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.

(CBS News)   This is it folks, your last Zimmerman thread as closing arguments start today and....who am I kidding? We're gonna have these threads everyday until Zimmerman's been dead for six years   (cbsnews.com) divider line 289
    More: Interesting, jury instructions, forensic pathologists, murderers, right of self-defense  
•       •       •

2505 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Jul 2013 at 9:23 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-07-11 10:03:15 AM
8 votes:

Fark It: Darth_Lukecash: If Zimmerman had been killed by Trayvon, would he not actually been in self defense? After all, Zimmerman had a gun and was following him!

Well, Trayvon didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until he started beating his head into the concrete.  So is it self defense to attack somebody who is following you?  Is 'following' a crime?


if it provokes a reasonable fear of imminent harm then yes. do you think being followed in the dark and the rain (after you tried to engage the man in conversation while he was in his vehicle) then suddenly confronted in a dark alley after you thought you had avoided a confrontation with him would provoke a fear? What if after you ask him why he's following you he very quickly reaches for his pocket?? (Zimmerman said it was his phone but it could have just as easily been a weapon) Do you think you have the right to punch this guy and keep him from reaching what you think is his weapon? He hasn't identified himself or his intentions. And lets remember when this initiated Trayvon was on the phone. Zimmerman refused to meet the cops back at his truck and told them to call him and he would tell them where he was at. So Zimmerman's story about being ambushed doesn't make sense. If you were hiding and trying to be quiet so you could ambush someone you wouldn't be talking to someone on the phone. Zimmerman ignored all his training. He ignored the instructions by the dispatcher. He profiled and convicted Martin in his mind. To George this was the burglar. And he was going to be the hero and not let him get away this time.
2013-07-11 08:32:56 AM
8 votes:

kimwim: He's going to walk. Much as I don't want to see it, he's going to walk.


No one should get convicted of murder on evidence this thin.
2013-07-11 09:56:23 AM
6 votes:
Zimmerman was neighborhood watch.

Martin was neighborhood thug.

Martin decided he didn't like Zimmerman watching him and decided to administer a beat down.

Martin got shot for it.

And Martin had it coming.
2013-07-11 09:29:14 AM
6 votes:
"Your"    mutherfarkers!....not You ARE=You're

/can't believe I have to be the grammar nazi.
2013-07-11 02:50:51 PM
5 votes:
9,241 black teens killed since Trayvon . . . .

0 farks given by any of you . . . .
2013-07-11 12:40:04 PM
5 votes:

Thunderpipes: 99% of Farkers wanted George to burn for a long time. The fact that most people now seem to realize how weak the case against him is shows why this was pushed with the wrong intentions completely.


100% of thunderpipes' statistics come from his ass
2013-07-11 09:31:01 AM
5 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.


"I misunderstand what actually happened, and I make suppositions that support my misunderstandings".

FTFY.
2013-07-11 01:35:52 PM
4 votes:
i240.photobucket.com
2013-07-11 09:43:14 AM
4 votes:
I find both "sides" of this argument so distasteful that I hope the jury somehow manages to reach a verdict that enrages both "sides".
2013-07-11 09:28:14 AM
4 votes:
Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.
2013-07-11 08:32:01 AM
4 votes:
In all seriousness, the state of Florida may need to take this guy into protective custody when he walks. And sneak him off to some undisclosed location. Maybe fat camp.
2013-07-11 08:31:47 AM
4 votes:

kimwim: He's going to walk. Much as I don't want to see it, he's going to walk.


You don't want to see justice done?
2013-07-11 07:49:11 AM
4 votes:

ChaosStar: Much like these threads have swayed the, what do you call them, J4T people?


I believe the PC term is, Evidence Ostriches.
2013-07-11 11:30:27 AM
3 votes:

PC LOAD LETTER: At no point has anyone proven that TM's response was, in fact, deadly.


www.claimspages.com
Punched in the face once. Died.
2013-07-11 10:32:13 AM
3 votes:
An innocent man is being railroaded on national television.  Truly a sad day, and a nail in the coffin of the U.S.  The judge is giving the defense zero preparation time.
2013-07-11 10:14:17 AM
3 votes:
Hobodeluxe

all those are facts.

When was it established as a fact that Zimmerman confronted Martin? Because no one in the trial has suggested that...rather the opposite.
2013-07-11 09:55:39 AM
3 votes:
Into the blue again:
So his crime was being a young black kid?

