Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(SeattlePI)   Latest development in Zimmerman case is: a) Judge declares mistrial, b) Zimmerman changes plea to guilty, or c) prosecution gets their feelings hurt by a photo posted on Instagram of people eating ice cream   (seattlepi.com) divider line 386
    More: Weird, George Zimmerman  
•       •       •

10463 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Jul 2013 at 6:37 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-02 08:38:37 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Why would you want someone running your HOA that doesn't actually live there?

Because I would like unbiased, logical decisions.   People who do not live there to not exact retribution for having too many house parties by going overboard on how many flakes of paint are missing on the window trim that is unviewable from any public area.


No question that some HOA board members can be assholes.  However, I'd much rather have board members who are also subject to their decision making.
 
2013-07-02 08:39:21 PM  

Phinn: fredklein: ... Zimmerman starting the whole thing by chasing Trayvon. And since he started it, he's guilty

I don't know how to put this more bluntly than I already have, but what you say here is not the law.


"If the law supposes that ... the law is a ass-a idiot. If that's the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is that his eye may be opened by experience-by experience."

What is "Legal" is not always "Right". And what's "Right" is not always "Legal". If a series of 'perfectly legal' steps end up with an innocent person dead... I have to question the Rightness of the Law.
 
2013-07-02 08:39:23 PM  

Yogimus: Delay: The prosecution has apparently given up all pretenses. They are phoning it in.

I am curious as to where they are going with all this.


They will be going somewhere to escape the probable riots. Sensible, no?
 
2013-07-02 08:40:15 PM  

CliChe Guevara: Tatsuma: Not only that, but it is absolutely legal for someone to follow someone else and ask them what they are doing in their neighborhood.

Too bad that's not what a reasonable person would interpret Zimmerman's actions as doing then. Hell, if the roles were reversed, the ITG crowd here would shoot the black person for pursuing them, and justify feeling threatened in that position, too. "Shoot the black guy" is the only constant I see here on Fark from your little faction of supremacist wack jobs.


You mad. Claiming people are racist because they disagree is pretty...what's the word...unreasonable.
 
2013-07-02 08:40:41 PM  

ecl: Tatsuma: ecl: Cowards slapping each others backs. Disgusting.

How am I being a coward, sexist?

You are congratulating each other because you think this sniveling little quim is going to get off on a technicality and that will empower you pussies to go out and shoot someone who isn't armed because you're cowardly f*cking pussies.

Does that cover it?


The technicality that you're referring to is that his conduct wasn't illegal.
 
ecl
2013-07-02 08:40:48 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Third Day Mark: /white guy
//zimmerman would've shot me if I was wearing a hoodie.

Of course, because zimmerman stepped out of his car, saw someone wearing a hoodie, and shot them for it.

Zimmerman was apparently assaulted for WWW  walking while white.  Stupid cracker needs to know not to walk around without permission.


His hunter/prey?prey/hunter story is unbelievable at best.
 
2013-07-02 08:41:03 PM  

Tatsuma: King Something: He stopped his vehicle, got out, went looking for a fight (against the advice of the 911 operator), got into a fight, then shot and killed his opponent.

That's absolutely 100% false, the 911 Operator was on the stand and said that he never said to Zimmerman to either go after Martin or to go back to his car, he was 100% neutral because it's policy not to give direct orders.

So no, it was not against the advice of the 911 operator, all he said was 'It's not necessary'.


If someone (whether or not they are a 911 operator) tells you that drinking antifreeze is a bad idea and they don't need you to do that, but you drink it anyway, would it be correct to say that you drank antifreeze against that person's advice?

What if they tell you that juggling hand grenades, sticking a fork into a wall outlet or taunting Happy Fun Ball are bad ideas but you do them anyway? Would it be fair to say that you juggled grenades, plugged a fork into an outlet or taunted Happy Fun Ball against their advice?

What if you're driving along and see a "suspicious" person walking along, call 911, and then that pedestrian darts into a dark alley when he realizes you're following him? You tell this to the 911 operator, tell them your intent of exiting your vehicle and pursuing the other person on foot, and the dispatcher tells you that they don't need you to do that (with the implication that a foot pursuit would be an incredibly bad idea); yet you do it anyway. Wouldn't that qualify as having been done against the advice of the person who told you that you shouldn't do that?

