Zimmerman bond revoked

[londonfog]

probable cause affidavit

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Shellie-Zimmerman-Arrest-6-12-12.pdf

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

probable cause affidavit

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Shellie-Zimmerman-Arrest-6-12-12.pdf

good on ya for trying to actually provide credible information . . . . .but these tards dont want real information they want texas walker ranger
page 3 bottom paragraph mixed with previous 5 questions says it all

what does it sway when the only person who knows what really has his story contradicted over and over and then has to resort to getting his wife to lie to the court for him . . .. . what does that say about his credibility . .. . . bet the Z supported think he is resourceful . . . . more like shady

 

[Harrekin]

This is hilarious. I've got UB and londonfog taking asignments at my bidding, Harrekin is foaming at the mouth. Samwell Seed Well is the only one smart enough to not fall for it. Since UB really did try, tho still failing, to complete his "asignment", I'll be gracious and give him what he so desperately craves: "You, douche of all douches, are a worthless shit bag".

Lol, drooling at the troll feast more like.

I do think you're dumb as fuck tho.

EDIT: I'll help you out btw, if you think there's anything to "win"...you've already lost

 

[MuyLocoNC]

Right. I know you are on the z is guilty side at the moment.

Me? I'm on the let's see the trial side. Martin may have assaulted someone. Z may have murdered someone.

To say he is guilty at this stage is premature.

Innocent till proven guilty in a court of law.

You would want the same treatment for yourself. Unless of course you want to be found guilty in the court of public opinion...

Careful Anti, continued and unwaivering support of innocent until proven guilty will get you labeled a Zimmerman supporter by the lynch mob. Even bringing up the possibility of the shooting being justifiable under SYG or not, makes you a Trayvon hater. Your quoted post perfectly reflects what I've been saying for weeks.

 

[UncleBuck]

Careful Anti, continued and unwaivering support of innocent until proven guilty will get you labeled a Zimmerman supporter by the lynch mob. Even bringing up the possibility of the shooting being justifiable under SYG or not, makes you a Trayvon hater. Your quoted post perfectly reflects what I've been saying for weeks.

funny how no one jumped on him for that because unlike you, he is simply reserving judgment.

we all know how you feel about your loverboy zimm, however.

 

[Harrekin]

Careful Anti, continued and unwaivering support of innocent until proven guilty will get you labeled a Zimmerman supporter by the lynch mob. Even bringing up the possibility of the shooting being justifiable under SYG or not, makes you a Trayvon hater. Your quoted post perfectly reflects what I've been saying for weeks.

So Zim-Zim had absolutely no choice but to follow, confront and ultimately shoot Martin?

Bitch please...

 

[Corso312]

Careful Anti, continued and unwaivering support of innocent until proven guilty will get you labeled a Zimmerman supporter by the lynch mob. Even bringing up the possibility of the shooting being justifiable under SYG or not, makes you a Trayvon hater. Your quoted post perfectly reflects what I've been saying for weeks.

Innocent until proven guilty only applies to a court of law, this is the court of public opinion..Did you really have to wait until O.J. was acquitted to form an opinion on his guilt/innocence ?...No, common sense told you O.J. did it but beat it..Zimm won't beat it, he does not have O.J. $ ...you have heard the tapes and know the circumstances and zimms history..you just look past that because in your mind zimm did nothing wrong...he did and 12 people will agree he did and you will say "they bowed to fear from riots" or some other dumb statement..use your head..Zimm was armed and stalked a kid who was doing nothing wrong, zimm fired his weapon and killed a 16 year old boy..zimm fucked up.

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

Innocent until proven guilty only applies to a court of law, this is the court of public opinion..Did you really have to wait until O.J. was acquitted to form an opinion on his guilt/innocence ?...No, common sense told you O.J. did it but beat it..Zimm won't beat it, he does not have O.J. $ ...you have heard the tapes and know the circumstances and zimms history..you just look past that because in your mind zimm did nothing wrong...he did and 12 people will agree he did and you will say "they bowed to fear from riots" or some other dumb statement..use your head..Zimm was armed and stalked a kid who was doing nothing wrong, zimm fired his weapon and killed a 16 year old boy..zimm fucked up.

good post corso

all the PC ass clowns use stupid slogans like, innocent till proven guilty or use laws like SYG for there own personal agenda ,are just a bunch of liars /hypocrites. . .they are just fearful

people who think they can and should also be justified in stalking and shooting kids/people for what they looks like or can be stereotyped to be

, but i bet you anything if they were stalked and shot they would not feel so justified in dying

hypocrites who cant stand behind there own laws when they are used against them . . . .thats when they become tea partiers and try to make new stupid laws . . . ..

this country used to have god Samaritan laws . . . now we have SYG being used to stalk people in the guise of racial profiling

 

[desert dude]

Being complicit with a lie is as good as telling one yourself, the jury knows this, the Judge knows this and the public know this.

