Reply to Child killed by Neighborhood Watch captain while walking home

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Child killed by Neighborhood Watch captain while walking home"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]How will facts come out in the case when there is no arrest? Do you really think that justice is truly served in every case. That police never error intentionally or accidentally? That they don't turn a blind eye? That money doesn't talk? I think it is really naive to think that if any wrongdoing happened then he will be arrested and found guilty. He could be 100% guilty and never arrested or tried. I have a feeling if this was a black man shooting a white teen in an affluent neighborhood you wouldn't be so concerned about not in any way presuming any guilt, you'd be calling for blood. [/quote]

You guys have to decide what you are so upset about.  First, you say that anyone suggesting that there isn't a valid self-defense claim or that there might be some other thing we don't know that would cause the case to be looked at differently is an idiot or trying to start trouble.  Then when I tried to expand on that and to say this is why you can't just go by the facts in the media, now I'm an idiot because there was no arrest in fact.  Decide what your point it:  there is no possible valid defense and a murderer is walking free OR you're pissed because he wasn't arrested thereby meaning he will never be convicted or (what I think is probably the case) you are pissed that he wasn't arrested because it is blindingly obvious to you ( and you are always right) that he should be a convicted murderer.

I don't think the police always get it right.  In fact, [b]I do a ton of pro bono work to help overturn wrongful convictions[/b].  I went to great pains to point out in my post that it was [u]probably[/u] the case that it was everything peple think it is:  racially motivated, completely unprovoked, some whack-job who decided he was going to protect his perfect gated neighborhood from this "threat" by using deadly force.  I mean, what kind of idiot calls the police about somebody walking down the street who looks suspicious and then decides he has to get out of his car with a gun because the person is so dangerous that he can't wait for the police to get there?  Yet, the mob mentality in this thread, without any recognition that there could be another side (even if unlikely) or that there could be something we don't know is frightening.  Finally, your suggestion that I would feel differently if a black resident shot a white teen in Spring Valley is absolutely offensive and misplaced.  If I won't jump on the mob band wagon, now I'm racist, too?  Awesome.

The justice system isn't supposed to rush to justice for anybody.  As I previously said, if there is some reason the police are slakcling here, I hope DOJ will investigate it with the time and care it deserves so that no one else gets a free pass on any crime, let alone one that is as bizarre as this one seems.[/quote]

Fact: you are not a lawyer. And if I'm wrong (btw, I am not the PP you're responding to) please promise me you will go back and take a few remedial education courses. Yes, I'm sorry, you ARE an idiot to make all of these sweeping "let the facts come out during the trial" comments about a man who was not even ARRESTED! The only response that makes sense here, from you, is to say "gee, I guess I didn't realize he wasn't even arrested. That changes things." Whether or not PP will still feel justice was not found if there is an arrest with no conviction has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not she gets to feel outrage that there was not even so much as an arrest.

People are angry, yes, but nobody is mobbing. We are calling for an arrest. Certainly, I can see a handful of scenarios where it was self-defense. Let's say the shooter did not actually follow him, merely kept observing him, and then saw Mr. Martin try to break into a house, and intervened. That might be a different story. Or, maybe, Zimmerman stayed in his car, but nonetheless captured the attention of Mr. Martin, who pulled Zimmerman out of the car and whooped his ass. Each of these scenarios would still have me thinking "why didn't Zimmerman stay away?" but certainly I could see where the law would take a different view. it's not illegal to follow someone in your car, even if it should be.

So yes, I actually DO see scenarios where the shooter could have genuinely been activing in self defense (though, do I think it's likely? No.) But, there is simply no way this is open and shut. You have a man dead, possibly no witnesses, and police arrive to find someone has shot someone else, and admits it, and says "it was self defense."

So you tell me in what world does this not lead to at least an arrest and a thorough investigation? I mean, if someone breaks into your HOUSE and you shoot him you can be arrested in some scenarios. So how is it that the police can possibly know, with NO doubt, that this guy is telling the truth about how things unfold? And does the fact that the police say they let him go based on the fact that he has "a squeaky clean record" (when he doesn't!) and a "four year degree" lead you to believe something STINKS HERE?

The police do not get to be judge and jury. Get it? 
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics