Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

What in the testimony so far contradicts that?

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

He was following but lost/didn't have direct sight of Martin. He was asked if he was following and said yes. He was asked to stop. He said "ok".

It's been established that at this point he was at the eastern edge roughly at the top right of the "T" shaped paths between the sets of houses. Martin had apparently ran off. At this point no one is the "aggressor".

While returning back along the same path towards his vehicle parked on Twin Trees, he was approached by Martin. This is after Martin had got as far as the building he was staying at about 100m to the south at the "bottom of the T" (based on his own phone call to his friend) but then, for some reason, backtracked and met Zimmerman back at the top of the path.

At this point there is an altercation and the eyewitness in the nearest house pointed out that it was Zimmerman who appeared to be the one being beaten.

This is rather different to the picture painted by the other poster which states Zimmerman chased down Martin, "assaulted" him and then shot him. In this instance you'd expect Martin to have injuries from the "assault" (he didn't) and be the one seen by the witness on the ground (which wasn't the testimony given).

This is probably why we "can't prove that is what happened" because it seems far less likely that what has been testified to thus far by multiple people.

It's been a very interesting case to watch so far and, thanks to CIC, I've had quite a lot of free time to keep an eye on it. It appears to me, as an outsider, that the prosecution has a heavy burden of proof to get the 2nd degree murder charge entered. Doesn't look like they've got close to proving it beyond any sort of doubt. Of course we'll see what the jury decides.

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

Only 6 jurors...all women...5 white...1 black or hispanic. How come...I thought jurors were supposes to be a cross section of society. :confused:

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

I've no idea what you're all talking about. Is this Zimmerman related to Dylan?

If not, is it another wall-to-wall CNN media trial? I don't watch CNN.

I bet, sooner or later, the glove won't fit.

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

Emotions aside, it is irrelevant. If someone breaks into my house to steal something, I can choose to hide in the basement and call the cops or I can choose to confront them using reasonable force.

It doesn't matter how ridiculous you believe it to be, it is the law and, it would appear, the law is on the side of Zimmerman in Florida.

Where is the evidence that Zimmerman assaulted Martin (shooting aside)? There is compelling evidence that Martin assaulted Zimmerman, so much so that one of the world's leading expert gave very credible evidence in support of Zimmerman yesterday. What credible evidence is there in support of your assertion?

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

I don't think reasonable force comes into the equation in Florida. If you feel threatened you can shoot them. :eek:

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

I don't live in Florida:p

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

Perhaps as well...we wouldn't want you shooting people willy nilly just because you feel threatened. ;)

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

Even though the legislators permit me to do so?

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

Oh go on then...knock yourself out.

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

Nothing to do with emotion and not a good analogy either because Martin didn't break into Zimmerman's house or anyone else's house. The police have stated that there was no indication that Martin was doing anything illegal before he was confronted by Zimmerman. Zimmerman chose to arm himself, leave his car (even though he had called 911 and knew the cops were on the way), pursue, confront and shoot Martin. That was a situation that was created by Zimmerman. He did not need to create it.

Yes, it is ridiculous. It's a ridiculous law. Just because something is the law doesn't mean it isn't ridiculous. There are lots of ridiculous laws all over the world. Florida recently repealed a really stupid one that required all foreign visitors to the state who wanted to drive to purchase International Driving Permits even though their driving licenses were already in English! That one caused chaos but they had the good sense to repeal it because they realized it was a ridiculous law.

Er..the fact he pursued someone who was doing no wrong and ended up putting a bullet through him to kill him is the ultimate proof I guess. Whether that assault was justified or not is questionable given that Zimmerman did not need to instigate the confrontation in the first place.

The only thing he verified is that Martin was over Zimmerman when he was shot. That doesn't prove anything. That scenario and Zimmerman's injuries could just as well have been the result of Martin defending himself from Zimmerman. Unfortunately we will only get Zimmerman's side of the story since Martin is conveniently dead and so Zimmerman will be acquitted.

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

I don't think there's been a suggestion on this thread that Zimmerman assaulted Martin, unless following him and shooting him dead counts as an assault.

Would you say that this seems accurate:

"Last winter, George Zimmerman saw a hoodie-clad black male cutting through a subdivision in the rain, and registered him as a threat. There are many white people who do not think of themselves as racist who can imagine themselves drawing the same conclusion. From this perspective, blandishments about Trayvon Martin’s right to move through that neighborhood unmolested are only so much political correctness. And as a result, Zimmerman becomes a sympathetic figure, a man who did what anyone would do under the circumstances..."

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...-sympathy.html

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

Post 103

"Zimmerman pursues, confronts and assaults Martin"

As I said what was posted seems rather inaccurate compared to the testimony.

I have no real opinion on the rest of your quote.

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

The test quoted is preceded by "Consider this scenario...and this is certainly a possible scenario in this case." It's still possible, however it requires that Zimmerman be bad at fighting and Martin good. It seems to me more likely that Martin, knowing Zimmerman was coming after him with a gun, turned the tables and ambushed Zimmerman. That nearly worked for him, his other choice, running, likely would not have worked better. Once a crazy cracker is after you with a gun your options are somewhat limited.

Now we're left with a case about race. Zimmerman thought Martin was a threat because he was black. The police thought Zimmerman faced a credible threat because Martin was black. Martin's dead because he was black. It seems that life, or at least, death, in Florida is just like death in Rexdale; by the great circle route we've demonstrated that Canada is more like the US than it is like the UK.

Re: UK vs Canada vs US
 

It's entirely irrelevant, got to say you're showing a bit of a British mindset about the police. There is no obligation on you to call the police or get them involved in any way at all. The police generally tend to be spread more thinly in countries like the US than they are in the UK.

The police are trained civilians, generally speaking they have no more rights than anyone else although statute does for example allow them to arrest people under slightly different conditions usually or allow them to access certain information (but even then, that information is usually still accessible through public record laws). Citizen's arrests are generally legal too.

However as far as going up to someone and asking them what they're up to, I've done that and I'm sure most people have, nothing illegal about it, frankly most people wouldn't even have bothered to call 911 first.

And so... nothing illegal about that. Moreover he was licensed to carry the gun and carried it routinely, doesn't imply any sort of intent on his part.

Being stupid and being an idiot doesn't make you a criminal. And in cases where you start a fight and the fight escalates and you then fear for your life, you can legitimately claim you acted in self-defence, in Florida at least. And many other jurisdictions.

This assumes he did actually start the fight, which he apparently denies.

Basically two idiots got into a fight based on their incorrect perception of the other person.

Happens all the time, the difference in this case was the media attention.