/I'm not disputing that the 911 dispatcher never ordered Zimmerman to stay in his car; they merely advised him to stay put
//notice how above, I said "against the advice of the 911 operator" instead of "against the ordersof the 911 operator"
 
2013-07-02 08:41:16 PM  

fredklein: What is "Legal" is not always "Right". And what's "Right" is not always "Legal". If a series of 'perfectly legal' steps end up with an innocent person dead... I have to question the Rightness of the Law.



The next time we're talking about a case being tried in a court of rightness, your opinions may be worth something.
 
2013-07-02 08:41:20 PM  
fredklein: ..."in trying to keep Martin under surveillance until the po-po arrived"

Despite being told "We don't need you to do that, Sir."


Is that not when Zimmerman said "OK" and then turned around?
 
2013-07-02 08:41:30 PM  

King Something: I can see only two possible outcomes for the trial:

A) Zimmerman is acquitted, followed shortly thereafter by the biggest riots this country has seen in 20 years
B) Zimmerman is convicted, followed immediately by Governor Rick Scott issuing him a pardon just to spite black people (and possibly also the FL legislature passing a law specifically designed to prevent Trayvon Martin's family from suing anybody even tangentially involved in the trial but carefully worded so Martin's family can't get it overturned as a violation of the whole "no Bills of Attainder" bit in the US Constitution), in turn followed by the biggest riots this country has seen in 20 years

the biggest riots this country has seen in 20 years

There you go.
 
2013-07-02 08:42:09 PM  

sheep snorter: Daughter: "hey lets title the picture something that is almost racist but not illegal to the proceedings."


wtf do you mean by that?
care to explain why you think the title had anything to do with race at all?

or are you trying to say what the first thing that comes to your mind when someone uses the word "stupid".
 
2013-07-02 08:42:11 PM  

ecl: CliChe Guevara: Tatsuma: Not only that, but it is absolutely legal for someone to follow someone else and ask them what they are doing in their neighborhood.

Too bad that's not what a reasonable person would interpret Zimmerman's actions as doing then. Hell, if the roles were reversed, the ITG crowd here would shoot the black person for pursuing them, and justify feeling threatened in that position, too. "Shoot the black guy" is the only constant I see here on Fark from your little faction of supremacist wack jobs.

Be fair.  They hate Muslims too.


But not Hispanics? What kind of bigots are these?
 
2013-07-02 08:42:56 PM  

Hobodeluxe: CliChe Guevara: Hobodeluxe: big day for prosecution today. Zimmerman caught in a huge lie.

GZ has been caught in at least a dozen of them. So what? Just because everyone knows he is a lying sack of shiat doesn't change the fact that the prosecution has no one who -can- prove what happened. Still no case no matter how many lies he is caught in.

I'm hoping the judge allows lesser charges to come into play and they get him for negligent manslaughter.


Why, was he whipping the gun out and accidently shot someone?
 
2013-07-02 08:43:04 PM  

fredklein: What is "Legal" is not always "Right". And what's "Right" is not always "Legal". If a series of 'perfectly legal' steps end up with an innocent person dead... I have to question the Rightness of the Law.


That's not a bad point.  However, you should also consider whether the "innocent" person is really innocent.  Zimmerman's nose didn't get broken on its own.  He didn't end up on his back underneath Martin, all on his own.  Zimmerman was a moron for getting out of his truck, and for following.  However, that doesn't make him guilty of murder if he had to defend himself.
 
2013-07-02 08:43:11 PM  

BigNumber12: Magnus: BigNumber12: HA! I was wondering if that would earn a rebuke.

How will the judge rebuke the daughter, a non-participant in this case?  Hold her in contempt of twitter?  Or just send her father to county for 30 days due to guilt by association?

My comment was on the fact that the Judge seems to despise the Defense Team, and would loooooove an opportunity like this to reprimand one of them.


