Hey dung beetle, I'm having a polite conversation with Lucrum not you. He's the one claiming expert opinion ... ahh I mean expert fact and I asked him to prove his stated facts. He did not refute anything I said. Of course common sense or common civility is beyond you.
1)I never claimed I'm an expert. You made that up. 2) pspr is right. Here, I'll save you some time looking though. http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Index&Title_Request=XLVI#TitleXLVI
pspr is a fucking tool and his logic is wrong. You made a statement of fact and I asked for proof, simple enough. Question: Isn't it the judge and jury's job to decide what facts and information and evidence are relevant? Doesn't what is relevant change on every trial depending on the jury, judge, evidence, skill of the attorneys and the defendants?
In the scenario you describe Nope I'm not obligated to answer any questions except the police officer and I'd only give the minimal response required. Them asking questions doesn't give me the right to beat the shit out of them. Last year I had an episode where someone aggressively asked questions and I refused to answer since it was none of their business. He threatened to call the cops and evidently did so because 1/2hr later they showed up baffled and confused at the home I was visiting. In any case it was clear I didn't have the right to attack the guy. Had he brandished a weapon his probability of being attacked are nearly 100%. Had I started beating the shit outta him he would have been within his rights to shoot me. Everything worked out just fine because although the 2 of us disagreed we acted like civilized human beings. lil trey however ended up taking a celestial dirt nap because he couldn't act civilized, he had to be "all gansta". good riddance is all I can say. PS : I wonder if his mother was successful in getting his name trademarked. kinda lets you know what kind of people his family are comprised of and where their priorities are.
I'm saying I would politely answer. I wouldn't let somebody harass me with stupid questions but I'd politely answer. That was an American tradition and expected behavior at the beginning of this country.
I guess I missed that part. How so? See pspr's statement, again. I guess so, within the context of the alleged crime, relevant laws, rules of evidence bla bla bla. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Zimmerman followed Martin" So? Unless you can PROVE Zimmerman initiated the escalation that led to the shooting, it does not matter. Legally speaking. "Martin was not observed doing anything illegal" So? He didn't get shot while he "was not doing anything illegal". He was shot during the commission of a felony battery. " The police dispatcher asked Zimmerman not to pursue on foot...Zimmerman disregarded the police dispatcher and pursued on foot" Undisputed, but so what? Can you show where Zimmerman is required by law to follow directions from a dispatcher? "What started the confrontation when the two met no one here knows" True and again undisputed. This happens to be the only relevant fact you mentioned. If you could prove Zimmerman was in anyway responsible for the escalation in the confrontation leading to the shooting, he's guilty of manslaughter. Without it or at least evidence he's lying about it you got nothing, the prosecutor has nothing. Like I said he should never have been charged. "Zimmerman is a liar" You said yourself this won't matter and it shouldn't. The fact he's lied in the past in no way proves he's lying now.
I have to agree with you a bit. If someone asks you what you're doing, you don't owe them an explanation. If I were minding my business and someone asked me what i was doing and i told them to fuck off and they continued following me, I would get pissed.. i think most people would. BUT if you make the decision to physically attack them, YOU are taking things to the next level, and it's common sense that they are gonna defend themselves. I think Zimmerman did his part to provoke martin by following him around, and I'm not sure I believe his whole story, but that doesn't justify attacking him. It's a fact he was getting his ass beat, it's a fact he was calling out for help, and it's a fact that he shot trayvon from his back. I'm not sure what else he was gonna do if the guy wouldn't stop beating him and he had a gun. hmmm.. what would you do? That definitely isn't murder. Let's say zimmerman didn't have a gun on him, and he got his ass beat, do you not think trayvon was gonna be arrested and charged with battery? And what if he died or went into a coma, then trayvon would be facing serious time. You can't just attack people who make you uneasy, I can think of examples from my own life where there is no doubt that I would have been arrested and facing prison if I just attacked someone because they were antagonizing me. Probably everyone can. The only reason anyone even gives a damn about this case is because our fucking clown of a president decided to defend trayvon without having the facts, just like he sided with the black professor who got arrested for trying to break into his own house.. without the facts. yet, on these scandals he doesn't want to say anything until 'he has all the facts'. He is a hypocritical douchebag full of resentment/hate for white people and his AG is a racist, corrupt piece of shit who deserves execution.
Surely you don't expect Zimmermann to tell the police that he himself was the aggressor in this incident.