TexasCHLforum.com

Ashlar wrote: Actually, the lead detective on the case wanted to charge Zimmerman that night, but the PA decided not to. And after seeing the videotape of Zimmerman from multiple cameras at the PD, I'd have a hard time buying his story, too.

My guess is that Zimmerman grabbed, tried to detain, or tackled Martin- and if so, he's toast.

We have discussed before, and I in detail how that tape doesn't amount to anything. It was poor resolution, 8 hours after the incident and EMS had tended to GZ as well as the contacting officer on scene documented the reported injuries and grass stains on GZ's back. So if that's what your hanging your hat on.

I am curious as to what your basing your "guess" on? The only living eye witnesses are GZ and one other person. All other "witnesses" came after the fact. GZ says that he was jumped, taken down and that TM was going for his weapon. The only other eye witness has reported seeing TM on GZ banging his head on the sidewalk.

I wasn't there so all I have to go on is what information has come out while trying to filter all of the static. Do you have information the rest of the uninvolved world doesn't?

Dragonfighter wrote:
We have discussed before, and I in detail how that tape doesn't amount to anything. It was poor resolution, 8 hours after the incident and EMS had tended to GZ as well as the contacting officer on scene documented the reported injuries and grass stains on GZ's back. So if that's what your hanging your hat on.

I am curious as to what your basing your "guess" on? The only living eye witnesses are GZ and one other person. All other "witnesses" came after the fact. GZ says that he was jumped, taken down and that TM was going for his weapon. The only other eye witness has reported seeing TM on GZ banging his head on the sidewalk.

I wasn't there so all I have to go on is what information has come out while trying to filter all of the static. Do you have information the rest of the uninvolved world doesn't?

I'll wait for the EMS report, but I've treated enough scalp wounds and busted noses to know that unless Zimmerman had a change of clothes in his back pocket, it doesn't look like he had either. If Zimmerman were a boxer, I could understand his nose not bleeding much.

The other 'eye witness'? The one whom the police 'corrected' about who was on top? Or the other one who's only talked from behind a closed door, and only on fox?

Ashlar wrote: I'll wait for the EMS report, but I've treated enough scalp wounds and busted noses to know that unless Zimmerman had a change of clothes in his back pocket, it doesn't look like he had either. If Zimmerman were a boxer, I could understand his nose not bleeding much.

I'm not going to get into another round and round but with 25 years of Fire-Rescue I have treated plenty myself. Previously I explained why it was feasible for minimal if any blood to be on his back and the several broken noses I have treated that not only didn't bleed but barely darkened the eyes. At any rate the police report documented bleeding from the nose and the scalp not that he had a broken nose and certainly nothing stated as to the severity. As to waiting for the EMS report it appears that you have made up your mind already. I believe there is a large portion of the population, hopefully you're not included, that even with a not-guilty verdict or dismissal would not change their minds.

Ashlar wrote:The other 'eye witness'? The one whom the police 'corrected' about who was on top? Or the other one who's only talked from behind a closed door, and only on fox?

The thirteen year old? She wasn't "corrected" and she is still vacillating. The distance she was at, darkness and other factors can make such determination difficult. Add to that the pressure she was under from those around her and you have a frightened and unsure witness. The other that you deride for "speaking" from behind closed doors and "only on Fox". CNN wouldn't carry an interview with him on a bet, much less MSNBC. Locally Fox 4, 5 and KTVT have all aired excerpts. "John" has received death threats and has seen the seething violence surrounding the case. Are you seriously going to deride him for maintaining his anonymity, especially while not in court?

God forbid I should ever shoot anyone. But if I were to find myself there, I pray God you wouldn't be in the jury pool.

Just curious. What evidence has been presented that even remotely points to Zimmerman attacking trayvon first?

I will be the first to say Zimmerman should not have gotten out of his car in this situation, but that does not make it OK for Trayvon to pound his head into the concrete. You may be fooled by pictures of Trayvon when he was twelve, but I am not buying Into his total innocence for one minute. Trayvon forced Zimmerman to shoot him. Trayvon could have kept heading home but instead, circled back. Again... I think Zimmerman is a darned fool... But I don't see evidence showing him to be a murdering fool. Jesse and Al utilizing Trayvons death to personally profit is the real crime here. Where are those two racists when blacks are killing each other, which is the case in the majority of black men dying. If those two racists gave a spit about the black community for anything more than power and profit, they would be marching through Harlem demanding blacks quit killing each other.

Dragonfighter is absolutely correct about how fast a nose bleed or scalp wound stops bleeding. Twenty Five years around professional wrestlers and MMA fighters I have personally watched guys with broken noses stop bleeding within minutes. I have also watched many a gaping head wound stop bleeding within minutes. I have personally had a broken nose, three busted open scalps and thirty minutes after the injuries, you would have thought nothing happened to me. I have watched my son in law get his nose broken in the ring three times and been in the back with him when his nose looked like it was pointing sideways... NO BLOOD... Other than the bleeding the first few minutes after the breaks. I have sat with wrestlers in a restaurant an hour after they intentionally bladed their foreheads in the ring and bled like crazy for the five minutes it took to impress the fans. No stitches.

Head wounds take very little effort to treat and the lack of bleeding is not evidence of anything. Just the other night I hit my head on an open cabinet door. It cut my head open in a corner shape. It bled for maybe a minute and with a paper towel pressed on it stopped.