G
oing by the evidence it appears his crime was beating Zimmerman and slamming his head into concrete. Had he just been a young black kid the worst thing that would have happened to him would have been a creep cracker following him.
2013-07-11 09:49:14 AM
3 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: If Zimmerman had been killed by Trayvon, would he not actually been in self defense? After all, Zimmerman had a gun and was following him!


Well, Trayvon didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until he started beating his head into the concrete.  So is it self defense to attack somebody who is following you?  Is 'following' a crime?
2013-07-11 09:47:04 AM
3 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?


If the man starts brandishing the gun, then yes. Until he moves to attack, no. That's the standard rule. From all the evidence we have, Trayvon struck first, and there's no reason to believe he even knew Zimmerman had a gun at that point. That makes the question of Trayvon's self-defense moot. Even if it weren't, though, we also know he was the first to escalate to deadly force, at which point Zimmerman's own rights kick in: one does not negate the other.

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?

If that's as far as it went, then it's not valid cause for self-defense.

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

He did indeed, and that was reckless. If the self-defense claim is invalidated, then certainly it could underpin a case for manslaughter, but that's not what the prosecution is claiming he did.

But even so, he did not escalate to the use of force, and he did not escalate to the use of deadly force. Both of those were Martin's doing.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.

"I had to kill him" doesn't mean "He needed killing." There's no reason to believe that Trayvon Martin deserved to die, but that is not the central question in this case. Even at best, Zimmerman is not some angel of justice by any stretch of the imagination: he's just a guy who did what he had to do to survive, and that's if the self-defense claim is valid. But if it is valid, then he should walk.
2013-07-11 09:36:38 AM
3 votes:
The big mistake the defense made was not having at least one man on the jury. There's gonna be a lot of emotional and possibly irrational decision making in the jury room, and a man would have helped to keep the jury focused on the facts and make logical conclusions.
2013-07-11 09:35:47 AM
3 votes:
Then the civil suits against all those who falsified his arrest warrant just to pacify the dark skinned people will begin.
2013-07-11 09:30:36 AM
3 votes:

tripleseven: Nabb1: kimwim: He's going to walk. Much as I don't want to see it, he's going to walk.

No one should get convicted of murder on evidence this thin.

They should have gone with manslaughter.


I couldn't believe it when they first said they were going for murder 2.  Manslaughter they might have been able to prove.
2013-07-11 09:27:09 AM
3 votes:
I am last Zimmerman thread?
2013-07-11 08:24:30 AM
3 votes:
I half expect the judge to do the state's closing argument herself.
2013-07-11 10:55:52 PM
2 votes:

cretinbob: Southern100: Keep in mind if they find him guilty of ANYTHING, even Child Abuse, that's going to open him up to civil lawsuits by TMs family. Only an acquittal on all charges will shield him from civil lawsuits.

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 203x320]

Ummmm...no


You haven't been paying attention. OJ was California.  This is Florida. Florida has different laws. You can't sue someone civilly if they're found not guilty (which is the way it SHOULD be).
2013-07-11 08:07:55 PM
2 votes:

PC LOAD LETTER: Nah, you can keep your shiathole. NYC is safer than any city its size, and while we have problems with cops like everyone else, we have bigger problems from the average idiot. We don't put our trust in untrained people with guns and a hero complex, because bullets miss and kill bystanders in dense populations. I am sure it works in East Bumblefark, MS or whatever, but it is a horrible idea here. If TM was an actual dangerous criminal, the headline would read "Neighborhood Watch Volunteer Gunned Down", with a law enforcement official saying "we don't know why he left his vehicle and pursued him; this is why we tell people to observe and report and not engage"



Do you have any statistics on the rate of "bullets missing and killing bystanders" as compared to, say, the rate of cops who commit crimes, or commit acts of excessive force?  Or compared to the rate of violent crime generally?

The police can "tell people to observe and report and not engage" all they like, but the police don't define self-defense.

Also, Zimmerman was attempting to observe and report and not engage.  That's when he was attacked by NO_LIMIT.   No one can prove otherwise.
2013-07-11 07:06:04 PM
2 votes:

vrax: Dougie AXP: Popcorn Johnny: So let's say Zimmerman walks, where does he go and what does he do with his life?

Wherever Casey Anthony is hiding out.

He signs a book deal, makes a shiat ton of money off of it and hides because when he goes to apply to any job and any HR person googles his name, they'll find all of this and (right or wrong) it might work against him.

Casey Anthony has it easy.  Zimmerman could get shot on any street in the US.  I'm thinking that he will never be able to not look over his shoulder thinking, 'Is that strange guy following me?!  Maybe I should run away, double back, and shoot him first!"


