Zimmerman Trial

57Brave said:
Just think if Zimmerman had to go through a thorough background check before being given a carry permit (let alone be allowed to purchase)
Trayvon would be alive and y'all be talkin' bout how Obama is the devil

That's as civil as it gets today
Click to expand...

And Zimmerman could be dead
 
or turn into a zombie --- or turn into a unicorn with magical powers -- or maybe martin has a gun too, wouldn't that be cool then they could have just shot it out in the rain in those backyards around the cloths lines, old rusted tricycles,random tomato plants and stuff.

And Zimmerman could be dead. ----------- Seriously?

Or maybe, without the gun, Zimmerman stays in his GD car -- whatcha think bout that cowboy? That seems to work for everybody
 
57Brave said:
Just think if Zimmerman had to go through a thorough background check before being given a carry permit (let alone be allowed to purchase)
Trayvon would be alive and y'all be talkin' bout how Obama is the devil

That's as civil as it gets today
Click to expand...

He did didn't he? Isn't a background check along with verification of training a part of the Florida conceal carry law? Maybe it is not.
 
Julio3000 said:
I think we both agree that, based on the self-defense standard and lack of eyewitness to the confrontation, a verdict of "not guilty" is appropriate.

You've been, er, charitable enough to say that Zimmerman erred. But you've been pretty rigorous about making the statement that both people were at fault. (Note that I don't say "both men.") You seem to uncritically accept Zimmerman's version of events.

Do you think that, regardless of acquittal of a murder charge, Zimmerman was the motive force behind Martin's death? Do you think that Zimmerman told the whole truth? Do you think it was sad or just for the defense and the RW media to portray Martin as a thug?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I notice your use of "people." Course a 17 year old can do some damage. Are you implying otherwise?

And yes, both were at fault. Why folks like you won't say that they were is odd to me.

And what's this "you seem?" Do I believe everything Zimmerman has said? I doubt it. I do believe he was getting beat pretty well. And that he shot Martin at close range and that Martin was on top of him. You don't?

Yes, I think Martin was a young thug. And Zimmerman a creepy-ass cracker (well not really a "cracker" - what's the term? Oh yes, "white hispanic").

Do you think it was sad or just for the liberals and LW media to portray Zimmerman as they have?

Motive force? Like the only one at fault? No, why should I?
 
This would probably be a good time to mention that he was charged with a felony for assaulting a police officer. The charge was reduced through pre-trial intervention and alcohol counseling. Domestic violence charge, too. But, you know, Trayvon Martin was more likely to have instigated violence.
 
BedellBrave said:
He did didn't he? Isn't a background check along with verification of training a part of the Florida conceal carry law? Maybe it is not.
Click to expand...

I don't think it is thorough like other states. I personally would not have allowed him to have one because of his mental issues.

In saying that, I am glad he had one because he would have traded places with TM if it occurred and he had no weapon. TM had no business attacking him, question, yes, attacking no. But if you look at our race experiences and being young and foolhardy, most of us will attack if we see a weaker person.

But, GZ was stupid in this whole ordeal as well by getting out of the car.

I have no sides in this and the correct verdict was issued. I just question the common sense on both sides and that is why we had a tragic result.
 
Julio3000 said:
So I guess you're definitely going with an opinion that race played absolutely no part in this?

The only thing that made this a questionable charge was the relatively low bar for self-defense in Florida. In many other jurisdictions, it could have been quite different.

But you're seriously gonna say that even though the prosecution overreached with a murder charge, that there was no reason to arrest him? For anything? After he followed and ultimately killed a pedestrian?
Click to expand...

Race didn't play the role media and the race baiters have wanted it to play. I agree, I believe, with the FBI on this count. Why shouldn't I?

How exactly would it have been different from a self-defense angle? Do certain jurisdictions require a certain level of blows? Or amount of blood shed? Or types of weapons being used? Seriously, what do you have in mind here?

They overreached on manslaughter too. As the jury determined. As the original cops did as well.

What are you going to arrest him for?
 
Julio3000 said:
This would probably be a good time to mention that he was charged with a felony for assaulting a police officer. The charge was reduced through pre-trial intervention and alcohol counseling. Domestic violence charge, too. But, you know, Trayvon Martin was more likely to have instigated violence.
Click to expand...

Sure that's fine. Mention away. Both were at fault. Both were sinners. Both were stupid. Both had pasts that would lead others to infer guilt in this incident. Exactly.
 
Yeah, I notice your use of "people." Course a 17 year old can do some damage. Are you implying otherwise?

I differentiate between adults and teenagers for reasons that should be obvious: discretion, judgement, etc.

And yes, both were at fault. Why folks like you won't say that they were is odd to me.

Oh, did I say that?

If Martin attacked him, he certainly bore some responsibility. Still, you act like it's totally normal for an armed guy to stalk a kid. You state that it was appropriate for Zimmerman to use deadly force because he thought his life was being threatened, but not what the appropriate course of action would be for a person who was being suspiciously and aggressively pursued by an armed man for no apparent reason.

Do I believe everything Zimmerman has said? I doubt it.

OK. Well, that says a lot.

I do believe he was getting beat pretty well. And that he shot Martin at close range and that Martin was on top of him. You don't?

I believe that is the likeliest scenario, which is why he wasn't convicted of murder. I also believe that Zimmerman's account of the altercation sounds like hogwash, and that no one else (including me...and you) can say with any confidence what actually happened. Further, that the cops initially bent over backwards to accomodate him.

Yes, I think Martin was a young thug.

Por que?

Do you think it was sad or just for the liberals and LW media to portray Zimmerman as they have?

How? As being a guy with a history of violence and an inappropriate sense of entitlement to do a job better suited for professionals? As a "creepy-ass cracker?" Hell, you agreed with that assessment. I think that intimations of racism, unsupported by evidence, were inappropriate, but I allow some latitude there because of the circumstantial appearance of profiling and media reports of neighbors who suggested that he was capable of same.

Motive force? Like the only one at fault? No, why should I?

As being the primary reason for the incident. Not the only one at fault.

"These assholes always get away..."
 
Julio3000 said:
This would probably be a good time to mention that he was charged with a felony for assaulting a police officer. The charge was reduced through pre-trial intervention and alcohol counseling. Domestic violence charge, too. But, you know, Trayvon Martin was more likely to have instigated violence.
Click to expand...

And Martin got suspended from school for fighting. He's also known to both participate and referree in fights. Had pics on his phone of marijuana plants (and smoking weed) and texts of him discussing buying a gun (along with a picture of someones hand holding a gun). Martin has tools common with burglary in his school locker and pictures of a large cache of ***elry that could match ***elry that was previously stolen.

Trayvons Mom even kicked him out of the house to go live with his father because of the trouble he was getting in.

So I respect having an opinion on it. But, to think Zimmerman was likely the instigator based on a prior charge,then you are probably ignoring Trayvon Martins history as well.
 
I can't help but think the portrayal of Martin being an innocent kid and GZ being a racist white honkey out for renegeance played a large part int he public opinion of the case.

How much of either is true?

Did Zimmerman impede Martin's progress in going home? Could Martin have gone home and never even had an altercation with Zimmerman? Zimmerman indicated on the call that Martin had gotten away (and Martin was in the direction of his house), what stopped him from going home? How would Zimmerman have caught up with him?

And yes, it's certainly possible that Martin could have killed ZImmerman. Why is that not the case? Do people not die in fights? Do they not get brain injuries when pounded against concrete?
 
There's no doubt that the media tried to portray Zimmerman as a racist mercenary and Martin as some innocent little boy.

They also trumped up the racial aspect of the case. Liberal politicians did the same... mainly for votes and/or attention. They are still doing it now, even though there's no real evidence any of this from anyone was racially motivated. Just a bunch of wild speculation really. The media want to fan the flames of racism for ratings.

