BBM
You missed this post of mine, I guess ... :biggrin:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=35256693#post35256693
BBMSunny comes off as wanting to jump Guy's junk.
She was actually called out on it by Mark Firman.
It was pretty funny.
And?
Is that illegal?
Trayvon had 4 minutes to go 100 yards if he was scared. The truth is he was not scared, he was angry and wanted a confrontation.
BBM
You missed this post of mine, I guess ... :biggrin:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=35256693#post35256693
BBMSunny comes off as wanting to jump Guy's junk.
She was actually called out on it by Mark Firman.
It was pretty funny.
He did say that in his statements the night of the 26th.
It changed in the reenactment to pushing stumbling a bit and then he went down. Nothing explains 30' in any meaningful or reasonable way.
Where Z points in the reenactment is about where the key chain flashlight was found 8' or so from the T. I think its possible to stumble 8 feet before going down, but then wheres the other 22'?
...and there's no reason why he could not have easily run that 100 yards in under 1 minute (and probably under 45 or 30 seconds). He wasn't overweight and had been involved in athletics at one time.
That makes more sense if he didn't run to begin with.
Truth is we don't know the truth.
...and there's no reason why he could not have easily run that 100 yards in under 1 minute (and probably under 45 or 30 seconds). He wasn't overweight and had been involved in athletics at one time.
And?
Is that illegal?
Yes he indicated he may have stumbled, right around where the keychain flashlight was found about 8' from the T. What about the other 22'ish feet?
Thats my point the physical evidence supports a number of different scenarios so making an affirmative conclusion like EK is simply not possible.
No its contrary to what he said he was doing though, if the goal was to walk back to the truck it doesn't take 2 minutes.
Yeah, lack of blood & oxygen to the brain caused by a gunshot to the heart could never cause brain damage, could it? And LOL at the pot statement.
I think people are making too big of a deal of the whole "scared" thing. When I was 17 I probably would've done what he did, except for assaulting GZ. Here's what I could see happening. You're initially freaked out because some guy is watching you, asking questions, whatever, so you take off. Once you're out of sight you relax a bit and you want to go back and see if he's still there, see what he's doing, or whatever.
17 year old me (I'm 31 now, I was never in trouble as a teen but I had a normal 17 year old male attitude) would've probably just left after I went back and saw him still there, and if he started questioning me I would've told him it's none of his business. I would've left it at that, but someone that's more aggressive might've gotten pissed off and sucker punched GZ. Just speculating, obviously, but I'm not sure why that's so hard for the TM supporters to believe. Of course that doesn't mean that TM deserved to die, but there's consequences for your actions.
Is TM not running home when he thinks he's safe from a guy following him in a car illegal?
It doesn't matter what he was doing.
Confronting Martin isn't illegal either.
The only illegal act would be who started the assault and the evidence points to Martin.
Zimmerman could have been wearing a KKK robe, carrying a burring cross, and following Martin. Up until someone assaults the other person, no crime has been committed.
If you believe that Martin was the first person to lay a hand on someone in this fight then Zimmerman is innocent.
If you believer that Zimmerman was the first person to lay a hand on someone in this fight then Zimmerman is guilty.
Since the state/prosecution didn't present a shred of evidence to support that Zimmerman was the first person to initiate a physical confrontation we must assume that no such evidence exists. As no evidence exists, Zimmerman gets the benefit of the doubt being the defendant as the state has proven nothing beyond a reasonable doubt.
Right had he agreed he wouldn't have been able to carry his gun on patrol and he would have had a full background check run, where his prior arrest would have been uncovered.
Its does matter when were considering the credibility of the shooter.
And would have been treated just like Lester and Nelson treated it.
Looking at the details; it becomes a non-event as to qualifications except for those looking for an excuse to make it one.
If one were to get a ticket for speeding does that preclude you from ever being a officer of the court or law enforcement.
NO!
It is a minor item; multiples could then be concern of a behavior pattern.
Sure and another witness said she saw two people running north towards the T. Witnesses are not completely reliable.
So say that Zimmerman lied. 100%.
So what?
What EVIDENCE did the prosecution produce to PROVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that a crime was committed.
A dead body isn't evidence that any crime was committed.
That dead body being shot isn't evidence a crime was committed.
Without her glasses (which were needed) and then stated it could have been one.
Also there were shadows. One person could create two shadows.
Because he has actually been trained in law enforcement and knows what to do and what justifies/triggers warranted suspicion.
It's no crime to do alot of stupid things, but doing them when you know it's stupid and against the guidelines/instructions laid out is asking for a bad outcome. I know it's stupid to wear a tie when operating a drill press, if I wear one and get hurt, was it the drill presses fault?