Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
97. I too believe that Zimmerman should be found guilty, most likely of manslaughter
Fri May 18, 2012, 11:54 AM
May 2012

but some of the screeds here are pure hyperbole...ignoring facts, the lack of public evidence, and the basics of legal procedure.

In the past I have had exactly what I described done to me and there has been violence. I have never been the one to throw the first punch and made sure there were witnesses before I hammered the idiot. I was younger and more foolish then.

If they attack you first and you are in fear of your life as your face gets pounded then maybe so. dkf May 2012 #1
Huh...maybe I should have stayed in my car since I told the dispatcher the man looked suspicous. vaberella May 2012 #9
+1 ScreamingMeemie May 2012 #12
Unfortunately, it's not illegal to disobey a dispatcher. randome May 2012 #26
I'm not talking about disobeying a dispatcher. I'm talking about finding the kid a threat. vaberella May 2012 #57
he was not threatened noiretextatique May 2012 #73
I completely agree. randome May 2012 #82
i pray for a good, aggressive prosecutor noiretextatique May 2012 #85
Bringing up his past should help the FBI if they want to pursue this as a hate crime. randome May 2012 #93
"fear for your life" = scary black man noiretextatique May 2012 #16
Yes. That's pretty much what it all boils down to -imo (nt) PotatoChip May 2012 #22
how many men, black or otherwise, do you let beat on you before you fight back? StarryNight May 2012 #165
if he had stayed in the car noiretextatique May 2012 #187
If you chase someone down you become the agressor in a sane state uponit7771 May 2012 #20
Bullshit Blue_Roses May 2012 #33
The girlfriend's testimony about what Trayvon said is second-hand and may be excluded amandabeech May 2012 #170
"face gets pounded"? riverwalker May 2012 #50
zimmerman apologists noiretextatique May 2012 #76
In your world, a rapist can stalk and attack someone Yavin4 May 2012 #56
YES...especially if the rapist is white noiretextatique May 2012 #68
You again. Taking up for another RW freak. kestrel91316 May 2012 #86
it does get tiresome, doesn't it? CatWoman May 2012 #102
I and many, MANY others have tried alert after alert. HughBeaumont May 2012 #132
I want to know the answer to this question too! JustAnotherGen May 2012 #2
No, that's not how it works. slackmaster May 2012 #3
Apparently so. Even if you have been told that the police don't need you to stalk ScreamingMeemie May 2012 #4
Where is the evidence that Zimmerman attacked Trayvon True Earthling May 2012 #5
stalking is illegal in some places noiretextatique May 2012 #14
It's illegal in all 50 states and in the Military's UCMJ. stevenleser May 2012 #75
In Fla, "stalking" requires repeated actions. SEe. Fla. crim law. 784.048 (2) (3). nt. amandabeech May 2012 #171
Ok, fess up. You're Zimmerman's dad, right? kestrel91316 May 2012 #87
OK, fess up. You are Martin's 1st cousin twice removed right? ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #113
You ABSOLUTELY can approach anyone in your neighborhood and ask them questions. Romulox May 2012 #6
sure...and if the suspicious person kicks your ass noiretextatique May 2012 #11
if you attack someone who has not put their hands on you first, StarryNight May 2012 #34
any evidence that Martin attacked first? noiretextatique May 2012 #37
didn't say that. we don't know who touched who first. and neither you nor I know StarryNight May 2012 #163
No one has a right to creep a stranger obamanut2012 May 2012 #134
well, if they don't have a right to do that, then they sure don't have a right to attack someone StarryNight May 2012 #164
Sure, and if they run away from you, Mariana May 2012 #41
Lots of "ifs" there. I'm not here to defend Zimmerman, just to get basic premises correct. nt Romulox May 2012 #80
Not too many "ifs". Mariana May 2012 #104
No, you can't obamanut2012 May 2012 #131
I get the feeling that Zimmerman wasn't exactly looking like a Mr. Rogers type that night Blue_Tires May 2012 #138
And I can tell you to FUCK OFF also. So what?? Logical May 2012 #148
Isn't great?! That's what Florida grants you and DUers support it. n/t vaberella May 2012 #7
only if you are white or a white latino...close enough noiretextatique May 2012 #8
+1 obamanut2012 May 2012 #135
apparently there are DUers who beleive bowens43 May 2012 #10
I think of a lot of what you're interpreting as 'support'... randome May 2012 #29
Well, GZ has at least two who show up on every thread kestrel91316 May 2012 #89
That's how it sounds to me, too. randome May 2012 #95
There has always been a segment on DU that supports the gun/death merchants Hugabear May 2012 #120
Pretty much. smokey nj May 2012 #13
seriously, what was Martin "defending himself" against? someone asking him StarryNight May 2012 #39
Um, George Zimmerman. You know the man who'd been following him. smokey nj May 2012 #48
why do you need to "defend" against following? you just keep walking. especially if you are a StarryNight May 2012 #167
He was defending himself (a child) from a creepy stalker that may or may not have been a sexual Dragonfli May 2012 #53
FAIL. A single punch doesn't justify a shooting, particularly if kestrel91316 May 2012 #90
So you think it is find to physically attack someone you believe they are following you? ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #99
I think it's FINE to verbally attack someone I believe is following me CatWoman May 2012 #103
There those here saying the Martin had the right to PHYSICALLY attack Zimmerman ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #105
ok, so explain it to me Blue_Tires May 2012 #141
You do realize that your are making the reasonable person case, just like Zimmerman ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #151
it's all in the manner of how you're being followed... Blue_Tires May 2012 #139
Not legally... ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #150
So why did it work for Bernie Goetz? Blue_Tires May 2012 #173
The jury believed that he had been threatened with IIRC the screwdrivers that were being carried. ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #179
just how martin had been threatened.... Blue_Tires May 2012 #181
Not sure where you are getting that... ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #183
it's a fine line... Blue_Tires May 2012 #184
you're african-american? Blue_Tires May 2012 #186
Yes, as was my late wife ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #188
Stop by sometime... Blue_Tires May 2012 #189
I'm subscribed there ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #190
You can follow and verbally accost someone in a non-threatening manner. hack89 May 2012 #15
but he did accost him, according to you noiretextatique May 2012 #18
Accost =/= threaten or assault hack89 May 2012 #23
How do you know any accosting was done in "a non threatening manner"? Fumesucker May 2012 #27
zimmerman went from "these people always get away" and "fucking coons" noiretextatique May 2012 #51
I don't know. Just pointing out what the jury will hear from his lawyers. hack89 May 2012 #72
you used the word accost, not me noiretextatique May 2012 #43
Your logic makes perfect sense and I agree with it hack89 May 2012 #78
i understand...i also know that juries are comprised of people noiretextatique May 2012 #79
So you are good with someone escalating a verbal confrontation to physical violence? ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #106
Is it possible to put a reasonable person in fear of their life without breaking any law? Fumesucker May 2012 #19
That is a question for the jury hack89 May 2012 #24
The "other side of the story" is the dead child. TBF May 2012 #44
I don't ignore it. hack89 May 2012 #64
Well then we'll ignore that dead child and go with the badass. TBF May 2012 #92
Look - explaining what the law actually says is not justifying Trayvon's death hack89 May 2012 #94
How the judge/jury interprets the law is what matters counselor. nt TBF May 2012 #96
No shit - but the law cannot be stretched beyond recognition to get "justice" hack89 May 2012 #101
I don't think they have a problem here. The only folks stretching are the TBF May 2012 #117
They have a hell of a problem hack89 May 2012 #121
Zimmerman can talk about ponies prancing in the sky if he wants to - TBF May 2012 #122
Zimmerman does not have to say a word hack89 May 2012 #123
Zimmerman being told on tape to stay in his vehicle & the dead child. TBF May 2012 #124
Ignoring the 911 operator is not a crime hack89 May 2012 #125
all i want is Zimmerman's official statement to police that night Blue_Tires May 2012 #176
of course it is noiretextatique May 2012 #47
Nope, I had someone arrested for following me obamanut2012 May 2012 #136
What was the exact charge that he was convicted on? nt hack89 May 2012 #146
Under florida law ctaylors6 May 2012 #17
+1 uponit7771 May 2012 #21
"Repeatedly follows" is why Zimmerman was not charged with stalking. nt hack89 May 2012 #25
We are not in court and stalking has another meaning besides the legal definition.. Fumesucker May 2012 #30
Yes - but what happens in court is all that matters. nt hack89 May 2012 #35
Then why worry about how people are using language outside of court? n/t Fumesucker May 2012 #42
Because it contributes to unrealistic expectations as to what will happen at trial. hack89 May 2012 #67
He did repeatedly follow, it doesn't have to happen over days hours or weeks uponit7771 May 2012 #46
He was not specifically charged with stalking hack89 May 2012 #62
True, they don't have to charge him to prove the chain of events and whos at fault uponit7771 May 2012 #65
"The initial act of felon aggression was the stalking" is a huge assumption on your part hack89 May 2012 #88
Florida Stalking Statute amandabeech May 2012 #174
I think a case could be made that Zimmerman had a habit of stalking people of color. intheflow May 2012 #147
I'd keep my ass in the car Aerows May 2012 #28
That seems to be the case ArcticFox May 2012 #31
Falsely framed, but you already knew that ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #32
I had the same thought professor Yupster May 2012 #40
The situation with Zimmerman and Martin, though Aerows May 2012 #63
No doubt about that Yupster May 2012 #70
Cops, who tend to overcharge only asked for manslaughter ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #84
"Cops" tend to overcharge no one, as they do not have the capacity to do do. Ikonoklast May 2012 #107
Ok, cops tend to recommend/request charges on the high side ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #110
Cops give evidence, reports, and testimony to a DA or a grand jury. Ikonoklast May 2012 #115
IIRC the Sanford PD requested/recommended that Zimmerman be charged with Manslaughter ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #116
Law enforcement do not charge anyone obamanut2012 May 2012 #137
Already discussed several posts up ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #152
Make it not political ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #81
I don't see that as political Aerows May 2012 #91
I too believe that Zimmerman should be found guilty, most likely of manslaughter ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #97
Incorrect. We have clear evidence that Zimmerman Pursued Martin. Yavin4 May 2012 #60
Here's how Florida defines stalking: Kaleva May 2012 #36
Yeap, ZMans following was willful and malicious and he followed him for a while uponit7771 May 2012 #38
But it wasn't repeated following of Trayvon. Kaleva May 2012 #52
Yes it was, he was even told at one time to stay in the car...repeated doesn't have to happen over.. uponit7771 May 2012 #55
He wasn't told to stay in the car. Kaleva May 2012 #69
he had a pattern of stalking black males noiretextatique May 2012 #71
Which would be profiling and he may be charged with that. Kaleva May 2012 #83
Z took more than Oneka May 2012 #77
Yes, it is that simple, I disagree but I lack the proper pistol to be manly enough for them Dragonfli May 2012 #45
Stalking is illegal in Florida, but no one was stalked in the Martin/Zimmerman case. ZombieHorde May 2012 #49
The "repeated instances" can happen in a short time, stalking DOES apply here.... uponit7771 May 2012 #54
How does the law define a single instance? nt ZombieHorde May 2012 #58
The act itself and then the continuation is repeated uponit7771 May 2012 #61
Is that the law? That seems extremely silly. ZombieHorde May 2012 #74
Can you cite a case or reg for that? amandabeech May 2012 #175
See Serial Killer Richard Ramirez Yavin4 May 2012 #156
He was called the Night Stalker because it sounds catchy, not necessarily because ZombieHorde May 2012 #168
yes.... according to some, you should be free to kill others fascisthunter May 2012 #59
yes, that's exactly what some DUers are arguing CreekDog May 2012 #66
If Zimmerman was on the ground, HockeyMom May 2012 #98
You might want to review the earlier posts on what intermediate range means ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #100
"Intermediate range" could be anywhere from 1 to 18 inches according to one source. Kaleva May 2012 #111
Apparently so. Both in Florida and on DU. Bake May 2012 #108
Nah. I said that a month and a half ago......... socialist_n_TN May 2012 #129
It depends on the colors of the persons involved Blue_Tires May 2012 #109
+1 La Lioness Priyanka May 2012 #126
only if you are white. really doubt it would work if you were black. La Lioness Priyanka May 2012 #112
Number one Life Long Dem May 2012 #114
NOT WITH DEADLY FORCE........ socialist_n_TN May 2012 #130
Trayvon was stalked obamanut2012 May 2012 #140
Yep that is EXACTLY what they are saying Rex May 2012 #118
Yes. That is it indeed. Incredible. uppityperson May 2012 #119
Zimmerman didn't "Stalk" Martin Taitertots May 2012 #127
yuh... he just "walked up to him"....lol fascisthunter May 2012 #133
Well, he certainly wasn't on horseback Taitertots May 2012 #144
what about the following in the car before that? Blue_Tires May 2012 #142
So, Serial Killer Richard Ramirez Didn't Stalk Anyone?? Yavin4 May 2012 #155
thank you! Nine May 2012 #157
WTF does Richard Ramirez have to do with this case and/or the laws of Florida? Taitertots May 2012 #161
I believe whatever my TV tells me. Is that what some DUers here are arguing? just1voice May 2012 #128
If you follow someone because you mistakenly or even stupidly suspect they may be up to no good, Vattel May 2012 #143
So, How Does The Person Being Followed Know That The Stalker Is Non-Violent? Yavin4 May 2012 #153
You tell me. Vattel May 2012 #159
If you are female, certainly. eridani May 2012 #191
depends on what the Race of the person you are going after is JI7 May 2012 #145
No hfojvt May 2012 #149
There Is A Famous LA Serial Killer Named Richard Ramirez Yavin4 May 2012 #154
Maybe Zimmerman put his hands on Martin and Martin responded? soccer1 May 2012 #158
Yes, that is definitely possible. slackmaster May 2012 #162
Maybe, but, again, the hearsay rule prevents a third party from reporting what Trayvon said to her. amandabeech May 2012 #177
Hearsay exceptions soccer1 May 2012 #178
Are you thinking about "dying declaration?" amandabeech May 2012 #180
Exceptions to hearsay rule soccer1 May 2012 #182
We don't know what happened treestar May 2012 #160
Yes, Zimmerman could have avoided shooting Trayvon. No doubt about that. soccer1 May 2012 #169
Lax gun laws mean bullies are armed. daaron May 2012 #166
You need to be a non-minority and have some pretext, but yes. gulliver May 2012 #172
The dumbing down of DU continues. flvegan May 2012 #185
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So, I Have The Right To S...»Reply #97