I just figured out why I despise the defense team... the lead freakishly reminds me of Joel Osteen.
 
2013-07-02 08:43:35 PM  

fredklein: Part of the problem is that some people are looking at the forest, and some are looking at one tree.

To those looking at the forest, the 'big picture', they see Zimmerman starting the whole thing by chasing Trayvon. And since he started it, he's guilty.

To those looking at the tree, the one instant Zimmerman was getting beat, they see... well, nothing but that one instant. And without context, what they see is.. useless for basing a decision on. But that doesn't stop them.


See my post above about this.

The lead investigator testified in the case today. NOTHING that Zimmerman did prior to the shooting was illegal, according to the police investigator in charge of the shooting. Following? Nope, not illegal.

Yesterday, the same lead investigator testified that, given all the evidence in the case, he believed Zimmerman was telling the truth.

Assaulting someone, mounting them for a bit of the ground 'n' pound? Not legal. Grounds for self-defense on Zimmerman's part, in fact.

So maybe what we see is one guy (Zimmerman) doing nothing illegal, and another guy (Martin) doing something illegal, and support the guy that was only doing the legal things. Zimmerman - again, who was doing nothing illegal - has a right to protect himself from an illegal assault that could have seriously injured of killed him.

Besides all of that, it baffles me that you seem to expect Zimmerman to be some superman with iron self-control, yet expect Martin to have none. You do realize that if Martin had stopped beating on Zimmerman when Zimmerman started screaming for help, that Martin would probably be alive today, right?
 
2013-07-02 08:43:50 PM  

ecl: Tatsuma: ecl: Cowards slapping each others backs. Disgusting.

How am I being a coward, sexist?

You are congratulating each other because you think this sniveling little quim is going to get off on a technicality and that will empower you pussies to go out and shoot someone who isn't armed because you're cowardly f*cking pussies.

Does that cover it?


Dude.
 
2013-07-02 08:44:24 PM  

sheep snorter: Daughter: "hey lets title the picture something that is almost racist but not illegal to the proceedings."
Dad Lawyer: "And I'll deny any responsibility since you are nothing but a stupid kid."


Um...yeah.  You know that the picture was actually taken the day before Precious testified, right?
 
2013-07-02 08:44:48 PM  

fredklein: Part of the problem is that some people are looking at the forest, and some are looking at one tree.

To those looking at the forest, the 'big picture', they see Zimmerman starting the whole thing by chasing Trayvon. And since he started it, he's guilty.

To those looking at the tree, the one instant Zimmerman was getting beat, they see... well, nothing but that one instant. And without context, what they see is.. useless for basing a decision on. But that doesn't stop them.


The law doesn't work that way.  What you call context is actually examined as a chain of events between cause and effect.  Legally, things can happen which break the chain and force you to ignore all of the links that came before that event.  In this case, the line between Zimmerman following or chasing Martin and the death of Martin can be broken in many places.  Because there is ZERO evidence that Zimmerman intended to kill Martin at the point he exited his vehicle, any events that preceded the initial physical confrontation are irrelevant.  If you see that initial confrontation as part of an overall sequence that leads to Martin's death, that's an opinion you are entitled to.  An equally valid opinion is that Martin escalated a simple physical conflict to a life-or-death (or serious bodily injury) conflict which would break the chain of causation and force you to examine only those events which occurred after that happened.

My Florida Bar exam had an exaggerated example of this as one of its questions.  It went something along the lines of a woman was jogging, bitten by a dog, hit by a car waiting for the ambulance, dropped out of the ambulance by the emts, and then treated by a drunk physician in the ER who seriously messed up resulting in her death.  Obviously, she would be alive but for having been bitten by the dog.  But, the owner of the dog bears no legal responsibility for her death as that chain had been broken many times.
 
2013-07-02 08:45:14 PM  

Scerpes: ecl: Tatsuma: ecl: Cowards slapping each others backs. Disgusting.

How am I being a coward, sexist?

You are congratulating each other because you think this sniveling little quim is going to get off on a technicality and that will empower you pussies to go out and shoot someone who isn't armed because you're cowardly f*cking pussies.

Does that cover it?

The technicality that you're referring to is that his conduct wasn't illegal.


You can't use law in here! This is a courtroom!
 
2013-07-02 08:45:37 PM  

fredklein: Phinn: fredklein: ... Zimmerman starting the whole thing by chasing Trayvon. And since he started it, he's guilty

I don't know how to put this more bluntly than I already have, but what you say here is not the law.

"If the law supposes that ... the law is a ass-a idiot. If that's the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is that his eye may be opened by experience-by experience."

What is "Legal" is not always "Right". And what's "Right" is not always "Legal". If a series of 'perfectly legal' steps end up with an innocent person dead... I have to question the Rightness of the Law.


Beating the crap out of someone is not legal.
So your logic doesn't apply in this case.

doesn't look like Martin was innocent of assaulting George.
 
2013-07-02 08:45:49 PM  

Giant Clown Shoe: judgment non obstante veredicto


That would be awesome.  If the Jury goes not guity..all we need is some evidence that proves zimmerman intended to kill martin for your fantasy to come true.
 
2013-07-02 08:46:09 PM  

GBB: Third Day Mark: Dr.Mxyzptlk.: [encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com image 299x169]
 Who needs evidence ?

You shut your whore mouth.

Because Jackson and Sharpton swoop into a small sleepy Florida town where this kind of murder-profiling has gone on before; and simply ask for the person who murdered someone to be arrested and the trial to be held in the first place, they're out to make a buck?

I'll say it again: Shut your goddamn whore mouth.

/white guy
//zimmerman would've shot me if I was wearing a hoodie.
///btw: it was raining.  everyone wears hoodies in fla in february if its going to rain -- because its got a f*cking hood.

Yes, we Floridians love wearing our hoodies to protect us from the rain, then proceed to not get out of said rain.  We're all funny like that.


Trayvon was walking home. How is that "not getting out of the rain"?
 
2013-07-02 08:47:35 PM  

ecl: Tatsuma: ecl: Cowards slapping each others backs. Disgusting.

How am I being a coward, sexist?

You are congratulating each other because you think this sniveling little quim is going to get off on a technicality and that will empower you pussies to go out and shoot someone who isn't armed because you're cowardly f*cking pussies.

Does that cover it?


No. I'm reasonably sure that the unarmed someone needs to be a child and he needs to be African American.

On the other hand, if the victim were a blonde girl in Aruba, Zimmerman would be in prison by now.
 
2013-07-02 08:48:26 PM  

Pud: Nutsac_Jim: Pud: I've seen this story several times. It's a picture of a guy eating ice-cream cones with his daughters. Where's  the problem??

the problem is that she is proud of her father for shaming the prosecution.  They decided that they must exact justice in some other way that they control.

This is why HOA board members should not be members of a given community.  It promotes little Hitlers.

Two questions. if I may ask.
1. What's wrong with a daughter being proud of her father?
2. Why would that be a bad thing??

/I guess a 3rd.would be they went out for ice cream ....I still don't see the problem. Sorry.


That was sarcasm.
 
2013-07-02 08:49:14 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Giant Clown Shoe: judgment non obstante veredicto

That would be awesome.  If the Jury goes not guity..all we need is some evidence that proves zimmerman intended to kill martin for your fantasy to come true.


Um...actually, you need a conviction for a finding of judgement notwithstanding the verdict.  The court can't convict without the jury, but they can overturn a jury verdict.  I believe the judge cold also make a not guilty finding at the close of the State's case, or a stand your ground finding at the close of evidence.
 
2013-07-02 08:49:50 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: GBB: Third Day Mark: Dr.Mxyzptlk.: [encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com image 299x169]
 Who needs evidence ?

You shut your whore mouth.

Because Jackson and Sharpton swoop into a small sleepy Florida town where this kind of murder-profiling has gone on before; and simply ask for the person who murdered someone to be arrested and the trial to be held in the first place, they're out to make a buck?

I'll say it again: Shut your goddamn whore mouth.

/white guy
//zimmerman would've shot me if I was wearing a hoodie.
///btw: it was raining.  everyone wears hoodies in fla in february if its going to rain -- because its got a f*cking hood.

