Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > Off the Court Lounge

Off the Court Lounge Basketball fans talk about everything EXCEPT basketball here

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-15-2013, 02:34 PM   #6601
MJ23forever
High School Varsity 6th Man
 
MJ23forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 759
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by ace23
When did I say it did? He couldn't be proven guilty in a court of law. I respect that. Doesn't mean he didn't murder Trayvon.

Justifiable homicide isn't murder.
MJ23forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 02:35 PM   #6602
Pointguard
NBA All-star
 
Pointguard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 9,560
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Daily, well at least you attempted which I think is a big step in the right direction. I don't have a problem deciphering what was said by the author but he makes way too many assumptions on legal precepts and he transitions thoughts horribly.

Originally Posted by Pointguard
Care to point out some inconsistencies then? I know you won't because you never back up anything you say, but one day you might show your virtual intelligence here - why not today???

WASHINGTON — It’s extremely unlikely George Zimmerman will pay a civil fine for killing Trayvon Martin, according to lawyers in Florida and other legal experts. One Florida law professor said he’d be “stunned” if a federal prosecution of Zimmerman goes ahead. So did he use civil fine to mean civil rights???
No he means Civil fine, he's talking about two different cases, A civil case as in martins family suing Zimmerman and a federal Civil Rights violation type of case. A civil fine is when you lose a civil suit, the "fine is the amount the plaintiffs are awarded. The second half is self explanatory, he said he'd be stunned if the feds bring a suit against Zimmerman

Show me where he says civil rights case in the paragraph. You can’t transition in the same paragraph to different subjects without clearly identifying the transition. You can’t take for granted that he even knows there is a difference. Bad writing. If it was a legal magazine you can take precepts for granted. But its far from that so its dangerous to presume his faulty wording can be taken for granted. You are guessing.


“Technically, there can still be a civil case,” said Tamara Rice Lave, a professor of criminal law at the University of Miami and a former San Diego public defender. {b]“However, Stand Your Ground is going to preclude that.” [/b]

At the start of his trial, Zimmerman waived the right to have a judge determine he was immune from prosecution in the Martin shooting under to Stand Your Ground, which says people can use deadly force rather than flee a situation where they feel their lives are in danger. After his acquittal, Zimmerman can rely on getting that immunity in a civil case, Lave said. So he can rely on the immunity he waived???
Yes he didn't waive it for all legal proceedings just the one he was facing at the time. If another legal action is brought against him he can ask for Stand Your Ground immunity and having just been acquitted in a self defense case there's a very good chance he would receive the immunity


Where in the article does it even mention a process of going to the court and getting the SYG procession. He also makes big assumptions that the SYG is a given when it is in fact a different law. Its not a guarantee nor given. He acts like its already done.


“It’s still hard, given a acquittal, to win in a civil case,” he said. He noted that if Zimmerman doesn’t get immunity under Stand Your Ground, the burden of proof would be much different and give the Martin family attorneys the chance for a win.
“If they got over the procedural hurdle [of immunity], I wouldn’t say that it would be impossible,” Hutchinson said. “I still think it’s difficult, given the lack of evidence we have in the case and the main eyewitness against him [Martin] being dead.” Who was the eyewitness in the OJ case??
Apples and Oranges OJ was in California, Zimmerman is in Florida, two different states with two different views on things. California has a very low burden of proof in Civil cases, You don't need much proof to bring action against an individual and there's no such thing as "reasonable doubt" for juries to overcome

You are implying that there is a beyond a reasonable doubt in the civil case in Florida? No it isn’t. I didn’t finish reading the article but I know it didn’t say that. And it leads people like you to make broad assumptions that are incorrect which is what I was saying in the beginning. And then they go on message boards and think they got it down pack.

Now it might have said that about the civil rights case and I will readily agree that the article makes that transition in horrible fashion.
Pointguard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 02:36 PM   #6603
MavsSuperFan
NBA sixth man of the year
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 7,825
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
Right. Zimmerman is no more required to stay in his car than Martin is to go straight home. But we know Zims intentions. We dont know Martins. Stand your ground laws dictate Martin didnt have to run. But you conveniently neglect that. Why did Zimmerman get ot of his car and go in the direction of Martin? Surely not to get an address.

I suspect he went because he assumed based on Trayvon's appearance (racial profiling) and the fact that he had not seen him previously that trayvon was a criminal. The truth is trayvon was going back to his dad's residence after buying skittles and ice tea. I consider what happens next tragic, but based on the trial I believe Zim killed trayvon in self defense.
MavsSuperFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 02:39 PM   #6604
ace23
*****
 
ace23's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 10,274
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dresta
I don't know, but there seem to be plenty of morons in here that think because Zimmerman got out of the car he is therefore the guilty party. I just assumed you were one of them.

It is like saying if i run over and kill someone who jumped in front of my car that it is my fault for choosing to go for a drive at that moment in time. If i had decided to stay in then that person would still be alive.

Such a rudimentary and pathetic understanding of cause and effect.
Not a good comparison.

