"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Robert Green" wrote:


I can refute that easily by pointing out the cops that shot Diallo and
Bell
went through a world of hurt. The Sean Bell shooters even lost their
jobs
because their claims of self-defense and "apprehended danger" were not
believed.

Cops are held to a higher standard because of the additional training.
Hardly relevant to this situation.

Interesting for you to clip what I was refuting and then make a point not
particularly relevant. I said, and still stand by the fact that a claim of
self defense is not enough to get you off the hook. It has to be credible.
The DA in this case originally found that to be true. It may very well be
that the special prosecutor will find that to be true as well. I would say
cops are held to a lower standard because of their responsibility to enforce
the law and to protect civilians. They are less likely to be jailed for a
"bad shoot" than the average citizen involved in a shooting. They're out
patroling the street armed because that's what we pay them to do. Z was out
there patroling the streets armed because that was what he chose to do. Big
difference.

Disagree. You have to convince the legal system that you acted based on
your fear. While reading material about the SGY laws, a lot of people
claim
self-defense but their claims are not believed. For instance,
Zimmerman's
alleged 47 calls to 911 are going to weigh against him. If he was so
fearful, why did he continually expose himself to potentially dangerous
situations, one of which ended up with a dead teenager?

He made 47 CALLS. Any indication of how many times he followed a
person around or other wise "expose(d) himself to dangerous situations.
Also, if he was such a loose cannon how come doesn't have 47 other
bodies lying around?

My comment was directed at his possible defense of being afraid for his life
yet putting himself into a potentially dangerous situation repeatedly. As
HeyBub might tell us, he knew the risks but continued with his armed
patrolling. Z had to be pretty stupid if he thought he would never face
someone who took exception to being followed around. You and others may
deny it, but very few people "enjoy" the experience of being followed at
night by a total stranger - if indeed M and Z were total strangers. They
might have had a previous encounter no one knows about. If there's a trial,
a lot will hinge on Z's conduct, his interaction with 911 and the reasons he
believed M was acting suspiciously.

--
Bobby G.