Road rules10 mins ago
American Man Aquited Of Murder
Answers
In the UK he would have been done for at least man slaughter as he doesn't deny killing him (in the chest and not a bullet wound) but to be guilty of absolutely nothing is incredible.
17:08 Sun 14th Jul 2013
Baz, all of this fuss about "the truth" though -- every time, but every time, that I or someone else provides evidence against your views, you reject it pretty much out of hand, or just ignore it. Now someone provides evidence to support on your view and you jump on it gleefully. Well, no surprises there, I suppose. But you have no authority to tell other people that they have "a problem with the truth", since you seem to as well, when it suits you to reject it.
" But you have no authority to tell other people that they have "a problem with the truth", since you seem to as well, when it suits you to reject it"
when someone calls me an eejit then therye leaving themselves open really, I was very restrained as to what i could have said
dont dish it if you cant take it i'd say.
As far as this post goes I havent rejected any truth, only pointed out that you printed some truths that the handwringers dont want to hear as it doesnt suit their blatantly obvious black guilt trip views
when someone calls me an eejit then therye leaving themselves open really, I was very restrained as to what i could have said
dont dish it if you cant take it i'd say.
As far as this post goes I havent rejected any truth, only pointed out that you printed some truths that the handwringers dont want to hear as it doesnt suit their blatantly obvious black guilt trip views
It is doubtful whether a civil action would succeed. Self-defence is what Americans call an 'affirmative defense' . The stand your ground law applies in Florida. It is a bar to arrest, detention, and suit, which is why the first prosecutor didn't pursue the case.
Now, the "plaintiff" has the enormous difficulty that the defendant ran self-defence at the outset of his trial;he did not deny being present, nor say that he didn't shoot the victim. Accordingly, the plaintiff has to persuade another Florida jury that the first jury got their decision wrong on self-defence or "stand your ground".It's easy to say that the standard of proof is lower, but the issue is the same. If the first jury thought it reasonably possible that those defences were valid in the case; and they may have decided that it was more than just reasonably possible, but likely ; it seems very unlikely that the civil jury will find for the plaintiff . The very fact that the man ran a confess and avoid line; admitting all the essential facts, but explaining them ; actually helps him. It was ,after all, quite a compelling answer; the man was found to have injuries when the police arrived two minutes after the shooting was reported.
Now, the "plaintiff" has the enormous difficulty that the defendant ran self-defence at the outset of his trial;he did not deny being present, nor say that he didn't shoot the victim. Accordingly, the plaintiff has to persuade another Florida jury that the first jury got their decision wrong on self-defence or "stand your ground".It's easy to say that the standard of proof is lower, but the issue is the same. If the first jury thought it reasonably possible that those defences were valid in the case; and they may have decided that it was more than just reasonably possible, but likely ; it seems very unlikely that the civil jury will find for the plaintiff . The very fact that the man ran a confess and avoid line; admitting all the essential facts, but explaining them ; actually helps him. It was ,after all, quite a compelling answer; the man was found to have injuries when the police arrived two minutes after the shooting was reported.
"Not at all surprised but I will be surprised if he's still alive for his next birthday- I imagine some strongly feeling person ( and there do seem a few about over there regarding this) will repay the gesture. It would have served the purpose of justice far more if he had been found guilty, and saved a world of trouble to come over it. "
you couldnt make that up...... and there speaketh the voice of reason
and you have the temerity to try and lecture people on here......i'm laughing so much i'm choking on my biscuit (that should please a few of you).
you couldnt make that up...... and there speaketh the voice of reason
and you have the temerity to try and lecture people on here......i'm laughing so much i'm choking on my biscuit (that should please a few of you).
I was not unduly surprised. Obviously a tragedy for the family and friends of Trayvon Martin, but there was simply insufficient evidence to contradict Zimmermans version of events, and no reason to suppose that Zimmerman was lying. The prosecution were unable to demonstrate why Zimmerman should not be believed, and were unable to explain the injuries that Zimmerman had sustained.
I do not like the US laws on guns. I do not like Floridas "stand your ground" policy.I do think that, had Zimmerman heeded police advice and not chased after the "suspect", Martin would still be alive. But on the basis of the evidenced and Zimmermans own testimony, I do not think there is grounds to think him a murderer or even a racist. I can understand why the black community, and indeed many others, might see this as an example of racist bias, but on the evidence and the facts as presented in this specific case, I do not think you can arrive at that conclusion.
I think Coccinelle mentioned another case from Florida, where it is alleged a woman, fearing for her health/life at the hands of an advancing husband, fired shots in the air which did not wound her husband. She has recently been sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. This news - a black woman jailed for 20 years over a self-defence issue, and Zimmerman walking free having killed a young black guy allegedly in self defence, will obviously be seen by the black community and many others as evidence of racial discrimination....
One thing that does really puzzle me about the Martin case though - In various reports and stories, I have read several comments about the jury. I am sure I read that the jury comprised just 6 people- would that be right, or have I misunderstood? And the jury composition was all-white and all female - again that sounds just a little odd for a random selection from a jury pool.....
I do not like the US laws on guns. I do not like Floridas "stand your ground" policy.I do think that, had Zimmerman heeded police advice and not chased after the "suspect", Martin would still be alive. But on the basis of the evidenced and Zimmermans own testimony, I do not think there is grounds to think him a murderer or even a racist. I can understand why the black community, and indeed many others, might see this as an example of racist bias, but on the evidence and the facts as presented in this specific case, I do not think you can arrive at that conclusion.
I think Coccinelle mentioned another case from Florida, where it is alleged a woman, fearing for her health/life at the hands of an advancing husband, fired shots in the air which did not wound her husband. She has recently been sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. This news - a black woman jailed for 20 years over a self-defence issue, and Zimmerman walking free having killed a young black guy allegedly in self defence, will obviously be seen by the black community and many others as evidence of racial discrimination....
One thing that does really puzzle me about the Martin case though - In various reports and stories, I have read several comments about the jury. I am sure I read that the jury comprised just 6 people- would that be right, or have I misunderstood? And the jury composition was all-white and all female - again that sounds just a little odd for a random selection from a jury pool.....
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.