fight?"
"No."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_...ld-be-imminent/

[Lonestar]

If he didn't start the fight, he's not guilty of manslaughter.

Hogwash.

The actions he took led directly to a unarmed minor getting killed. He absolutely is responsible for manslaughter. People have been convicted of manslaughter for leaving their fence gate open and a kid drowning in their pool, to use the example in my previous post.

If I drank a little and then drove and killed someone, it would be fairly easy for a prosecutor to get me on vehicular manslaughter. Because the actions I took led directly to someone getting killed.

Zimmerman was the "responsible adult" with a CHP, and he's the one that drove the events that got Martin killed, not Martin. Unfortunately, Martin isn't alive to dispute claims that he jumped out of nonexistent bushes and initiated the attack.

[regexcellent]

He wasn't even following him anymore when he was attacked. He'd lost sight of Trayvon.

Moreover, can you conceive of the possibility that Zimmerman, with the initiative, could have wound up on his back without landing significant blows on Martin, getting pummeled into the pavement?

And getting attacked for being a dick, then defending yourself, simply isn't a crime. It's just not manslaughter no matter how much you think it should be.

And all of that aside, there is simply not enough evidence (any evidence really) to demonstrate that Zimmerman's story isn't true. You have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it wasn't self defense.

[Lonestar]

He wasn't even following him anymore when he was attacked. He'd lost sight of Trayvon.

No, no, no, that's what he claims. He also initally claimed that he "jumped out of some bushes" which aren't there.

Moreover, can you conceive of the possibility that Zimmerman, with the initiative, could have wound up on his back without landing significant blows on Martin, getting pummeled into the pavement?

Sure, but that isn't the scenario. Confrontation can mean he was spouting "fighting words" and Martin popped him on.

And getting attacked for being a dick, then defending yourself, simply isn't a crime. It's just not manslaughter no matter how much you think it should be.

It absolutely is manslaughter if a reasonable person could see that he was responsible for the chain of events that led to a unarmed minor getting whacked.

He was, not Martin. He chose to go play vigilante and ignore the advice of the dispatching officer. He chose to create a scenario where a confrontation wasn't just possible, but likely.

[regexcellent]

It absolutely is manslaughter if a reasonable person could see that he was responsible for the chain of events that led to a unarmed minor getting whacked.

Wiglaf, the guy in here with an actual law degree, just explained that this isn't the case in the other thread.