Team Zimmerman, Broke

Um - Martin was shot by Zimmerman. That's an attack. It may have been in self-defense; but it was an attack. You may choose to read "to set upon or work against forcefully" differently; I think shooting someone is working against them forcefully.

but I really hate wordsmithing.

The reason I say that in this case, if Martin hit Zimmerman first, it's not as important to me - it's that if I was being stalked for several blocks - um that is if I was being "followed" for several blocks at night by a stranger - I would already feel in danger. I would already feel attacked, in your parlance. Might I be the first one to have fist make contact with face? Possibly. But given the circumstances we seem to know about, a fierce offense is sometimes the best defense.
 
tekkychick said:
Um - Martin was shot by Zimmerman. That's an attack. It may have been in self-defense; but it was an attack. You may choose to read "to set upon or work against forcefully" differently; I think shooting someone is working against them forcefully.

but I really hate wordsmithing.

The reason I say that in this case, if Martin hit Zimmerman first, it's not as important to me - it's that if I was being stalked for several blocks - um that is if I was being "followed" for several blocks at night by a stranger - I would already feel in danger. I would already feel attacked, in your parlance. Might I be the first one to have fist make contact with face? Possibly. But given the circumstances we seem to know about, a fierce offense is sometimes the best defense.
Click to expand...

A wordsmith is a person who is skillful at the written language, and who writes with clarity; avoids confusion. You should learn how to use words properly, because a defense is not an attack.

It may not be important to you that Martin initiated the physical altercation, but it will be critical to the jury.

Attackers are routinely shot by their would-be victims. In many cases the local authorities don't even bother to press charges. That likely would have been the case if the attacker had been a white man in his 20's rather than a black teenager.

This case is entirely political now. Who do you think is to blame for that?
 
tekkychick said:
Um - Martin was shot by Zimmerman. That's an attack. It may have been in self-defense; but it was an attack. You may choose to read "to set upon or work against forcefully" differently; I think shooting someone is working against them forcefully.

but I really hate wordsmithing.

The reason I say that in this case, if Martin hit Zimmerman first, it's not as important to me - it's that if I was being stalked for several blocks - um that is if I was being "followed" for several blocks at night by a stranger - I would already feel in danger. I would already feel attacked, in your parlance. Might I be the first one to have fist make contact with face? Possibly. But given the circumstances we seem to know about, a fierce offense is sometimes the best defense.
Click to expand...

I have said this so many times. It's like talking to walls.
 
Darla said:
I have said this so many times. It's like talking to walls.
Click to expand...

Yeah... but I just liked the movie "Damn Yankee" so much it's hard to believe the poster named that is so ... thick.

One final comment to DY - you may not consider Zimmerman's past relevant; but as you commented to me when considering who struck first, it very well might critical to the jury.
 
tekkychick said:
Yeah... but I just liked the movie "Damn Yankee" so much it's hard to believe the poster named that is so ... thick.

One final comment to DY - you may not consider Zimmerman's past relevant; but as you commented to me when considering who struck first, it very well might critical to the jury.
Click to expand...

Lookie, lookie, who threw out the first insult. That didn't take very long. I always consider that a win for me.

The judge doesn't consider Martin's history relevant, so, based on that, I don't consider Zimmerman's to be.
 
Oh, I'm sorry DY - if I knew it would give you so much pleasure, I would have insulted you much earlier, and with something much stronger. Terribly sorry, I hope you forgive me my delay.
 
DamnYankee said:
Lookie, lookie, who threw out the first insult. That didn't take very long. I always consider that a win for me.

The judge doesn't consider Martin's history relevant, so, based on that, I don't consider Zimmerman's to be.
Click to expand...

But YOU do consider Martin's history relevent, but YOU don't consider Zimmerman's to be....that says a lot about YOU David Duke.
 
tekkychick said:
Oh, I'm sorry DY - if I knew it would give you so much pleasure, I would have insulted you much earlier, and with something much stronger. Terribly sorry, I hope you forgive me my delay.
Click to expand...
I didn't say it gave me pleasure, just that it was a "win". As a coach would say, an ugly win, but still a win.
 
Steelplate said:
But YOU do consider Martin's history relevent, but YOU don't consider Zimmerman's to be....that says a lot about YOU David Duke.
Click to expand...

I don't consider it relevant to this case that Zimmerman isn't a perfect angel, no. I do consider it relevant that Martin had a history of violence in school and was probably high on weed. Being high tends to make one paranoid, wouldn't you agree?

My opinion wouldn't change regardless of the race of the individuals, racist.
 
Zimmerman had a history of violence. Battery on a leo and spousal abuse, AS AN ADULT, seem a bit more relevant and severe than getting into a schoolyard fight.
 
Last edited:
Rana said:
What a laugh, a black guy shooting a white guy would have been arrested at the scene, and would not be granted bail and would have had the trial and been convicted by now.

You are funny
Click to expand...
This! A black male in Florida shooting a white ANYBODY in Florida is going to jail, directly to jail, not passing go, and going straight to prison. To pretend that somehow poor old George is getting the shaft here is to ignore the last 100 years of the Florida criminal justice system.
 
DamnYankee said:
I don't consider it relevant to this case that Zimmerman isn't a perfect angel, no. I do consider it relevant that Martin had a history of violence in school and was probably high on weed. Being high tends to make one paranoid, wouldn't you agree?

My opinion wouldn't change regardless of the race of the individuals, racist.
Click to expand...

Autopsy only showed a trace of THC....Martin was not high at the time of the incident
 
Professor Baxter said:
Acknowledging that you don't know the whole truth does not establish a reasonable doubt. It is REASONABLE doubt. Not any possible doubt.

Zimmerman will have to create a reasonable doubt to establish a self defense defense. Certainly, he should have his opportunity. A wise jurist would always take the claims of the accused with a grain of salt and this is one we know is willing to commit perjury for much less. There are also several inconsistencies in his story and the evidence. By his actions, words and deeds so far I can't say I have a reasonable doubt, but I would want to give him an opportunity with competent defense.
Click to expand...
Actually by claiming self defense, Zim shifts the burden to himself to PROVE that he acted reasonably in shooting Martin. The standard is a REASONABLE PERSON STANDARD, meaning that a reasonable person, when confronted with the same situation as Zim would have acted as Zim did, i.e., taking his life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top