If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Click Orlando)   The first prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin case is a little upset at the "outright lies" being told in the media. Subby just wants to know brand of tennis shoe Trayvon had, the type of cell phone used, type of grass seed in the lawn   (clickorlando.com) divider line 96
    More: Misc, State Attorney, neighborhood watch, martin case, United States Department of Justice, brought to trial, Rick Scott, prosecutors  
•       •       •

5094 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Apr 2012 at 9:46 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



96 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-03 10:43:33 AM
Martin only had to watch his back a short time. He might have gotten the better deal.

Run Forest run.

i.chzbgr.com
 
2012-04-03 10:44:37 AM

The_Sheriff_Is_A_Niiii: jmadisonbiii: [solipsism2.files.wordpress.com image 300x214]
BOMBSHELL TONITE!!!

Oh Christ, that farking coont should be hanged up by her ankles and beaten to death on her own show.


I would enjoy this very much.
 
2012-04-03 10:45:33 AM

OBBN: GAT_00: Guy who let a murderer go is mad that people are upset about this.

Yawn. why do we bother to have a legal system?'it seems that GAT here is the only form of court system we need. see he has the unique ability to proclaim a mans guilt based only upon evidence from the media. yep, no need for a trial with witnesses and all the evidence, nope. GAT has made the conclusion he is guilty, he has spoken.

/just wondering if he gets upset when people convict minorities without a trail?


If George Zimmerman is made of wood, and weighs more than a duck, then he should be burned at the stake.
 
2012-04-03 10:46:57 AM

Launch Code: People have to stop wasting time on this. There's only 7 days left until the new/but far from improved black panther dictated "day of action." Or the burn and loot because that's what we do when we're angry rally, whatever it's called. People need to put those hoodie's back in the car jacking/home invasion/rape kits and break out the riot costumes. Voice your outrage and maybe get some free (actually its stolen) stuff in the process.


i18.photobucket.com
 
2012-04-03 10:47:44 AM

BigBooper: s2s2s2: BigBooper: Why are we obsessed with this? Really, how many threads are we going to have on this?

We will have all the threads, until everyone is proven completely wrong at some point.

Ok, I'll start. I was wrong. When I first heard of this, I thought it was clearly a case of self defense based on Zimmerman's version. Then parts of his story started falling apart.

Now I think the incident should be investigated thoroughly. I don't know what happened, but I hope that they get to the truth, and that justice is done.

There, Happy? Can we move on now?


That's funny, I had pretty much the exact opposite happen. When I first heard the story the narrative was a crazy unemployed white nationalist chased a 12 year old black boy and shot him while he was on the ground screaming for his life.

And since then pretty much every one of those details has been proven wrong.
 
2012-04-03 10:48:36 AM

vpb: Get ready for plenty more.

It doesn't really have much to do with Zimmerman or Martin, it's more about the emotional issues of the people following the case. Any time you have people deciding that they are on a first name basis with someone they have never met it's a good bet that it has turned into a soap opera. "Lacy", "Caylee", "Travon", it's all the same thing.

Most people are going to be pissed off no matter what the outcome because so many people have decided that they want it to be about racism or gun rights or whatever else.


Zimmerman is the Tot Killer! Tot Dad? Tot Halfspanic? Gotta have tot in the name. If only Trayvon had been eating tater tots. Skittle Gunner? Vittles Vigilante?
 
2012-04-03 10:49:59 AM

ChuDogg: BigBooper: s2s2s2: BigBooper: Why are we obsessed with this? Really, how many threads are we going to have on this?

We will have all the threads, until everyone is proven completely wrong at some point.

Ok, I'll start. I was wrong. When I first heard of this, I thought it was clearly a case of self defense based on Zimmerman's version. Then parts of his story started falling apart.

Now I think the incident should be investigated thoroughly. I don't know what happened, but I hope that they get to the truth, and that justice is done.

There, Happy? Can we move on now?

That's funny, I had pretty much the exact opposite happen. When I first heard the story the narrative was a crazy unemployed white nationalist chased a 12 year old black boy and shot him while he was on the ground screaming for his life.

And since then pretty much every one of those details has been proven wrong.


No, actually, nothing has been proven right or wrong at this point. That's why we have trials.
Patience is a virtue.
 
2012-04-03 10:59:18 AM

jso2897: No, actually, nothing has been proven right or wrong at this point. That's why we have trials.
Patience is a virtue.


I'm still holding out for Archie Bunker shooting the Fresh Prince.
 
