George Zimmerman Emerged From Hiding for Truck Crash Rescue

I still don't understand why defending yourself against a threatening person is "self defense" - unless you're a black teenager on your way home from 7-11.

 

Assault and battery, or self defense?

 

He should have spoken like a rational human being before putting his hand in his pocket for a gun. Martin would have had no reason to punch him out if he looked like a bumbling NW person, instead of a trash-talking boy bumper with a gun in his pocket.

If I am ever in an accident, I would just as soon idiots like Z kept on driving and called the fire department. I hate to think what would have happened had anyone in that vehicle had a back injury. Z has displayed absolutely no skill in any public safety capacity.

He doesn't even know that you are supposed to identify yourself when confronted, at risk of being mistaken for a felon and getting an attitude adjustment.

 

rapunzel

Great point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Someone has suggested that Zimmerman should change his name to get away from all the racist nuts that are threatening his life. It has been suggested that he change his name to Ben-------------Ben Ghazi. That way Obama and the MSM would never mention his name again!!!!

 

Unprovoked , as we know this was, would be assault and battery. Self defense requires an attack on your person you are responding to. Trayvon had not one mark on him excet scuffed knuckles and a gunshot wound.

- - - Updated - - -

Unprovoked , as we know this was, would be assault and battery. Self defense requires an attack on your person you are responding to. Trayvon had not one mark on him excet scuffed knuckles and a gunshot wound.

- - - Updated - - -

The gun wasn't in his pocket. you are so clueless it is hilarious!

 

OBVIOUSLY the jury did not see any evidence that Trayvon was in fear for his life or imminent harm from Zimmerman. In fact, he could have walked home several times, but instead decided to walk toward and confront Zimmerman.

 

Of course, you know an operator asked him, WHAT WAY DID HE GO- you know this, yet the response from George, according to you, should of been, I am too afraid to get out of this car in front of this person, lol.

 

George had no obligation to wait near his truck. He was trying to protect his neighbors by watching what a suspicious character was doing in his neighborhood.
Martin's death was caused by his own poor decision to physically attack Zimmerman after Martin pursued him and confronted him.

- - - Updated - - -

I think he is the type who would freak out and tell you "we don't need a gun" if he was your roommate and you told him you had one, then when someone beats on the door at 3am trying to get in he would immediately yell where's that gun?

 

Defending yourself from what? A question? Violence is not the answer and in this case, you now certainly understand that defending yourself from a beating is also self defense.

 

He did, he yelled for help which is quite rational in a neighborhood before you take more drastic action.

 

Well Skippy he did have a duty not to phsyically assault Zimmerman, which he clearly breached and that is why you are on the wrong side of this story and have been from the beginning.

As I have pointed out, Martin pursuing Zimmerman prohibits him claiming he was in fear of him.

 

Unprovoked?! Let's discuss what "we know this was":
An adult used his vehicle to follow a teenager at night, while that teenager was on his way home from the store. When the teen attempted to get away from the stalker, he was followed on foot. At some point, the teen asked the apparent stalker what his problem was, and the adult still chose not to identify himself or provide any reason for following the teen.... According to Zimmerman, who has the most motive to lie by making Trayvon look bad, Martin used unarmed attacks.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ng=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.012.html

You can use non-lethal force to defend yourself if you believe that it is required to protect yourself. You don't have to be attacked first.
If anything, the fact that Trayvon "didn't have a mark on him" proves that Zimmerman didn't even try to use proportionate force, he just skipped straight to shooting his stalking victim to death.

 

What question? When Trayvon and Zimmerman spoke, Zimmerman didn't ask any question (or identify himself, or explain why he was stalking a teenager at night...).

If you believe that both were "defending themselves", then the entire incident boils down to who created the situation....

 

Even if you feel Zimmerman started it, the actions speak for themselves. By law, you have a right to defend yourself from imminent physical harm.

 

Erroneous! The "teenager" was at his father's home's door when a witness was talking to him, shorly after that point in time he was a considerable distance from his father's home (or where he was staying) confronting Zimmerman, shortly after that point in time Zimmerman was on the ground with a broken nose with Martin on top of him pinning him down beating on him (according to an eye witness). This attack on Zimmerman preventing his from escaping the situation, led to Zimmerman defending himself with his firearm. You don't pursue someone you are supposedly threatened by.

FACTS junior, learn some.

The FACTS simply don't support that. An eye witness saw Zimmerman pinned down on the ground being beaten by the 6 foot all 160 lb "kid" right before the shot was fired.

 

You left the part out where the teenager had plenty of time to get away but decided not to.

 

What ever happened to "Stand Your Ground"?
According to Florida's laws, he didn't have to run from a perceived threat since he wasn't doing anything wrong.

 

There is no rational debate that he was on his way home after picking up Skittles and ice tea. Those are the facts of the case, and they were undisputed.
The fact that Zimmerman was having his backside handed to him by a teenager has no bearing on the fact that Zimmerman provoked the attack.

How does this not support the fact that Zimmerman didn't even try to use proportionate force, he just skipped straight to shooting his stalking victim to death or the fact that Trayvon was legally justified in using non-lethal force to defend himself if he believed that it was required to protect himself?

Ditto, gramps.

- - - Updated - - -

Which is exactly what Trayvon did before being shot by his stalker.

 

What? Read again. He DID have a duty not to attack Zimmerman, he breached it by attacking Zimmerman. Seems your reading comprehension has failed you.

Well it deosn't work, at all actually. If Martin had not committed a felony on Zimmerman, the gun would have stayed holstered. A more accurate representation would have been to say "Zimmerman had no duty to allow Martin to beat him to death".

I am glad you are stopping here, since your posts are getting steadily more off track.

Have a nice day yourself.

 

What threat of imminent bodily harm did he have? A question?