Posted on 03/22/2012 5:48:28 AM PDT by libstripper
They are?
They are?
The cops did say he had scratches ~ so where’s the blood/
Zimmerman’s voice is in the recordings that’ve been released. He initiated the contact.
So, that's where Zimmerman was ~ on a public road ~ and he'd followed Martin from where?
Zimmerman was EVASIVE ~ that's the word bill collectors (and lawyers) use when a supposed expert can't tell you something he should know ~ like the address of where he's at in a community where he's a neighborhood watch "captain".
Now, regarding ballistics ~ anyone know what the coroner's report says?
It's probably good police work to withhold physical evidence at least until all the witnesses can be interviewed.
If, for example, Zimmerman's account conflicts with statements he made in the 911 call, that could indicate an attempt to deceive.
If Zimmerman made any statements to police after the shooting and without legal representation, then it might confirm some peoples' suspicion that he is a fool.
Neither Zimmerman nor Martin had justification to assault the other. My understanding of "assault" is that no contact is necessary, only the justified fear of attack.
It seems reasonable to me that Martin may have been assaulted by Zimmerman's behavior in following him. This might justify Martin defending himself, but Martin's justification for taking action against Zimmerman ends if Zimmerman retreats sufficiently. At some point during a retreat by Zimmerman, Martin's actions can become an assault against Zimmerman.
The very words "Stand Your Ground" reflect the reality that one is not justified in continuing response to an attack after the attacker has withdrawn. You can stand your ground, but you can't gain ground or take the other guy's ground.
It seems to me that the challenge for a prosecutor will be to prove that Zimmerman did assault Martin and that following that assault, Zimmerman did not withdraw effectively enough to eliminate Martin's right to defend himself.
I have not heard any tape the has any contact on it, only that he would follow. And when he did find him we do not know who did what. Being asked a question is not grounds to attack someone, while physically contacted by someone is. Problem is we do not know who contacted who first.
It's probably good police work to withhold physical evidence at least until all the witnesses can be interviewed.
I agree they rarely release all info until the conclusion of the case, no sense in corrupting the case.
It seems to me that the challenge for a prosecutor will be to prove that Zimmerman did assault Martin and that following that assault, Zimmerman did not withdraw effectively enough to eliminate Martin's right to defend himself.
Yes it will be a tough case, which may be why no charges were brought originally in the case.
IT"S more than touching.
In this situation Zimmerman has to come up with something that removes Martin's well-grounded fear for his life ~
BTW, we know it was a well grounded fear because, as it turned out, Zimmerman shot Martin and killed him. Among other things that proves that Zimmerman was 'chasing Martin with a gun".
_______________________________
It might be just a bit more unfortunate that the un-armed teenager minding his own business whom an armed Zimmerman admittedly followed both by car and on foot isn't here to tell his side.....because, you know, Zimmerman killed him.
This is exactly what a teen should do when being followed, both by car and then on foot.
The known fact that Martin avoided confrontation and the equally known fact that Zimmerman's actions were aggressive (what do you think stalking is?) are thrown out the window by those here who want to believe that Martin, to quote a freeper, "surprised and attacked" Zimmerman.
They also ignore Zimmerman's documented legal history of violence while suggesting without any evidence that Martin was a thug.
Zimmerman will spend the rest of his loser's life looking over his shoulder at the very least. He will always be the guy who killed that kid. He will also find certain freepers always ready to shake his hand and buy him a beer.
Being contacted by someone verbally is not grounds to attack. What information do you have that justifies one or the other person in the case to attack the other?
‘Contact” can start at the point where Zimmerman, in his pickup truck, began following Martin on foot.
This could become SERIES and HUGH
Once again “What information do you have that justifies one or the other person in the case to attack the other?”
Martin would have been right to physically attack Zimmerman since it was Zimmerman admittedly following Martin and not the other way around.
So you are saying that any who follows someone else has become a physical threat just because they are following someone. Is this what you mean? The mere act if following someone and observing them is grounds for a physical attack.
(Every princes to thug has a cellphone).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.