The Jury Got It Right

Depends on the circumstances. So what?

You have no knowledge of whether Martin acted as a reasonable person would or not. What indication is there he had any opportunity to back off when the gun was visible?

 

Not so much, nobody should be under a legal obligation to take a beating. So what?

 

Depends on the circumstances. If you pick a fight, you shouldn't be able to pull out your gun and blow the other guy away because you're losing.

that is what I keep asking.

 

Yes you should, if the guy had you pinned down beating the crap out of you and wil not get up and quit. So what?

 

To address the OP. One of the jurors disagrees, and says he got away with murder.

 

The "correct name" rule applies to us all, I trust.

I should be able to go back and find that all my "fraud" name tags have been edited in the same manner. That's a good thing.

 

So if he had a gun you'd just be dead.

View attachment 21227

But I disagree. We don't want a rule that let's guys with guns pick fights and the shoot the other guy if they start losing. If you are armed with a guy and you caused the situation you should bear fault for the consequences.

 

No evidence that we had that situation herre.

 

Pretty good summing up there.

 

Now it seems most of the jury was second guessing themselves !

 

You mean other than the wanna be cop who (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)ed that "these (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s are always getting away" and who, in violation of the NW rules and the dispatcher's admonishment, went after Travon?

We were talking in the hypothetical. But there is no evidence that that isn't what happened.

 

Nothing factual here except he wanted to be a policeman.

 

LOL, now you're admitting it?

My entire statement was factual.

 

How come certain poster's comments are edited? (probably because it's selectively enforced). Does this mean OJZ was guilty?

 

Was my post edited?

 

Subsequent responses have been "mysteriously" deleted. Oh well. I thought we were heading in a more honest direction.

 

I didn't post that on the thread.

 

No, it's another poster's "obsession" with me that is removed and the other poster's response. (like it never even happened). Deleted. Don't know why. I wasn't notified. PM me and I can give you details.

 

Your insults were deleted, and you're surprised?

Seriously, just read the ToS and follow the rules.

 

No...WHOLE posts and responses were deleted. Don't know who though. I'll be happy to follow the rules. I just want them to be enforced equally. That wrong?

 

They are being enforced equally. The mods mark exactly what is edited and why.

 

I disagree. Whenever I point out things, it gets deleted. Strangely, it usually involves another poster consistently, while they seem to get preferential treatment. Must have something to do with cash, I'd imagine.

 

Well that's no fun to prove you wrong when your post showing that I won is deleted. Well fellow forum members that missed it I won he lost miserably.

 

With some folks everything is a conspiracy.

 

Many things are indeed. In this example, you and I both know the truth.