17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #25

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
JeannaT said:
Well it's obviously a mystery to me.

So when you are on the phone, if you become disconnected because the phone drops, it locks itself and the phone owner would have to get back in with a password to call the person back? We don't own any phones that are password protected, so I don't know.

I thought you had to lock a phone. I know the phones in my house, you pick them up and you can get in to them with no password. But people can lock them, if they chose, like if you don't want to have a pocket call or something.

I use an old rickety phone and don't play around with my family's better newer iphones.
Click to expand...

As a :websleuther: note: I was on a bus trip to Florida 3 weeks ago, and found a blackberry phone someone had left in the back pocket of a seat. It was "locked" in that it required a password to get into it when I tried to go into it to call the last number dialed etc. So, my sleuthing took 90 minutes, but since the guy was smart enough to put on the display his unique name, and the company for which he worked for - I sat on the bus and googled and found the number for his corporation, did that thingy where you input their last name, and VIOLA! I called and left him a phone message from my phone that I had his phone!
 
CathyinTexas said:
For some reason, I have a different opinion of how GZ looked. He looked like a criminal to me. I suspect that most criminals look scared and some cry according to Nancy Grace. They are human after all.
Click to expand...

ITA. There is no way to know what someone is crying about just by looking at them. IMO, GZ thought this "would blow over" and his "frustration" over being arrested is behind his tears. And lets not forget that website picture he posted of vandalism to a Black cultural center shortly before his arrest. His words and quotes he posted indicate he feels he did the right thing. Like he's some kind of matyr. I'm not feeling that GZ has a meek or remorseful bone in his body.
 
jjenny said:
Well in all the discussions about this law I haven't seen anyone else interpreting it that way. Under SYG law, a person can prevent bodily injury/death OR commission of forcible felony. It doesn't say the person only can prevent commission of forcible felony to be covered under this law.
Click to expand...

I think she is arguing a reasonable person would not be in fear of their life from just a simple assault and they had to put in the "or forcible felony" for cases like kidnapping where an actual death threat was not made or a strong armed robbery.
 
Dr.Fessel said:
I think she is arguing a reasonable person would not be in fear of their life from just a simple assault and they had to put in the "or forcible felony" for cases like kidnapping where an actual death threat was not made or a strong armed robbery.
Click to expand...

Forcible felony is something one can prevent under this law. For instance if you go about your business and see that a forcible felony is about to be committed you can use deadly force even if you are not in danger of death/great bodily harm. You might not be in danger at all but you can still use SYG to prevent forcible felony.
But you can also use that same law to prevent death/great bodily harm to yourself.
Separate things that you can use the law for.
 
LiveLaughLuv said:
Grand Jury is used to get a true bill (indictment) for a premediated murder or 1st degree murder, one is not needed for a 2nd degree murder charge...

ACorey did not do this for political gain, did not bring charges on GZ due to emotional pressures, she brought charges against GZ due to the statutes that govern her state...Had she not thought she could safely bring charges with reasonable doubts, he'd not have been charged...She charged quite possibly due to his account of things, conflicting witness statements, autopsy results, did not meet the criteria to use this SYG defense...and if GZ uses this defense, he will get a trial on that issue alone and he'd have to take the stand to do so, the State will staunchly defend their stance..then it either gets dismissed or doesn't..

The SYG defense is widely misused and abused..could be this is where it stops...
Click to expand...

After reading some of the case law on defendants that have used the SYG defense, I totally agree with you.
 
SuziQ said:
ITA. There is no way to know what someone is crying about just by looking at them. IMO, GZ thought this "would blow over" and his "frustration" over being arrested is behind his tears. And lets not forget that website picture he posted of vandalism to a Black cultural center shortly before his arrest. His words and quotes he posted indicate he feels he did the right thing. Like he's some kind of matyr. I'm not feeling that GZ has a meek or remorseful bone in his body.
Click to expand...

His sense of entitlement is pretty clear, isn't it? FCA was "frushhhh-trated too" about being in jail. I don't think George is a monster, like FCA, but they do show similar signs of being coddled from a very young age and allowed to get away with things they shouldn't get away with. Wish we knew George's High School history! I think it would be interesting!

MOO
 
jjenny said:
Well who am I going to trust? What she told Nancy or what I can see with my own eyes after reading the actual law?
The law says OR. It's a separate issue. One can prevent imminent commission of forcible felony. But one can also prevent death/great bodily harm.
Click to expand...

I believe that Judges and attorneys also must use applicable case law from previous rulings in their interpretations. Do you have any case law that backs your interpretation? With all due respect there is much more to it than just reading the laws. If there weren't, we wouldn't even need the court system and lots of people going to law school could save lots of tuition. :moo:
 
If George was so scared... he wouldn't have gotten out of his car. He shows no signs of being scared of confronting a kid who was "checking him out", and "had something in his pocket", and appeared to be "on drugs."

Trayvon running shows someone who was "scared" and felt threatened. Backed up by the girlfriends statement.

It's all right there... in George's own words!