Yes, we Floridians love wearing our hoodies to protect us from the rain, then proceed to not get out of said rain.  We're all funny like that.

Trayvon was walking home. How is that "not getting out of the rain"?


if his friend is to be believed, he took something like 40 minutes to make a 3 minute walk.
 
2013-07-02 08:50:21 PM  
If someone is acting within the law, then there's no legal excuse to commit an illegal action against them. If Zimmerman's story is true then he was at no legal fault.

His actions may be unwise or stupid but so is driving through a "bad" neighborhood, leaving your door unlocked, or wearing revealing clothing. That doesn't excuse someone attacking them, robbing them, or raping them nor does it invalidate their right to self defense because they could have "avoided" it.
 
2013-07-02 08:50:42 PM  

Tatsuma: Also one thing I really found interesting about the trial. Turns out a police officer, trying to make Zimmerman slip up and see if he was lying, told him 'Turns out that someone filmed the whole incident on their phone' and Zimmerman immediately closed his eyes, said 'Thank G-d!' and sighed in relief.


of course he said that. he's taken criminal justice and knows their tactics
 
2013-07-02 08:51:36 PM  

Cataholic: fredklein: Part of the problem is that some people are looking at the forest, and some are looking at one tree.

To those looking at the forest, the 'big picture', they see Zimmerman starting the whole thing by chasing Trayvon. And since he started it, he's guilty.


My Florida Bar exam had an exaggerated example of this as one of its questions.  It went something along the lines of a woman was jogging, bitten by a dog, hit by a car waiting for the ambulance, dropped out of the ambulance by the emts, and then treated by a drunk physician in the ER who seriously messed up resulting in her death.  Obviously, she would be alive but for having been bitten by the dog.  But, the owner of the dog bears no legal responsibility for her death as that chain had been broken many times.


This.

Oh, and there is a huge difference between chasing someone as you claim and someone keeping track of where someone is so he can tell the police when they arrive (as he did on all his other calls).
 
2013-07-02 08:51:38 PM  

Phinn: fredklein: What is "Legal" is not always "Right". And what's "Right" is not always "Legal". If a series of 'perfectly legal' steps end up with an innocent person dead... I have to question the Rightness of the Law.

The next time we're talking about a case being tried in a court of rightness, your opinions may be worth something.


So, your 'Justice System' isn't supposed to do the right thing? Doing Right isn't Just??
 
2013-07-02 08:52:06 PM  

Hobodeluxe: Tatsuma: Also one thing I really found interesting about the trial. Turns out a police officer, trying to make Zimmerman slip up and see if he was lying, told him 'Turns out that someone filmed the whole incident on their phone' and Zimmerman immediately closed his eyes, said 'Thank G-d!' and sighed in relief.

of course he said that. he's taken criminal justice and knows their tactics


Yes...lie to the suspect about the existence of a video is a course in it's own right.
 
2013-07-02 08:52:23 PM  

I_C_Weener: ecl: Tatsuma: ecl: Cowards slapping each others backs. Disgusting.

How am I being a coward, sexist?

You are congratulating each other because you think this sniveling little quim is going to get off on a technicality and that will empower you pussies to go out and shoot someone who isn't armed because you're cowardly f*cking pussies.

Does that cover it?

Dude.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-07-02 08:53:17 PM  

DoomPaul: If someone is acting within the law, then there's no legal excuse to commit an illegal action against them. If Zimmerman's story is true then he was at no legal fault.

His actions may be unwise or stupid but so is driving through a "bad" neighborhood, leaving your door unlocked, or wearing revealing clothing. That doesn't excuse someone attacking them, robbing them, or raping them nor does it invalidate their right to self defense because they could have "avoided" it.


Great sum up.

The state must prove that Zimmermans story is untrue...beyond a reasonable doubt. Or in other words that his version defies logic, basically. That or a competing eye witness, which they lack.
 
2013-07-02 08:55:31 PM  

fredklein: Phinn: fredklein: What is "Legal" is not always "Right". And what's "Right" is not always "Legal". If a series of 'perfectly legal' steps end up with an innocent person dead... I have to question the Rightness of the Law.