The people who are most outraged haven't been watching the trial with any regularity.  At best, they'll forget what he looks like in a month.  They'll be attacking white and Hispanic people at random, because if this trial taught us anything, justice doesn't matter, blind revenge does.
2013-07-11 06:53:41 PM
2 votes:
simhq.com
2013-07-11 04:20:15 PM
2 votes:
"You are not to text"

Why not?  Since there's evidently no way to prove that a juror sent the text...
2013-07-11 04:10:56 PM
2 votes:

Boojum2k: DROxINxTHExWIND: I think

You're not putting any real thought into this Dro, it's all feelings. Zimmerman was going to the store, he saw Trayvon getting all squirrelly in peoples yards, and called it in. In the phone call, Zimmerman showed no interest in a confrontation, just wanted the police out there to determine who it was and what they were doing.

Everything seen about Trayvon, and described by his phone call, show he went out of his way to start trouble that night.


I prefaced everything that I said with "I believe" or "IMO". NONE of us knows what really happened. But it takes a special kind of cognitive dissonance
  to assume that the guy who called the police on a person who he believed to be one of "these guys" who "always gets away" was minding his business when he was attacked savagely by a stranger without provocation. And I think the idea that we should assume Trayvon Martin initiated the contact because "he was a thug" is rooted in the same racist preconceptions that caused George Zimmerman to call the police in the first place.
2013-07-11 03:45:52 PM
2 votes:

DROxINxTHExWIND: I think


You're not putting any real thought into this Dro, it's all feelings. Zimmerman was going to the store, he saw Trayvon getting all squirrelly in peoples yards, and called it in. In the phone call, Zimmerman showed no interest in a confrontation, just wanted the police out there to determine who it was and what they were doing.

Everything seen about Trayvon, and described by his phone call, show he went out of his way to start trouble that night.
2013-07-11 03:00:43 PM
2 votes:

fredklein: I admitted self-defense by Zimmerman was POSSIBLE. Not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. We know he killed Trayvon. We don't know it was in self defense.



Self-defense must be DISPROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt.  Let your brain stew on that concept for a good long while.

fredklein: Reason, perhaps. But not Law, if Law allows killers to go free.



The Law allows defendants who are charged with unproven allegations to go free.
2013-07-11 02:51:05 PM
2 votes:

WillofJ2: Trayvons mother staring down the jury


Hopefully they understand that they have nothing in common with this terrible parent.  Her son is dead because she didn't raise him right.
2013-07-11 02:45:37 PM
2 votes:
Does anyone else recall the reason that this case initially came to national attention?

Have we forgotten that the INITIAL OUTRAGE surrounding this case had little to do with George Zimmerman or Trayvon Martin, rather the accusation was that the Sanford Police Department and the District Attorney's office demonstrated institutionalized racism by failing to charge Zimmerman.

Strangely, no one seems to mention those allegations anymore. Rather, the focus of our attention has subtly shifted from the Sanford PD to George Zimmerman himself - YET - the emotions associated with RACISM invoked in the initial brouhaha have remained intact.

Why does this remain an issue that is fanning the flames of racial tension? Why are there threats of riots and mayhem if the jury doesn't reach a "politically correct" verdict?

With the initial allegations of  institutionalized racism all but forgotten, why is this case any more worthy of attention than any one of hundreds of similar interracial incidents that take place each and every year?

Have we been played by those who want to see us divided along racial lines?
2013-07-11 02:29:53 PM
2 votes:
This guy has absolutely nothing. Zero. He's just re-doing the opening statement and apologizing for how bad his star witness blew it.
2013-07-11 02:05:00 PM
2 votes:
Step 1:  Go to twitter.
Step 2:  Type "zimmerman" in search box.
Step 3:  Be very afraid.
2013-07-11 01:37:25 PM
2 votes:
Here's the problem I'm seeing. Zimmerman was told by the dispatcher to "let me know if he does anything else" while Zimmerman was totally exaggerating the events. Martin was standing under the mailbox kiosk talking on the phone because it was raining. In Zimmerman's mind this was suspicious. Then, when Martin decided to continue his trek home he naturally walked in the direction of that townhouse. But Zimmerman saw him as "coming at me" and "he's got something in his hand" (a cellphone) and "he's got his hand in his waistband" and "he's checking me out."

What the dispatcher meant was let him know if Martin did anything wrong or threatened Zimmerman. He didn't mean follow Martin or keep an eye on him or anything else. The police were on their way and Zimmerman should have kept his ass in his car. The jury needs to decide if, by the act of following Martin, Zimmerman has some fault in the death of a kid (and yes, Zimmerman himself called Martin a "kid") and therefore deserves some kind of punishment.
2013-07-11 01:30:09 PM
2 votes:

TheSup3rN0va: princehal: Do you think Zimmerman would be out stalking under-aged men if he did not have a gun with him?

No, but not for the reason you want it to be

/Hint: he wasn't stalking anyone to begin with


Sure he was. That's why he didn't want to meet the cops at the truck or the mailboxes. this guy in his mind was guilty of those burglaries and this time he wasn't going to get away.
2013-07-11 12:43:11 PM
2 votes:

Facetious_Speciest: The My Little Pony Killer

I still don't see how people are getting "dude following around somebody else" with "victim" of anything.

It probably has something to do with the idea that Martin attacked him, thus making him the victim of said attack.


While conveniently ignoring the fact that Martin had every right to walk around his neighborhood wearing whatever the fark he felt like and carrying whatever candy he felt like eating. Zimmerman was never the victim in this scenario.
2013-07-11 12:33:33 PM
2 votes:

Treygreen13: Boojum2k: Latinwolf: Well GZ could have avoided that by not following that suspicious person in the first place.

Well, she could have avoided that rape by not wearing that skirt.

I dunno man, I bet she'd be more likely to be raped if she was walking around bottomless.


I still fail to see how any person who is able to operate on the internet, let alone (apparently) function in society can equate rape with this situation.  You really need to take a knee and punch yourself in the face by equating the two.

/
2013-07-11 12:26:37 PM
2 votes:

Latinwolf: Carth: MFAWG: AngryDragon: Elegy: Now the state is trying to keep out self-defense and justifiable use of deadly force as an instruction.

Isn't that what the whole goddamn case is about?!

No, it's about being able to walk the streets safely at night.

Really.

Agreed. It is terrifying that you can't report a suspicious person in your own neighborhood without having to worry about getting attacked and being forced to fight for your life.

Well GZ could have avoided that by not following that suspicious person in the first place.


Yup.

"Hi, police?  I'd like to report a suspicious person, here is his location."  Followed by giving your information and hanging up.

Not "Hi, police, there's a suspicious person, and I've been following him, emboldened by the fact I am armed"
2013-07-11 12:04:05 PM
2 votes:

PC LOAD LETTER: PC LOAD LETTER: happydude45: Their worst nightmare should be being killed by other black folk, because they kill a lot more black people than white racists do

Maybe in East New York or Newark, but not in the area that this incident occurred.

Note: I'm not saying there are lynchings in this area or whatever, I'm saying that black on black crime occurs in poor black areas, which this was not.  I don't know what the hate crime rates are in FL.



*Sigh*

This case is not about George Zimmerman or seeing a "white racist" go to jail because black people hate racists. This is about African-American's distrust of the American legal system. The reason this became a national issue is that initial reports through social media and the news were that a white man in the south profiled, followed, and killed a 17 year old black boy and he was not going to be forced to explain the incident in a court of law. This is why the Sanford Police, not George Zimmerman, not "the wite man", were the initial focus of the people seeking justice for Trayvon. People believed, myself included, that had this incident happened with the races of the perpetrators reversed, there would be no chance that police would have failed to charge the killer with a crime.

Thinking that does not make me a racist. There are generations of precedent set showing the disparity in treatment of white and black defendants. Its interesting that the people who believe Zimmerman was well within his rights to profile Trayvon because some black people previously committed crimes have a problem with someone taking the past into account when weighing the actions of police and those in the criminal justice system. I acknowledge that the demands of the people seeking jutice for Trayvon have evolved from simply getting a day in court to seeing Zimmerman get convcted of a crime and I attribute that to two things: First, there are those who have listened to the facts of the case and determined that Zimmerman profiled Martin, got into a fight that he was losing and killed Martin in cold blood. Then, there are others who only have the information they started with...white man, black boy, Skittles & Iced tea...who have stumbled clumsily on to what I believe is the right side of the issue. They're correct in their desire to see Zimmerman convicted, but they want it for all of the wrong reasons. These are the empty drums that make the most noise, and the people who pro-Zimmerman folks use to try to accuse everyone seeking a conviction of being racist against white people.

I also think that many of the "pro-Trayvon" crowd have been successfully trolled by Zimmermaniacs who know how easy it is to get a reaction in a discussion of race. Even the defense has played a part in it, calling to the stand a woman whose sole purpose was to make the argument that Trayvon should have been profiled because someone black once broke into her home. Is this now the standard for identifying "sucpicious" people? Its also troubling that so many people can take the information available to us, such as the fact that Zimmerman frequently saw a reason to suspect black people when he contacted police, and find some ridiculous rationalization.

