And yet your hero's still going to trial, and could well be facing a long ass time in jail. Doesn't sound very clear cut to me.
Oh, and the prosecution said it was a contact shot. The gunpowder and stippling prove it was (I guess thats the rippling of the skin/flesh from the force of the gas from the barrel).
So that knocks out the "made up shit in their heads" story that martin got off of zimmerman trying to get away and zimmerman murdered him in cold blood.
This is clear cut self defense, it hardly gets any more clear given all this evidence.
-edit-
Stippling is actually gun power/debris embedded in the skin proving a contact shot.
So they'll burn their own !@#$ again. Only hurts them.
And yet your hero's still going to trial, and could well be facing a long ass time in jail. Doesn't sound very clear cut to me.
-edit-
Stippling is actually gun power/debris embedded in the skin proving a contact shot.
Stippling is the pattern caused by the gun powder/debris, not the gun powder/debris itself.
Stippling (tattooing): Unburned powder and debris, causing punctate abrasions on target. Larger and heavier so travels farther. Does not wipe off.
Not what I read. There is a stippling pattern, but stippling is powder/debris that isn't wiped off and embedded in skin indicating a contact shot or extremely close (under 6 inches).
Not necessary a contact shot as in muzzle against skin, which wouldn't show stippling, but a shot from a very close proximity. Power is moving at a very high speed, but having an extremely low density very rapidly loses velocity. But if the barrel is actually against the body, the powder has no time or room to expand into a stippling pattern and is carried into the wound channel.Oh, and the prosecution said it was a contact shot. The gunpowder and stippling prove it was (I guess thats the rippling of the skin/flesh from the force of the gas from the barrel).
So that knocks out the "made up shit in their heads" story that martin got off of zimmerman trying to get away and zimmerman murdered him in cold blood.
This is clear cut self defense, it hardly gets any more clear given all this evidence.
-edit-
Stippling is actually gun power/debris embedded in the skin proving a contact shot.
For example, the weapon was a black Kel Tek 9 mm PF9 semiautomatic. The bullet would have been discharged when Zimmerman pulled the trigger causing the hammer to strike the primer igniting the smokeless powder in the casing producing rapidly expanding gas (consisting of carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon dioxide and other gases) that ejects the bullet, burning and unburned gunpowder (the burn always is incomplete), and trace amounts of the primer that contains heavy metals, including lead, antimony, and bismuth. Depending on the nature of the wound and the presence of all, some, or none of these materials, a qualified forensic firearms expert can determine how far away the gun barrel was when the shot was fired.
The gases, including the heavy metals, and some smoke from unburned but gaseous carbon, are projected only a few inches. The effects of the gas produce what are called contact or near-contact wounds that are characterized by variable skin lacerations or tears from the expanding gases that rip the skin apart and stippling, which is blackening skin from the unburned smokeless gunpowder that is propelled out the barrel of the gun with the bullet by the rapidly expanding gas.
As the distance of the gun barrel to the skin increases, the effect of the gas diminishes and only the unburned powder and bullet are capable of penetrating the skin. Stippling is present when the gun barrel is 0.5 centimeter to 1 meter from the wound. The pattern gets larger as the distance increases. So-called distant wounds do not cause tearing or stippling.
He was doing all those things at the same time? If so, why would he be living with his parents if he's married? Doesn't make sense. And what advanced degree was he pursuing at age 28? But let's just say he was doing all those things, why would you be on a NW? It seems like he felt like he had something to prove. His father failed him big time and here we are...
More info on stippling and how close the muzzle has to be for it to occur. Not to argue, but it's very interesting.
http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/
When Zimmerman gets found not guilty, I'm sure there will be many black people rioting and looting.
Black people like to get violent when they don't get their way. Take the Oakland Bart shooting for example.
If, and thats a really big if, you aren't just another racists asshole then keep in mind that black people just very recently obtained the rights to even speak up in public without risking a legal (or semi-legal) asswhooping (or worse). Not trying to excuse anything but context is always a good thing.
What, a couple little scratches in the back of his head? That's the evidence of a life threatening struggle with someone? Looks more like Zimmerman started a fight, started losing, then pulled a gun out.
or he was truly concerned about his neighbors? Are you seriously finding fault in him for solely that reason?
You can have your own opinion on if what he did was right or what exactly happened that night but to fault him solely on being a member of NW due to him being 28????
How in the hell do you gather all of that from that picture????
I have no f'ing clue what happened and have not pretended to but exactly what does that picture show that gives you any insight on who started the fight?
By ROBERT LEIDER
The shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman has spurred national outrage over Florida's Stand Your Ground law. Unfortunately, the discussion of this law has been marred by misinformation. Jeffrey Toobin, CNN senior legal analyst, erroneously claimed that the law "allows a disproportionate response; if someone comes at you with a fist, you can reply with a gun."
Many have asserted that in Florida anyone who believes he is in danger can use deadly force, no matter how unreasonable his belief. These perceptions of the law are wrong. As compared with other states, Florida's Stand Your Ground law is neither extreme nor an outlier.
In Florida, as in most states, a person claiming self-defense must show that he (1) reasonably believed that such force was (2) necessary to protect himself against (3) the imminent and (4) unlawful use of force by another. The person claiming self-defense usually cannot be the initial aggressor. And to use deadly force in Florida, as Mr. Zimmerman did, a person must also reasonably believe that the aggressor threatened him with death, great bodily injury, or intended to commit a forcible felony (e.g., rape, robbery or kidnapping).
In short, under Florida's Stand Your Ground law, Mr. Zimmerman now must show that an average person in his circumstances would have viewed the Skittle-armed Martin as a mortal threat.
To these basic requirements, a minority of states add a general duty to retreat before using deadly force. Most states in this minority apply the rule only if the defender knows he can retreat with complete safety. In Florida before 2005, a person usually could not use deadly force if he could retreat without increasing his danger.
Enlarge Image
Close
Corbis
.
Although expanding Stand Your Ground laws has suddenly become part of the culture war, the existence of such laws traditionally depended on geography, not politics. Older states generally inherited the duty to retreat from English common law. As the United States expanded westward, the retreat requirement usually did not follow. Instead, Western states followed the "true man" doctrine, named because "true men" do not retreat when faced with danger. California became a Stand Your Ground state more than 150 years before Florida.
With the prevalent use of firearms, the retreat requirement has limited application today. Individuals usually cannot know that they can retreat in complete safety when facing aggressors armed with guns. And the retreat requirement has numerous exceptions in addition to the "castle doctrine," which exempts people in their homes from the duty to retreat.
For example, in states that require retreat, law-enforcement officers making arrests always may "stand their ground" when threatened.
Sometimes, private citizens making arrests have the same privilege. Mr. Zimmerman's right to use deadly force in self-defense under Florida law was approximately equivalent to—and certainly no greater than—a law-enforcement officer's right to use deadly force in a state requiring retreat.
This is not to say that eliminating the retreat requirement has no drawbacks. Eliminating the duty to retreat often makes it difficult to prosecute cases involving shady self-defense claims—such as bar fights and gang conflicts—when both parties should have simply walked away. Prosecutors have an easier time proving that a combatant could have safely withdrawn than they do convincing juries, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the person did not reasonably believe that he was in danger.
Now that prosecutors have charged Mr. Zimmerman, they will face a similar challenge. Mr. Zimmerman had called 911, and the dispatcher instructed Mr. Zimmerman not to pursue Martin. Had Mr. Zimmerman complied, no one would have been hurt. Before Stand Your Ground, prosecutors could have relied on Mr. Zimmerman's opportunity to retreat in order to help rebut his claim of self-defense.
Related Video
Yale law student Robert Leider dissects Florida's "stand your ground" law and what George Zimmerman's prosecutors will have to prove. Photo: Getty Images
.
.
After Stand Your Ground, prosecutors have a more difficult case. Now, they must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Zimmerman did not reasonably fear for his life. The police report contains some evidence to back Mr. Zimmerman's self-defense claim. Mr. Zimmerman reportedly sustained a broken nose, cuts to the back of his head, and had grass stains on the back of his shirt. These facts could provide reasonable doubt on the self-defense question if jurors thought that Martin may have had Mr. Zimmerman pinned to the ground and was beating him. This inquiry is much more fact-intensive than relying on Mr. Zimmerman's ability to leave the scene.
Nevertheless, even with Florida's Stand Your Ground law, Mr. Zimmerman will have difficulty asserting a successful self-defense claim. Stand Your Ground laws do not affect most basic requirements of pleading self-defense. Individuals using lethal force in self-defense must reasonably believe that they are in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury—in other words, an average person, given the facts as Mr. Zimmerman knew them, would have reached the same inferences about the danger Martin posed and the necessity of using deadly force to avoid it. Mr. Zimmerman's mere honest beliefs will not suffice.
Nor does the Stand Your Ground law permit individuals to use disproportionate force in self-defense. Mr. Zimmerman must demonstrate that he reasonably feared that Martin was going to kill him, cause great bodily injury (e.g., permanent disfigurement), or commit a forcible felony. A few cuts and a broken nose may not rise to this level. And Mr. Zimmerman will have to show that he was not the initial aggressor.
There is no need to exaggerate the leniency of Florida law. Regardless of whether he should have walked away, Mr. Zimmerman now must show that an average person in his circumstances would have viewed Martin as a mortal threat.
Mr. Leider, a student at Yale Law School, holds a Ph.D. in philosophy from Georgetown University.
I can understand doing NW when you're old and have no social life. That I can understand. But doing it at 28 when the rest of your life is just starting is odd (to me). And if he's married why live at home? Why not get an apartment with your wife? I can't imagine living with my parents, especially when I'm married. Ugh!
His father failed him by not seeing that his son was unstable, not normal. His son was defective in a very special way. He has a police complex and felt he needed to prove himself. Perhaps it's because he was married and living at home and going to college at 28. Perhaps. But the old man should've had a sit-down with his man-child and massaged his crippled ego.
I have nothing against people going to college when they're older. Neither do I have anything against people being married and living with their parents. It's only when these people try to "correct" their situation in an external manner that I think those closest to them have a duty to set them straight. The police were using Zimmerman like he was an auxiliary cop or a neighborhood snitch and his father stood by and did not understand the psychology of it all. It's a sad family affair.
I've been saying that TM would have to have a reasonable belief that his life was in danger before he could exercise self defense for a while now.
Its nice to see that we can finally agree on something.
You arent this obtuse intentionally, are you? One punch can kill.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/07/06/20110706las-vegas-casino-beating-death.html
I've been saying that TM would have to have a reasonable belief that his life was in danger before he could exercise self defense for a while now.
Its nice to see that we can finally agree on something.
You arent this obtuse intentionally, are you? One punch can kill.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/07/06/20110706las-vegas-casino-beating-death.html