2012-04-03 10:59:51 AM
Main stream media reciting things that arent true?

This is unpossible!
 
2012-04-03 11:01:23 AM

Mr. Carpenter: Self defense is an affirmative defense, Zimmerman should have been arrested and tried at which point he could have used self defense as a mitigating circumstance. This may or may not have been a justifiable homicide, but it certainly deserves to see the inside of a courtroom. Please close this thread.


Well no:

"he protection given by the law is the highest protection, immunity from prosecution. No longer must you place your fate in the hands of the jury while pursuing the affirmative defense of self-defense. Your legal team can go proactive to prevent charges from being filed, or dismissed if they have been filed already."

Link (new window)
 
2012-04-03 11:05:10 AM

Alonjar: Main stream media reciting things that arent true?

This is unpossible!


I do not think it means what you think it means.
 
2012-04-03 11:05:59 AM

ChuDogg: BigBooper: s2s2s2: BigBooper: Why are we obsessed with this? Really, how many threads are we going to have on this?

We will have all the threads, until everyone is proven completely wrong at some point.

Ok, I'll start. I was wrong. When I first heard of this, I thought it was clearly a case of self defense based on Zimmerman's version. Then parts of his story started falling apart.

Now I think the incident should be investigated thoroughly. I don't know what happened, but I hope that they get to the truth, and that justice is done.

There, Happy? Can we move on now?

That's funny, I had pretty much the exact opposite happen. When I first heard the story the narrative was a crazy unemployed white nationalist chased a 12 year old black boy and shot him while he was on the ground screaming for his life.

And since then pretty much every one of those details has been proven wrong.


I think the real outrageous part of this whole story has been the reporting. Most sources have been incredibly slanted one way or the other. This includes many main stream media outlets that are supposed to be objective. Instead they've sensationalized it. Now we have the real possibility that violence could be the result, and innocent people, perhaps many of them, could end up hurt.
 
2012-04-03 11:15:33 AM

cryinoutloud: If they'd handled the case correctly in the first place, we could have avoided a lot of this drama. I'm sure everyone knew it was a hot potato right from the start--how about following the law and doing what you're supposed to do.


Now, they either have to arrest and convict the guy, and hope they didn't screw up procedurally, or wait until the slam-dunk civil lawsuit and/or Federal case to convict him of civil rights violations.

And yeah, his guilt or innocence doesn't matter anymore.
 
2012-04-03 11:18:20 AM

BigBooper: I think the real outrageous part of this whole story has been the reporting. Most sources have been incredibly slanted one way or the other. This includes many main stream media outlets that are supposed to be objective. Instead they've sensationalized it. Now we have the real possibility that violence could be the result, and innocent people, perhaps many of them, could end up hurt.


This.
 
2012-04-03 11:23:37 AM
Slightly off topic- I used to have a friend with the last name Wolfinger. Of course, we called him Wolf and he had a wicked wolf tattoo on his calf. Unfortunately, the ex-husband got him in the divorce.
 
2012-04-03 11:26:00 AM

cryinoutloud: If they'd handled the case correctly in the first place, we could have avoided a lot of this drama. I'm sure everyone knew it was a hot potato right from the start--how about following the law and doing what you're supposed to do.


It appears that they are following the law and doing what they are supposed to do.

The standard should be the same in all cases. The potential level or the current level of publicity should not play a role in whether charges should be filed. As soon as a person is charged they are arrested they are forced to make a bond at usually great costs, or continue to have their liberty restrained. They will also have to hire an attorney to defend themselves. Even if they are ultimately acquitted they will never be compensated for money they paid a bonds man to make their bond and they will never be compensated for the costs of their legal representation.

A person should only be arrested and charged when there is probable cause they have committed a crime, after eliminating all affirmative defenses, especially when law enforcement is still investigating the facts. In this case, it appears that the "Stand Your Ground" law will be used as an affirmative defense. I am sure this is the central issue in the investigation. How did the shooter sustain the injuries and does this avail him to the statutory defense provided by Stand Your Ground? It doesn't appear that following a suspicious person is against the law in Florida, even if it is not the smartest thing to do. But does the fact that the shooter followed Martin negate the statutory defense provided by the Stand Your Ground law?

Every media outlet is attempting to out maneuver the next. Things are being reported as facts before a proper conclusion can be made. For example, the first stories about the police video stated that no injuries could be seen, while the enhanced video and police shows injuries.

