Travon Martin Trial

He had the galloping munchies and Zimmerman got between him and his Skittles, maybe?

 

Olympic record leaps in logic here.

Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 2

 

1. We have eye witness testimony that says (while under oath) TM attacked GZ, so we do know whom attacked.

2. A side effect of pot is paranoia but perhaps you are right and that had nothing to do with it and his motivation was based in racism.

 

1. We have sworn testimony from GZ while in police custody that says TM was the aggressor. The evidence supports his version.

2. Nice try in making this about me but I am not the one who made the mistake of jumping an armed man. TM made a very unfortunate miscalculation. He could of continued to run to his home, called 911 himself, called out for help from one of the residents but he did not do any of those things. He made the choice to lay in wait and attack GZ while GZ was returning back to his vehicle. The fact that TM was under the influence of a drug that makes people paranoid and impairs ones judgment is a relevant factor. You say that it would make you paranoid dead sober but would you ambush someone dead sober too?

 

Sure they do.

lol Drug-induced haze? He had THC found in his system, not PCP. Saying it was his drug use that got him killed is as silly as saying his skittles addiction did him in.

Someone following/chasing you at night is a fine reason to stand your ground. Oops forgot that law only applies for GZ (the man w the gun).

 

Well fellas, I'm not intolerant of light MJ use, heavy use does lead to a sort of psychosis, changed personality, changed thought process etc.

I say that as I've actually SEEN it happen to people.

That said, at 17, imo it's doubtful Martin had that condition.

The judge going in on Zimmerman over taking the 5th was yet another kangarooville moment, what sort of trained monkeys do they have running these things in la Florida?

 

That's correct, add in, Zimmerman is entitled to the benefit of the doubt, not Martin, and I've yet to hear or see any evidence to contrary to his recounting of events.

Add in, Zimmerman has NOT asserted a STYG affirmative defense.

 

Is there a way to know exactly how much was in his system like they can with alcohol?

THC is different no?

 

Nah, when one is being chased far better to run into the darkness to hide rather then stay in the brightly lit area where one is the proverbial sitting duck

 

Now the prosecution wants to go after him for aggravated child abuse charges??

 

Wow.

 

That's entirely wrong and makes no sense on any level.

#1. Look at a map. The most direct route to his house was the way he was going. His house was on the opposite side of the sidewalk that his body was found on.
#2. If you're scared of someone in a vehicle, you get away from them by running to where cars can't go.
#3. Its just as likely he was going to run home and heard GZ pass the T and hid.
#4. No one has convincingly explained why TM was scared enough to run in the first place but then turn around and confront GZ.

 

That's far from a fact.

 

Really? Did I not witness what I witnessed or will you tell me that I did not?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110606131705.htm

Took 3 seconds to find, you may try for yourself.

 

Bc you've seen it happen to a few people absolutely does not mean that's the standard or what happens to everyone who uses it, "heavily."

 

Do note the addendum as well slickj, "chronic heavy use" not "occasional" usage.

INOW, unless Martin's parents were wealthy and sporting him $$$ to buy the stuff, or he had his own plantation, chances are good, it really had no effect on the outcome that night.

 

Changing the receptors doesn't automatically = psychosis and major personality shifts.

As you say you've seen these major changes in people who uses it heavily for years I can absolutely tell you I've seen the exact opposite w many of my friends.

 

Ball is in your court, where is the study that shows that to be factual.

 

Your own study only states that heavy usage changes some receptors and makes them, "abnormal" compared to those of people who don't use it. That's the only fact they present.

What exact effects these abnormalities have isn't defined and they def do not indicate psychosis or anything as dramatic as you were suggesting.

 

Forget that belated stroke of genius by the State. Aggravated child abuse is not a scheduled lesser included offense to second degree murder. Third degree murder is lesser included to second degree murder, but Zimmerman would have to have been engaged in the commission of a felony. That's where the aggravated child abuse comes in -- as a predicate felony. But the state didn't charge it, and since it's not lesser included to second degree murder, the judge can't instruct the jury on it.

This, by the way, is an absolute act of desperation on the part of the State. It's manslaughter by culpable negligence or nothing, boys.

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/chapters/chapter33/schedlesserincludoffens.rtf

 

Atty CDZ ladies and gentlemen ....nice breakdown brother, the law gets tricky from State to State....

 

It is about time AP goes on the "DL" and bring up Pineda.....

 

I'm ticked. They're trying to railroad this guy. They want to apply the minimum-mandatory gun enhancement statute to a third degree murder or manslaughter conviction and put the guy in the deep freeze for at least a decade, without the jury realizing what they're actually doing.

 

The problem is the SYG law to begin with.

Unlike other issues, it absolutely requires one person or another to be guilty. If one person is innocent the other has to be guilty. So what we have in this case, is GZ gets the benefit of reasonable doubt to be innocent and TM doesn't. TM is just shot and dead. If TM was innocent then GZ has to be guilty and vice versa. What this means is that you can kill someone as long as they fight back and leave a mark and the person you killed is automatically guilty and you're automatically innocent until proven guilty.

So GZ is automatically innocent until proven guilty and for that to be true, then TM is automatically guilty until proven innocent, accept he's dead so it can't be proven.

 

Yep, that is as hostile a judge as I've ever seen, typically there is a filing that the defendant will invoke the 5th amendment, not for her Kangarooness, she basically went in on him. The jury will hear "manslaughter" and assume it would be a couple of year sentence, BUT, the length of sentence is and cannot be argued prior to jury deliberations, it has no bearing on guilt or innocence.

I thought NC courts were a zoo..

 

Zimmerman..is..not..arguing..SYG..as..a..defense.

What his lawyers are arguing is what is known as an affirmative defense, meaning "I did it but was justified in doing so do to X/Y/Z"

 

ok. In padreland how does that differ from SYG?

 

Sorry guys this was meant for the baseball forum.....

 

http://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2...or-in-zimmerman-before-we-even-get-a-verdict/

This is why I call the judge "her kangarooness", to be clear here, so his mother can testify though not there, but evidence of Martin's frame of mind is not admissible?

As for your Q FinD:

SYG basically says there is no duty to retreat when confronted:

Affirmative Defense:

What is the difference? Simply put, SYG is a sort of special status that the defendant claims to justify their actions, in FL they have a bar that has to be met in order to claim that status. A simple affirmative defense does not have to meet that same standard as it is accepted in either common law, or via a seperate no SYG statute.

 

Neither definition changes my point. For GZ to be innocent until proven guilty, TM must be guilty until proven innocent.

 

Don't be sorry yank, anything to break up this TM/GZ thread

 

Nope, Martin is not on trial, his actions are in question and it is up to the State to prove Zimmerman responded unreasonably to Martin's actions.