"Oh, he didn't SAY they were black until the police asked!" (as if they were not going to ask for a description of the "suspect")

That disingenousness leads some black people to believe that maybe justice is tied to race more than we all admit. I mean, the Zimmerman supporters are presmebly potential jurors in SOME jurisdiction in America. If so many of them are willing to assasinate the character of a young black kid who was killed walking home based mostly on the contradictory statements of the killer, how far are we actually from equality in this country? From my perspective, the vitriol coming from the pro-Zimmerman crowd that is directed towards a dead child fuels some of the more idiotic statements that come from people who want to see Zimmerman hung. They claim they just want to see justice but their dog whistles (Trayvon was a "thug", etc.) betray them.
2013-07-11 12:02:35 PM
2 votes:

The Haberdasher: Maybe this has been metioned before, but why is this trial even news. I don't get the infactuation with this trial.


DOJ, per Obama guidance, sent activists to assist in organizing protests, and hired publicity specialists were employed to loudly call National attention to this case.  This case is an orchestrated dog and pony show that has been cast forward into the larger public domain in a brazenly foolish misuse of this FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION'S political power.  Disgusting and stupid braincramped idiots working their mindless dogmatic "magic" on Low Information Citizens....this monkey trial should have NEVER occurred.
2013-07-11 11:59:11 AM
2 votes:
I think the most important lesson to take away from this trial is "don't punch strangers or you might get shot."
2013-07-11 11:18:36 AM
2 votes:

Facetious_Speciest: fredklein

Zimmerman showed his ... dislike... for Trayvon when he referred to Trayvon as part of "these assholes" who "always get away". Someone who dislikes someone is more likely to start a fight with them.

That's a wash, as Martin referred to Zimmerman with (ignorantly incorrect) racial slurs.


Zimmerman referred to Trayvon as an "asshole" after barely seeing him for a few seconds. Trayvon called Zimmerman a 'creepy-ass cracker' after Zimmerman followed him by vehicle and on foot. Looks like Zimmerman was the biased one, calling people names with no evidence.
2013-07-11 10:33:38 AM
2 votes:
Hobodeluxe

no she said that ZImmerman approached him really close and Trayvon asked what's your problem. that is not initiating it. When George approached him was what initiated it.

No, guy. Just no. She said Martin turned back to Zimmerman, and confronted him with "what you following me for?"

Your version has no testimony to support it.
2013-07-11 10:27:51 AM
2 votes:

tripleseven: It would depend on context concerning the legality of following someone, but if you are stating that being followed at night by a stranger in a car, and on foot doesn't pose a threat or a basic human emotional response of fear or danger, then you are totally lying to yourself.


Still not illegal.
2013-07-11 10:27:21 AM
2 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: Trayvon thought Zimmerman meant him harm. He was right.


Actually, we don't know if he was right. Zimmerman escalated things by following him, but there are degrees of escalation, and Zimmerman is not the one who escalated even further by initiating physical force. There is no reason to believe he'd have shot Martin if that had not happened.

Trayvon should be okay with someone following him for no reason?

Strawman. Of course he shouldn't have been OK with it. But that does not excuse striking first.

Some people believe that it's better to throw the first punch in a fight than to get beaten up themselves.

According to the law, they are wrong.

Zimmerman left the car after he was told not to. He may have been heading back to his car, but he was out if it. He escalated it.

He did indeed escalate it, and he should not have done that. He was reckless. But there are lines he did not cross. Escalation is not a simple binary: it's not merely "deadly force" versus "no force." He didn't even escalate to the use of force.

Trayvon shouldn't have assaulted Zimmerman, and died because of it. But to say Zimmerman is innocent is rediculous. He purposely injected himself into a dangerous situation.

And all of what you say is correct, but it is not what he's being charged with. If he is to be punished, then it should be for something he actually did. The prosecution failed to do that.

Probably because he had that happy warm gun toting superiority that comes with the second amendment.

We get it. You're scared.
2013-07-11 10:25:29 AM
2 votes:

fredklein: Unless you can read dead people's minds, you don't know if Trayvon knew about the gun.


So you admit that a lot is unknown, then you post a graphic that perfectly explains your argument as a bunch of scribbles to support your unsupported theories.

You are precious.
2013-07-11 10:22:33 AM
2 votes:

calm like a bomb: Is this where I leave my daily "subtract one fat, insecure loser with a gun from the situation and nobody dies" post?


