Well obviously. That's a pretty silly hypothetical. It's like asking if I'd support prosecuting some Democrat if he were caught committing mass murder. It's common for murderers to claim self-defense. What's highly unusual, at least in the other 49 states, is for the cops to believe the guy enough to not prosecute until political pressure is brought to bear. This isn't a case of a person shooting down an intruder in his home, which from what I understand is what these stand your ground laws had originally been intended for, and which is a perfectly reasonable thing to legislate. This is a case of a person using a public right-of-way for a completely innocent purpose being shot down. Not prosecuting something like this is what most of us (outside of ET P&R anyway) think is nuts. So how your hypothetical would play out given the above is a pretty large stretch. But we'll see when the trial comes around. I mean, who knows? Maybe Trayvon knew Z and wanted him dead for some other reason we don't know about? Could be. Could be the Sun rises in the west too, but the chances are it won't, ya know?
So that's a yes? I do not mean to be contfrontational. And I liked it more when this computer had a spellcheck, sheesh. Anyway, would you agree that it appears that one branch of the local government has failed to do their job? I mean, if there was reasonable evidence to charge Zimmerman, then the cops should have charged him. If there was insufficient grounds to prosecute, then the government should have refrained. Can we not agree on this?
Note that I have no idea on what might be reasonable nor what evidence was actually collected. We're drawing sketches in the wind, generally.
Yeah. I think where we have a difference here is: without all the other crap it's pretty clear Z wasn't prosecuted because, once again as he did in prior episodes where he got in trouble, his well-connected father intervened and got the charges to be dropped. You guys never seem to connect the rather obvious dots on this score. Stripped of all the political barnacles this case has collected, this is what happened. Unfortunately for father and son, they ran into the rather obvious fact that killing someone is a different order of magnitude from assault or verbal abuse. People tend not to take it too well when close relatives are murdered for no reason.
I don't know that he was or was not prosecuted for whatever issues. Curious that you consider it relevant. Should an axe murduring child molestor be inncocently accused of theft, you'd support his being railroaded? Are we to debate previous and potential crimes upon the accused?
We're not talking about the outcome of the trial, merely about whether he should be charged. The trial will be determining the rest of it, and I doubt his priors, such as they are since he somehow, can't imagine how, managed to get charges dropped every single time before this one as well as on this one (can you believe how lucky this guy is? Truly he must have a guardian angel), will be admitted into the record. Very lucky guy, somehow. We should all be so lucky as to be able to kill people we merely suspect of being dangerous who then turn out to be guilty of nothing at all, and then be able to get off by saying we did it in self-defense, and have the cops actually believe us, and do all that merely based on the strength of the established facts in the case. We would then be able to fill out a job application and truthfully say, dead guy notwithstanding, that we were never charged with a felony. Like, wow. Being born lucky is a very good thing.
See TGregg? After George Zimmerman KILL Trayon, he write what he feel and think. He write about the crime before in the community. So George Zimmerman think is ok to KILL Trayvon because he say before is crime in that community, so he is thinking he is right to be suspicious of Trayvon and to KILL him? Why? He tell the 911 nothing that he see Trayvon do crime. Nothing. He only have his paranoid and he only have his anger, and he judge guilty Trayvon and he kill Trayon. Why is George Zimmerman writing about the crime of the past? Why? He can not judge Trayvon guilty because of other crime is happened before in that community. "In his narrative handwritten the night of the shooting and released Tuesday, Zimmerman, who listed himself as 5 feet 8 inches tall and 194 pounds, recounted an August 2011 incident in which he said a neighbor's home was broken into while she was there with her infant son." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...ence-police-doubt-self-defense_n_1628209.html And "These assholes always get away" George Zimmerman talking to the 911.
You're speculating about stuff you know nothing about. Zimmerman's so-called priors were the type of minor incidents that typically are not prosecuted. As I recall, there was one incident that involved some shoving at a bar and the other was a girlfriend who got upset about something and called 911. What is so annoying about the way you libs approach this case is that you completely invent facts. I actually believe that is a large part of the reason conservatives are instinctively supporting this guy. We see a typical hysterical lib lynchmob, swept up in emotion and intoxicated by their own imagined sense of moral superiority. To say or imply that Zimmerman hunted this guy down and shot him is to completely ignore Zimmerman's documented injuries, witness statements, forensic evidence and his own unimpeached story, all of which tell a completely different story that is totally consistent with a neighborhod volunteer being savagely attacked and defending himself. But don't let the facts get in the way of your lynch mob. After all, the state of florida is now leading it.
Oh, I see. Give the murderer who failed to listen to police, a pass on his prior transgressions, but the kid who smoked pot is a fucking criminal. Nice.
Go to this pdf and scroll to page 104 first. This is the (laboratory report). From this report you scroll to page 3 of 6. Trayvon have no DNA of George Zimmerman from his fingernails, and he have no DNA of George Zimmerman on the low sleeve/cuff of the hoodie. Why no DNA of George to Trayvon if Trayvon is punch George and he slamming his head? Where is the DNA of George on Trayon's fingernails and cuff of his hoodie? George is saying Trayvon is slamming his head many times, and punch him and cover his mouth and nose too. But no DNA on Trayvon's fingersnails? And no DNA on the cuff of the hoodie? http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/Zimmerman_Discovery.pdf