Justice for Zimmerman

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
fanaskin_sl said:
And that doesn't mean you know what would have happened if he didn't stop the beating he was receiving with a gunshot, you just don't know is the entire point. When you can predict the future with 100% accuracy then you can say what you're saying but you can't, you're applying hindsight. you're the one applying hypothetical assumptions.
Click to expand...
What hypothetical assumptions am I making? That we don't have proof Martin would have killed Zimmerman? We don't, you know. We do know that Martin had never killed anyone before. We also know that the grand majority of cases where somebody gets beat up don't end in their deaths. I'm not taking any wild "leaps of faith" here.


hodj_sl said:
No, but you are projecting now, because you need to argue these points that you've already been proven wrong on time and time and time again.

All I'm doing is telling you you won't get away with it without someone telling you point blank why you're wrong.

It is not foolish to assume that repeated blows of a head against a concrete sidewalk can result in serious bodily harm or death. Your entire argument is so fallacious its clear that you're the one who needs to constantly argue with people about this shit, because if you didn't, you'd shut the fuck up because you know you're wrong.
Click to expand...
What point am I arguing that has been proven wrong? Are you even understanding what I'm saying? Are you on LSDright now?

OF COURSE"It is not foolish to assume that repeated blows of a head against a concrete sidewalk can result in serious bodily harm or death". That's why Zimmerman was legally justified in using deadly force to defend himself. I'm not arguing this!!!

But "repeated blows of a head against a concrete sidewalk" is NOT evidence of murderous intent! Zimmerman had two cuts to the back of his head and a fractured nose. Millions of people have received far worse beatings and not been remotely close to death. Legally, because thingsCOULDhave gotten worse, Zimmerman's actions were justified, but his actions don't prove that thingsWOULDhave gotten worse. It's foolish and irresponsible to say "Zimmerman's gun saved his life that night". There's simply no proof of that!
 
Foggy

Foggy

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
6,294
4,879
Tanoomba_sl said:
Actually, you're wrong. As has been pointed out in this very thread (not by me), any attack to the head could be considered a "potential" threat to your life. Just by getting punched you could get a concussion or brain injury or become paralyzed or killed. It might not be likely but the fact that it could happen is enough for you to legally consider your life in danger and respond with deadly force.
Click to expand...
Under your hypo, Zimmerman would not be justified to use deadly force. Martin walking up and throwing a punch to the face would not allow deadly force. The strike would have to disorient the person, putting them at a decided disadvantage, and the attacker would have to continue the attack to warrant deadly force. Hence, why pinning him to the ground and pummeling him was necessary for Zimmerman's use of deadly force to be legal.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
rrr_img_35989.png

rrr_img_35990.jpg
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
43,764
52,350
Even if it wasn't self defense because she left the house and returned with the gun, I think it's retarded that they charged her with attempted murder for firing a warning shot. Attempted murder is firing at him and missing or only wounding him, not intentionally missing him.
 
Dashel

Dashel

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,833
2,931
Anyone running for President on a platform of deporting anyone who ever threatened to move to Canada get's my vote.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Well, Florida has pretty well proved they suck at actually identifying an appropriate crime to charge someone with.

My understanding, and I could be wrong on this, is that the shot was fired in the vicinity of children in the household. Probably part of the reason why they charged her with attempted murder.

In the end I think the jury only hit her with aggravated assault. Could be wrong.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/11/justic...und-sentencing

Saying he had no discretion under state law, a judge sentenced a Jacksonville, Florida, woman to 20 years in prison Friday for firing a warning shot in an effort to scare off her abusive husband.

Marissa Alexander unsuccessfully tried to use Florida's controversial "stand your ground" law to derail the prosecution, but a jury in March convicted her of aggravated assault after just 12 minutes of deliberation.

The case, which was prosecuted by the same state attorney who is handling the Trayvon Martin case, has gained the attention of civil rights leaders who say the African-American woman was persecuted because of her race.

After the sentencing, Rep. Corrine Brown confronted State Attorney Angela Corey in the hallway, accusing her of being overzealous, according to video from CNN affiliate WJXT.
"There is no justification for 20 years," Brown told Corey during an exchange frequently interrupted by onlookers. "All the community was asking for was mercy and justice," she said.

Corey said she had offered Alexander a plea bargain that would have resulted in a three-year prison sentence, but Alexander chose to take the case to a jury trial, where a conviction would carry a mandatory sentence under a Florida law known as "10-20-life."

