George Zimmerman /Trayvon Martin General Discussion #11 Tues. July 9

[Mahouston69]

IMO OMG..... Where do I even start with a response to your statements? First of all, we have already addressed the various reasons a civilian may carry a gun. I.E. Random shooters, carjacker, someone attacks you, someone tries to attack a child....... The world is FULL of loose cannons. And the fact that the State of FL decided it was his legal right to take that gun everywhere regardless of what you or I think. Just because YOU personally have not encountered a situation where an armed civilian has to protect you from harm doesn't mean it doesn't happen all the time. OMO

IMO It appears that you are saying anyone who carries a gun who is not part of the police force is "looking for trouble"...?? Actually, IMO it's the exact opposite.

I agree. I am very protective of my gun rights and of others gun rights.

IMO
Had Trayvon been carrying a gun he could have "stood his ground" if he felt threatened for his life or life of his family, with a strange man exiting his car and quickly following him so close to his family home when GZ approached and would have been in the right if he shot and killed him without waiting for an attack or injury. Unfortunately, he was unarmed and had only his fists to defend what he perseived as a criminal threat chasing him. I wonder if those that believe GZ and self defense would consider Trayvon the victim in that case or still support GZ? We will never know.
OMO

 

[ShadyLady]

I carry for personal protection Every. Single. Day. In all location except those with CORRECT POSTINGS that say I should not. I carry at Kroger when I go grocery shopping. I carry at the gas station. I carry everywhere.

I can tell you, after witnessing and reporting a robbery at my apartment neighbors place, it brings a level of fear that you can't describe. I am federal law enforcement, and I was still in fear in my own home. I can usually leave my diligence at work, but being home and jumping at every single noise will heighten your senses to the extreme.

I know I don't agree with everyone, but hopefully I'm bringing a perspective that you may not have considered before. I will not wait until you actually break through my skull or give me a concussion before I defend myself. If I'm at a disadvantage in a fight and in reasonable fear for my life, I will react in a purpose to stop you.

I am a female, so my fear may be greater than a man's fear depending on the situation. The litmus for these things are subjective, but I believe there is not a valid argument to say that GZ's injuries were not serious or severe. Had he not reacted, he could have very well ended up deceased at the end of the altercation. I believe that it was an active, ongoing and escalating physical altercation.

I believe TM did not understand at his age and ignorance of what he was actually doing) the seriousness of fighting. His experience of fighting was probably limited to school fighting, and not real life consequences in the real world. I think kids have a limited scope of what their juvenile actions could cause. Again, he probably just thought he would beat the guy up and be on his way. I think it's tragic all the way around.

Bumped. I really like your post. A tragedy for many people, but if we can't get at the root of the problem, nothing positive will come from it. IMO.

 

[Isabelle]

Does anyone recall how long Trayvon had been staying in the complex, with his dad and dad's fiancee? thanks.

Does anyone have an answer to the above question? Thanks

 

[DIBSY]

The expert is quite good, and Yet, he's made ONE outstanding mistake, IMO.
He has G U E S S E D that the sidewalk was A Perfectly Flat Surface ...in order to arrive at ALL of his conclusions....but as the first ME already testified, the surface was NOT flat....there were indentations, as well burs / spurs or whatever you wish to call the inconsistancies in a pavement.

Thus this witness' comments are not consistant with the surface. IMO

 

[ShadyLady]

IMO TM's supporters can't (or won't) grasp the fact that one or two more head slams would have put GZ in a coma or killed him.

Therefore he had no right to self-defense. The only thing that I can figure is that if NW in anyway follows and watches a suspicious person (by their own definition), the volunteer looses the right to self-defense? Is this the argument some people are making?

IMO

 

[ShadyLady]

Does anyone have an answer to the above question? Thanks

I believe it came out in testimony. One week. And I wonder, had Trayvon known that there was a Neighborhood Watch would that have changed his actions?

imo

 

[mdana]

Do any of you remember a case several years back where a guy and his gf were on the street and another guy tried to talk to the gf or something like that and her boyfriend jumped the other guy and started beating the crap out of him and then the guy stabbed and killed him? I remember it was alot like this case in that it was really divided on whether it was self defense or not. Anyway they did an aminated reinactment during the trial.

If it was the case I am thinking about it was in KC's Westport district. A black guy (Stanford Griswold) and his gf were accosted by a white guy (Brian Euston) and ended up killing BE. BE was extremely drunk (0.387) and extremely talkative, and SG tried numerous times to get away from the drunk guy. Eventually, SG punched BE and BE died from striking the pavement. The punch was not deemed lethal enough on its own to kill BE, his level of inebriation contributed to his death. SG was acquitted. I think this was a another terrible tragedy of two people misunderstanding each other resulting in death.

http://www.pitch.com/plog/archives/...swold-found-not-guilty-in-brian-eustons-death

 

[costalpilot]

Here is what we know. Head trauma can be devastating. It can take one blow. We know head injuries hurt and can daze us. We know that head injuries are now always taken seriously.

We also know that some head injuries can not seem at all serious at first but can be deadly later as with Natasha Richardson who fell and hit her head on snow..

But we also know that based on law, he did not have to have severe injuries to meet the burden for self defense.

OMO

imo these are facts, not opinions.

xcept i would say head injuries SHOULD always be taken seriously.
in this case, the medical personnel were remiss in their duties not to supervise GZ for a possible concussion.


he certainly was a candidate for one, based on the injuries. you can be concussed with NO obvious injury, for goodness sake.

 

[missmazzy]

IMO TM's supporters can't (or won't) grasp the fact that one or two more head slams would have put GZ in a coma or killed him.

If that had happened, IMO, GZ would have been just another statistic.

 

[Mahouston69]

This isn't the toxicology report. It's the autoposy--say to see separate document which I don't think has been fully released (or is redacted). JMO--Does anyone know about this?

Pg13 lists thc levels

 

[William N]

The fact is, it did not happen. The "head slams" were not sufficient to put him in a coma and did not kill him. MO

As I have been saying all week, few more would have done exactly that IMO.

 

[sacrablue]

These head wounds are getting really out of control. The Doctor is getting embarrassed. IMO

 

[cityslick]

I agree. I am very protective of my gun rights and of others gun rights.

IMO
Had Trayvon been carrying a gun he could have "stood his ground" if he felt threatened for his life or life of his family, with a strange man exiting his car and quickly following him so close to his family home when GZ approached and would have been in the right if he shot and killed him without waiting for an attack or injury. Unfortunately, he was unarmed and had only his fists to defend what he preserved as a criminal threat chasing him. I wonder if those that believe GZ and self defense would consider Trayvon the victim in that case or still support GZ? We will never know.
OMO

BBM

That is not the law IMO. You can't just assault/shoot/kill someone because they approach you or even ask you a question.

Once again, the notion that an unarmed person is not capable of hurting/killing someone simply because they are unarmed is fallacy IMO.

 

[Mollyandme]

The fact is, it did not happen. The "head slams" were not sufficient to put him in a coma and did not kill him. MO

you are right, the head slams did not put him in a coma and did not kill him, but if he hadn't defended himself against trayvon and the beating continued, it could have killed him. in fact, one blow could kill a person. the main fact though is that the head slams didn't need to put him in a coma, or even give him a concussion in order for him to be justified to defend himself in the state of florida. the jury will be instructed on this before they deliberate

 

[sorrell skye]

The irony is (IMO) the state has not even argued that GZ did not sustain these injuries during the fight. They have not suggested otherwise.

Excellent point. After watching this trial for the past 2+ weeks, I haven't heard word one from the prosecution that has even remotely attempted to refute how GZ received the injuries depicted in the photos.

I think it's safe to say that the prosecution knows that TM inflicted those injuries on GZ, IMO.

I, personally, have no doubt that GZ acted in self defense. MOO

My only lingering doubt, at this point, is whether or not GZ truly believed that his only option was to fatally shoot TM.

Having said that, IDK how the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that GZ didn't fear imminent grievous bodily harm or fear for his life, and acted to save himself. I haven't seen any evidence thus far that supports the State's case of ill will or malice toward the 2nd degree murder charge. MOO

 

[missmazzy]

The fact is, it did not happen. The "head slams" were not sufficient to put him in a coma and did not kill him. MO

Disappointed? How many times does a person have to be hit before it's self defense? Perhaps the next one would have done it, then it would have been too late. IMO, of course...

 

[sacrablue]

there is no uniform response to concussions. one might feel one thing, another quite another. I rarely felt the same symptoms,

i used to do back flips off the side of a pool and somewhat regularly hit my head on the side of the pool.

you might feel fine till you get nauseous and fall into a coma. or you might get sick and start vomiting right away, or in 16 hours; or you might not be able to talk, concentrate.

the possibilities are endless.


you may feel absolutely fine for hours and then start exhibiting symptoms.


and the only safe thing to do with a head injury is be aware of the possibility of a concussion. for the possibility of a concussion exists with any head injury. (imo...) especially if there is lacerations and swelling.

imo

The way I treat possible concussion is to not allow victim to sleep the night after injury regardless of symptoms. IMO

 

[missmazzy]

The expert is quite good, and Yet, he's made ONE outstanding mistake, IMO.
He has G U E S S E D that the sidewalk was A Perfectly Flat Surface ...in order to arrive at ALL of his conclusions....but as the first ME already testified, the surface was NOT flat....there were indentations, as well burs / spurs or whatever you wish to call the inconsistancies in a pavement.

Thus this witness' comments are not consistant with the surface. IMO

Are you sure? I could have sworn I heard him say the surface wasn't flat? Does anyone know for sure?

 

[gxm]

you know, it is really shocking to me the amount of people who do not think george was beaten up. There is photographic EVIDENCE! That is down right scary. IMO people are not looking at the facts of the case. I sure as heck hope this is not decided on the publics emotion. It's frightening that the case was even brought to trial simply due to public demand....doesn't that scare anyone here? my goodness.

Photographic evidence and an eye witness. JMO. OMO. MOO.

 

[popsicle]

The fact is, it did not happen. The "head slams" were not sufficient to put him in a coma and did not kill him. MO

FL law states he didn't have to sustain any injuries in order to use self-defense while defending himself from serious bodily injury or death. imo