The next time we're talking about a case being tried in a court of rightness, your opinions may be worth something.

So, your 'Justice System' isn't supposed to do the right thing? Doing Right isn't Just??


It's supposed to do the right thing by not risking sending innocent people to jail. Rather 10 guilty go free than one innocent be wrongly convicted. That's the crux of the system.
 
2013-07-02 08:56:38 PM  

fredklein: CliChe Guevara: fredklein: I guess you're one of those people who believe that Zimmerman, who was actively chasing Trayvon the whole time (by vehicle and on foot), and who was pissed at "these assholes" who "always get away", suddenly had a change of heart and 'just decided to go back to his truck' at the exact same moment that Trayvon, who was running away from the "creepy cracker" (your words) following him happened to decide to turn and confront him for no reason.

That is to say, two people who were showing one type of behavior (hunter, prey) suddenly, and for no reason, changed into the other. At the same time.

This is one of the giant disconnects our "Fark Independents" cannot and will not address. Just let it go. They are never going to listen to reason as long as reason keeps telling them something other than "its the black guys fault"

[imageshack.us image 800x302]


What is most likely is some 17 year old was out to prove how much of a man he is.  That's what they do.
Thats part of the reason more geeks show up to the 20th HS reunion.   The dumber ones have killed themselves off or are sitting in state sponsored one bedroom units with open floor plans, getting visited by Barney Fife 8 times a day.
 
Pud
2013-07-02 08:57:12 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: Pud: Nutsac_Jim: Pud: I've seen this story several times. It's a picture of a guy eating ice-cream cones with his daughters. Where's  the problem??

the problem is that she is proud of her father for shaming the prosecution.  They decided that they must exact justice in some other way that they control.

This is why HOA board members should not be members of a given community.  It promotes little Hitlers.

Two questions. if I may ask.
1. What's wrong with a daughter being proud of her father?
2. Why would that be a bad thing??

/I guess a 3rd.would be they went out for ice cream ....I still don't see the problem. Sorry.

That was sarcasm.


I guess my sarcasm meter needs re-calibration.
 
2013-07-02 08:58:52 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: fredklein: ..."in trying to keep Martin under surveillance until the po-po arrived"

Despite being told "We don't need you to do that, Sir."

Is that not when Zimmerman said "OK" and then turned around?


If you believe him, yes. Unfortunately, his actions and attitude up to that point don't really jibe with that. He was armed. He followed Trayvon by vehicle, got out and followed him on foot. He referred to Trayvon as one of "these assholes" who "always get away". ... and then he just gave up and turned around??

imageshack.us
 
2013-07-02 09:00:02 PM  

fredklein: If you believe him, yes. Unfortunately, his actions and attitude up to that point don't really jibe with that. He was armed. He followed Trayvon by vehicle, got out and followed him on foot. He referred to Trayvon as one of "these assholes" who "always get away". ... and then he just gave up and turned around??


Yes.  That's exactly what happened.  And there's NOTHING to contradict it.
 
2013-07-02 09:01:30 PM  
Someone got a little butt hurt?
 
2013-07-02 09:01:35 PM  

Tatsuma: NightOwl2255: But then again, as the average thread gets about 100 comments, Zimmerman is a cash cow for Drew.

100 comments? I remember when 100 comments were basically considered dead threads and 'cash cow threads' were basically stuff like I/P that always brought between 600-800 posts on average.


To be fair, half that 300-400 was from you. Heh.
No one can keep a thread going like you. That's not an insult or anything, it's just remarkable in a way.
 
2013-07-02 09:03:55 PM  

fredklein: HAMMERTOE: They've also proved that Trayvon was meandering through yards at night,

If by that you mean 'walking on the sidewalk', then yes.

in the rain,

Trayvon didn't control the weather. What's he supposed to do, wait for the sun to shine before he goes home?

and then led the "creepy cracker" who spotted him doing so into a nice dark back-alley

What a "nice dark back-alley" looks like:

[www1.pictures.zimbio.com image 404x594]
[imageshack.us image 755x502]

suitable for an ambush

::Sigh::

I guess you're one of those people who believe that Zimmerman, who was actively chasing Trayvon the whole time (by vehicle and on foot)


You are either the most uniformed person in the world or you are lying. Which is it? For around 1.5 minutes of the call with the dispatcher, Martin was no where in sight. How did Zimmerman magically catch up to Martin after not seeing him for that long? Martin could have been home in that amount of time easily.

