trayvan martin

londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
Harrekin said:
It's clear youve really no experience of the world if you can't even accept the outside possibility that Zimmerman is in the right?

He shouldn't have followed him or shot him, but we weren't there and life experience teaches sometimes shit tends to happen we didn't expect or desire.

But you just continue trying to hang the guy based on zero actual evidence. Did Trayvon tell you otherwise?

EDIT: My life is full of misery and drama? My life is fucking awesome fucktard, Im living the dream, you're crying like a little bitch on a message board ;)
Click to expand...
Trust me son.. I have more experience in the world then you could ever imagine.. and dude you have too much hate for your life to be so awesome. Who you think you fooling..??
 
H R Puff N Stuff

H R Puff N Stuff

Well-Known Member
he will be judged by a jury of his peer's and that is how it should be.stand your ground law doesnt apply or it he would not go to trial or thats how i understood it (based on police and wittness statements).besides if he is not guilty then it will come out in court.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Harrekin said:
It's clear youve really no experience of the world if you can't even accept the outside possibility that Zimmerman is in the right?

He shouldn't have followed him or shot him, but we weren't there and life experience teaches sometimes shit tends to happen we didn't expect or desire.

But you just continue trying to hang the guy based on zero actual evidence. Did Trayvon tell you otherwise?

EDIT: My life is full of misery and drama? My life is fucking awesome fucktard, Im living the dream, you're crying like a little bitch on a message board ;)
Click to expand...
Since you admit that Zimmerman should not have followed Trayvon, that makes it hard to construe a situation in which Z can have been "in the right". By pursuing T even after a dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that", Z has imo relinquished the moral high ground. Some have pointed out that the SYG law allows for using deadly force in the face of "great physical harm" etc. However any ordinary person who fears great physical yada yada would not pursue! It stands to reason that Z was emboldened by the gun on his person, and that makes it likely that he was actively seeking a confrontation.

In another post you asked if some would change their tune if Trayvon had attacked first. It's likely that Z accosted T first. Does "accost" affect how we define "attack" in this instance? Is a (very hypothetical) defensive blow an attack? Until a chronology of events of that night becomes published and certified as probable fact, the question cannot be answered. In the meantime, the salient facts are that Z followed T unnecessarily and created a situation in which the younger man died at Z's hands. I conclude that Z being in the right here, while conceivable, is unlikely. cn
 
Samwell Seed Well

Samwell Seed Well

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Since you admit that Zimmerman should not have followed Trayvon, that makes it hard to construe a situation in which Z can have been "in the right". By pursuing T even after a dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that", Z has imo relinquished the moral high ground. Some have pointed out that the SYG law allows for using deadly force in the face of "great physical harm" etc. However any ordinary person who fears great physical yada yada would not pursue! It stands to reason that Z was emboldened by the gun on his person, and that makes it likely that he was actively seeking a confrontation.

In another post you asked if some would change their tune if Trayvon had attacked first. It's likely that Z accosted T first. Does "accost" affect how we define "attack" in this instance? Is a (very hypothetical) defensive blow an attack? Until a chronology of events of that night becomes published and certified as probable fact, the question cannot be answered. In the meantime, the salient facts are that Z followed T unnecessarily and created a situation in which the younger man died at Z's hands. I conclude that Z being in the right here, while conceivable, is unlikely. cn
Click to expand...
+++++like+++++
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
doc111 said:
Your assumption that Zimmerman attacked Trayvon first is using faulty logic. Simply because a person may have an arrest or criminal record does not make it "more likely" that they attacked someone first. My Grandmother has a "criminal record" but she doesn't go around attacking people. lol!
Click to expand...
i never assume that zimmerman attacked martin. i base it on empirical evidence about zimmerman.

having a history of violence indeed DOES make it more likely that the person with the history of violence is the aggressor, rather than the person with no history of violence.

does your grandma have a record of assaulting police officers, beating up women, throwing women across bars, anger management classes, and the like?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
doc111 said:
More assumptions? You were there? How is it that nobody really knows what happened (hence all the controversy and debate) yet we've got people here who talk like they witnessed the whole thing? lmfao!!!!!! Nice try!:dunce:
Click to expand...
zimmerman himself said so on a recorded call.

"shit, he's running"
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Harrekin said:
I have weed right now, and as a result remembered I no longer care about this, lol.
Click to expand...
I never really gave a shit. Kinda sounds like Zimm was profiling. It seems clear to me that this controversy was created in order to inflame black voters in Florida in the hopes that they will show up to the polls, since Obama needs that state. Good for him, not like the other candidate is going to play fair, but I'm not going to get into the debate. Particularly since so many other debates are more important.
 