In the end we've spent a tremendous amount of time and resources on a trial that should never have been national news in the first place. In the end this entire discussion is just silly and relatively pointless. We are all now a little bit dumber for discussing it.
 
weso1 said:
There's no doubt that the media tried to portray Zimmerman as a racist mercenary and Martin as some innocent little boy.

They also trumped up the racial aspect of the case. Liberal politicians did the same... mainly for votes and/or attention. They are still doing it now, even though there's no real evidence any of this from anyone was racially motivated. Just a bunch of wild speculation really. The media want to fan the flames of racism for ratings.

In the end we've spent a tremendous amount of time and resources on a trial that should never have been national news in the first place. In the end this entire discussion is just silly and relatively pointless. We are all now a little bit dumber for discussing it.
Click to expand...

Spot on.
 
gilesfan said:
And Martin got suspended from school for fighting. He's also known to both participate and referree in fights. Had pics on his phone of marijuana plants (and smoking weed) and texts of him discussing buying a gun (along with a picture of someones hand holding a gun). Martin has tools common with burglary in his school locker and pictures of a large cache of ***elry that could match ***elry that was previously stolen.

Trayvons Mom even kicked him out of the house to go live with his father because of the trouble he was getting in.

So I respect having an opinion on it. But, to think Zimmerman was likely the instigator based on a prior charge,then you are probably ignoring Trayvon Martins history as well.
Click to expand...

He was suspended for truancy, tardiness, and possession of a weed pipe. Not fighting. And, FWIW, he had no criminal record.

I will say the ***elry thing looks sketchy. Still, you're talking about teenage BS, for the most part. If every kid who smoked weed and talked tough were a hardened, violent criminal, we wouldn't have enough qualified people to staff all of the prisons we'd need.
 
BedellBrave said:
Sure that's fine. Mention away. Both were at fault. Both were sinners. Both were stupid. Both had pasts that would lead others to infer guilt in this incident. Exactly.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but only one of them had been arrested for felony violence, and only one of them was pursuing the other with a weapon.
 
Julio3000 said:
He was suspended for truancy, tardiness, and possession of a weed pipe. Not fighting. And, FWIW, he had no criminal record.

I will say the ***elry thing looks sketchy. Still, you're talking about teenage BS, for the most part. If every kid who smoked weed and talked tough were a hardened, violent criminal, we wouldn't have enough qualified people to staff all of the prisons we'd need.
Click to expand...

Aren't juvenile criminal records sealed or was his released?

Teenage BS includes pics of guns, pics of him smoking weed, pics of him fighting, texts of him talking about beating someone up, but "dat ****a" didn't bleed enough?

Neither parties were hardened, violent criminals. Why is GZ more likely to have been the aggressor knowing Martins history of fighting and general thuggery?
 
BedellBrave said:
Race didn't play the role media and the race baiters have wanted it to play. I agree, I believe, with the FBI on this count. Why shouldn't I?

How exactly would it have been different from a self-defense angle? Do certain jurisdictions require a certain level of blows? Or amount of blood shed? Or types of weapons being used? Seriously, what do you have in mind here?

They overreached on manslaughter too. As the jury determined. As the original cops did as well.

What are you going to arrest him for?
Click to expand...

Other states have stronger requirements wrt proportionality of force.

Most of it hangs, legally, on who was the aggressor in the incident. The fact that in this case (and many others) we only have one surviving witness would indicate that this is problematic.
 
gilesfan said:
Aren't juvenile criminal records sealed or was his released?

Teenage BS includes pics of guns, pics of him smoking weed, pics of him fighting, texts of him talking about beating someone up, but "dat ****a" didn't bleed enough?

Neither parties were hardened, violent criminals. Why is GZ more likely to have been the aggressor knowing Martins history of fighting and general thuggery?
Click to expand...

Who was pursuing whom?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top