Zimmerman trial starts

[eric]

[Charai]

[The Dharma Bum]

[Professor]

[The Dharma Bum]

Skin color is what locks them into the social situation though. Yes white people can be poor as well, there are a host of factors associated with poverty. So I agree it's not a "black problem" per se, but rather a problem with our social structure.

I think the best way to address that might be reparations. Indians at least got some land they can kind of use, blacks didn't really ever get the 40 acres and mule that were promised to former slaves.

[uebermann]

I think we're getting a bit off-topic here. Talking about race in this case is fine but I think we've gone a bit past that at this point. Lets try to head back towards the case.

[The Dharma Bum]

To build this shining edifice of modern post industrial culture/society we had to tear down thousands of other culture/societies over 6 continents.

That's leaving a lot of devastation in our wake.

[Professor]

But, back to the OP, since we have gotten sidetracked.

I don't think that the prosecution has even come close to proving their case. I have seen no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise, that Zimmerman was the initial aggressor.

Interestingly, I'm not sure, even if they had proven that he was, that it would have made their case. After all, the "initial aggressor" defense is only relevant in "stand your ground" cases. Zimmerman refused to use that defense. "Stand your ground" is not being used here. Under FL law, you are allowed to defend yourself if you think that your life is in imminent danger. There is no language in the law about who is the initial aggressor. Perhaps it should be there, but it's not.

I heard a random prosecution attorney interviewed on CNN yesterday. He said that he has seen several cases where one person started a fight, but just started it with words and shoving. Then, the other person escalated it by threatening using deadly force (pulled a knife, reached for a gun, etc.). Because the first guy is now in fear for his life, he was justified in using deadly force to defend himself. In other words, prior to the threat of deadly force, it was just a good-old-fashioned fisticuffs. Then, one guy escalated the situation by threatening a life. The prosecutor being interviewed was opining that, even if Zimmerman confronted TM and perhaps even initiated physical contact, when TM smashed his head on the concrete and/or reached for Z's gun, Z was justified in using deadly force to defend himself.

[The Dharma Bum]

OK

[The Dharma Bum]

I don't think there is a case either. The kid attacked him. Yeah, he's a weird dickhead but he has a right to defend his bodily integrity.

It's a biological imperative and thus an objective foundation for the right to self defense.