So the short fat Latino dude ...

[chrisinhouston]

I thought this was a good annalysis of some of the reasons the jury reached the decision they did, that being based on the way the judge explained the law and her instructions.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alafai...ef=mostpopular

[chrisinhouston]

Adak, I think you are misunderstanding what is known as "the castle doctrine" which most "stand your ground" laws are based on. I believe it had more to do with protecting one's home or "castle." I don't follow your connection to people being conscripted to serve in battle. I also think it worth noting that current UK laws have no such provision and that a home owner defending his/her home with a weapon is most likely breaking the law!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/cele...ith-knife.html

I also don't understand your claim that AG Holder is a liar. I thought his speech was pertinent and extemely personal as to his experinces as a black man.

Origin of Castle Doctrin laws from Wikipedia:
According to 18th-century Presbyterian minister and biblical commentator Matthew Henry, the prohibition of murder found in the Torah contains an exception for legitimate self-defense. A home defender who struck and killed a thief caught in the act of breaking in at night was not guilty of bloodshed. “If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the thief owes no blood-debt to the home-defender; but if the thief lives, he owes a blood-debt to the home-defender and must make restitution.”[7][8]

The American interpretation of this doctrine is largely derived from the English Common Law as it stood in the 18th century. In Book 4, Chapter 16[9] of William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, he states that the laws "leave him (the inhabitant) the natural right of killing the aggressor (the burglar)" and goes on to generalize in the following words: And the law of England has so particular and tender a regard to the immunity of a man's house, that it stiles it his castle, and will never suffer it to be violated with immunity: agreeing herein with the sentiments of ancient Rome, as expressed in the works of Tully;[10] quid enim sanctius, quid omni religione munitius, quam domus unusquisque civium?[11] For this reason no doors can in general be broken open to execute any civil process; though, in criminal causes, the public safety supersedes the private. Hence also in part arises the animadversion of the law upon eaves-droppers, nusancers, and incendiaries: and to this principle it must be assigned, that a man may assemble people together lawfully without danger of raising a riot, rout, or unlawful assembly, in order to protect and defend his house; which he is not permitted to do in any other case.
—William Blackstone,*Commentaries on the Laws of England

[Spexxvet]

To the juror who said Zimmerman's heart was in the right place:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/07/1...ave-had-a-gun/

In July 2005, he was arrested for“resisting officer with violence.” The neighborhood watch volunteer who wanted to be a cop got into a scuffle with cops who were questioning a friend for alleged underage drinking. The charges were reduced and then waived after he entered an alcohol education program. Then in August 2005, Zimmerman’s former fiance sought a restraining order against him because of domestic violence. Zimmerman sought a restraining order against her in return. Both were granted. Meanwhile, over the course of eight years, Zimmerman made at least 46 calls to the Sanford (Fla.) Police Department reporting suspicious activity involving black males.

Violence against women
violence against authority
alcohol problem
paranoia of African Americans

It's no wonder Martin is dead. If Trayvon had the gun that night, and killed Zimmerman, I think the outcome would have been different.

[Adak]

Originally Posted by chrisinhouston

Adak, I think you are misunderstanding what is known as "the castle doctrine" which most "stand your ground" laws are based on. I believe it had more to do with protecting one's home or "castle." I don't follow your connection to people being conscripted to serve in battle. I also think it worth noting that current UK laws have no such provision and that a home owner defending his/her home with a weapon is most likely breaking the law!

I also don't understand your claim that AG Holder is a liar. I thought his speech was pertinent and extemely personal as to his experinces as a black man.

Since being outside your home is central to the Martin/Zimmerman case, I don't see any relationship to a "Castle Doctrine", which pertains directly to those who are inside their homes.

Frankly, I don't care WHAT his personal experiences are - whether he's white or black, or brown or purple. What Holder is DOING is the only thing I care about - and so far, it's been a lot on the negative side, and damn little on the positive side.

Holder has withheld documents required by law, from Darryl Issa's investigation committee. He's also lied about it, and had some of the whistleblowers, fired. Fast and Furious was a line item in his departments budget, and a special program designed and approved by retards (which includes him, since he ultimately approves everything in his department).

What is Holder's department doing to investigate and prosecute the federal crime committed by the IRS, in suppressing the conservative 501c/501c[3] applications, prior to the last election?

This was #2 on the impeachment actions taken against Richard Nixon. But under Holder, -- it's crickets singing in the night.

The Black Panthers were stationing teams of men armed with clubs, outside voting sites in Philly. Documentation and pics were made of it, by reporters.

But under Holder, -- no investigation, and no prosecution.

I haven't seen anything good come out of the DOJ, since Holder took over. Have you?

If so, what?

[DanaC]

The case last year of a black woman, in the same state, being sentenced to 20 years for firing her gun into the air to frighten away her abusive husband, with the judge saying SYG didn't apply, suggests you may be right.