I have been practicing law for over 15 years and have handled a huge number of cases, one of which received coverage in the national media. (Nancy Grace wanted my co-counsel and I to appear on her show and we told her to stuff it!). What I have found to be the most troubling is the district attorney actions in high profile cases. In a case that has generated little or no media attention the district attorney's office is very willing to dismiss a case when new evidence is discovered that weakens the case. However, the district attorney's office will more often go to trail knowing they are going to lose a high publicity case, as it is easier to blame the jury than to have the media and community question their actions.

When we "put the cart before the horse" we get travesties of justice like the Duke Lacrosse Rape Scandal. Once the men were charged the District Attorney continued to push for a conviction despite all the facts that later came out that show the accused didn't commit the rape. Many have suggested the continued prosecution was motivated by attempt to appeal to black voters ahead of his re-election. Had the case been fully investigated it would have allowed the DA to side step the whole issue by taking the case directly to the grand jury, which meets in secret, and ditching it there by noting how weak the case was and how there was a lot of evidence of actual innocence. Then when the grand jury didn't return an indictment the DA could have side stepped the issue by noting they provided all the facts to the grand jury and only they have the power to indict.
 
2012-04-03 11:26:05 AM
everyone who posts after me is no better than spike lee
 
2012-04-03 11:30:45 AM

JeffreyScott: It appears that they are following the law and doing what they are supposed to do.


By...not investigating a murder at all?

Actually, if they HAD followed the law and done what they are supposed to do there wouldn't be a huge firestorm coming down on them right now.

If someone get shot to death, you don't just believe the story of the shooter. You should have a full investigation. All they did was get Zimmerman's side of it and then let him go. If every murder was investigated that thoroughly nobody'd ever get caught.
 
2012-04-03 11:35:43 AM

cameroncrazy1984: JeffreyScott: It appears that they are following the law and doing what they are supposed to do.

By...not investigating a murder at all?

Actually, if they HAD followed the law and done what they are supposed to do there wouldn't be a huge firestorm coming down on them right now.

If someone get shot to death, you don't just believe the story of the shooter. You should have a full investigation. All they did was get Zimmerman's side of it and then let him go. If every murder was investigated that thoroughly nobody'd ever get caught.


Read the Florida case law on it. Precedent has been set that you actively have to prove that the self-defense story is bullshiat. Plenty of prosecutors have avoided filing charges in cases like this because they usually get dismissed before the trial even starts.
 
2012-04-03 11:36:28 AM
Is this the thread where i come to biatch and moan about so many of these threads being made, thereby perpetuating these threads like a hypocritical retard?
 
2012-04-03 11:36:36 AM
From the hate filled comments

This happened after the Democratic party destroyed the black family.
African Americans should have thought twice before putting in with the
Democrats, who after all, were the party of slavery, Jim Crow and
lynchings.

So what happened after African Americans made the committed 100% to Democrats?

Democrats made welfare dependent on the father not being in the home,
thereby subsidizing single mothers, the result of which is that 70% or
more of African American children are now born to single mothers. The
result is criminalization of the community since children need fathers.
Also dismal education achievements, same reason.

Democrats in 1968 started importing voters, who took jobs traditionally
done by African Americans. In the absence of these workers, there would
have been a labor shortage, the result of which would have been higher
wages for black workers. Instead, the Democrats tossed the black
community under the bus in a craven effort to get votes.

And, of course, Democrat media adopted a political correctness standard
in an effort to hide Democratic failures in the black community.

Or, to look at it another way, after a half century of 100% loyalty to
Democrats, shouldn't African Americans be in favor of tax breaks for the
rich? Instead, year after year after year, the level of black
achievement stays dismally low.

All I hear in response to this is nonsense about how Republicans are
bad. How about defending the Democratic Party's record in the black
community the last 50 years - I'd love to hear someone try to defend the
indefensible!

All those lives wasted the last 50 years and no end in sight. In
Paterson New Jersey there used to be a rolling crime wave when the
mostly black high school got out - now the police are all over the place
preventing it. The flash mob videos - who do you think is in those?

Go ahead -defend the Democratic Party, the most corrupt institution on the planet.
 
2012-04-03 11:37:42 AM

JeffreyScott: Every media outlet is attempting to out maneuver the next. Things are being reported as facts before a proper conclusion can be made. For example, the first stories about the police video stated that no injuries could be seen, while the enhanced video and police shows injuries.


How do we stop this from happening? Or is it just something we have to live with in today's world of 24 hour news and internet "outlets"?