The law mandates increased penalties for some felonies, including aggravated assault, in which a gun is carried or used.

Corey said the case deserved to be prosecuted because Alexander fired in the direction of a room where two children were standing.

Alexander said she was attempting to flee her husband, Rico Gray, on August 1, 2010, when she picked up a handgun and fired a shot into a wall.

She said her husband had read cell phone text messages that she had written to her ex-husband, got angry and tried to strangle her.

She said she escaped and ran to the garage, intending to drive away. But, she said, she forgot her keys, so she picked up her gun and went back into the house. She said her husband threatened to kill her, so she fired one shot.

"I believe when he threatened to kill me, that's what he was absolutely going to do," she said. "That's what he intended to do. Had I not discharged my weapon at that point, I would not be here."

Alexander's attorneys tried to use the state law that allows people to use potentially deadly force anywhere they feel reasonably threatened with serious harm or death.

But a previous judge in the case rejected the request, saying Alexander's decision to go back into the house was not consistent with someone in fear for her safety, according to the Florida Times Union newspaper.
Click to expand...
Part of what fucked her was the same shit we were talking about would potentially fuck Zimmerman were he found guilty of manslaughter. Mandatory minimums (which I don't agree with at all) and what not.

The CBS news article for this story is tripe, don't rely on it. I've rarely seen such a badly written article.
 
Dashel

Dashel

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,833
2,931
Gavinrad_sl said:
Even if it wasn't self defense because she left the house and returned with the gun, I think it's retarded that they charged her with attempted murder for firing a warning shot. Attempted murder is firing at him and missing or only wounding him, not intentionally missing him.
Click to expand...
I agree. If he was really the aggressor and she went out, got a gun, came back, shot at the wall near him and said "now get the fuck out". Medal of honor not 20 years. Of course, if she's a psycho making up the abuse then proceed.
 
Foggy

Foggy

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
6,294
4,879
Gavinrad_sl said:
Even if it wasn't self defense because she left the house and returned with the gun, I think it's retarded that they charged her with attempted murder for firing a warning shot. Attempted murder is firing at him and missing or only wounding him, not intentionally missing him.
Click to expand...
I am trying to figure out how they worked their way around intent to kill. I'm assuming firing a gun in an occupied residence rises to intent to kill whether or not the person actually had the intent. Or maybe they proved she just missed?
 
Abefroman

Abefroman

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
12,594
11,937
I think it's pretty clear that people arguing for conviction didn't watch the trial and are just regurgitating facebook posts and repeating what the spindoctors on CNN have said. I am captain obvious.
 
Gavinmad

Gavinmad

Mr. Poopybutthole
43,764
52,350
Can't really tell him to get out of his own house. Even if she fired the warning shot near children, I don't see how you can get to attempted murder without intent to kill. That being said, her attorney probably did a pretty shitty job explaining her chances to her, or maybe she was just retarded in the first place, cause she probably should have taken the deal for 3 years.
 
hodj

hodj

Vox Populi Jihadi
<Silver Donator>
31,672
18,377
Gavinrad_sl said:
I don't see how you can get to attempted murder without intent to kill.
Click to expand...
Don't disagree with this at all, apparently the jury was also on that wavelength so they hit her with aggravated assault, which is probably a more accurate charge.
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
Foggy_sl said:
Under your hypo, Zimmerman would not be justified to use deadly force. Martin walking up and throwing a punch to the face would not allow deadly force. The strike would have to disorient the person, putting them at a decided disadvantage, and the attacker would have to continue the attack to warrant deadly force. Hence, why pinning him to the ground and pummeling him was necessary for Zimmerman's use of deadly force to be legal.
Click to expand...
That's not the conclusion this board came to many pages ago. Still, even if you're right that doesn't change that we have no proof that Martin would have killed Zimmerman. "Zimmerman was justified using deadly force" does not equal "Martin would have killed Zimmerman". That's all I'm saying.
 
Foggy

Foggy

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
6,294
4,879
Gavinrad_sl said:
Can't really tell him to get out of his own house. Even if she fired the warning shot near children, I don't see how you can get to attempted murder without intent to kill. That being said, her attorney probably did a pretty shitty job explaining her chances to her, or maybe she was just retarded in the first place, cause she probably should have taken the deal for 3 years.
Click to expand...
If you just fire a gun into a random occupied house is attempted murder because it is depraved indifference which qualifies for intent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.