I understand.
Well, when it comes to social condemnation, that is something that every individual has to decide on their own based on their own set of morals and values.
1) It depends. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. In my opinion, it would depend on what Trayvon does with the gun and what he is facing after he has control of it. Tho I seriously doubt that he was reaching for Zimmermans gun.
2) I think Zimmerman committed manslaughter.
3) like I said, I...
Under the law in Florida, Trayvon had a right to use force to defend himself. You are basically saying that if someone defends themselves and are killed, it is their own fault.
Also, in your cited case, the guy that's asking for an appeal was on HIS OWN PROPERTY and the other guy was CLEARLY...
The law flat out says that I can use force upon you in self defense if you don't threaten me or use force upon me first as long as I have a reasonable belief that you will IMMINENTLY use force upon me. I don't have to hear or see a clear threat. Do you think muggers just neatly announce...
Were still on this?
I'm saying that the prosecution didn't want to win the case. It was a show trial that was fixed up from the ground up. Even the medical examiner (who they didn't prepare AT ALL) said that they didn't want to win the case and flat out told him what he will and won't discuss...
I don't have time to go through all those posts, the point is that all of my posts have been responses to what someone else said based on the subject matter of THEIR posts.
In post 440 I was talking about why people were pissed off at Zimmerman and why that pissedoffitude continued to mount...
There was plenty to refute his claim in the evidence. The prosecution simply did not use what was actually there. Remember when I brought up the misalignment earlier? I knew about that before the trial and the evidence in the discovery supports it. Did the prosecution use it? Nope. Did they know...
That's basically what the other guy said. What I'm saying is that he is saying that it is completely impossible for any other scenario to exist, which is foolish.
Zimmerman was already in the national news before NBC made their first story on him. His name was already hated, he was already being called a racist by people all over the country and NBC's broadcast had nothing to do with that.
Self defense law DOES NOT require someone else to use force first before you can initiate force upon them in self defense. Your belief that it does, is a complete fallacy.
Self defense law requires the REASONABLE BELIEF that someone else will imminently use force upon you. I cited TWO (2) cases...
I didn't change my tune about the rape thing, that is a stupid analogy that does not fit. A better analogy is that Zimmerman has a totaled car or a burned down house and he wants to blame NBC because they scratched the paint on the door to his totaled car, or flicked a cigarette onto the...
The facts support a great many differing beliefs of what happened. It isn't my fault that your mind is so limited that you look at the facts and believe whatever you are told by a liar like Zimmerman without looking at the situation or his claims critically.
But him leaving his truck and following Trayvon aren't the only facts. That's the point. If the only facts of Trayvons behavior are that he was walking around and ran away from Zimmerman, then Zimmerman was wrong to leave his truck. See how this works?
I didn't add facts to the scenario as...
Well, I'm not the one that's trying to say people are posting from multiple accounts and I'm not the one that's in full denial mode like you are.
You keep saying that you'll wait for an appeal, but I don't see you shutting up and doing what you said you'd do.
They had plenty of evidence, they didn't use it. Also there is plenty of evidence that refutes his claims. Even in the video, he lied about where the fight ended up and you can tell that he lied because he sat there and stared at the actual location long and hard.
I'm guessing that you didn't watch the video I linked, did you? Zimmerman admits flat out that he reached for something. Not that I believe much of what he had to say.
Don't care if Zimmerman was acquitted. He's still wrong. Also, I'm telling you that Zimmerman has no case and a snowballs...
I didn't add facts.
Zimmerman told the police that Trayvon said "is there a problem homie?" And instead of answering the question, he reached (in the area where he keeps his gun) for his phone. Then Trayvon punched him. :/
Start watching this video at the 9:50 mark...
Um no he wouldn't.
I posted a case earlier where a guy walked up to a teen and his dad sitting in a car, said 'you good' then reached for his waistband. The teen shot him dead. The man he shot was unarmed. He was acquitted.
