View Single Post
#10
Old 06-24-2013, 06:11 PM
Golden Boi 360
Boxing's Biggest Cash Cow
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 1,784
Blog Entries: 1
Rep Power: 8 Golden Boi 360 has a reputation beyond reputeGolden Boi 360 has a reputation beyond reputeGolden Boi 360 has a reputation beyond reputeGolden Boi 360 has a reputation beyond reputeGolden Boi 360 has a reputation beyond reputeGolden Boi 360 has a reputation beyond reputeGolden Boi 360 has a reputation beyond reputeGolden Boi 360 has a reputation beyond reputeGolden Boi 360 has a reputation beyond reputeGolden Boi 360 has a reputation beyond reputeGolden Boi 360 has a reputation beyond repute
Points: 84,305.21
Bank: 4,331,104,100.86
Total Points: 4,331,188,406.07
this one's on me - S H O B O X 
Default

1.Mr.Zimmerman committed no crime that night, February 26, 2012, before he was battered which would invalidate his claim to self defense under FL776.012/13 (see law below)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Forensics show the gun was fired in the immediate area of the kid's body.Not standing over him, not feet away and upright. This corroborates Mr.Zimmerman***8217;s account.
http://www.docstoc.Com/docs/12068703...autopsy-report
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.Wounds on the face and back of Mr.Zimmerman's head corroborate his account of being battered.
http://www.huffingtonpost.Com/2012/0...n_1526045.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. No defensive wounds or marks of any kind to suggest or hint that he was even touched. The only mark on him, other than the bullet hole, was an abrasion on his knuckle , probably from where he struck Mr.Zimmerman.
http://www.docstoc.Com/docs/12068703...autopsy-report
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. The only witness who clearly saw the two puts the kid on top and committing battery. "he described the person on top as male with a darker complexion, wearing a black or a dark colored shirt or jacket. He described the second person, or the person on the
bottom, as being a male with a lighter complexion, wearing a lighter colored red or white shirt."... "While still positioned on the ground, he describes the two individuals turning and moving onto the sidewalk. He said the person wearing the black shirt was still on top of the person wearing red. He recalls seeing the person on top either forcefully holding the person on bottom down, or hitting the person on the bottom." This corroborates Mr.Zimmerman***8217;s story.
http://www.click2houston.Com/blob/vi...-documents.pdf
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Mr.Zimmerman claims he was going back to his car when he was confronted and attacked, the state has nothing to refute this.

O'Mara " do you have any evidence in your investigation to date that specifically contradicts either of those two pieces of evidence that were in
his statement given several hours after the event?
GILBREATH: Which two?
O'MARA: That he turned back to his car. We'll start with that one.
GILBREATH: I have nothing to indicate he did not
http://transcripts.cnn.COM/TRANSCRIP...20/cnr.02.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. The kid had a less than 10 second trip home, if he was scared or not wanting a confrontation he could run (or use his phone to call for help) to his father and others which were less than a football field away He was found closer to the location where he was last seen by Mr.Zimmerman than his destination, which suggests that he either did not head home and merely stayed in the area waiting for Mr.Zimmerman or that he came back toward him. Which corroborates Mr.Zimmerman***8217;s account.
http://bcclist.files.wordpress.Com/2...erman-path.jpg
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Mr.Zimmerman feared great bodily harm and/or death which justifies the use of deadly force under FL 776.012/13. http://www.click2houston.Com/blob/vi...-documents.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9.Mr.Zimmerman did not stalk the kid. Getting out of the car one time is not considered stalking. This is: 784.48 Stalking Defined as :Willful, malicious, and repeated following or harassing. (704.048(2)); Aggravated stalking: willful, malicious and repeated following or harassing another with credible threats with the intent to place person in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury; or willfully, maliciously, repeatedly follows or harasses minor under 16; or after injunction for protection or any court-imposed prohibition of conduct, knowingly, willfully, maliciously and repeatedly follows or harasses another person.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. There is ZERO evidence that Mr.Zimmerman started the fight. This is corroborated be the Florida state investigator. ***8220;the investigator said the state didn't have evidence to contradict Zimmerman's account that Martin started the fight that led to the shooting,***8221;
http://news.blogs.cnn.Com/2012/04/20...rge-zimmerman/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
FL 776.012***8195;

Use of force in defense of person.***8212;A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other***8217;s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if: (1)***8195;He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or (2)***8195;Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There you go. Those cannot be refuted by any evidence which has been released so far. If the prosecution was able to, they would have said so during the bond hearings or they would have released some contradictory evidence in the year since this happened.

Thanks to a man named James Billingsworth for this
Reply With Quote
Golden Boi 360 is offline