This is what frustrates me. The media needs to be able to report on things that are going on, but I firmly believe there should be some sort of gag order against discussing or bringing up evidence -- be it real or not. All it does is get people riled up.
 
2012-04-03 11:42:57 AM

redmid17: cameroncrazy1984: JeffreyScott: It appears that they are following the law and doing what they are supposed to do.

By...not investigating a murder at all?

Actually, if they HAD followed the law and done what they are supposed to do there wouldn't be a huge firestorm coming down on them right now.

If someone get shot to death, you don't just believe the story of the shooter. You should have a full investigation. All they did was get Zimmerman's side of it and then let him go. If every murder was investigated that thoroughly nobody'd ever get caught.

Read the Florida case law on it. Precedent has been set that you actively have to prove that the self-defense story is bullshiat. Plenty of prosecutors have avoided filing charges in cases like this because they usually get dismissed before the trial even starts.


Doesn't mean they should be doing so without any investigation at all. Then every murderer just claims self-defense, nobody checks the story, and he gets off.
 
2012-04-03 11:44:53 AM

cameroncrazy1984: redmid17: cameroncrazy1984: JeffreyScott: It appears that they are following the law and doing what they are supposed to do.

By...not investigating a murder at all?

Actually, if they HAD followed the law and done what they are supposed to do there wouldn't be a huge firestorm coming down on them right now.

If someone get shot to death, you don't just believe the story of the shooter. You should have a full investigation. All they did was get Zimmerman's side of it and then let him go. If every murder was investigated that thoroughly nobody'd ever get caught.

Read the Florida case law on it. Precedent has been set that you actively have to prove that the self-defense story is bullshiat. Plenty of prosecutors have avoided filing charges in cases like this because they usually get dismissed before the trial even starts.

Doesn't mean they should be doing so without any investigation at all. Then every murderer just claims self-defense, nobody checks the story, and he gets off.


They cannot arrest the claimant if the evidence at the scene doesn't directly contradict his story. The law is too lax, but the police did detain him and take him to the station. You can and probably should knock their initial investigation, but Florida law is pretty clear.
 
MrT
2012-04-03 11:54:16 AM

JeffreyScott: For example, the first stories about the police video stated that no injuries could be seen, while the enhanced video and police shows injuries.


Let's enhance that.
 
2012-04-03 11:56:05 AM

redmid17: They cannot arrest the claimant if the evidence at the scene doesn't directly contradict his story.


So they can only use evidence at the scene? And they can't arrest him later if 911 tapes contradict his story?

Stop defending people who screwed up. I'm not saying he's a bad person, I'm just saying he screwed up and should have had Zimmerman arrested once it became clear that the story didn't add up.
 
2012-04-03 11:59:08 AM

cameroncrazy1984: redmid17: They cannot arrest the claimant if the evidence at the scene doesn't directly contradict his story.

So they can only use evidence at the scene? And they can't arrest him later if 911 tapes contradict his story?

Stop defending people who screwed up. I'm not saying he's a bad person, I'm just saying he screwed up and should have had Zimmerman arrested once it became clear that the story didn't add up.


Just google it. I remember you arguing semantics of a dispatcher's statement for hours on end. I'm not defending Zimmerman. He needlessly escalated a situation and killed a 17 year old kid. Unfortunately, the law is written in a way where he will probably avoid or be acquitted on state charges.
 
2012-04-03 12:00:49 PM

cameroncrazy1984: JeffreyScott: It appears that they are following the law and doing what they are supposed to do.

By...not investigating a murder at all?

Actually, if they HAD followed the law and done what they are supposed to do there wouldn't be a huge firestorm coming down on them right now.

If someone get shot to death, you don't just believe the story of the shooter. You should have a full investigation. All they did was get Zimmerman's side of it and then let him go. If every murder was investigated that thoroughly nobody'd ever get caught.


This is also a reflection of media reporting: the case is still being investigated and is going to grand jury.
 
2012-04-03 12:02:11 PM

ChuDogg: cameroncrazy1984: JeffreyScott: It appears that they are following the law and doing what they are supposed to do.

By...not investigating a murder at all?

Actually, if they HAD followed the law and done what they are supposed to do there wouldn't be a huge firestorm coming down on them right now.

If someone get shot to death, you don't just believe the story of the shooter. You should have a full investigation. All they did was get Zimmerman's side of it and then let him go. If every murder was investigated that thoroughly nobody'd ever get caught.