MOO
 
jjenny said:
I really don't know what is there to interpret. Anybody who can read can read this law and see that it says one can use deadly force if one reasonably believes its necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm OR the commission of forcible felony. OR. Not and. Not only. Forcible felony is separate from death/great bodily injury and I am pretty sure that the part that Zimmerman will say applies to him is preventing death/great bodily harm and not "forcible felony."
What is there to interpret? Anyone that can read should be able to figure out what it says. One doesn't need a law degree for that. Jury will not have law degrees. I am reasonably certain I am not any more stupid than members of this jury that will have understand what the law says.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with your interpretation of the SYG law. You're right, a law degree is not required. The statues are very clear. IMO
 
Adrienne37 said:
I look at it like this, she is the attorney, this is what she says, she has successfully prosecuted multiple cases of stand your ground including the one that she discussed in this article. It's not up to me, a layman, to interpret the law. There has been much discussion about this issue, I found this article, and posted it. It's not up to any of us to decide this case. We do not have all the details that either side will have so how can any of us make a determination, especially when we aren't attorneys ourselves? All I know is that both authors of the bill as well as the governor who signed it into law clearly states that this case doesn't fall under Stand Your Ground because Zimmerman was the pursuer. This law doesn't give anyone the right to chase another person down and murder them.


~jmo~
Click to expand...

Legal msm experts have said that AC must have more than we are privy too. She did say no more documents would be leaked to the public shortly after her investigation began. There must be forensics and/or more witnesses who we are not aware of. I agree, GZ could not have been afraid of TM based on his actions. It was said recently that GZ is 185 and Trayvon was 160. Trayvon is very tall and was a skinny kid. 185 pounds on a short man is quite heavy and he didn't look to be fat, but does look to be in good shape, imo. Based on those facts, I don't think it is hard to believe that GZ could "handle" TM, he apparently didn't think it would be a problem. The witness who said GZ got up from the body indicates it was GZ who was on top, might there be other witnesses who said the same thing. Also, more than one witness stated the police changed their testimony or told them what to think. That is definitely tampering with the witnesses and AC may have gotten the true account from said witnesses. jmo.
 
Well, when the people who actually made the SYG law and the govenor who signed it into law believe that George Zimmerman's actions that night do NOT fall under the SYG laws... we have a problem.

Can we agree on that?
 
jjenny said:
I really don't know what is there to interpret. Anybody who can read can read this law and see that it says one can use deadly force if one reasonably believes its necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm OR the commission of forcible felony. OR. Not and. Not only. Forcible felony is separate from death/great bodily injury and I am pretty sure that the part that Zimmerman will say applies to him is preventing death/great bodily harm and not "forcible felony."
What is there to interpret? Anyone that can read should be able to figure out what it says. One doesn't need a law degree for that. Jury will not have law degrees. I am reasonably certain I am not any more stupid than members of this jury that will have understand what the law says.
Click to expand...

We have arguments over this law, but it was also stated in the msm interviews that if a person starts a fight, they cannot then claim syg or self defense. Maybe that is what AC is thinking.
 
CathyinTexas said:
Legal msm experts have said that AC must have more than we are privy too. She did say no more documents would be leaked to the public shortly after her investigation began. There must be forensics and/or more witnesses who we are not aware of. I agree, GZ could not have been afraid of TM based on his actions. It was said recently that GZ is 185 and Trayvon was 160. Trayvon is very tall and was a skinny kid. 185 pounds on a short man is quite heavy and he didn't look to be fat, but does look to be in good shape, imo. Based on those facts, I don't think it is hard to believe that GZ could "handle" TM, he apparently didn't think it would be a problem. The witness who said GZ got up from the body indicates it was GZ who was on top, might there be other witnesses who said the same thing. Also, more than one witness stated the police changed their testimony or told them what to think. That is definitely tampering with the witnesses and AC may have gotten the true account from said witnesses. jmo.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think when we are privy to all the documents that she has, we will see that she has plenty of evidence to convict him of the second degree murder charge. She doesn't appear to be the type of prosecutor to charge someone without having the means to back it up from what I have read about her.



~jmo~
 
I may be confused ( it certainly wouldn't be the first time and probably won't be the last :) ) but when AC says forcible felony, the First Aggressor is what she's talking about? GZ couldn't be the first aggressor and then turn around and say he was standing his ground? The forcible felony would have been on Trayvon's part, against GZ, and that's what gave GZ the right to stand his ground?

Forcible felony covers quite a few things;

776.08 Forcible felony.—“Forcible felony” means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2011/776.08

JMHO
 
waltzingmatilda said:
Let's not forget....
When the dispatcher asks GZ's home address towards the end of the call, GZ starts giving his address and then says I don't wanna give it all out on here.(paraphrased) Then, under his breath, states, 'I don't know where this KID went'.
That tells me right there that come he77 or high water 'this one wasn't going to get away'.

Why do I think of the 'policeman' in Terminator (who morphs into liquid metal when he is in a pickle) when I envision GZ's pursuit of Trayvon?

IMO, he didn't look like he was 'gone' at the hearing the other day. His posture was quite erect and confident.

MOO

wm
Click to expand...

That still has me puzzled. I mean, clearly he isn't afraid of Trayvon since he's pursuing him. Obviously he's not concerned about LE knowing where he lives since he made a career of calling them whenever he perceived wrong doing. He seemed to be hesitant giving his name, even when asked point blank, IMO. Maybe he wanted them to think it was someone else calling this time? IDK. Just puzzling...
 
jjenny said:
Well in all the discussions about this law I haven't seen anyone else interpreting it that way. Under SYG law, a person can prevent bodily injury/death OR commission of forcible felony. It doesn't say the person only can prevent commission of forcible felony to be covered under this law.
Click to expand...

BBM

I don't think it says that does it?
 
annalia said:
I may be confused ( it certainly wouldn't be the first time and probably won't be the last :) ) but when AC says forcible felony, the First Aggressor is what she's talking about? GZ couldn't be the first aggressor and then turn around and say he was standing his ground? The forcible felony would have been on Trayvon's part, against GZ, and that's what gave GZ the right to stand his ground?

Forcible felony covers quite a few things;

776.08 Forcible felony.—“Forcible felony” means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2011/776.08

JMHO
Click to expand...

According to what Ms. Corey said in her interview with NG, Trayvon would have had to be in the process of committing a forcible felony against Zimmerman in which case Zimmerman could claim that he was standing his ground. Like the example cited in the interview with Ms. Corey, the woman claimed that her husband slapped her, she went for the gun, and shot him. She couldn't claim she was standing her ground because the husband was not in the act of committing a forcible felony against her.

Secondly, the stand your ground law is not going to cover Zimmerman if he was the first aggressor and we already know that is exactly what he was. He pursued Trayvon; therefore, he can't turn around and say that he murdered him because he was standing his ground.

(I myself haven't read the law nor will I and am only going by Ms. Corey's interpretation of the law as she has prosecuted many cases under the SYG law. I'm sure there are many interpretations of the laws out there and I will leave it to an attorney that I trust to make that decision).

~jmo~
 
suzihawk said:
That still has me puzzled. I mean, clearly he isn't afraid of Trayvon since he's pursuing him. Obviously he's not concerned about LE knowing where he lives since he made a career of calling them whenever he perceived wrong doing. He seemed to be hesitant giving his name, even when asked point blank, IMO. Maybe he wanted them to think it was someone else calling this time? IDK. Just puzzling...
Click to expand...

In a previous call to SPD GZ refused to give his home address even though he was calling FROM HOME. If he's that paranoid, I don't get why he was calling the police at all.

I've called the sheriff's non-emergency number here for things like noise complaints, aggressive dogs and what I thought were gunshots and never hesitated to give my name, address, or home phone number. Other than the suspected gunshots, I waited to meet with the officers.

O/T -
The "gunshots" were a different story - they sounded as though they were in the pasture where I had a newborn foal. If it had been poachers, they could have mistaken her for a deer, so I went down into the pasture with a big flashlight, calling the mare to come to me - I figured if it were poachers, that would scare them off.

Even when the deputy got there, he thought they were gunshots, but another deputy notified him that it was actually someone setting off fireworks in the neighborhood east of my farm. The echo across the valley made the fireworks sound just like gunfire, even to the professional!
​

I think GZ's actions are all part of the frightened paranoid mindset that made him get a concealed carry permit and buy a gun. While I agree we all have a right to own weapons - I own a gun myself - I will never understand the need for the average citizen to carry a concealed weapon. I don't consider this to be a healthy attitude and think it is bad for the country.

If people think their community is unsafe, I think they should work to make where they live safer by addressing the factors that increase crime - lack of education, jobs, opportunities, etc. Putting more weapons on the streets is NOT making us safer!

IMO, JMO, etc.
 
mercuriod said:
Ms. Corey had the cased sealed when she filed the charges. That means unless someone (the media usually) files in court to have the records unsealed per the states Sunshine Laws, the documents will not be made public until they are introduced in the trial.
Click to expand...

And then we'll be looking for another *Musikman* that lives near the courthouse to get records for us as he did for another case? Still waiting for Musikman to come back ! :seeya:
 
annalia said:
I may be confused ( it certainly wouldn't be the first time and probably won't be the last :) ) but when AC says forcible felony, the First Aggressor is what she's talking about? GZ couldn't be the first aggressor and then turn around and say he was standing his ground? The forcible felony would have been on Trayvon's part, against GZ, and that's what gave GZ the right to stand his ground?

Forcible felony covers quite a few things;

776.08 Forcible felony.—“Forcible felony” means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2011/776.08

JMHO
Click to expand...

Isn't that strange, you can shoot a person you see committing arson.

No couch burning in Florida.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 109 more.
Total: 2,894 (members: 110, guests: 2,784)

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
2,784
Total visitors
2,894
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,198
Messages
17,964,895
Members
228,714
Latest member
hannahdunnam
Back
Top