doc111

doc111

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
Have you listen to the 911 tapes ???? Zimmerman himself said that he was running away. For a person who says that they are not "defending" Zimmerman you sure are doing a lot of "defending" Zimmerman. No we were not there, but we can listen to tapes and see what was done and what was not done. Bottom line is if Zimmerman had not followed Trayvon and went back to his truck to wait for the "real" police, Trayvon would still be alive and Zimmerman would still be free. You are a smart man ..take the time and listen to the 911 tape when Zimmerman called in and you will see what I'm talking about. Judge for yourself if you hear a truck door open and the ding of it. Judge for yourself how long it would take to stop and return back to the truck from the minute he said " ok" to "we don't need you following him." It will help in your understanding as to why people are saying the things they are. Tell me this..in ten seconds how far can you run with a phone to your ear carrying on a conversation??? Zimmerman should have been back at his truck..not stalking Trayvon. Hell Trayvon could have thought this creepy guy was some sort of pervert. Now do I think that Zimmerman wanted to kill Trayvon from the jump..NO..do I think Zimmerman actions are what led to the death of Trayvon..Yes...real men know how to take responsibility and own up.!!! and real men defend real men. I don't defend cowards, liars, women beaters,and wannabe cops who needs a gun just to feel safe. What Zimmerman should have been looking for is a real job.
Click to expand...
I have listened to them and don't recall anything that screams "2nd degree murder". Perhaps I will give them another listen. ;-)

As for defending Zimmerman? No, I'm not defending him, but I'm also not rushing to judgement. Especially this case which has few to NO eyewitnesses, and so much contradictory "evidence". If the man killed Trayvon and violated Florida state law, he deserves whatever the justice system sees fit to hand out. However, rushing to judgement often puts innocent people in prison. I have a REAL problem incarcerating innocent people. I don't know if he's innocent or not, but there seems to be little to NO physical evidence and a whole lot of speculation. I'm not about to send anyone to prison for life (or even a day for that matter) simply because it appears one way. On the surface, I admit, it looks horrible for Zimm, but upon closer examination a whole lot of reasonable doubt seems to be lurking around every corner. Any decent criminal defense attorney already knows this and will exploit it. I think the state has an uphill battle proving Murder 2 beyond a reasonable doubt. They may even have trouble with manslaughter given the lack of evidence.
:blsmoke:



http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/why-are-so-many-innocent-people-convicted-of-746194.html
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
I never really gave a shit. Kinda sounds like Zimm was profiling. It seems clear to me that this controversy was created in order to inflame black voters in Florida in the hopes that they will show up to the polls, since Obama needs that state. Good for him, not like the other candidate is going to play fair, but I'm not going to get into the debate. Particularly since so many other debates are more important.
Click to expand...
He was profiling, Its what they do on neighborhood watches, its how they catch criminals. this is all explained in the handbook.

FYI the very first person who said that this is being used as a spring board for Obama was myself.
 
Mindmelted

Mindmelted

Well-Known Member
doc111 said:
I have listened to them and don't recall anything that screams "2nd degree murder". Perhaps I will give them another listen. ;-)

As for defending Zimmerman? No, I'm not defending him, but I'm also not rushing to judgement. Especially this case which has few to NO eyewitnesses, and so much contradictory "evidence". If the man killed Trayvon and violated Florida state law, he deserves whatever the justice system sees fit to hand out. However, rushing to judgement often puts innocent people in prison. I have a REAL problem incarcerating innocent people. I don't know if he's innocent or not, but there seems to be little to NO physical evidence and a whole lot of speculation. I'm not about to send anyone to prison for life (or even a day for that matter) simply because it appears one way. On the surface, I admit, it looks horrible for Zimm, but upon closer examination a whole lot of reasonable doubt seems to be lurking around every corner. Any decent criminal defense attorney already knows this and will exploit it. I think the state has an uphill battle proving Murder 2 beyond a reasonable doubt. They may even have trouble with manslaughter given the lack of evidence.
:blsmoke:



http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/why-are-so-many-innocent-people-convicted-of-746194.html
Click to expand...

:clap::clap::clap::clap: Knew you would come and save the day doc.
The only reasonable one here it seems(and that includes me)Even though i never said i thought he was innocent or guilty.
While all the rest like to hear words that are not there or commands that are not commands.
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
doc111 said:
I have listened to them and don't recall anything that screams "2nd degree murder". Perhaps I will give them another listen. ;-)

As for defending Zimmerman? No, I'm not defending him, but I'm also not rushing to judgement. Especially this case which has few to NO eyewitnesses, and so much contradictory "evidence". If the man killed Trayvon and violated Florida state law, he deserves whatever the justice system sees fit to hand out. However, rushing to judgement often puts innocent people in prison. I have a REAL problem incarcerating innocent people. I don't know if he's innocent or not, but there seems to be little to NO physical evidence and a whole lot of speculation. I'm not about to send anyone to prison for life (or even a day for that matter) simply because it appears one way. On the surface, I admit, it looks horrible for Zimm, but upon closer examination a whole lot of reasonable doubt seems to be lurking around every corner. Any decent criminal defense attorney already knows this and will exploit it. I think the state has an uphill battle proving Murder 2 beyond a reasonable doubt. They may even have trouble with manslaughter given the lack of evidence.
:blsmoke:



http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/why-are-so-many-innocent-people-convicted-of-746194.html
Click to expand...

My compliments, very well said!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top