<p>I agree, razorsharp, the defense attorney is really, really good. BOTH the prosecution and defense are behaving admirably, in my opinion. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, he did. Trayvon Martin’s only “crime” that night was being black and looking like other people George Zimmerman had been suspicious of in the past. </p>
<p>It’s hard for me to understand how people can support SYG laws and not Trayvon’s right to stand his ground against a creeper following him for no apparent reason.</p>
<p>I heard about that case, riprorin. The people who killed the victims were sentenced to death or life without parole. Exactly what is the “narrative” you are looking for? Or maybe I should state the question more clearly: exactly what is the point you are trying to make by posting that link and your comment?</p>
<p>Of course, that does not seem to prevent widespread misinterpretation of the law (which is not all that different from the laws in many other states). Actual differences in what happens between states may have more to do with what people (including police, judges, and juries) think the law means, rather than what it actually says, and whether other political biases (e.g. racial bias or politics) get mixed into the case.</p>
<p>“Zimmerman only reached for his gun when his shirt came up and Martin saw the gun and tried to reach for it.”</p>
<p>Whoa, now I’m confused. I thought TM was so dominant that the GZ had no recourse but to shoot him. But this is quite … um … the opposite. This is George “Cage Fighter” Zimmerman managing conflict. He’s fending off TM’s blows, while carefully considering his options for reversing the situation. He notices his shirt coming up. GZ thinks, “Oh no, my shirt is coming up. I’d better be cognizant of TM’s movements, lest he notice my piece.” He sees TM go for the gun, but GZ’s prepared. He deftly counters TM’s move and grabs the pistol first. </p>
<p>Doesn’t SOUND like a guy who believes he’s being beaten to death.</p>
<p>I always try to visualize things and there is simply no way I can visualize that account unless each man has 3 hands. Which hand does TM have on GZ’s mouth? Which side of his body is GZ’s gun holster? Where are TM’s legs when he is straddling GZ? If GZ’s hands are free when GZ is on top of him, why isn’t he trying to push TM away? If TM is in the superior position and can see the gun, who does GZ manage to successfully get the gun with one hand and manipulate it to a position where he can get a clear shot at TM’s chest – without TZ seeing what he is doing and trying to deflect the gun?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But we know that Martin’s hands were underneath his body – not pulled out – so that part of GZ’s account can’t be true.</p>
<p>“I heard about that case, riprorin. The people who killed the victims were sentenced to death or life without parole. Exactly what is the “narrative” you are looking for?”</p>
<p>Yes, justice was ultimately served, but that I think you missed my point. You don’t think that the mainstream media has an agenda?</p>
<p>Their agenda is ratings. You see some sinister motive when it is white/black crime others see a sinister motive when a missing young blond girl gets minute by minute coverage but we get no coverage when a minority girl goes missing.
They televise or write about what draws people to their station or paper.</p>
<p>Wolverine, you are mixing up Castle laws and SYG laws.</p>
<p>I believe in Castle laws. SYG, not as much.</p>
<p>In a true self defense case, which a SYG case would be, self defense can be used just fine. As we see here.</p>
<p>Rip-- I’m familiar with that case. Nobody wants to hear about that more than once. It’s too horrific. The thing about this case is that it is not gruesome. Nobody will watch that.</p>
<p>“Yes, he did. Trayvon Martin’s only “crime” that night was being black and looking like other people George Zimmerman had been suspicious of in the past.”</p>
<p>Punching someone in the nose, getting on top of them, punching them in the face, and banging their head on the ground isn’t a crime? Hmmm.</p>
<p>“Stand your ground” when someone illegally enters your home is generally called “castle doctrine” (“your home is your castle”). There are places which have the “castle doctrine”, but not “stand your ground” outside your home (i.e. you have a “duty to retreat” generally, but not if you are in your home).</p>
<p>If that is what happened. There are so many inconsistencies in GZ’s story that it’s hard to tell. What we DO know is that he stalked a teenager and killed him.</p>
<p>Stand your ground just means that you don’t have an obligation to run away and then you can shoot when they almost catch up to you. I shouldn’t have to run, you’re completely focused on me when somebody else is attacking me and deserves the blame.</p>
<p>“Their agenda is ratings. You see some sinister motive when it is white/black crime others see a sinister motive when a missing young blond girl gets minute by minute coverage but we get no coverage when a minority girl goes missing.
They televise or write about what draws people to their station or paper.”</p>
<p>Why do we see so little media coverage about the approximately 7000 black Americans that are murdered each year, 93% of whom are murdered by another black? Does a black life only have value when it is taken by a white, a white-Hispanic, a hispanic or some other race? Is it because it doesn’t fit the mainstream media narrative of continuing white racism? Please explain.</p>