In this case, Zimmerman followed Trayvon for several blocks and left...
Zimmermans point of view and behavior were defective. That's the point. He had the point of view that Trayvon was a suspect of a crime, but he didn't see anything to justify that point of view or make his behavior of leaving his truck to run after Trayvon seem reasonable in any way.
Zimmermans...
Too bad that he's incredibly wrong. It's stupid backwards logic that could only be proven if you can somehow read the minds of thousands of people. And even then, there were things that Zimmerman factually said in the unedited tape that would be stronger evidence of him being racist than NBC's...
What makes Trayvon a suspected criminal? Walking down the street is not against the law.
Look, it is NOT a criminal act for Trayvon to use force to defend himself if he believes that Zimmerman may use unlawful force upon him. Especially if Zimmerman had actually used unlawful force.
Actually, my arguments WERE placed before the finder of fact during the NBC case.
Zimmerman was already believed to be a racist before NBC made a single broadcast. He is a pariah based on things that happened before NBC aired a single thing about him and his own behavior. People aren't...
He doesn't care about the facts surrounding the article. He just wants an excuse to say that it is ok to call OJ a murderer after he was acquitted yet still demand that nobody call Zimmerman a murderer even though both beliefs are valid.
Calling OJ a murderer after he was acquitted IS the same as calling Zimmerman a murderer. You weren't there! You DONT know for a fact OJ committed a murder, but you are entitled to believe what you wish and you're not obligated to give OJ the benefit of the doubt or any comfort. NOBODY is...
His current reputation is a result of the negative press that he received BEFORE NBC aired a single show and Zimmerman's behavior and statements before the shooting, during the shooting, after the shooting, during the trial and after the acquittal. NBC's sound bytes had no real effect or cause...
Um, I was responding to what was said of the OJ trial. Only time I brought up OJ was to point out that he was acquitted almost 20 years ago and people still call him a murderer, then someone (possibly you) wanted to talk about his trial and blahblahblah.
OJ never admitted that he killed someone. The fact is that the enquirer is not a reliable source for anything. 'News' from them is about as reliable as all that 'news' from techblogs that apple was going to make touch screen macs running vanilla osx or that they were going to make an iWatch or a...
Jesus, now we are arguing about a case from almost twenty years ago.
Dude, you're the delusional one here on this. Like I said, I'm sitting here and staring at you. o_o
Actually it is material to the suit. Anytime you sue someone for damages, the facts of whether or not they caused your damages are always material to your lawsuit.
Oh, he also thinks NBC defamed Zimmerman when they made their first broadcast long after his reputation was already rubble. As though Zimmerman had a great reputation or worthwhile earning potential before the shooting... -_-
I already stated how the evidence was tainted. Look, I tire of going in these circles with you. This is the point where I just sit here and look at you.
Note, there was plenty of evidence in the Zimmerman trial if you read the discovery and in the dunn trial both witnesses and the forensic...
Can you quote me saying anything about judge Lester or crump?
EVERY judge gets a judgement appealed at some point in their career. The problem here is that Zimmermans lawyer has so many hurdles to jump in order to make an appeal and if he fails to clear any one of those hurdles the judgement...
In order to get the judgement reversed, they have to appeal every point the judge mentioned in her judgement. One of those is impossible to overturn because Zimmermans reputation was ruined and people were calling him a racist long before NBC came along and aired anything about Zimmerman...
Everything I've posted has been a response to what someone else said. If you bring up the case, I'll make a response to address what you bring up.
In post 264, YOU were clearly talking about the trial and I responded to what You said. To the arguments that YOU made. Want to stop talking about...
Blahdeblahblahblah
Not interested in reading a book first thing in the morning man.
Look, in the dunn case the prosecution had EYE WITNESSES that said they saw him say 'nobody talks to me like that', pull out his gun and shoot into the truck. They had FORENSIC EVIDENCE that the door to...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.