Yeah... this week alone, I only found time to sleep on Tuesday and Thursday night, for a total of about 7 hours.

Currently, I'm a full-time college professor, where I teach a minimum of 4 courses semester. Additionally, I'm also a full-time (evening, technically) law student, where I take a minimum of 9 hours of law per semester. This semester, for whatever reason, I thought it would be alright to develop and teach an advanced networking course (which I've never taught before) while taking Evidence -- which is probably the hardest course most will take while in law school. On top of all of that, I also own and operate my own consulting company, which admittedly, has been put on hold this semester.

Aside from my law classes, the single thing that's literally keeping me up at night is that advanced networking course. I keep telling myself (and my wife) that once it's done, it's "smooth sailing" as far as having to prepare for it in the future.

When I was 25, my quarter-life crisis wasn't that I had not "lived it up" enough -- rather, I was dissapointed that I had not achieved enough in my career at that point. We're all different when it comes to motivations, so what's good for me may not be so much for you, but then again, I've never put much stock in the "YOLO" lifestyle that many follow these days.

[QUOTE="Ernesto_basic"]

[QUOTE="DevilMightCry"] Great post. Where are you from btw? DevilMightCry

Deep in the heart of Texas, my friend!

San Antonio is a great city.

[QUOTE="Ernesto_basic"]

From the sparse evidence I've seen, this case looks like it should not have even been sought by the State. Moreover, considering the "reasonable doubt" standard applicable to criminal cases, I do not think that the State succeeded -- again, in my opinion -- in providing enough evidence to extinguish the degree of doubt necessary to convict. As for what's "reasonable," well... that's (usually) 12 strangers (typically laymen at that) in a room. From what I've watched and read (busy with my own law courses and work at the moment), it stands to reason that when you have the State trying a case with little-to-no evidence for probable cause, coupled with their hail-mary attempt of felony-murder (for you non-law types, felony murder is probably the most pro-prosecutorial method of acquiring a homicide conviction against a defendant) at the 11th hour, I'm not at all convinced that we'll see a second-degree charge.

With that said, again, what's "reasonable" to the 6 fact-finders (jurors) is impossible to predict.

On a personal level, my heart goes out to both the Martin and Zimmerman family, because my gut (and lack of corroborating evidence) tells me that this was a case of legal use of deadly self-defense under the circumstances. Keep in mind, however, that there's a big difference between what's "legal" under the attendant circumstances and what's "reasonable" in hindsight.

Just my two cents :)

DevilMightCry

Deep in the heart of Texas, my friend!

i believe if he gets off you might see riots.    Its definitely possible.

XBOunity

The sad thing about it, is that they'd likely be organized, racially-charged and ultimately do nothing more than engender further ignorance and hate towards innocent parties.

 

The central question of the Zimmerman case is as follows : Is it considered self-defense to attack someone who is following you in their car?

LazySloth718

1) There is nothing illegal about following someone; and

2) Even if it were illegal -- and again, it is not -- it would be very difficult to meet the "reasonable" standard of self-defense.

Self-defense (deadly) comes down to the "reasonable person" standard with regards to being in apprehension of imminent serious bodily injury or death.

The central question of this case, if it even should have been sought, is as follows:

• Who instigated the conflict? We don't know, because there are no witnesses (other than the defendant) who can provide such evidence.
• When the defendant chose to use deadly self-defense, did he do so "reasonably?" Again, upon assessing the evidence, testimony and attendant circumstances, one could easily argue that the "reasonable" standard had been met. Moreover, the State's lack of evidence does nothing to diminish the significant doubt that surrounds this case.

From the sparse evidence I've seen, this case looks like it should not have even been sought by the State. Moreover, considering the "reasonable doubt" standard applicable to criminal cases, I do not think that the State succeeded -- again, in my opinion -- in providing enough evidence to extinguish the degree of doubt necessary to convict. As for what's "reasonable," well... that's (usually) 12 strangers (typically laymen at that) in a room. From what I've watched and read (busy with my own law courses and work at the moment), it stands to reason that when you have the State trying a case with little-to-no evidence for probable cause, coupled with their hail-mary attempt of felony-murder (for you non-law types, felony murder is probably the most pro-prosecutorial method of acquiring a homicide conviction against a defendant) at the 11th hour, I'm not at all convinced that we'll see a second-degree charge.

With that said, again, what's "reasonable" to the 6 fact-finders (jurors) is impossible to predict.

On a personal level, my heart goes out to both the Martin and Zimmerman family, because my gut (and lack of corroborating evidence) tells me that this was a case of legal use of deadly self-defense under the circumstances. Keep in mind, however, that there's a big difference between what's "legal" under the attendant circumstances and what's "reasonable" in hindsight.

Just my two cents :)

I'm excited to play this game, but I really wish it was also coming out for the next-gen consoles and PC (I'm sure it will in time, but I want it at launch). The game looks great, but judging from the gameplay video, it looks like the screens we've been seeing are a step-up from what we can realistically expect when we play it in September. Graphics aside -- the gameplay looks to be unprecedented.

Huh... well, I guess I had a point!

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

After playing the demo for this game, I'm super excited for the PC release. Yeah, it's a budget game with Xbox/PS2-like graphics, but the game mechanics make for a pretty compelling zombie/strategy game.