Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: wtc911
"Based on the known facts - the kid was carrying candy and iced tea and had every right to be where he was -- zimmerman was told by the 911 op to back off -- zimmerman approached the kid --- zimmerman shot the kid --- this should be a slam dunk -- murder."

At this point, your posts on the Martin/Zimmerman matter generally aren't worth the effort to respond. Your 'known facts' aren't facts and you leave out anything that doesn't support your conclusion. For example, as for 'known facts," there's a Police Report that states the back of Zimmerman's shirt was wet; that there was grass on the back of his clothing; and that he was bleeding from the back of his head and nose. Those are known facts, but you skipped those.

In addition - even if there were no self-protection defense available to Zimmerman - you left out something important. You failed to state a single legal element that would lift a shooting, any shooting, from manslaughter to murder, yet you use the term 'murder.'

101 posted on 04/19/2012 5:52:34 PM PDT by Scoutmaster (You knew the job was dangerous when you took it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]


To: Scoutmaster

responding to a month old post by saying that it isn’t worth responding to...genius.


106 posted on 04/19/2012 6:11:05 PM PDT by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson