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

uponit7771

(90,225 posts)
71. Stalking only has to be malicious, it's reasonable to belive Martin thought it was so looking at the
Fri May 18, 2012, 04:34 PM
May 2012

...GF phone call and his actions ZMan described...

ZMan shouldn't have talked tot he cops no doubt...

sorry, but this isn't stalking gharris714 May 2012 #1
Glad you could join us, just to post that. ScreamingMeemie May 2012 #2
You're certainly not sorry. I can sense the glee of your anticipation. EOTE May 2012 #3
Post removed Post removed May 2012 #5
he folowed in his truck and then by foot.. frylock May 2012 #7
Good catch, the "repeated" can be a continued action or actions...of stalking uponit7771 May 2012 #13
This is wrong, Here's the definition uponit7771 May 2012 #12
A witness said Martin was chased which would indicate to Martin this person was aggressive Quixote1818 May 2012 #44
+1 uponit7771 May 2012 #48
If you think Zimmerman was stalking Life Long Dem May 2012 #4
Stalking has more than one definition. EOTE May 2012 #6
One thing is always included in stalking Life Long Dem May 2012 #8
Are you capable of reading? EOTE May 2012 #9
obsessive is repetitive Life Long Dem May 2012 #11
So you have a very hard time with logic as well as reading, do you? EOTE May 2012 #14
That's false, it can be a singular instance of continued stalking and that's what ZMan did... uponit7771 May 2012 #15
I think you ought to look up how Florida defines "stalking". Kaleva May 2012 #28
Yes, repeated doesn't have no intermentant it can be continuous one can't argue that if ZMan stalked uponit7771 May 2012 #34
We're not talking about how Florida defines "stalking", we're talking about the actual definition. EOTE May 2012 #37
The "actual definition" doesn't really matter, does it? Kaleva May 2012 #43
Either way, websters or FlawDuh law ZMan stalked...repeated actions doesn't mean repeated over uponit7771 May 2012 #45
Actually, it definitely does matter. EOTE May 2012 #47
The DA doesn't have to charge him with the crime just prove that it was done and then it's down uponit7771 May 2012 #53
While I wouldn't say he stalked Trayvon... Kaleva May 2012 #79
The only definition that counts is the one in the Florida statute. nt hack89 May 2012 #51
Like hell it does. EOTE May 2012 #57
The DA has to prove Trayvon's fear of being killed was reasonable hack89 May 2012 #62
Which, once again, has nothing to do with the fact that Martin was stalked. EOTE May 2012 #64
I know that hack89 May 2012 #67
That's not true, a reasonable person can conclude ZMan wasn't chasing the guy to ask uponit7771 May 2012 #65
But will a reasonable person conclude that Zimmerman was chasing him to kill him? hack89 May 2012 #69
Stalking only has to be malicious, it's reasonable to belive Martin thought it was so looking at the uponit7771 May 2012 #71
But he is not being charged with stalking hack89 May 2012 #74
He doesn't have to be charged with the crime to conclude the actions occured, his self defense uponit7771 May 2012 #76
He does not meet the legal definition of stalking hack89 May 2012 #78
Martin ran didn't he? He ran cause he thought the guy wanted Skittles? uponit7771 May 2012 #70
That might work hack89 May 2012 #73
true, I'll never talk to the cops after this one. I really though ZMan was going to go free until uponit7771 May 2012 #77
my understanding of burden of proof is different than this ctaylors6 May 2012 #83
The CONTINUED act even if it's in a singular time span is "repetitave" in itself... uponit7771 May 2012 #10
I disagree Life Long Dem May 2012 #16
Yes, I'm quite aware that you tend to disagree with objective facts quite often. NT EOTE May 2012 #17
Really? Life Long Dem May 2012 #20
First of all, you said nothing about the legal definition of stalking. EOTE May 2012 #21
How the hell do you get that from my post? Life Long Dem May 2012 #27
Once again I have to ask if you're capable of reading. EOTE May 2012 #30
He's ingnoring the definition on purpose, even if the defenders stick with repated in the legal.. uponit7771 May 2012 #31
Repetitively or not, what Zimmerman did was stalking. EOTE May 2012 #41
Your trying to find what you want to fit into your definition of stalking. Life Long Dem May 2012 #32
This is slicing some serious onions but even if we take your assumed definition of stop and starting uponit7771 May 2012 #38
Are you really incapable of understanding that some words have multiple definitions? EOTE May 2012 #39
But we are talking legal definitions and Life Long Dem May 2012 #50
No, we were NOT talking about the legal definition. You lost your chance to make that argument long EOTE May 2012 #52
Repetitive acts have been proven given ZMans own statements, the repitition doesn't have to be over uponit7771 May 2012 #55
K, so if he folllowed him for a month continually NON STOP then it wouldn't be stalking? uponit7771 May 2012 #18
Of course it would be stalking. Life Long Dem May 2012 #22
This is a TOTAL stretch, if T Martin had been a 12yr old girl of any color and ZMan a white man uponit7771 May 2012 #25
he followed martin in his truck and repeated to follow by foot frylock May 2012 #33
So, how many times do you believe he followed Trayvon that night? slackmaster May 2012 #19
Good one Life Long Dem May 2012 #24
Twice, once in car and then on foot....a continues action...see above statemens about skin color uponit7771 May 2012 #26
You have just proved that Zimmerman didn't Stalk Martin Taitertots May 2012 #23
A reasonable person can conclude ZMan wasn't going to ask Martin for some Skittles and uponit7771 May 2012 #29
The law is clear and his actions do not constitute stalking Taitertots May 2012 #49
Let's see. Followed in his car. Then followed on foot. = repeated. "reasonable fear of injury/death" uppityperson May 2012 #84
Your interpretation of the law is incorrect Taitertots May 2012 #85
that argument ProdigalJunkMail May 2012 #86
ha ha ha uppityperson May 2012 #88
"Being briefly followed simply doesn't qualify as reasonable fear of injury/death"? Are you serious? uppityperson May 2012 #87
he followed in his car then followed by foot frylock May 2012 #36
They'll argue he never stopped his car, just let the damn thing roll uponit7771 May 2012 #42
And didn't ZMan change course on foot... KansDem May 2012 #60
GREAT POINT...From just the 911 tape that makes this 3 instances of "stalking" uponit7771 May 2012 #63
well fuck having a trial then... ProdigalJunkMail May 2012 #35
Nope, peopel sholdn't say shit to the cops without a lawyer....he's due hiis day in court and I'm uponit7771 May 2012 #40
is he charged with that? i don't know what the exact charges are... ProdigalJunkMail May 2012 #54
No, he doesn't have to be charged with it just proven that he started the felon AGGRESSION & every.. uponit7771 May 2012 #56
once again...juries make those decisions ProdigalJunkMail May 2012 #58
Yes, a jury will decided if ZMan stalked Martin...that goes without saying...this post was for uponit7771 May 2012 #61
from what i can find a jury will make no such decision ProdigalJunkMail May 2012 #66
He doesn't have to be charged with the crime to conclude the actions occured, his self defense uponit7771 May 2012 #68
i think you are wrong ProdigalJunkMail May 2012 #72
Continue to educate just like I do with OJ Simpson and the racist Furman who bashed that case uponit7771 May 2012 #75
ok...that's fair ProdigalJunkMail May 2012 #80
If you want to talk about the law then talk about the law cthulu2016 May 2012 #46
Again, 1...got out of his car.....2....followed him on foot...time span is NOT mentioned as a factor uponit7771 May 2012 #59
- cthulu2016 May 2012 #81
The trick... Cave_Johnson May 2012 #82
Since he's not being charged with stalking, a crime,... Kaleva May 2012 #89
I guess that's not the end of the story nt kudzu22 May 2012 #90
I'm not sure why you're ctaylors6 May 2012 #91
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The stalking of Trayvon M...»Reply #71