I dunno why some people debate, they're totally locked in their views. I changed my opinion on this through good debate, isn't that how it's supposed to work? If not, why bother?

I said early on in the Trayvon thread that I am willing to be persuaded of Zimmerman's guilt. Here is what will change my mind:

1. Refute the physical evidence. Zimmerman is the only one battered. Martin hasn't a mark on him except for scraped knuckles and a bullet hole.
2. Convince me that the physical evidence, which converges with the eye witness accounts and the initial police reports are all mere coincidence.
3. On the night of the incident Zimmerman willingly gave a statement to the police. He didn't clam up and say "talk to my lawyer". This is not the behavior of a guilty man.
4. The 911 recordings have somebody screaming for help. In his statement to the police, Zimmerman said he cried for help but nobody came. This is just more corroboration of Z's account of the incident.

I don't want to hear all the irrelevant BS, because it is irrelevant:
1. "Z was told not to follow"
2. "Z could have avoided this if he stayed in his truck"
3. "Z's wife lied about her finances"

Now, I will admit it is possible that the prosecutor has some evidence that I have not seen or heard that will clinch this for the prosecutor's side, but I think that is extremely unlikely mainly because the affidavit of probable cause filed by the prosecutor was utterly lacking in probably cause.

This case is politically motivated to keep the lid on unrest.

That's the way I see it.

 

[Corso312]

So 1 and 2 are not important to you?

 

[UncleBuck]

I said early on in the Trayvon thread that I am willing to be persuaded of Zimmerman's guilt. Here is what will change my mind:

1. Refute the physical evidence. Zimmerman is the only one battered. Martin hasn't a mark on him except for scraped knuckles and a bullet hole.
2. Convince me that the physical evidence, which converges with the eye witness accounts and the initial police reports are all mere coincidence.
3. On the night of the incident Zimmerman willingly gave a statement to the police. He didn't clam up and say "talk to my lawyer". This is not the behavior of a guilty man.
4. The 911 recordings have somebody screaming for help. In his statement to the police, Zimmerman said he cried for help but nobody came. This is just more corroboration of Z's account of the incident.

I don't want to hear all the irrelevant BS, because it is irrelevant:
1. "Z was told not to follow"
2. "Z could have avoided this if he stayed in his truck"
3. "Z's wife lied about her finances"

Now, I will admit it is possible that the prosecutor has some evidence that I have not seen or heard that will clinch this for the prosecutor's side, but I think that is extremely unlikely mainly because the affidavit of probable cause filed by the prosecutor was utterly lacking in probably cause.

This case is politically motivated to keep the lid on unrest.

That's the way I see it.

what you call "irrelevant BS" is central to zimmbot's claim that he acted in self defense.

"i'm willing to change my mind, but don't remind me of any of those thigns that frame zimmerman in a negative, psychopathic light"

laughable.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

So Zim-Zim had absolutely no choice but to follow, confront and ultimately shoot Martin?

Bitch please...

Who ever said he had no choice? Quote please or jam your "bitch please" right up your ass.

All I've ever stated, correctly I might add, is Zimmerman had the right to observe Martin. He had the right to ask him a question. He had the right to be back on that sidewalk. If he was attacked for doing nothing more than those three things, he retains his right to self defense. If he did more, like trying to physically detain or assault Martin, I think he loses that right.

That's it. I've tried to look at this like an impartial juror, assuming innocence while factoring evidence and reasonable doubt. I've stated several times that's how I'm approaching this. I refuse to be swayed by assumptions and supposition based on psychic readings of Zimmerman's mindset by the oh so level headed individuals who proclaim their hatred of SYG laws and in many cases gun ownership.

