Octopus Overlords

Alefroth wrote:I don't see how you cannot see how this complicates things

Ale

Eh? We have his word that he was attacked. It was claimed (I believe by the police) that he had injuries that corroborated his story (well, not really, they only corroborate that a struggle occurred). Those injuries go away, we still are left with his word, and the word of an eye witness.

The injuries NEVER told us anything about how the incident started, or even told us anything about how threatened his life was.

My person opinion not with standing, we are still left with his statement and a witness. Given what Jag has said about SYG cases in Florida, even if we were left with ONLY his statement and no physical evidence, he'd still walk.

It only complicates things in the minds of 3rd party observers like you and me. It doesn't change anything from a due process view point. As unhappy as that might make people.

Edit: I don't know about that town, but in my city paramedics are called to administer first aid. Cops almost never provide medical attention. Do we have any info on this? ambulance driver, paramedic, hospital? While I maintain that the injuries are not relevant from a jurisprudence standpoint, I am curious. Unfortunately I still feel that there has been wrongdoing that has not been revealed as of yet, which is probably tainted by the police station and officer's history of wrongdoing if not outright corruption, and the idea that Zimmermann caused this to happen based on his own words and the up 'til now lack of violent history for Trayvon (I'm in hepcat's court on this one. Any "evidence" that he was a bad guy is nothing more than typical teenage chestpuffing, especially since he doesn't have any record. Not even an arrest, let alone conviction).

RunningMn9 wrote:
My dumbass brother has staked out his position, not because of any particular truth about it - but because he perceives that one outcome could possibly help liberals (in his mind), an therefore he clearly must adopt the other position. And I see that from a lot of people.

Is your brother a radio talk show host, by any chance?

Chrisoc13 wrote:Can you give a specific example of what you are describing here? Something less anecdotal than your brother whom I have never met? Not meaning this as an attack but this is the second time you have stated this in this thread and I am wondering what specifically you are referring to.

Since I am in the "let the process play out" camp I find this comment rather interesting. I think it is best to normally wait and see with any case and let the process roll out.

Which camp do you find yourself in? I would hope everyone would want to be in the "wait and see" camp.

I am in the wait and see camp, because I have no desire for any particular outcome. I am not predisposed to want Zimmerman o be guilty or innocent. If the facts change, my opinion is free to change.

As for an example, I'm sure that I won't have much trouble digging something up here, but it will have to wait until I am not on my phone.

Not to pick on him, but I don't expect it to be too difficult to sift through threads started by an outraged MSD that focus on things to be outraged about that didn't actually happen.

I don't want to specifically charge him with being disingenuous in advocating restraint here though - that's why I focused on my brother. I know him well enough to know why he's doing what he is doing.

Maybe I am alone in finding it alarming that we can predict with nearly 100% accuracy how everyone here will react to every situation, and which facts they will cling to and which they will ignore.

Maybe I am as predictable in me not really staking out any position here, I don't know. Or that my position would be dismay at the predictability of it all.

/shrugs

Don't cops typically wear rubber gloves or something if they are handling a suspect that is bleeding? I doesn't appear that any of the cops in the video are wearing gloves while they are interacting with Zimmerman.

deadzone wrote:Don't cops typically wear rubber gloves or something if they are handling a suspect that is bleeding?

They should. It's usually standard policy.



Also, while I'm refraining from commenting on this issue, I was out drinking last night (got punched and a nice cut over my nose, but that's not the point). Here, smoking isn't allowed inside and you're supposed to smoke 25 feet from a door, which is impossible on a street lined with doors. Anyway, some guy was outside the door, smoking. Some other guy (not a bar employee) said, "Hey, guy, no smoking withing 25 feet of the door!" The smoker put his hands up and said, "Hey, don't shoot, Zimmerman!"

Have to admit, I chuckled.

deadzone wrote:Don't cops typically wear rubber gloves or something if they are handling a suspect that is bleeding? I doesn't appear that any of the cops in the video are wearing gloves while they are interacting with Zimmerman.

This video is useless. Any answers re:blood would be answered by (1) blood on clothes of Zimmerman (2) blood on concrete, sidewalk, asphalt etc. Zimmerman could have easily been cleaned up by the time this video is taken and there is a point in the video where the cops look at his head.

The video is of a quality that it answers no questions, only asks them.

LawBeefaroni wrote:

deadzone wrote:Don't cops typically wear rubber gloves or something if they are handling a suspect that is bleeding?

They should. It's usually standard policy.