You could leave a "subtract one pathetic violent head-smashing junkie thug from the situation and nobody dies" post.
2013-07-11 10:22:15 AM
2 votes:

tripleseven: I'm never going to convince you, but, lets look at reality:


Reality is WHY you will never convince me.
2013-07-11 10:15:06 AM
2 votes:
Ok so if TM was fearful for his life while from ZImmerman following him, why didnt he hang up with Jaba and call the police?
2013-07-11 10:14:34 AM
2 votes:
We would like to add 'Wearing White After Labor Day' to the list of charges, Ms. Judge.
2013-07-11 10:12:29 AM
2 votes:

NeoCortex42: Sline: Lo and behold, she's allowing manslaughter.

I don't think it should be an option, but from the case law the prosecution cited, it sounds like she couldn't have ruled any other way thanks to Florida law.


Prosecution: We couldn't meet the burden of proof for our original charge, so could we lower please??
2013-07-11 10:10:46 AM
2 votes:

s2s2s2: tripleseven: Yeah, people have NO RIGHT to be in the streets or anything.

So then we agree, George had a right to get out of his car. Thank you.


and trayvon had the right to defend himself from a perceived threat
2013-07-11 10:10:29 AM
2 votes:

Hobodeluxe: Fark It: Darth_Lukecash: If Zimmerman had been killed by Trayvon, would he not actually been in self defense? After all, Zimmerman had a gun and was following him!

Well, Trayvon didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until he started beating his head into the concrete.  So is it self defense to attack somebody who is following you?  Is 'following' a crime?

if it provokes a reasonable fear of imminent harm then yes. do you think being followed in the dark and the rain (after you tried to engage the man in conversation while he was in his vehicle) then suddenly confronted in a dark alley after you thought you had avoided a confrontation with him would provoke a fear? What if after you ask him why he's following you he very quickly reaches for his pocket?? (Zimmerman said it was his phone but it could have just as easily been a weapon) Do you think you have the right to punch this guy and keep him from reaching what you think is his weapon? He hasn't identified himself or his intentions. And lets remember when this initiated Trayvon was on the phone. Zimmerman refused to meet the cops back at his truck and told them to call him and he would tell them where he was at. So Zimmerman's story about being ambushed doesn't make sense. If you were hiding and trying to be quiet so you could ambush someone you wouldn't be talking to someone on the phone. Zimmerman ignored all his training. He ignored the instructions by the dispatcher. He profiled and convicted Martin in his mind. To George this was the burglar. And he was going to be the hero and not let him get away this time.


Erroneous statements of the law aside, you speculate about facts not in evidence quite imaginatively.
2013-07-11 10:09:43 AM
2 votes:

tripleseven: Yeah, people have NO RIGHT to be in the streets or anything.


So then we agree, George had a right to get out of his car. Thank you.
2013-07-11 10:07:53 AM
2 votes:

s2s2s2: Into the blue again: So his crime was being a young black kid?

LOL

No, it was criminal assault. I will only mention the additional crime of being a pothead, because he was a minor.


and why did he feel the need to defend himself? why did he think this guy who wouldn't identify himself. who wouldn't talk to him when he approached his vehicle. who followed him halfway home and then when asked again "why are you following me" suddenly reached for his pocket was a threat? is that not reasonable? cops shoot people all the time for reaching for their pockets
2013-07-11 10:04:36 AM
2 votes:
whizbangthedirtfarmer:

Hyperbole much?  I've looked worse after a game of pickup basketball.  It COULD have been a vicious assault (if it is happening the way the alive guy is saying), but I didn't see anything extraordinary.

If you get a broken nose and need to go to the doctor for head wounds after a game of basketball you need to play with different people.
2013-07-11 09:58:15 AM
2 votes:
It's funny to read all the tough on crime throw the book at em types worried about the fairness of this trial, they suddenly care about defendant's rights, overzealous prosecution and judges. I wonder if it will stick...
2013-07-11 09:55:45 AM
2 votes:

Into the blue again: s2s2s2: Nabb1: Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?

For the millionth time, this does not matter under the law.  The evidence established Trayvon Martin had Zimmerman on the ground and was beating him when he got shot.  Following someone for a few minutes because you believe them to be a criminal, even if you are wrong, is not against the law.  Period.

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

Martin escalated the situation even more when he was punching Zimmerman in the face.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.

And if he had kept on going and gone inside, that's exactly what would have happened.

And let's be clear. If he had gone straight home, instead of hanging out for 30 minutes, he would have NEVER even been seen by Zimmerman.

So his crime was being a young black kid? That is my only problem with this. All Zimmerman had to do was not profile, or not get out of his car.

Victim blaming is bad.


So why are blaming GZ, the victim of a vicious assault?
2013-07-11 09:47:02 AM
2 votes:

tricycleracer: Zimmerman will be back protecting the streets of his apartment complex by lunchtime tomorrow.


I'm guessing he'll never feel like trying to do anything helpful for his neighbors, ever again, after this shiatstorm. And I don't blame him a bit.
2013-07-11 09:40:41 AM
2 votes:

Nabb1: Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?

For the millionth time, this does not matter under the law.  The evidence established Trayvon Martin had Zimmerman on the ground and was beating him when he got shot.  Following someone for a few minutes because you believe them to be a criminal, even if you are wrong, is not against the law.  Period.

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

Martin escalated the situation even more when he was punching Zimmerman in the face.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.

And if he had kept on going and gone inside, that's exactly what would have happened.


And let's be clear. If he had gone straight home, instead of hanging out for 30 minutes, he would have NEVER even been seen by Zimmerman.
2013-07-11 09:36:07 AM
2 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?


When I walk through the mall with my concealed weapon, am I assaulting people with my aura of being armed?
2013-07-11 09:33:38 AM
2 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?


For the millionth time, this does not matter under the law.  The evidence established Trayvon Martin had Zimmerman on the ground and was beating him when he got shot.  Following someone for a few minutes because you believe them to be a criminal, even if you are wrong, is not against the law.  Period.

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

Martin escalated the situation even more when he was punching Zimmerman in the face.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.

And if he had kept on going and gone inside, that's exactly what would have happened.
2013-07-11 09:32:25 AM
2 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.


No.  He had no idea Zimmerman had a gun.
No.  Following someone is not a reason to assault them.
No.  He was reporting to the police what he was seeing and stopped following when it was suggested.
No.  He also assaulted a person (for racist reasons if you believe his girlfriends testimony) and took things way too far.

That help?
2013-07-11 09:32:04 AM
2 votes:

Nabb1: I half expect the judge to do the state's closing argument herself.


Nailed it. This woman is doing everything in her power to ensure that the man who killed Obama's son is found guilty of something.
2013-07-11 09:25:36 AM
2 votes:
i.imgur.com
2013-07-11 08:52:54 AM
2 votes:
Here are some summaries of how the trial has been going thus far:

i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com

/mad props to daRog for shrinking them enough for inline posting
2013-07-11 08:40:29 AM
2 votes:

Nabb1: In all seriousness, the state of Florida may need to take this guy into protective custody when he walks. And sneak him off to some undisclosed location. Maybe fat camp.


I think if I were him, I'd get the HELL away from Florida as soon as possible.  Maybe even out of the country.
2013-07-11 08:30:34 AM
2 votes:
He's going to walk. Much as I don't want to see it, he's going to walk.
2013-07-12 06:00:48 PM
1 votes:

Miss Alexandra: I've posted this in another thread...but Skittles and WATERMELON juice (how stereotypical, no?), along with codeine (I think) are used to make some kind of drug.  Trayvon wasn't some innocent little boy that happened to run into a big, mean, scary racist, as the media wants you to believe.  St. Skittles was up to no good.



You keep telling that lie, I'll keep busting it.  That "drug" you are talking about doesn't require skittles in any way.  And the part that makes that "drug" a drug is the the cough syrup, which has codeine.  The one part that makes it an actual drug, he didn't have, nor did the toxicology show any in his system.

You can keep telling  your lie.  It's obvious you don't mind being a lying bastard.
2013-07-12 01:31:18 AM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Somebody else take this one.


So, when he was walking slowly in the rain, which caused Zimmerman to call the police and then follow him because he was "suspicious", what was it Martin did wrong?
HBK
2013-07-12 12:12:18 AM
1 votes:

Thunderpipes: 99% of Farkers wanted George to burn for a long time. The fact that most people now seem to realize how weak the case against him is shows why this was pushed with the wrong intentions completely.


To pat myself on the back, I've been saying "Zimmerman may have been stupid, but there's no evidence supporting a conviction" since Spring of last year.
2013-07-11 11:49:54 PM
1 votes:

Phinn: cretinbob: Phinn: How many electrons have been wasted here, arguing that Zimmerman brought the beating on himself by provoking force against himself?

None. You should have learned that in middle school science.

OK, fine.  Time, then.  Time has been wasted, because there is no basis to even argue that Zimmerman provoked the use of force against himself, as "provocation" is defined by Florida law.  Something that some of us have been saying all along.

Can time be wasted, Professor Science?