There's just no reason for Zimmerman to have left the car in my mind other than to confront Trayvon. It's not just the fact that he left his car; it's that there seems to be no reason for him to do so - we're forced to fill in the blanks. It was the prosecution's job to do so with evidence - they didn't. Oh well.
ace23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 02:42 PM   #6605
DonDadda59
Lord High Executioner
 
DonDadda59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Killing Fields
Posts: 19,457
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymone
FACT: Trayvon had ample time to enter the house after Zim lost sight of him. 4 minutes, to be exact.

The State, police, and even the defense are all on record that Trayvon Martin hid from Zimmerman after running away from him (most likely after realizing the creepy guy stalking him was now out of his car chasing after him). So that's Trayvon's alibi for what he was doing during that time span.

Now what was Zimmerman doing in the 2 minutes space after he hung up with dispatch and when Trayvon's phone call with Rachel Jeantel ended (the time where the confrontation would've started)? According to him, he was a 30-40 sec walk away from the car he was allegedly returning too. Yet 2 minutes later the confrontation occurs.

Logic says he continued searching for the kid, and eventually found where he was hiding and according to Jeantel, he tried to physically engage him.

To this day, I still haven't seen anyone who claims that Trayvon went home and then returned to randomly kill a stranger he had just run away from and just happened to run into Zim at the exact moment he returned from his address hunt at the T give an answer as to what his motive was.

We know Zim was convinced that Trayvon was 'up to no good', a 'f*cking punk', and one of those 'assholes who always get away'. His motive was making sure someone he mistakenly profiled as a criminal didn't escape. He wanted to detain him so he could be the hero when the police arrived. Trayvon wasn't compliant and tried to fight him off thinking (reasonably) he was a mugger, or a child molester (ironically, he was), etc.

Now what was Trayvon's motive for trying to kill a stranger he ran away from? I've asked this question probably a dozen times here and no one has even attempted to tackle this.
DonDadda59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 02:42 PM   #6606
97 bulls
NBA Superstar
 
97 bulls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,935
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by MavsSuperFan
I guess it depends on what you consider starting a physical fight. Zim who verbally questioned Trayvon. Or according to Zim's account, Trayvon who threw the first punch.

There were no marks on trayvon indicating he got punched.

I would never do what Zim did, but he didn't necessarily go pick a fight with trayvon. According to him he went to investigate a recent string of robberies. And got punched. Its not against the law to follow someone and ask them questions on public property.

And yes the prosecution had to explain the injuries. Not doing so really did a disservice to Trayvon. Zim never disputed he followed trayvon, he never disputed he shot trayvon. The crux of the whole trial was if it was self defense or not. Zim decided to forego a stand your ground defense, instead he decided to argue a traditional self defense claim. The prosecution by ignoring the injuries basically let Zim's account of self defense stand.
I disagree. The only important fact is how it started. Not who was winning. The confrontation began because Zimmerman went behind those houses looking for Martin. Martin demands to know why hes being followed. Which any sane person woukd want ti know. And Zimmerman reaches for his phone in his pocket. Or Jacket. Again, I ask, how is Martin supposed to know hes not reaching for a weapon?

The way I see it. Zimmerman thinks hes fighting a burglar, Martin thinks hes fighting a racists trying to do him harm. If Zimmerman identifies himself and doesn't reach for anything, this is either a non inssue or id feel Martin was the aggressor. Zimmerman never shoukdve reached for anything.

Hiw many times have the police shot and killed people for that exact reason?
97 bulls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 02:44 PM   #6607
longtime lurker
Very good NBA starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,750
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
I disagree. The only important fact is how it started. Not who was winning. The confrontation began because Zimmerman went behind those houses looking for Martin. Martin demands to know why hes being followed. Which any sane person woukd want ti know. And Zimmerman reaches for his phone in his pocket. Or Jacket. Again, I ask, how is Martin supposed to know hes not reaching for a weapon?

The way I see it. Zimmerman thinks hes fighting a burglar, Martin thinks hes fighting a racists trying to do him harm. If Zimmerman identifies himself and doesn't reach for anything, this is either a non inssue or id feel Martin was the aggressor. Zimmerman never shoukdve reached for anything.

Hiw many times have the police shot and killed people for that exact reason?

Great post. I've yet to see someone defend why Zimmerman wouldn't identify himself as the neighbourhood watch. If this happened and Trayvon still attacked him the story would be a lot more clear cut.
longtime lurker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 02:47 PM   #6608
97 bulls
NBA Superstar
 
97 bulls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,935
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by MavsSuperFan
I suspect he went because he assumed based on Trayvon's appearance (racial profiling) and the fact that he had not seen him previously that trayvon was a criminal. The truth is trayvon was going back to his dad's residence after buying skittles and ice tea. I consider what happens next tragic, but based on the trial I believe Zim killed trayvon in self defense.
Right. Self defense because he was getting his ass kicked.
97 bulls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 02:50 PM   #6609
longtime lurker
Very good NBA starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,750
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
Right. Self defense because he was getting his ass kicked.