This is also a reflection of media reporting: the case is still being investigated and is going to grand jury.


Only after the media reported it.

redmid17: Just google it. I remember you arguing semantics of a dispatcher's statement for hours on end. I'm not defending Zimmerman. He needlessly escalated a situation and killed a 17 year old kid. Unfortunately, the law is written in a way where he will probably avoid or be acquitted on state charges.


Not if he started the confrontation, i.e. if he was the aggresor, the SYG law doesn't apply.

Dear god I hope you're not a lawyer.
 
2012-04-03 12:02:23 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Doesn't mean they should be doing so without any investigation at all.


Then you can rest easy knowing they didn't, and they aren't. Also that you got to drink beer in the Underground.
 
2012-04-03 12:03:53 PM

Government Fromage: JeffreyScott: Every media outlet is attempting to out maneuver the next. Things are being reported as facts before a proper conclusion can be made. For example, the first stories about the police video stated that no injuries could be seen, while the enhanced video and police shows injuries.

How do we stop this from happening? Or is it just something we have to live with in today's world of 24 hour news and internet "outlets"?

This is what frustrates me. The media needs to be able to report on things that are going on, but I firmly believe there should be some sort of gag order against discussing or bringing up evidence -- be it real or not. All it does is get people riled up.


Most of the 'degradation' of the media these days is a result of 24 hour internet news deadlines. Journalists face a huge amount of pressure to put stories out as fast as they can, and by doing so, lose the in-depth analysis stories deserve. This case has seen it all, and what frustrates me is bringing up irrelevant information that just confuses people, like the fact that most stories used out dated photos of both George and Trayvon, as if that mattered at all, the argument being we see photos that give us negative perceptions, but honestly, did it really matter and when does the media ever use flattering photos of people. The case almost reminds me of the media swarm around the kidnapping of the Lindberg baby, and because of it, that is why we don't have cameras in the courtroom, from the newseum.org site:

-The sensationalism of the case led to a two-year study that recommended new rules for trial coverage. Because reporters sneaked a camera and a microphone into the trial and made unauthorized newsreels of the proceedings, most states adopted a portion of the American Bar Association code of ethics banning photography and radio broadcasting in courtrooms.

Today, all 50 states and the District of Columbia have rules regarding news coverage of court proceedings. Most involve some restrictions on cameras, and the news media continue to challenge such limitations.
 
2012-04-03 12:06:04 PM
The court of last resort is no longer the Supreme Court. It's "Nightline."
Alan Dershowitz
 
2012-04-03 12:08:06 PM

cameroncrazy1984: redmid17: Just google it. I remember you arguing semantics of a dispatcher's statement for hours on end. I'm not defending Zimmerman. He needlessly escalated a situation and killed a 17 year old kid. Unfortunately, the law is written in a way where he will probably avoid or be acquitted on state charges.

Not if he started the confrontation, i.e. if he was the aggresor, the SYG law doesn't apply.

Dear god I hope you're not a lawyer.


I am not a lawyer. I'm also able to read and use Google. The way SYG and justification of deadly force statues in Florida are written, it's extremely vague and permissible. Read this Link (new window) and get back to no one in the thread. If someone can chase down a thief, stab them, and get of scot-free, then it definitely doesn't matter if Zimmerman was the aggressor unless it can be demonstrably proven beyond a doubt he was engaged in illegal activity before he killed Trayvon Martin. With only one of them alive to testify, you're not liable to get that.
 
2012-04-03 12:17:59 PM

redmid17: cameroncrazy1984: redmid17: Just google it. I remember you arguing semantics of a dispatcher's statement for hours on end. I'm not defending Zimmerman. He needlessly escalated a situation and killed a 17 year old kid. Unfortunately, the law is written in a way where he will probably avoid or be acquitted on state charges.

Not if he started the confrontation, i.e. if he was the aggresor, the SYG law doesn't apply.

Dear god I hope you're not a lawyer.

I am not a lawyer. I'm also able to read and use Google. The way SYG and justification of deadly force statues in Florida are written, it's extremely vague and permissible. Read this Link (new window) and get back to no one in the thread. If someone can chase down a thief, stab them, and get of scot-free, then it definitely doesn't matter if Zimmerman was the aggressor unless it can be demonstrably proven beyond a doubt he was engaged in illegal activity before he killed Trayvon Martin. With only one of them alive to testify, you're not liable to get that.