Also, while I'm refraining from commenting on this issue, I was out drinking last night (got punched and a nice cut over my nose, but that's not the point). Here, smoking isn't allowed inside and you're supposed to smoke 25 feet from a door, which is impossible on a street lined with doors. Anyway, some guy was outside the door, smoking. Some other guy (not a bar employee) said, "Hey, guy, no smoking withing 25 feet of the door!" The smoker put his hands up and said, "Hey, don't shoot, Zimmerman!"

Have to admit, I chuckled.

My guess...neither guy was black.

deadzone wrote:Don't cops typically wear rubber gloves or something if they are handling a suspect that is bleeding? I doesn't appear that any of the cops in the video are wearing gloves while they are interacting with Zimmerman.

He was treated by EMT's at the scene of the incident. I doubt they would have released him to the police if he had still been bleeding.

Scuzz wrote: My guess...neither guy was black.

One was a White Hispanic.

GreenGoo wrote:Given what Jag has said about SYG cases in Florida, even if we were left with ONLY his statement and no physical evidence, he'd still walk.

As the link to Volokh I previously posted makes clear, assuming Zimmerman's story is true, this has nothing to do with SYG but is a clear case of self defense. SYG never enters into it. If Zimmerman was attacked, he has a claim of self defense.

Grifman wrote:

GreenGoo wrote:Given what Jag has said about SYG cases in Florida, even if we were left with ONLY his statement and no physical evidence, he'd still walk.

As the link to Volokh I previously posted makes clear, assuming Zimmerman's story is true, this has nothing to do with SYG but is a clear case of self defense. SYG never enters into it. If Zimmerman was attacked, he has a claim of self defense.

SYG *is* self-defense. Codified.

LawBeefaroni wrote:

Scuzz wrote: My guess...neither guy was black.

One was a White Hispanic.

chuckle

Grifman wrote:

deadzone wrote:Don't cops typically wear rubber gloves or something if they are handling a suspect that is bleeding? I doesn't appear that any of the cops in the video are wearing gloves while they are interacting with Zimmerman.

He was treated by EMT's at the scene of the incident. I doubt they would have released him to the police if he had still been bleeding.

Which is good, because they can corroborate the wounds, for those who think it's relevant. It's important to me at least that the information not come from Zimmermann or the police department.

Jag wrote:

Grifman wrote:

GreenGoo wrote:Given what Jag has said about SYG cases in Florida, even if we were left with ONLY his statement and no physical evidence, he'd still walk.

As the link to Volokh I previously posted makes clear, assuming Zimmerman's story is true, this has nothing to do with SYG but is a clear case of self defense. SYG never enters into it. If Zimmerman was attacked, he has a claim of self defense.

SYG *is* self-defense. Codified.

Without SYG Zimmermann has to retreat if possible. Given that Trayvon wasn't armed and Zimmermann was, he would probably have been arrested initially, although you're right, it might have resulted in him being released anyway. At a minimum he'd have to explain why he followed a guy, got himself into a situation (with someone he was already suspicious of) where he couldn't retreat despite being armed while his assailant wasn't, and was forced to use deadly force. It's not a HUGE difference, but it is a difference. With SYG he just has to say that Trayvon made him feel threatened so he stood his ground and Trayvon ended up dead. No explanation needed.

More complete video in the police station than the one I have seen earlier.

Again not that this adds anything, but this article (by the daily caller so... take it for what it is worth) is claiming a gash is on the back of the head. Whether this is true or not it doesn't really add much to the case since as GreenGoo said earlier it only has an impact on public opinion not the real case.

It also shows that the video is horribly grainy and really adds nothing, people will find what they want to find.

It seems like he could have abrasions in the low-res video. I don't see that video as particularly damning or supporting of either sides' narrative.

Bob wrote:It seems like he could have abrasions in the low-res video. I don't see that video as particularly damning or supporting of either sides' narrative.

Are you sure, Kieth Olbermann considered that video the smoking gun last night.

People will see in it what they want to see in it.

That video doesn't interest me as much as what the coroner's report says about Martin's hands.

This page is starting to generate a decent REPM...

...Rolly Eyes Per Minute

Looks to me like he has a case of ugly bald head. I know this problem on an intimate level as I myself, suffer from ugly bald head.

Chrisoc13 wrote:

RunningMn9 wrote: I can't speak for everyone, or about everyone. But in many cases, the "let's wait and see about the facts" is coming from people that are wholly inconsistent about which situations they choose to wait and see about the facts.

Choosing to wait and see about this, while rushing to judgement about other things eventually paints a picture that they aren't genuinely waiting to see the facts.

They are waiting to hopefully see a very specific set of facts.

Can you give a specific example of what you are describing here? Something less anecdotal than your brother whom I have never met? Not meaning this as an attack but this is the second time you have stated this in this thread and I am wondering what specifically you are referring to.

Since I am in the "let the process play out" camp I find this comment rather interesting. I think it is best to normally wait and see with any case and let the process roll out.

Which camp do you find yourself in? I would hope everyone would want to be in the "wait and see" camp.

If this was facebook, you would have received a "like", but it's not so...
+1

GreenGoo wrote:

Grifman wrote:

deadzone wrote:Don't cops typically wear rubber gloves or something if they are handling a suspect that is bleeding? I doesn't appear that any of the cops in the video are wearing gloves while they are interacting with Zimmerman.

He was treated by EMT's at the scene of the incident. I doubt they would have released him to the police if he had still been bleeding.

Which is good, because they can corroborate the wounds, for those who think it's relevant. It's important to me at least that the information not come from Zimmermann or the police department.

first you don't trust STEAM, now the police!

Jag wrote:

Grifman wrote:

GreenGoo wrote:Given what Jag has said about SYG cases in Florida, even if we were left with ONLY his statement and no physical evidence, he'd still walk.

As the link to Volokh I previously posted makes clear, assuming Zimmerman's story is true, this has nothing to do with SYG but is a clear case of self defense. SYG never enters into it. If Zimmerman was attacked, he has a claim of self defense.

SYG *is* self-defense. Codified.

Self defense is already codified under Florida law. SYG is a special subset of self defense as I understand it.

Grifman wrote:

Jag wrote:

Grifman wrote:

GreenGoo wrote:Given what Jag has said about SYG cases in Florida, even if we were left with ONLY his statement and no physical evidence, he'd still walk.

As the link to Volokh I previously posted makes clear, assuming Zimmerman's story is true, this has nothing to do with SYG but is a clear case of self defense. SYG never enters into it. If Zimmerman was attacked, he has a claim of self defense.

SYG *is* self-defense. Codified.

Self defense is already codified under Florida law. SYG is a special subset of self defense as I understand it.

But it is still self-defense. You it has nothing to do with SYG because it is self defense.

WTF?! Gawker is reporting that some White Supremacist hacked Treyvon Martin's e-mail account and leaked all the contents online. Claims Treyvon is a habitual pot user and a drug dealer.

http://gawker.com/5897485/white-suprema ... ges-online" target="_blank

Jag wrote:But it is still self-defense. You it has nothing to do with SYG because it is self defense.

Volokh says SYG is irrelevant, that the regular laws regarding self defense would apply as he notes that even states that don't have SYG would recognize Zimmerman's right to self defense:

Media coverage of Florida’s self-defense laws in recent weeks has often been very inaccurate. While some persons, particularly from the gun prohibition lobbies, have claimed that the Martin/Zimmerman case shows the danger of Florida’s “Stand your ground” law, that law is legally irrelevant to case.

So the general rule is that deadly force may be used only to “imminent death or great bodily harm,” or “the imminent commission of a forcible felony.” A person may only use deadly force if he “reasonably believes” that the aforesaid factual conditions exist. These standards are the norm throughout the United States.

The core Florida law on deadly force in self-defense leads to clear results. If M is true, then Zimmerman’s firing of the gun was a criminal homicide. If Z is true, the act was lawful self-defense. The results would be the same in every other state.

SYG doesn't come into play here if Zimmerman was attacked as he claims.

SYG exactly is in play here (and that article is shit, I read it). If Zimmerman was attacked, he was allowed to "stand his ground" and use deadly force to defend himself. The statute immunizes him from prosecution. That is a big difference between the Florida statute and common law self defense. Chances are a jury would let a guy off for reasonable self-defense. With SYG it never gets to a jury.

Jag wrote:SYG exactly is in play here (and that article is shit, I read it).[/i].

LOL! Forgive me if I find the opinion of a blog run by a group of law professors more authoritative than your opinion. That's why we call them "expert" opinions.

I think the point is that once Zimmerman is attacked, SYG doesn't matter any more. It's plain self defense. SYG says you don't have to retreat if threatened, and you can respond to the threat of force. Here there's no question of retreat or standing your ground, the attack has taken place, so regular self defense applies.

naednek wrote:first you don't trust STEAM, now the police!

This particular police department has shown that placing your trust in them is potentially a bad idea.

Paingod's link in his sig (assuming he put it there) shows why even if you have the best of intentions, talking to the police has very little pros and a lot of cons from a personal perspective.

But mostly I am unhappy with their history (assuming what was posted earlier about them is accurate) and I'm unhappy with how they handled their information flow to the media from the beginning. And as rmn9 has stated more than once, the lead investigator had a different opinion of the situation, which throws some confusion in there.

