George Zimmerman found not guilty

Glaucus said:
And btw, this won't add anything positive to the thread, but if that was my child that was shot dead, I'd have shot Zimmerman by now and maybe his entire family too. {bleep} Zimmerman and {bleep} the law and I wouldn't care what happened to me afterwards.
Click to expand...

Then you better keep your kid well stocked with Arizona Watermelon tea, skittles and Robotussin so your kid won't have to go to the store ..

 
Glaucus said:
At the very least the victims and their families deserve a fair trial.
Click to expand...

Zimmerman was the victim. He was assaulted and the person who assaulted him attempted to murder him.

And btw, this won't add anything positive to the thread, but if that was my child that was shot dead, I'd have shot Zimmerman by now and maybe his entire family too. {bleep} Zimmerman and {bleep} the law and I wouldn't care what happened to me afterwards.
Click to expand...

So you are proudly proclaiming you will raise your kid to be like Trayvon? Better get ready to attend either a funeral or a murder trial.
 
Glaucus said:
Well, it took the jury over two days to come to a decision, so it couldn't have been that clear cut.

Personally, I figured that Florida laws are lax enough to allow these type of killings. Good for Zimmerman for knowing how to game the system. However, I still think all cases should be brought in front of a jury because the slightest of details can sway a jury either way. At the very least the victims and their families deserve a fair trial.

And btw, this won't add anything positive to the thread, but if that was my child that was shot dead, I'd have shot Zimmerman by now and maybe his entire family too. {bleep} Zimmerman and {bleep} the law and I wouldn't care what happened to me afterwards.
Click to expand...
Martin was not doing anything I haven't done many times: walk down the street minding my own business. Sometimes I have returned from the store, sometimes I just walk around looking for an interesting subject to take a picture of. I'm taller than zimmerman, I have hoodies and often wear them on days where it could be rainy because I don't have to carry an umbrella and it keeps me warm.

So if zimmerman was stalking me for whatever invented reason in his tiny brain, I'd defend myself. However, if zimmerman killed or injured me he would be in jail today BECAUSE I AM A WHITE FEMALE.
and not a black teenager.
 
redrumloa said:
Zimmerman was the victim.
Click to expand...

Outstanding.

tumblr_mm3i8cigUq1s0xrqjo1_400.gif
 
It seems Zimmerman isn't the only one to game the system. It seems like it's the Florida thing to do:

Florida 'stand your ground' law yields some shocking outcomes depending on how law is applied

Red likes to post scary photos of Martin smoking dope or whatever, but he should also post some pictures of actual scary people who walked out of jail thanks to Stand Your Ground.

People often go free under "stand your ground" in cases that seem to make a mockery of what lawmakers intended. One man killed two unarmed people and walked out of jail. Another shot a man as he lay on the ground. Others went free after shooting their victims in the back. In nearly a third of the cases the Times analyzed, defendants initiated the fight, shot an unarmed person or pursued their victim — and still went free.
Click to expand...

So basically, I could walk up to Red, harass him to the point where he might wish to take a swing at me, and then regardless of what transpires I can pull out a gun and shoot him and expect a very good chance of getting off free simply by invoking stand your ground as a defense. Sure I might need to pay an attorney a serious chunk of change but it's probably on par with what a hit man would charge. Since there will only be one story heard in court, all I have to say is that he saw my gun and reached for it and it's a cut and dried closed case. I probably won't even need a lawyer at all.
 
Glaucus said:
So basically, I could walk up to Red, harass him to the point where he might wish to take a swing at me, and then regardless of what transpires I can pull out a gun and shoot him and expect a very good chance of getting off free simply by invoking stand your ground as a defense. Sure I might need to pay an attorney a serious chunk of change but it's probably on par with what a hit man would charge. Since there will only be one story heard in court, all I have to say is that he saw my gun and reached for it and it's a cut and dried closed case. I probably won't even need a lawyer at all.
Click to expand...
Make sure you shoot to kill. Cuz if you give a warning shot that's 20 years.
 
metalman said:
Now that the police have Trayvon's finger prints on file, you would think they would run them to see if there are any matches with unsolved local burglaries ...
Click to expand...

It's irrelevant to the case. Trayvon wasn't committing any burglaries at the time. Equally you wouldn't be justified in shooting Gangsta GeeZee if you saw him on the street based on the fact that he had shot Trayvon at some point in the past. Self defense is only justified in the case of immediate threat to life.
 
redrumloa said:
Zimmerman was the victim.
Click to expand...
Trayvon was the victim. He was followed by a guy who was armed and intent on intimidating him. Trayvon may not have known he was armed but did feel threatened so the assault on Zimmerman could be couched in self defense and had Trayvon shot Zimmerman with Zimmerman's own gun it WOULD certainly have been argued as self defense. One the weapon is discovered and two people are fighting for control of it either can claim self defense.
He was assaulted and the person who assaulted him attempted to murder him.
Click to expand...
The victor writes the history. The guy who survives gets to tell the story.
 
redrumloa said:
The jury saw it my way..
Click to expand...


Perhaps they did but, thankfully, I see no evidence of that. To the contrary, from where I'm standing there's a huge and rather important difference between a "not guilty" verdict and seeing it your "the guy who shot dead the unarmed teenager is the victim" way.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Trayvon was the victim. He was followed by a guy who was armed and intent on intimidating him. Trayvon may not have known he was armed but did feel threatened so the assault on Zimmerman could be couched in self defense and had Trayvon shot Zimmerman with Zimmerman's own gun it WOULD certainly have been argued as self defense.
Click to expand...

Every time you make shit up, baby jesus cries. Don't just make shit up.
 
Robert said:
Perhaps they did but, thankfully, I see no evidence of that. To the contrary, from where I'm standing there's a huge and rather important difference between a "not guilty" verdict and seeing it your "the guy who shot dead the unarmed teenager is the victim" way.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should look beyond the headlines and at the actual facts?
 
redrumloa said:
Maybe you should look beyond the headlines and at the actual facts?
Click to expand...


For your reply to my comment to make any sense whatsoever those facts would have to at least one of two things.

Either:
Zimmerman did not shoot dead an unarmed teenager.
Or:
The jury made a statement that Zimmerman was the victim.

I've seen neither.
 
Wayne said:
Zimmerman was not THE victim, but had he not been carrying legally, he would have been.
Click to expand...


Assuming of course that, had he not been carrying, he'd still have followed the kid in the first place. I haven't seen anything that would give anyone any reason for thinking that.
 
Robert said:
Assuming of course that, had he not been carrying, he'd still have followed the kid in the first place. I haven't seen anything that would give anyone any reason for thinking that.
Click to expand...
You forget, according to the prosecution.... Repeatedly and continually… George Zimmerman was a super-cop bad ass wannabe, so yes, I believe Zimmerman would have acted exactly as he did with or without a weapon.

He was getting his ass kicked. He reportedly thought his life in danger. He shot the guy. End of story according to the law... So much so that initially they did not even want to charge him with a crime.
 
Wayne said:
You forget, according to the prosecution.... Repeatedly and continually… George Zimmerman was a super-cop bad ass wannabe, so yes, I believe Zimmerman would have acted exactly as he did with or without a weapon.
Click to expand...

Because the prosecution, in a round about way, sort of, maybe, depending how you took it, implied so? I'm not sure I follow your logic.
Given that you seem to have disagreed with most of what the prosecution said, I'd be interested in reading how you reached such a conclusion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top