The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Beard v. U.S. (158 U.S. 550 (1895)) that a man who was "on his premises" when he came under attack and "...did not provoke the assault, and had at the time reasonable grounds to believe, and in good faith believed, that the deceased intended to take his life, or do him great bodily harm...was not obliged to retreat, nor to consider whether he could safely retreat, but was entitled to stand his ground."[2][3] Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. declared in Brown v. United States (1921) (256 U.S. 335, 343 (16 May 1921)), a case that upheld the "no duty to retreat" maxim, that "detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife".
He was at his place of work, he was in a place where he had a legal right to be, he was in his own neighborhood (a gated community) and he was being murdered. I'm sure you would have handled the situation differently than he did but maybe you have no reason to live. He has a family he chose to live for. Can't fault him for that. The jury read the jury instructions that you keep telling everyone to read, and they found no reason at all to help the media and race-carders persecute him any longer.
Right above your post, you quoted this: The Washington State Supreme Court, for example, has ruled "that there is no duty to retreat when a person is assaulted in a place where he or she has a right to be."
This is just one of the strange parts about Zimmerman's story Isn't that just so convenient, lol. I'm sure it played out exactly like that. You followed him for a block and had a police officer sent out for him. You really want me to believe you said "no" when he asked you if you have a problem? That's how it went down? He's a lying cocksucker. Story is filled with holes and has been inconsistent from the start.
You keep posting stuff it looks like you don't read yourself. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Beard v. U.S. (158 U.S. 550 (1895)) that a man who was "on his premises" when he came under attack What part of "on his premises" means "anywhere in the world he can claim as his (utter bullshit) place of business.
And? Washington state has a stand your ground law. http://theolympiareport.com/washington-one-of-31-states-with-stand-your-ground-law/ The court is supposed to rule on its laws. EDIT: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.050 RCW 9A.16.050 Homicide — By other person — When justifiable. Homicide is also justifiable when committed either: (1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or (2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is. [2011 c 336 § 354; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.16.050.]
The only inconsistencies are with the state. You may not believe his story but there is nothing that refutes it. hoop fam
I've said numerous times the evidence is on the side of the defense. Doesn't mean I don't think George Zimmerman isn't a lying cocksucker that hasn't changed aspects of his story (he has).
By what standard? He is guilty. There's tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands who are protesting because they know him guilty.
What standard? Based on the evidence and facts of the case which was tried through the criminal courts system which has proven him to be not guilty. People protesting in the streets doesn't make someone guilty of a crime. They know less about this case than you do (and you're way off base on it to begin with).
So.. If I followed you to a secluded place and shot and killed you, I could just get away with it by saying you jumped me? Cause you're dead! What do you know? I'm alive, people listen to me, I win?
well, I'd have to be attacking you and ballistics would have to back up your story. I'd probably be able to kill you before you got your gun out though.