Kasey Chang wrote:WTF?! Gawker is reporting that some White Supremacist hacked Treyvon Martin's e-mail account and leaked all the contents online. Claims Treyvon is a habitual pot user ...

So are a significant number of people on this board, and more when they were younger. My office has about 50% admitting to participation at some point in their lives, with the other 50% not being completely honest about it. If Treyvon was just dealing pot then I suspect he's going to get more supporters, not less from this big "reveal".

The article indicates that the contents of his email appeared to be more concerned with SATs and college applications than the reefer.

GreenGoo wrote:

Kasey Chang wrote:WTF?! Gawker is reporting that some White Supremacist hacked Treyvon Martin's e-mail account and leaked all the contents online. Claims Treyvon is a habitual pot user ...

So are a significant number of people on this board, and more when they were younger. My office has about 50% admitting to participation at some point in their lives, with the other 50% not being completely honest about it. If Treyvon was just dealing pot then I suspect he's going to get more supporters, not less from this big "reveal".

I'm about as straitlaced as a liberal gets, and I hate the pothead-slacker lifestyle to a probably irrational degree, but I have to admit that my present stances are not 100% un-undermined by certain experimental behaviors from my early 20's.

If you know what I mean.

Grifman wrote:Here there's no question of retreat or standing your ground, the attack has taken place, so regular self defense applies.

This shows a basic failure to understand what it is that you're talking about.

I read that Spike Lee has settled with that couple he targeted with his retweet.

Haha, what a crazy world. One guy in Florida kills another guy and somehow Spike Lee is the first person who pays in this whole tangled mess.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-574 ... t-on-body/" target="_blank

Trayvon Martin was buried in Miami with a gunshot wound to his chest. But otherwise, according to Richard Kurtz, the funeral director who prepared Martin for burial, his body showed no injuries.

"We could see no physical signs like there had been a scuffle [or] there had been a fight," he said. "The hands -- I didn't see any knuckles, bruises or what have you. And that is something we would have covered up if it would have been there."

Maybe more important than the video?

Victoria Raverna wrote:http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-574 ... t-on-body/

Trayvon Martin was buried in Miami with a gunshot wound to his chest. But otherwise, according to Richard Kurtz, the funeral director who prepared Martin for burial, his body showed no injuries.

"We could see no physical signs like there had been a scuffle [or] there had been a fight," he said. "The hands -- I didn't see any knuckles, bruises or what have you. And that is something we would have covered up if it would have been there."

Maybe more important than the video?

If it were an M.E.

Epic 4g/Tapatalk

Pyperkub wrote:
If it were an M.E.

Epic 4g/Tapatalk

Embalmers know quite a bit about that sort of thing as they have to 'rebuild' bodies after all kinds of unfortunate accidents (falls, car accidents, gun shot wounds, etc). I think it's noteworthy, though he wasn't under oath and obviously the family was a client.

But again, if Trayvon was the aggressor, he might not show any effects.

Zurai wrote:

Grifman wrote:Here there's no question of retreat or standing your ground, the attack has taken place, so regular self defense applies.

This shows a basic failure to understand what it is that you're talking about.

I'll see if I can let this pass, the choice is up to you.

About the lone eyewitness that "saw" Martin was on top of Zimmerman:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.1052713" target="_blank

Police in Sanford, Fla., have said that Austin Brown, who went out to walk his dog on Feb. 26 near where Trayvon was shot, saw Zimmerman lying in the grass crying for help just before the slaying.

But Austin’s mom, Cheryl Brown, told the News that when cops interviewed her son eight days after Trayvon’s death, he told them he saw only one person lying in the grass and he couldn’t tell who it was.

“He kept telling them he couldn't see anything because it was too dark,” she said. “He said he couldn't see the race or anything. He never saw a second person. ”

“Then they asked him if he saw what the man was wearing. They gave him a multiple choice question and gave him three colors. He said, ‘I think it was red.’”

Zimmerman, 28, was wearing a red and black jacket. Trayvon, 17, was wearing a grey hoodie.

“Knowing my son, I believe he felt pressured to give the color,” Brown said.

“He really couldn't see anything,” she said. “I think when interviewing a 13 year old you don't give them three options.”

I guess there was no eyewitness that saw the fight.

Turned out there were two eyewitnesses according to the police. One is that kid and the other in an unknown man. But now we know that the police pressured this kid to give an account that fit the picture that the police wanted, how do we know that they didn't do the same with the other witness? For all we know the other witness is someone like Zimmerman's "best friend" Joe Oliver.