[Griff]

As I understand that case, the DA convinced the jury that they were both abusers, her shot "into the air" was aimed at the husband and narrowly missed him and the children going through the kitchen wall. Stand your ground was not allowed by the judge because she went back into the house with a gun for her car keys after leaving. She refused a three year plea bargain was convicted and got ten years plus ten for using a gun in the commission of a crime. This is gleaned from the net, I don't have a good source. Much like the current case it is tried in the press under different terms than the court case. Our judicial system is a mess but our entertainment based press is as much problem as solution.

[sexobon]

Adak, are you responding to tw or to me. You quoted my response to tw in which I was addressing tw's notion that Martin was standing his ground. When I parodied Kenny Rogers' song The Gambler, I was implying that Martin needed to know when to hold or give ground. Even when someone is in fear for their life, standing ground just because one can isn't always the prudent course of action. Martin is now the poster child for that mistake.

I question whether any judge would apply the Stand Your Ground law to Martin as he had not yet reached the age of majority. It would set a president for all minors to perpetrate violence against adults by simply claiming they were in fear for their lives. This, even though minors as a group are generally considered to not have the skill sets, experience and maturity, to make an accurate determination like those inadequacies personified by Martin. There are many laws on the books that minors can't avail themselves of for that reason.

Additionally, the courts have routinely upheld that once someone turns and closes on an antagonist, rather than just remaining in place (standing their ground), their action demonstrates that they were not in fear for their life. The courts have also upheld that in a confrontation the first one to lay hands on another, in the absence of demonstrable serious threat to their physical self, becomes the aggressor. Many have resisted police arrest claiming that they did it in self defense while in fear for their lives 'cause the police had guns. The courts have routinely upheld that the mere presence of police officers' legally carried guns does not constitute a threat and the courts are extending that to all legally armed citizens.

Right or wrong, Zimmerman provoked only a verbal confrontation. The verdict implies that Martin initiated a physical confrontation, without adequate justification, and escalated it to such a level that his actions forfeited his right to life. Zimmerman was talking on the phone with police. Martin was talking on the phone with his girlfriend. Who intended to proceed within the limits of the law is clear. Childlike interpretation of the facts secondary to emotionally dysfunctional hoplophobia is alive and well.

[sexobon]

Zimmerman was undoubtedly being a douchbag, perhaps to appease his own ego. Unfortunately, Martin responded to that by being a punk, perhaps to impress his girlfriend. Both showed serious lapses in judgment. Martin paid for it with his life; because, he was too naïve to live. Zimmerman will pay for it one way or another for the rest of his life; because, he was the adult in that situation and responsible for controlling it which he failed to do. But there are right ways and wrong ways to hold Zimmerman accountable and many are upset 'cause they can't take matters into their own paranoid hands, perhaps they're not all that much unlike Zimmerman themselves.

[Happy Monkey]

Winding its way downward. It seemed pretty bad when first reported, when it seemed like they were doing it to only the right, but that turned out to be false. The guy who initially reported that they were targetting the Tea Party turned out to have been told to find any bad treatment of the Tea Party, and failed to report that the list of keywords was across the board.

Who "it's up to" doesn't matter much if "it" isn't actually a scandal.

[BigV]

Conversely, if they "who it's up to" has already been decided, the "it" is merely a placeholder.

[DanaC]

I'll take a wild stab in the dark and say someone on Fox News said it?

[Adak]

Originally Posted by DanaC

I'll take a wild stab in the dark and say someone on Fox News said it?

Yes, very likely it was Fox News I have a fox radio station very close to me, and listen to it a lot.

The gf testified Martin said:

"creepy ass cracker"

in describing the man who was following him.

I can't find any reference to Martin using the term "fix", in that phrase.

[tw]

Originally Posted by DanaC

I'll take a wild stab in the dark and say someone on Fox News said it?

I heard it on one of those wacko extremists talk radio shows. It may have been on broadcast on the shortwave bands. Don't remember. But I do remember what it was. Extremists telling their brainwashed brethren how to think and what to know.

I used to listen to early 1960s Radio Moscow. Fox News today is similar. So your guess is based in good statistical probability.

I lived the 60s. Adak claims and denials sound very much like closet racists of that era.

[Adak]

Originally Posted by tw

I heard it on one of those wacko extremists talk radio shows. It may have been on broadcast on the shortwave bands. Don't remember. But I do remember what it was. Extremists telling their brainwashed brethren how to think and what to know.

I used to listen to early 1960s Radio Moscow. Fox News today is similar. So your guess is based in good statistical probability.

I lived the 60s. Adak claims and denials sound very much like closet racists of that era.

Right after the incident, it was a friend of Trayvon's, who was saying that Trayvon went to the store, and made it to her house, and was "sitting on the porch".

Here is the video of it, and the media that found it again, plays it slowly so you can catch it word for word.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVirVLp47oY

So Martin clearly made it to his friend's home, or the friend's explanation to Trayvon's father, is a lie.

And you can stuff your racist theories. I was raised for a couple years as a child, by a black woman, who was very kind to me. Didn't grow up with this "hate races other than your own", type of attitude.

[BigV]

Lamplighter, you should go outside, *now*, and check your hubcaps.