After so many threads on this subject, I have to conclude everyone who posts such dishonest statements in these threads must have a mental illness. The transcript and audio of Zimmerman's conversation with the dispatcher have been posted so many times, yet there are posters who still claim ZImmerman chased Martin right up until the fight, and that he disobeyed the dispatcher. Both of those assertions are demonstrably false by any reasonable reading of the transcript and simply listening to the audio. Make your arguments within the known facts, not from your imagination.
 
2013-07-02 09:08:10 PM  
WOW. So either Tatsuma is a white supremacist, or everyone that doesn't believe Zimmerman's guilt has been proven is a Jewish supremacist?

That was pretty weird.
 
2013-07-02 09:08:28 PM  

fredklein: Nutsac_Jim: fredklein: ..."in trying to keep Martin under surveillance until the po-po arrived"

Despite being told "We don't need you to do that, Sir."

Is that not when Zimmerman said "OK" and then turned around?

If you believe him, yes. Unfortunately, his actions and attitude up to that point don't really jibe with that. He was armed. He followed Trayvon by vehicle, got out and followed him on foot. He referred to Trayvon as one of "these assholes" who "always get away". ... and then he just gave up and turned around??



No.  That was not specifically about Martin since he didn't know anything about Martin when he said that.
He was referring to people who are actually committing crimes.  Not suspects.

Stop lying. It doesn't make your case any better.
 
2013-07-02 09:08:55 PM  
Martin stood his ground, and forgot to bring a gun.
 
2013-07-02 09:11:55 PM  

fredklein: Nutsac_Jim: fredklein: ..."in trying to keep Martin under surveillance until the po-po arrived"

Despite being told "We don't need you to do that, Sir."

Is that not when Zimmerman said "OK" and then turned around?

If you believe him, yes. Unfortunately, his actions and attitude up to that point don't really jibe with that. He was armed. He followed Trayvon by vehicle, got out and followed him on foot. He referred to Trayvon as one of "these assholes" who "always get away". ... and then he just gave up and turned around??

[imageshack.us image 800x302]


Zimmerman wanted someone punished for the previous break-ins. He sees a lone young black man walking down the street, recalls that the description of the perpetrators was "young black men", and immediately decides Trayvon was responsible for them. He goes off after him, determined to catch him and make him pay for those break-ins, because he's obviously guilty by being a young black man, which matches the description.

Sounds far-fetched? Zimmerman is knows to have a short temper and be impulsive. "These assholes always get away" is not something said by a person who's merely suspicious of a stranger. And he's given at least three different stories of what Trayvon was doing as he was walking down the street: peering into windows, casing houses, and skipping down the road. Zimmerman wanted justice done, and it went tits-up in a huge way.
 
2013-07-02 09:14:28 PM  

Scerpes: fredklein: What is "Legal" is not always "Right". And what's "Right" is not always "Legal". If a series of 'perfectly legal' steps end up with an innocent person dead... I have to question the Rightness of the Law.

That's not a bad point.  However, you should also consider whether the "innocent" person is really innocent.  Zimmerman's nose didn't get broken on its own.  He didn't end up on his back underneath Martin, all on his own.  Zimmerman was a moron for getting out of his truck, and for following.  However, that doesn't make him guilty of murder if he had to defend himself.