Well to be honest MavsSuperFan is just going based on the evidence or lack of evidence in court and Zimmerman's story. Who knows the full story, but judging by his actions and past history I'm willing to lean on the side that Zimmerman wanted to initiate a confrontation that night and got more than he bargained for.
longtime lurker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 02:54 PM   #6610
daily
cereal killah
 
daily's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,648
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by longtime lurker
Well to be honest MavsSuperFan is just going based on the evidence or lack of evidence in court and Zimmerman's story. Who knows the full story, but judging by his actions and past history I'm willing to lean on the side that Zimmerman wanted to initiate a confrontation that night and got more than he bargained for.
IF you look at Zimmerman's past history then you have to take an honest appraisal of Martin's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
Right. Self defense because he was getting his ass kicked.
That's usually when self defense comes into play.
daily is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 02:56 PM   #6611
Dresta
A humble prophet
 
Dresta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Medina
Posts: 8,950
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by ace23
Not a good comparison.

There's just no reason for Zimmerman to have left the car in my mind other than to confront Trayvon. It's not just the fact that he left his car; it's that there seems to be no reason for him to do so - we're forced to fill in the blanks. It was the prosecution's job to do so with evidence - they didn't. Oh well.
He gave his reason: to check what road he was on. I don't know the road names of the roads around mine, so i don't see why Zimmerman should.

There's no reason for me to want to go for a drive randomly - does not mean i meant to run said person over. It is exactly the same faulty logic which would not hold up in a courtroom anywhere in the world.
Dresta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 02:56 PM   #6612
MJ23forever
High School Varsity 6th Man
 
MJ23forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 759
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by MavsSuperFan
I suspect he went because he assumed based on Trayvon's appearance (racial profiling) and the fact that he had not seen him previously that trayvon was a criminal. The truth is trayvon was going back to his dad's residence after buying skittles and ice tea. I consider what happens next tragic, but based on the trial I believe Zim killed trayvon in self defense.

I don't believe it was strictly because of his race, rather because he fit the description of the perpetrators of the recent string of home invasions of his neighbors, the fact that he had never seen him before, and that he though he was acting suspicious. If the the perpetrators of the recent string of home invasions were Hispanic or White's in their late teens, and George observed and reported a Hispanic or White teenager as he was on his way to the store, would it still be considered 'racial profiling?"

I mean based on what we know about George, he's Afro-Peruvian, he self identifies as Hispanic based on his voter registration, and his brother Robert said himself that they identify as being Hispanic, George mentored two black teenagers for free, and he's a registered Democrat and voted for Obama, do you think he would profile somebody as a criminal ONLY because they're black, or rather because they fit a description, he never seen him in his neighborhood before and he thought they were acting suspicious?

Last edited by MJ23forever : 07-15-2013 at 03:02 PM.
MJ23forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 03:02 PM   #6613
ace23
*****
 
ace23's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 10,274
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dresta
He gave his reason: to check what road he was on. I don't know the road names of the roads around mine, so i don't see why Zimmerman should.

There's no reason for me to want to go for a drive randomly - does not mean i meant to run said person over. It is exactly the same faulty logic which would not hold up in a courtroom anywhere in the world.
Because he'd been patrolling this street for the past year.

Either way, there's reasonable doubt since Zimmerman is the only one other than Trayvon who witnessed the whole thing. We'll never know who really initiated the altercation. Just hard to get a conviction in this case when "not guilty" is the null.

And going for a drive randomly is not the same as getting out of a car when there happens to be a "suspicious" person in the vicinity. No.
ace23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 03:02 PM   #6614
DonDadda59
Lord High Executioner
 
DonDadda59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Killing Fields
Posts: 19,457
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dresta
He gave his reason: to check what road he was on. I don't know the road names of the roads around mine, so i don't see why Zimmerman should.

There are only 3 streets in Zimmerman's complex where he lived for 4 years and was the head of the neighborhood watch, come on man. Even in the recreation he knew the name of the street he couldn't remember a few hours before. And why did he feel he had to get an address from a street he wasn't parked on, in a direction that Trayvon hadn't run to (and he jumped out of his car a second after saying 'oh shit, he's running!'). And then when prompted by the dispatcher to tell him the address, his response was 'could you have [the police] call me, and I'll tell them where I'm at'.

Really?

And I'd love to finally get an answer to the question I posted above. Can't be that difficult to answer, right? I mean there must be a logical reason why a kid walking home to watch the NBA all star game with a fruit drink and candy in hand would all of a sudden transform, unprovoked obviously, into a bloodthirsty murderous werewolf.
DonDadda59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2013, 03:08 PM   #6615
longtime lurker
Very good NBA starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,750
Default Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by daily
IF you look at Zimmerman's past history then you have to take an honest appraisal of Martin's.

One's a kid who does stupid kid stuff unless he has criminal record that wasn't presented to the public. Trayvon was just minding his own business.

The other is a grown adult that has repeatedly had aggression issues as an adult and kept ignored the advice of the 911 operator.

Unless Trayvon has a criminal record or was carrying weapons on him all this stuff about his past history is only relevant if you believe Zimmerman's version of events is the only version.
longtime lurker is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:36 AM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site















Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy