At 3/31/12 11:08 AM, RacistBassist wrote:
Yes, punches aren't usually intended to cause serious bodily injury. Banging someones head onto the ground does though.
Submission is not serious bodily injury. I'm not disagreeing that smashibng of the head is more serious than a regular fight. What I am saying is that it doesn't rise to the level necessary to end the inquiry before it begins. It is strong evidence, but hardly conclusive. I think we're having different standards for what should shut down a homicide case on a claim of self defense at the very beginning. I hold that standard to be extremely high. Like, knife, gun, baseball bat, or ganging up assault. 1 on 1 smashing of the head at the end of an altercation is not that high. There is enough other possibilities, especially with the holes in the story, that the self defense claim cannot just be taken on face value.
Did you forget the part where I said "serious"? You can argue semantics all day long, but you know exactly what I meant. Serious bodily injury is more then losing function of an organ. You see, here's the thing. Nowhere in self-defense do you have to wait for the other person to actually cause the serious damage if they have shown their clear intent to do so. Which happened.
I don't see smashing the heasd of another during a fight as clear intent of that. It is intent to harm, but intent to cause serious harm? It's not definitive enough. Now if Martian had then asked Zimmerman to go to the street and bite the curb, then we have another story.
No shit, that's because he pacified the threat. As I said, punch something, shit, go ahead and headbutt something. You can cause no visible damage on the first few strikes. Eventually though, you'll start bleeding and feel dizzy, maybe even knocking yourself out. This is repeated trauma, with intent to do more.
If head smashing was the threat, it has to be more than light. If it was light head smashibng, the only threat he put down was getting his ass kicked, which does not justify the use of lethal force.
Quit shifting the goal posts. Nobody said anything about not wanting a trial.
Wait, what? I have been arguing reasons why this bypasses the self defense law that immediately stops all prosecution and investigation, not that it would fail as an affirmative defense in front of a fact finder.
Worked fairly well? People have almost always been allowed to use lethal force in self-defense. Worked pretty well.
Exactly, but they're only allowed to use proportional actions. Now proportional doesn't mean equal. Proportional means the least amount possible to diffuse the threat of the situation as presented. There have been numerous cases where a victim has been convicted of murder because they went well overboard in their response. to the initial attack.
Go to the Wiki page. It's one of the basic facts of the shooting.
None of the witness in that page saw the beginning of the altercation.
You really are dense aren't you? "He was choking me, but he hadn't caused damage yet, so I better wait until somebody helps or he stops." Both can cause serious injury or death, but both also cause little to no injury up until that point.
"How many times can I use a fundamentally different set of facts and act like I have outsmarted you?" Strangling is different, very different.
How exactly did the altercation start?Don't know. But we have witnesses confirming the part where Trayvon took it beyond a fight.
No we don't. We have witness who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman striking him. None of the witnesses saw the fight so they have no idea what led up to this. Information about how the fight started could send this story either direction. Based on the buildup, Zimmerman following Martin for a while at night after he was asked not to, indicated enough intent on Zimmerman's part to raise questions.
Where was the gun the whole time?Probably on him not being brandished
Conjecture. However, if Martian was able to see the gun prior to the head smashing, Zimmerman loses his defense. Thjere are some many missing facts that could easily flip this case from Zimmerman self defense to Martin self defense (both sides can't have it).
If Zimmerman was so overpowered and being so dangerously smashed into the ground, how exactly did he get and shoot his gun?If somebody has you in a full mount, you could still easily access a firearm depending on where you have it and how high up on you they are. And that's assuming it was a fullmount with Trayvon 100% of the way on top of him and not partially or from the side.
Again, conjecture based on no facts. There needs to be a proper investigation to figure out some of these facts, and unless something pops up at that point that unequivocally exhonerates Zimmerman, this should go to trial.
The self-defense was meant to let anybody being attacked be able to use the right to defend themselves. If a 6'2 250 ib linebacker is attacked by a small guy who gets the jump on him, he can easily end up dead.
Yes he can. However, you cannot make that determination based on the last quarter of a story and evidence of extremely minor injuries. When it turns out the Linebacker was following the smaller guy in the middle of the night for several minutes after being told he shouldn't by police dispatch, this evidence is even less definitive.
Good thing no one disputes that. I do agree that the victim should have all the facts come forward, and not have the media persecute him and make him might as well be guilty, with the whole 4 year old pictures, conveniently leaving out parts of the story like the part where Trayvon was smashing his head against the ground.
I am perfectly fine with this.
My issues are that the facts are nowhere near definitive enough to let Zimmerman get off without a trial or even a full investigation.
Zimmerman's story (not his dad's which is completely fabricated) in the light most favorable to him shows that self defense was necessary, but only has mild indications that that force ever needed to be deadly. In my opinion, and this is how I would act as the prosecutor, unless it was damn near definitive that deadly force was necessary to the threat presented, I would proceed forward. Instead, the DA and the police (who actually were smart enough to request a charge) decided that somewhere between 'possibly' and 'somewhat likely' was enough. If that's the kind of zeal DAs put into their jobs in Florida, no wonder parts of Florida are crime ridden shitholes. (perhaps this DA saw how the Anthony DA's overzealousness cost him the case, and instead of doing the right thing, kneejerked to the point a killer is going free without any legal inquiry)
Head smashing, while bad, is not definitive a deadly or seriously injurious enough move to end all discussions as the the use of deadly force against it. It is borderline, and definitely evicdence of that in court. However, the strength at which head smashing is done can change it from a serious attempt to injure to an attempt to subdue. The threat of submission in a physical altercation does NOT kick the level of appropriate self defense up to deadly force. All the evidence we have as of right now, indicates that smashing very much on the lighter side (the injuries to the back of a bald head where slight and not visible in the video, and Zimmerman got up from the shooting appearing to be uninjured, not in a daze or anything like that)
We don't have the lead up either. We have the story of Zimmerman following Martin at night for a few minutes when he was told not to. Our story then skips to minutes later where people see Martin on top of Zimmernman. Those missing minutes are crucial. Based on Zimmerman's act of following Martin, it is highly possible that it was in fact Martin who was acting in self defense, trying to subdue a strange man who had following him through a strange neighborhood in the middle of the night.
Neither of those two points are definitive or unequivocal.