Not to mention that I KNOW Coach K's maid has been in these threads where another Farker has posted the relevant FL Statute that states, quite plainly, that being the first agressor does not negate the SYG defense. That ZImmerman, even if he pursued Martin, was still permitted to Stand His Ground under the FL law.

Coach K's maid just doesn't want to believe that, but he does know it to be true.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-04-03 12:21:04 PM

jso2897: Joe Blowme: If zimmerman was black this would not be in the news. Just look at the 49 kids killed in chicago over the last month... never heard of them? I know right?

/black on black or muslim on muslim is not news

It would be if the cops had picked him up and he'd said "self-defense" and they'd let him go - but that doesn't happen to black folks or "muslims".


Sure it does.

Here is a case where a black man shot a white man and wasn't arrested. He was arrested later, and is standing trial, but only because there were plenty of witnesses.
 
2012-04-03 12:22:43 PM
i'm not sure if anyone noted it before, but i'm curious about the location of the entrace/exit wound from the bullet.

i also hope this goes to trial, to see what gets sorted out of the laundry.

in addition, i hope the local police acquire a federal investigation, in order to analyze the process of documentation of a potentially criminal event, and if steps/procedures were missed/sidestepped (and, with intentionality or not.).
 
2012-04-03 12:29:48 PM
Just wait until you see the al sharpton interviews on the case.
soooo full of fail

I couldn't care one way or the other

since the 70s there have been about a thousand murders in Florida every year.
Iand now, roughly fourty two thousand people later...one matters?

this is my apathy, suck it
 
2012-04-03 12:33:34 PM

natas6.0: Just wait until you see the al sharpton interviews on the case.
soooo full of fail

I couldn't care one way or the other

since the 70s there have been about a thousand murders in Florida every year.
Iand now, roughly fourty two thousand people later...one matters?

this is my apathy, suck it

so perhaps this case/event, for people that live in florida, isn;t about only trayvon martin.
 
2012-04-03 12:46:18 PM
Obviously the proper course of action would have been to lynch Zimmerman first and convene a grand jury to decide who else should be executed for failing to outlaw guns at the federal level throughout the USA, so white hispanics would quietly accept their righteous beatings from innocent attractive and successful adolescents.
 
2012-04-03 12:57:34 PM
Man, the comments thread on that article looks like a Stormfront garden party.
 
2012-04-03 01:08:17 PM

JeffreyScott: It appears that they are following the law and doing what they are supposed to do.


They are NOW. Why was the kid put in the morgue as a John Doe? First off--without even mentioning all the other stuff the cops messed up. They wanted to make it easy for Zimmerman and have it all go quietly away, and they dun goofed.
 
2012-04-03 02:19:01 PM

s2s2s2: cameroncrazy1984: Doesn't mean they should be doing so without any investigation at all.

Then you can rest easy knowing they didn't, and they aren't. Also that you got to drink beer in the Underground.


They weren't until the media decided that it was very interesting that there was no investigation. Also, after a Sanford city council vote of no-confidence in the police chief.

Why would they do that if there was always an ongoing investigation?

Also, it wasn't always beer. You sound jealous.
 
2012-04-03 06:26:14 PM
Zimmerman was arrested. We've all seen his intake video.

Why is he not in jail?

Perhaps because they need to investigate to figure out exactly what happened, so they would know what charges (if any) need to be filed against Zimmerman. Unless he's deemed a terrorist they aren't going to hold him without charging him (which is another topic altogether)

Its not complicated. A prosecutor isn't just going to file charges against somebody for whatever the media feels like when it turns out later they'd never stick for whatever reasons.

/facepalm
 
2012-04-03 10:37:22 PM

cameroncrazy1984: s2s2s2: cameroncrazy1984: Doesn't mean they should be doing so without any investigation at all.

Then you can rest easy knowing they didn't, and they aren't. Also that you got to drink beer in the Underground.

They weren't until the media decided that it was very interesting that there was no investigation. Also, after a Sanford city council vote of no-confidence in the police chief.

Why would they do that if there was always an ongoing investigation?

Also, it wasn't always beer. You sound jealous.


Why you ask? Politics.
 
2012-04-04 07:04:04 AM
IMO news media needs to be pimpslapped and big time. Most, if not all, seem convinced that the next big ratings spike will only happen after they have wrestled justice away from the courtroom and put it in the hands of the public (which they influence).
 
2012-04-04 10:23:36 AM
static01.mediaite.com

"Who farted, ya'll?"
 
Displayed 46 of 96 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report