My theory of what happened is that Trayvon hid. Zimmerman passed him, then hung up with the cops and turned to go back to his truck. Trayvon, seeing the crazy guy who's been chasing him turn and walk back toward his hiding place, assumes Zimmerman had found his hiding place (or was about to). That's when Trayvon confronted Zimmerman. Somewhere in there, Trayvon realizes Zimmerman is armed. (How? Maybe Zimmerman pulled or flashed his gun. Maybe Trayvon saw it as Zimmerman put his cell phone away after hanging up with the cops. Doesn't matter.) So, Trayvon jumps the crazy armed guy following him... in self defense. And if he had hit Zimmerman's head against the sidewalk harder, we'd be posting about how TRAYVON wasn't "guilty of murder if he had to defend himself".

Besides, didn't someone at the top of the thread post that the injuries were trivial? Lemme see... Oh, Here:

Hobodeluxe 2013-07-02 06:50:34 PM
big day for prosecution today. Zimmerman caught in a huge lie. (had to walk all the way through the alley to find an address) all those houses have addresses on the front right beside the outside light. even George's house had one there. He knew where he was.
the medical examiner also said his injuries were insignificant, not a result of head being slammed into the concrete several times. no stitches, no real trauma. just small scratches and a couple of small knots.


And that is born out by news articles:

http://www.seattlepi.com/default/article/Prosecutors-attack-Zimmerman- story-several-ways-4641973.php
Prosecutors also called a medical examiner who had reviewed evidence for them to the witness stand. Dr. Valerie Rao testified that Zimmerman's injuries were insignificant, bolstering the prosecution's claims that Zimmerman's life wasn't in jeopardy during his fight with Martin. Rao was not the medical examiner who autopsied Martin.

"They were so minor that the individual who treated and examined Mr. Zimmerman decided stitches weren't required," Rao said.

Oh, and does anyone find it funny that Zimmerman's head was hit on 'concrete', but his back was covered in 'grass'. Which was it?
 
2013-07-02 09:15:23 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: fredklein: Nutsac_Jim: fredklein: ..."in trying to keep Martin under surveillance until the po-po arrived"

Despite being told "We don't need you to do that, Sir."

Is that not when Zimmerman said "OK" and then turned around?

If you believe him, yes. Unfortunately, his actions and attitude up to that point don't really jibe with that. He was armed. He followed Trayvon by vehicle, got out and followed him on foot. He referred to Trayvon as one of "these assholes" who "always get away". ... and then he just gave up and turned around??


No.  That was not specifically about Martin since he didn't know anything about Martin when he said that.
He was referring to people who are actually committing crimes.  Not suspects.

Stop lying. It doesn't make your case any better.


Then why did he say that at all? If he was only suspicious about Trayvon in a general way, why make that comment as he started going after him? That's an odd thought process: "Hmm, there's someone making me suspicious. I'll follow him. These assholes always get away". Sounds like Zimmerman had already convicted Trayvon of something.
 
2013-07-02 09:16:30 PM  
What if martin WAS behind the breakins?
 
2013-07-02 09:17:29 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: fredklein: Nutsac_Jim: fredklein: ..."in trying to keep Martin under surveillance until the po-po arrived"

Despite being told "We don't need you to do that, Sir."

Is that not when Zimmerman said "OK" and then turned around?

If you believe him, yes. Unfortunately, his actions and attitude up to that point don't really jibe with that. He was armed. He followed Trayvon by vehicle, got out and followed him on foot. He referred to Trayvon as one of "these assholes" who "always get away". ... and then he just gave up and turned around??

[imageshack.us image 800x302]

Zimmerman wanted someone punished for the previous break-ins. He sees a lone young black man walking down the street,


I thought when the 911 dispatcher asked him, he was at first hesitant of the suspect's race.


recalls that the description of the perpetrators was "young black men", and immediately decides Trayvon was responsible for them. He goes off after him, determined to catch him and make him pay for those break-ins, because he's obviously guilty by being a young black man, which matches the description.

Sounds far-fetched?


Yes.

Zimmerman is knows to have a short temper and be impulsive.

He maybe 'is knows" but if you listen to the 911 tape he didn't sound to have a temper or be impulsive.

"These assholes always get away" is not something said by a person who's merely suspicious of a stranger.
He said it under his breath expressing frustration - he has been doing this for four years, right?


vs. a guy who refers to a specific person as a n***** and a creepy-ass cracker?
 
Displayed 50 of 386 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report