07-18-2013, 10:50 AM
(07-18-2013, 10:21 AM)ramseycat Wrote: You have a point Six. T should have just asked G what he wanted instead of running. I don't believe G ever intended to kill T and I really don't believe he went through any "check list." We will never know the whole truth. Only G's truth as he sees it. The bottom line is he had a fair trial and was acquitted. We have to accept that and move on.
Exactly.
No one gets to a particular point in a vacuum. Both T and Z IMHO made a Long string of bad decisions. I don't think T was scared, he had no reason to be, Z hadn't made any threatening moves, at least not that I have heard, he profiled Z same way Z did him, made a decision on that and ran.
OK, good enough, he should have run all the way. H didn't, he went to ground. OK, good enough, its a good evasion tactic. Then it goes off the rails and he apparently confronts Z, or Z finds him and Z confronts T.
Bad decisions often hurt, pain is a good teacher.
T paid a high price, Z paid a pretty good one too. The state of Fl MIGHT learn something and fix the law, I don't think its way broken, but it definitely needs a tweak or two. Then again, its Florida, they are not famous for learning and making good decisions.