(disclaimer) No... I am not now, nor have I ever been anything more than just a friend or acquaintance with these fellers. I am not a professional fighter and didn't want my post to mislead anyone. I don't need any of you tough guys out there trying to beat me up...LOL. I am an HVAC guy who has always loved professional fighting and wrestling and just happened to get pretty close to the inside of these sports by way of family. I was only bringing the fighting thing up to explain where my insights on this came from.

Ashlar wrote:

Dragonfighter wrote:
We have discussed before, and I in detail how that tape doesn't amount to anything. It was poor resolution, 8 hours after the incident and EMS had tended to GZ as well as the contacting officer on scene documented the reported injuries and grass stains on GZ's back. So if that's what your hanging your hat on.

I am curious as to what your basing your "guess" on? The only living eye witnesses are GZ and one other person. All other "witnesses" came after the fact. GZ says that he was jumped, taken down and that TM was going for his weapon. The only other eye witness has reported seeing TM on GZ banging his head on the sidewalk.

I wasn't there so all I have to go on is what information has come out while trying to filter all of the static. Do you have information the rest of the uninvolved world doesn't?

I'll wait for the EMS report, but I've treated enough scalp wounds and busted noses to know that unless Zimmerman had a change of clothes in his back pocket, it doesn't look like he had either. If Zimmerman were a boxer, I could understand his nose not bleeding much.

The other 'eye witness'? The one whom the police 'corrected' about who was on top? Or the other one who's only talked from behind a closed door, and only on fox?

Actually, there was a 911 caller that stated Zimmerman (by description) was on the bottom. The only contridictory witness so far was one that said the guy in white was on top. Neither of them were wearing white.

Not sure if this has been posted before (can't keep up with this ever-expanding thread), but found this video on CNN today:

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/crime/2012 ... und-fl.cnn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

also this article about Marion Hammer, with a bit more hatchetry toward Stand Your Ground from CNN

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/15/us/marion ... ?hpt=hp_c2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A-R wrote:Not sure if this has been posted before (can't keep up with this ever-expanding thread), but found this video on CNN today:

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/crime/2012 ... und-fl.cnn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The little girl's testimony is a bit difficult to understand, but it sounds like she said her dad was on top of the man, with his hands on his arms, "so he could get the answer" (presumably as to where the 'no skateboard" signs were).
That's sounding pretty aggressive, to me.
But the story is pretty thin all around.

Thought I'd resurrect this old thread since it seems those upset with Zimmerman verdict will be aiming to overturn SYG as the "social justice" answer for the injustice they perceive.

AG Holder even told the NAACP today that SYG has got to go (how's that for the obvious moment of the day AND the most use of acronyms in one sentence? )

Article below is a good starting point, as are the links at end of article.

http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/gun-sh ... n+Shots%29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seems to me the obvious common sense rebuttal (to sway those who have common sense, not the idiots calling for this) is to ask if they're ok with again being told you MUST retreat if someone attacks you. Wouldn't they rather have the choice to decide what is the better response (fight or flight?) to any given life- threatening incident? And then remind them that a criminal who knows you MUST flee is emboldened to attack with impunity.

Aren't there a couple states where they actually require one retreat if they are able to? I am speaking specifically if someone is breaking into the home. I thought I remembered us discussing a situation where a college kid got a BG with a sword and was facing charges because they said he could have gone out the back door.

One cannot retreat if the earth is in ones way. Zimmerman was flat on his back being pummeled.

mamabearCali wrote:One cannot retreat if the earth is in ones way. Zimmerman was flat on his back being pummeled.

Yeah... Which is why SYG laws have nothing to do with it. People saying, "this verdict should make us reconsider our pineapple export laws" would have about the same amount of relevance.

03Lightningrocks wrote:Aren't there a couple states where they actually require one retreat if they are able to? I am speaking specifically if someone is breaking into the home. I thought I remembered us discussing a situation where a college kid got a BG with a sword and was facing charges because they said he could have gone out the back door.

Many states still have a retreat duty in their criminal codes. Some require you to retreat even in your home, while others have a retreat duty only outside your home. The latter are "Castle Doctrine" states.

The Texas version of a "Castle Doctrine" bill (SB378, 2007) wasn't really a Castle Doctrine bill at all. We already were a Castle Doctrine state. Our bill removed the retreat duty outside your home, but it also did something far more important in my view.

Chas.

03Lightningrocks wrote:Aren't there a couple states where they actually require one retreat if they are able to? I am speaking specifically if someone is breaking into the home. I thought I remembered us discussing a situation where a college kid got a BG with a sword and was facing charges because they said he could have gone out the back door.

Surprisingly, Arkansas is one of these states. I believe it applies even in one's own home.

speedsix wrote:...Zimmerman was in no way conceivable "standing his ground"...he was playing police...and pursued the boy even after being told not to...he does not represent most responsible CHLers and we have no moral or ethical responsibility to support him...
...as to the fight to preserve "Stand your ground"-type laws...certainly...

This misrepresents the facts. First of all, Stand Your Ground never entered in to the Zimmerman trial and was not part of the defense strategy. The judge chose to include the verbiage in the jury instructions, but that's the only time the law even entered the case. Secondly, Zimmerman wasn't playing police, he was playing observer, which is what he was supposed to be doing. Thirdly, there was zero evidence, ZERO, entered during the trial that he pursued Trayvon. The media keeps repeating that lie, and that's exactly what it is, a lie. Finally, if Zimmerman's case isn't a perfect example of self defense, I don't know what is. How many blows to the head do you think someone should have to absorb, EVEN IF THEY STARTED THE FIGHT, before they have a right to defend themselves against great bodily harm or death?

If we can't stand up for Zimmerman, then why carry a weapon?