My personal feelings, Zimmerman should have waited for the police in his truck, period. But, those feelings don't make him guilty. It makes him an idiot or an over zealous neighborhood watch guy, but it doesn't make the three rights I listed above any less valid.

I've NEVER wavered on the position that his guilt will be determined by who physically attacked first. Im still at the same point I was earlier, exactly 50/50 on who attacked first.

The dolts can claim that makes me a Zimmerman supporter all they want, they just don't like their conclusions exposed as conjecture.

 

[tet1953]

I'm in the same boat, Muy. More like a dinghy lol..not many of us on the fence.

 

[Red1966]

If you don't join them, you're a racist. Or retarded. Or gay. Can't you see the wizdom in ignoring the physical evidence? Facts just confuse us, do the right thing. Join them or shut the fuck up. Four more years!!!!

 

[Harrekin]

If you don't join them, you're a racist. Or retarded. Or gay. Can't you see the wizdom in ignoring the physical evidence? Facts just confuse us, do the right thing. Join them or shut the fuck up. Four more years!!!!

Just cos I think Zimmerman went lynching doesnt mean Im a lefty.

I agree with some people on here regarding this, but dont lump us all together, Im not a commie like the rest of them.

 

[Wordz]

Z:Herro powice thers a negro outsides taking all my stuff they are always stealing from me everyday

P: leave him alone

Z. Inaudable (Fuckin cold) maybe coons

(z follows M)

M: Whats up mothafucka why you all up in my grill, Nigga I gots to get home to eat my snacks.

Z: YOURE stealing all the things I think those were my skittles and that's my neighbors tea

M: shut the fuck up spic. I am going to kill you with my fisticuffs. YOu fucked with the wrong 17 year old nigga today. I have the strength of 12 apes

Z: OH no I am getting beat up by a 17 year old with the strength of 12 apes

Z: HELP ME HELP ME HELP ME

M: They can never help you for I've got you now.

Z: You thought you had me but you forgot about my secret weapon but first you have to get off me so I can stand my ground.

M replies to request to get off Z)

Z: HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA take this 17 year old with the strength of 12 apes( shoots martin)



I'm working on a script for the lifetime channel

 

[UncleBuck]

I've NEVER wavered on the position that his guilt will be determined by who physically attacked first.

and that's what makes you incredibly stupid with regards to this case.

the prosecution has no fucking clue who started the actual fight, it's irrelevant to the case, they proceeded knowing this.

they are going to destroy zimm's self defense claim before it even tries to grow legs. he chased a kid around with a gun then went looking for him again. that's not self defense!

if you can't fire a warning shot into the ceiling without getting 20 years, you're not going to be able to chase a kid around with a gun and shoot him either. precedent has been set. angela corey is going to eat your zimmlunch.

 

[UncleBuck]

All I've ever stated, correctly I might add, is Zimmerman had the right to observe Martin. He had the right to ask him a question. He had the right to be back on that sidewalk. If he was attacked for doing nothing more than those three things, he retains his right to self defense.

observe = chase around.

ask him a question? he had several chances. never did. he was not interested in asking any questions.

back on that sidewalk? oj, you mean he chased the innocent kid with his gun AGAIN.

and you still call that self defense?

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

you are so dumb. you are really dumb, for real.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

and that's what makes you incredibly stupid with regards to this case.

the prosecution has no fucking clue who started the actual fight, it's irrelevant to the case, they proceeded knowing this.

they are going to destroy zimm's self defense claim before it even tries to grow legs. he chased a kid around with a gun then went looking for him again. that's not self defense!

if you can't fire a warning shot into the ceiling without getting 20 years, you're not going to be able to chase a kid around with a gun and shoot him either. precedent has been set. angela corey is going to eat your zimmlunch.

If they don't know who initiated the physical assault, they aren't going to get murder 2. You believe that just because the prosecution proceeded anyway means they're going to be successful, that's incredibly naive. Prosecutors lose and overcharge all the time.

I won't resort to calling you stupid, but you aren't looking at it objectively, at all.

 

[desert dude]

If they don't know who initiated the physical assault, they aren't going to get murder 2. You believe that just because the prosecution proceeded anyway means they're going to be successful, that's incredibly naive. Prosecutors lose and overcharge all the time.

I won't resort to calling you stupid, but you aren't looking at it objectively, at all.

You're right, UB is not stupid, he's a vigilante.