07-09-2013, 04:08 PM
(07-09-2013, 03:51 PM)BlueTiki Wrote:(07-09-2013, 03:45 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: For many (if not all) it comes down to who initiated the physical confrontation.
Really?
I thought it was all about the use of deadly force.
"As I've said for the past 6 months, if you're going to kick some ass, make sure that person is unarmed, or at the very least, get their weapon."
I'm surprised you left out " or a woman", too.
You're not often called a moron, so I'll do it now.
Hey moron!
I realize most of what you said here was said tongue in cheek, but instead of trying to discredit what I'm saying, how about taking it a little farther?
If I were on the jury, and it could be established 100% that either GZ or T threw the first punch, it would go a long way toward a conviction or an acquittal.
Especially if GZ had done it. I'd have a real hard time buying the 'in fear of my life' defense at that point.
As far as I know, I don't believe the prosecution tried to pin that on GZ. If the state can't prove that, I think Z's self-defense claim becomes much more believable.