The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question - Page 3 - TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
doubleb
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
6202 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


Since we are playing what ifs here, if Zimmerman had been shot and killed after they fought, Martin would have likely gotten off without a trial unless he confessed to a crime.

If Martin tells a logical story where would the evidence come from to convict him? Not from Zimmerman.

Martin wouldn't even have to testify at trial.






Back to top
Antonio Moss
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
28821 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

If Martin tells a logical story where would the evidence come from to convict him? Not from Zimmerman.


The state would have to rely in Zimmerman's injuries and the neighbor's account.

Still a tough argument.






Back to top
augrad00
Auburn Fan
Member since Nov 2010
1040 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

augrad because he lacks the cognitive ability to decipher between established facts and conjecture


What established facts did I miss? What facts proved who the aggressor was? It was the prosecution job to prove Zimmerman was the aggressor. But the defense couldn't or had to prove that TM was the aggressor. There are no facts that show who the aggressor was. Nothing but hypotheticals. The facts that I know of are as follows:
1. Zimmerman followed TM
2. There was a confrontation
3. TM got the upper hand in the fight
4. Zimmerman shot TM
5. TM died.

What facts did I miss?






Back to top
augrad00
Auburn Fan
Member since Nov 2010
1040 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

Zimmerman's injuries


Injuries don't prove anything. I wish you would clarify why you think they do.






Back to top
TheDoc
LSU Fan
doc is no more
Member since Dec 2005
99297 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

Injuries don't prove anything. I wish you would clarify why you think they do.


Proves that Martin smashed him in the face and got him on the ground bashing his head on the concrete.

Even Rachel jeantel said he was handing out a "whoop ass"






Back to top
tigersaint26
LSU Fan
In front of my computer
Member since Sep 2005
1201 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


TM had no injuries so if GZ would have punched him 1st in the face there wuld have been injuries. All the defense had to do was prove that GZ was on the bottom a feared for his life whe he pulled the trigger (which they did). There is no doubt TM beat the crap out of GZ for 40 sec before GZ shot him.





Back to top
TheDoc
LSU Fan
doc is no more
Member since Dec 2005
99297 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


What is the rule on length of time that you are being beaten before you can shoot?

1 minute?
5 minutes?






Back to top
Antonio Moss
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
28821 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

What established facts did I miss? What facts proved who the aggressor was? It was the prosecution job to prove Zimmerman was the aggressor. But the defense couldn't or had to prove that TM was the aggressor. There are no facts that show who the aggressor was. Nothing but hypotheticals. The facts that I know of are as follows:

1. Zimmerman followed TM
2. There was a confrontation


And there was testimony from Zimmerman that the confrontation was initiated by Martin. The physical evidence (bullet trajectory and Zimmerman's injuries) support Zimmerman's version of the events. Furthermore, the neighbor's testimony supports Zimmerman's versions of the events.

That's called credibility building. The Juror who was interviewed after the trial stated that all members of the jury found Zimmerman to be credible in his retelling of the event.

Obviously, you can never be 100% certain on testimony, but the more corroborating evidence presented, the more likely the testimony becomes.

Furthermore, there was no evidence to dispute Zimmerman's testimony. Martin had no physical injuries other than the gunshot wound which suggests that Zimmerman was not able to physical batter Martin.

quote:

3. TM got the upper hand in the fight


Literally no evidence to suggest that this was a consented to fight or that Martin was either losing or neutral at one point such that he needed to get the upper hand.

Complete conjecture.


quote:

4. Zimmerman shot TM
5. TM died.








Back to top
Antonio Moss
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
28821 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

Injuries don't prove anything.


They absolutely corroborate Zimmerman's versions of the events.






Back to top
tigersaint26
LSU Fan
In front of my computer
Member since Sep 2005
1201 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


Just saying that TM beat the crap out of him for 40 sec which is why GZ feared for his life--he might not have known how long TM would have continued. We also know that TM was still leaned over GZ when the shot was fired.





Back to top
  Replies (0)
moneyg
LSU Fan
Member since Jun 2006
18850 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

Would it have been better if Martin had killed Zimmerman instead of the other way around? Would it have helped race relations?



It would have been irrelevant since it would not have been a big news story. So, yes. It would be better than what we have today.

quote:

Would it have been just? Would it have set a good legal precedent if he'd killed him and gotten off?


It is impossible to say until you know the evidence. If there was zero proof that Martin had initiated the fight, then an acquittal would have been just.

If the evidence pointed out that Martin jumped Zimmerman because he felt disrespected (I'm 95% sure that is what happened), then an acquittal would have been unjust, IMO.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
augrad00
Auburn Fan
Member since Nov 2010
1040 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

Proves that Martin smashed him in the face and got him on the ground bashing his head on the concrete


There's no debating that. But we are talking about who started the fight. Injuries don't prove who started the fight. I've seen several fights where the person who started gets his/her butt kicked.






Back to top
Antonio Moss
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
28821 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


Please list all evidence which suggests that Zimmerman started the altercation:







Back to top
augrad00
Auburn Fan
Member since Nov 2010
1040 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

They absolutely corroborate Zimmerman's versions of the events


It only proves that TM probably hit Zimmerman's head against the pavement. It doesn't prove who start the fight. I'm waiting to hear how it does. No hypotheticals since you don't like them.






Back to top
augrad00
Auburn Fan
Member since Nov 2010
1040 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

Please list all evidence which suggests that Zimmerman started the altercation


There is no evidence of who started the fight. That's what I've been trying to tell you. The only evidence is what I listed. None of it tells who started the fight. Only two people know who started the fight and one is dead and one was trying to save his butt from being locked up for life.






Back to top
RogerTheShrubber
LSU Fan
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
90323 posts
 Online 

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:


Would it have been better if Martin had killed Zimmerman instead of the other way around?


No. Doesn't matter who died. Sucks anyone did.

quote:

Would it have helped race relations?


No.

Race relations haven't changed, some things have just been uncovered. In fact, may be eye opening for a few people and not in the way you probably think.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Antonio Moss
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
28821 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

It only proves that TM probably hit Zimmerman's head against the pavement. It doesn't prove who start the fight. I'm waiting to hear how it does.


First, "prove" is the wrong word. It's very hard to "prove" anything. What this evidence does is support Zimmerman's testimony in which he testified that Martin started the altercation. We have objective, unbiased evidence that supports Zimmerman's story which plays very well with a jury (as it did in this case.)






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Antonio Moss
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
28821 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

There is no evidence of who started the fight. That's what I've been trying to tell you.


Sure there is.

Zimmerman's account to police was that Martin started the altercation.

That's evidence.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
augrad00
Auburn Fan
Member since Nov 2010
1040 posts

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:

testimony from Zimmerman that the confrontation was initiated by Martin


Testimony isn't fact unless you believe everybody is honest.

quote:

e neighbor's testimony supports Zimmerman's versions of the events


Neighbors didn't see the fight start. So let's only deal with FACTS.

quote:

Martin had no physical injuries other than the gunshot wound which suggests that Zimmerman was not able to physical batter Martin


You are speculating because he doesn't have physical injuries that he must have started the fight. The fat kid in the video I posted didn't have physical injuries but he didn't start the fight. So physical injuries only proves who was winning the fight, not who started the fight.






Back to top
RogerTheShrubber
LSU Fan
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
90323 posts
 Online 

re: The Simplest Summary of the Martin-Zimmerman Ordeal And a Philosophical Question


quote:


Injuries don't prove anything. I wish you would clarify why you think they do.



This is some of the "eye opening" things I referred to. I think I, and many, have given some people too much credit for cognitive ability.






Back to top
  Replies (0)


Back to top