"If I had a son He'd look like Trayvon"

[knkali]

I find this thread is becoming very aggressive. See.... there is the rub. The definition of aggressor/aggressive. Another example of the pussification of America. If following someone for a few minutes to see if they are up no good without impeding them, touching them or talking to them is labeled aggressive, then we have truly lost the meaning of said word. I am not saying Glock is wrong or anyone is right. I am just pointing out how trite things have become. Because of this, people behave in a way so they do not get involved anymore because there is liability for doing or not doing the most mundane actions. I have been thoroughly convinced by this trial that getting into a possible sheet storm from helping out isn't worth it anymore. Make the phone call and walk away. Hell, if possible, don't give your name when you make the call either.

I think being the aggressor would have been physically stopping T, or pulling your gun on him, or touching him in a way other than shaking his hand, or even so far as yelling. Wow, the fact that we are having a dialog whether or not Z was the aggressor by following T amazes me at where our society has devolved to. Again I am not hammering Glock. He made a great post and seems to know the law more than most along with its ins and outs and what Z can be found guilty of.

[Bawanna]

Too bad his siding with the wrong team will ruin the good guys life if he's right which of course he's not.

bawanna is gone fishin, see ya in a couple weeks.

[muggsy]

Not true. Every guilty verdict, regardless of the crime (various levels of a crime) require guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The difference is in the level of crime and what its distinctions are.

Murder/homicide/manslaughter... no one is denying that Zimmerman killed Trayvon, so that part of the burden of proof is already taken care of. What's left is the mens rea (state of mind) and malice aforethought (intent, if any).

1st degree murder (not applicable to this trial) requires premeditation or planning.

2nd degree murder requires ill will, or the intent to do harm. Z followed T out of suspicion, not with the intent to do him harm... at least as far as the prosecution has shown, and most would probably agree to that.

Manslaughter (of the voluntary kind... i.e. intentionally shooting someone) is basically defined as a crime of passion. There is a sudden provocation, and you kill in response to the passion (fear, anger, etc.... emotional arousal). This fits the scenario that happened, according to the reported events.

The key as to whether or not he is actually guilty of manslaughter lies in how the jury view's the entire situation with regards to the legal claim of self defense.

If they believe he was not following T, that he really was just on his way back to his truck when T confronted him, then they should find him not guilty.

If they believe that Z WAS following T, then they should recognize that the law defines him as the aggressor, which nullifies justifiable use of deadly force in self defense, in which case they should find him guilty.

For the record... when asked by the dispatcher if he was following Z, he said that he was. However, trial testimony regarding his deposition and official statement has him claiming that he was not following T... but that he got out of his truck to find a street sign to tell the dispatcher a more accurate location. A more accurate location within a small neighborhood with all of 3 or 4 streets... which Z had lived in for several years. The police even brought up the fact (one which I questioned here before) that he had more than enough time to return to his truck, which he claims to have been doing.

If I'm on the jury, he's guilty of manslaughter.

The testimony that he was looking for an address came later in the sequence of events. That came long after he told the 9/11 dispatcher that he was following Trayvon. As the defense attorney stated Zimmermen did nothing illegal in following trayvon. If Trayvon was afraid of Zimmerman why didn't he run for home. Instead Trayvon chose to confront and assault the man who was following him. In fear of his life Zimmerman responded to force with force and that's called self-defense. Not guilty. I rest my case.

[muggsy]

Yes, because it was only your suspicions that he was up to something... you saw him do nothing wrong.

He didn't see Z and think, "****, he saw me" and ran off like he was busted peeping in windows. He saw Z, watched him... came closer... watched him... then split.

For all we know, he was worried that some strange white guy was watching him... so he ran. The point is, he was not visibly doing anything wrong, so Z had no reason to try and follow him.


By all means, defend yourself and others... against crimes actually directed at yourself and others.


And this part here, without making it personal, is the main problem with a lot of people.

Regardless of what information comes out after the fact about the victim, waaaaayyyyy too many people see that a black kid wearing a hoodie, walking in the rain, at night, in a predominantly "non-black" neighborhood, must certainly have been up to no good. Black guy in that situation must be a gang banger, right? Z even said he looked like he was on drugs or something, and he's the neighborhood watch captain, so he must know, right?

Take out the part about Z following him without cause, and it's a justified shooting. But that's not how it happened.

Blacks get racially profiled because a disproportionate number of blacks engage in crime. A disproportionate number of blacks are sent to prison because they engage in crime. Trayvon was a gang banger. Trayvon was using illegal drugs. Trayvon had committed burglery. Trayvon was suspended from school for theft and fighting. What part of the words street punk don't you understand? Trayvon wasn't a sweet little black boy. Trayvon was a thug. Trayvon has already received a thugs justice.

[knkali]

Guys the colonel gone fishing for a couple weeks. Please with a cherry on top, can we keep our sheet together long enough for him to have a good time without this forum blowing up? Racial discussions never go well and will certainly lead nothing but negativity. Cherry on top with whip cream--OK?

[Bawanna]

Good thought knkali, I'm not quite gone yet but soon.

Here's a parting gift.