ksig489;1129188 wrote:Now there is a witness who says they saw Zimmerman on the ground and bloody BEFORE the shooting. The police have confirmed that the back of his head was bloody as well as his nose before they questioned him. Sounds like the story that the kid hit him and pounded his head into the ground may be pretty believable. Self-defense sounds more and more realistic every day.

LJ;1129191 wrote:The instigator of the situation (aka the agressor) cannot claim self defense. Stand your ground and claiming Self Defense get you off with no penalty. When you instigate a situation, you do not get off with no penalty. He will get charged with Manslaughter at the very least IMO.

sleeper;1129205 wrote:I think he needs to be arrested. Innocent or not, its a crock of **** that's he's not at least charged with something.

Gblock;1129211 wrote:i think there is a zero percent chance we see a murder conviction and less than 25 percent chance of any criminal conviction.

at most some type of civil rights violation imo.

Gblock;1129211 wrote:i think there is a zero percent chance we see a murder conviction and less than 25 percent chance of any criminal conviction.

at most some type of civil rights violation imo.

bases_loaded;1129218 wrote:So if someone hits me in the back of the head a bounces my head off the cement, I'm in the wrong if I shoot them....only if were of different races?

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1129214 wrote:It can't be murder unless he knew Trayvon was going to be walking there that night and was going to kill him.

It could be manslaughter though.

LJ;1129222 wrote:The highest would probably be Involuntary Manslaughter with Provocation.

I could see Criminally Negligent Manslaughter as well

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1129225 wrote:I don't know near enough about what happened to say what it would probably be.

bases_loaded;1129218 wrote:So if someone hits me in the back of the head a bounces my head off the cement, I'm in the wrong if I shoot them....only if were of different races?

LJ;1129227 wrote:I think people need to look at it in equal but different terms.

Lets say Bobby Joe and Billy are standing there. Bobby Joe tells Billy that Billy's mom is a whore and tells him to get out of there. Then Billy starts beating on Bobby Joe. Bobby Joe then kills Billy. Who is wrong? Who instigated everything?

sleeper;1129228 wrote:Don't worry, LJ is a lawyer as well. Or he has an inside source in Sanford FL, that'll be the next thing he makes up.

LJ;1129231 wrote:Or you could just know the definitions of each of those and have a logical opinion

LJ;1129231 wrote:Or you could just know the definitions of each of those and have a logical opinion

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1129236 wrote:Definitions don't go from state to state though.

sleeper;1129238 wrote:So what really happened is you Google'd a legal experts opinion on the matter and tried to pass it off as your own?

You're a real piece of work.

LJ;1129239 wrote: Like, Florida doesn't have involuntary manslaughter

LJ;1129240 wrote:None of that happened.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1129241 wrote:I thought I had heard that, that's why I wondered when you said "Involuntary Manslaughter with Provocation" and also why I just said Manslaughter.

sleeper;1129244 wrote:What's the law in North Dakota? I don't know of anyone who keeps track of all the laws of each individual state/country/city/nation/district on the planet like you do? It doesn't matter what it is, rape/murder/STDs?/hunting/FDA regulations/FCC/etc., you know it all LJ, I'm impressed. :rolleyes:

LJ;1129247 wrote:I didn't realize I typed that. Oops. Yeah, I just mean manslaughter with provocation. I am saying that is the highest he would get, because he was obviously provoked into killing him.

mcburg93;1129249 wrote:You mean you dont read what you copy and paste?