It seems to me that this entire affair has been a social experiment designed to determine whether a certain sub-group of the population can be provoked into committing acts of civil unrest / violence by falsely portraying the facts of an incident that, were it not for the intentionally inflammatory actions / statements of the media and certain prominent figures (looking at you, Obama) would be unremarkable.

If that is indeed the case, the time devoted to the misrepresentation of said facts will only have been "wasted" if said civil unrest / violence fails to manifest following the pronouncement of a verdict that the sub-group ("educated" not by the facts, but by the media propaganda) finds unappealing.

Otherwise it might be seen as a rousing success.
2013-07-11 11:39:00 PM
1 votes:

Phinn: They are generally people who haven't been conditioned to defer to the government before making any significant decision. Free people, you might say.


Some people like being serfs. They can certainly assume that role for themselves, but they do not have the right to assign it to others.
2013-07-11 11:36:43 PM
1 votes:

PC LOAD LETTER: Giltric: He doesn't need to fabricate anything in order to be able to use deadly force.

In FL maybe. In other states, like NY, he'd be convicted in a heartbeat. No one wants someone with a gun and poor judgement killing kids.



Although a lot of people have no problem whatsoever with victims of potentially-fatal assaults and batteries killing their attackers.

Many even consider that response to be a basic human right.

They are generally people who haven't been conditioned to defer to the government before making any significant decision.  Free people, you might say.
2013-07-11 11:27:02 PM
1 votes:

PC LOAD LETTER: Phinn: Also, Zimmerman was attempting to observe and report and not engage. That's when he was attacked by NO_LIMIT. No one can prove otherwise.

How the fark is leaving your vehicle and following some random person not engaging? Do you really think following people is going to not result in someone misconstruing it and reacting to a threat?



So is hiding, lying in wait, confronting, attacking and viciously beating the person doing the following a proper and acceptable reaction to such a perceived "threat"?

Here's a clue, friend: The 17 y/o athlete Trayvon Martin was never threatened by Zimmerman - he saw that GZ was eying him with suspicion, and he was PISSED OFF that some "creepy-ass cracker" would have the NERVE to dare to view him with scrutiny.

Had the scrappy 17 y/o felt "scared" and "threatened" as the pathetic prosecutors claim, he would have SPLIT and headed home, but Trayvon was no coward, and he decided to teach a creepy-ass cracker a lesson, so he hid out, waited for the right moment, and confronted GZ, planning to play a little game of "knockout".

Difficulty: 1) Zimmerman was not K/O'd with the first (or subsequent) punches, and 2) Zimmerman was armed. Legally.

You plays your games and you takes your chances.

Sometimes you win, and sometimes you lose it all.

The only "threat" that Martin felt from Zimmerman was to his EGO.
2013-07-11 11:26:11 PM
1 votes:
All I've got to sat is the judge is a coont-


Fact
2013-07-11 11:03:58 PM
1 votes:

Facetious_Speciest: You would rather have people sent to prison when their guilt can't be proven?


That already happens more than you think.
2013-07-11 10:45:44 PM
1 votes:

cretinbob: Treygreen13: This judge needs to be disbarred.

For what crime?


In this case it would be more along the lines of ethics violations: nothing illegal per se, but so grossly unprofessional as to disgrace the entire judicial system.
2013-07-11 10:31:16 PM
1 votes:

Sline: Lo and behold, she's allowing manslaughter.


It was always Second degree with a lesser of manslaughter.
O'Mara tried to get the maslaughter part thrown out because that has been proven.
Of course, that's all the state should have gone for to begin with.
2013-07-11 10:13:42 PM
1 votes:

BoazMedic: and you get to learn how to twerk.


Twerk?

*googles*

Huh? I thought that was called "Booty Popping" or something like that. I guess I AM getting old.
2013-07-11 09:40:27 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Miss Ali needs her own show.


Only if InsaneTrollLogic becomes a TV network.

Then her, JVM and NG can be on it 24 hours a day.
2013-07-11 09:40:00 PM
1 votes:
Dumbass Lady, who is black, with a made-up arabic name, spouts shiat. News.
2013-07-11 09:08:49 PM
1 votes:
Miss Ali ain't taking no shiat from the white judicial system.
2013-07-11 08:50:12 PM
1 votes:

Amos Quito: The "Profiling" of one civilian by another is not a crime.

Sorry race-baiter.


Neighborhood Watches tell people to call anything they think something is even a bit suspicious.

A cop told a neighbor of mine, a couple days ago, that that means "anyone you don't recognize, acting in anyway that makes you feel uneasy."
2013-07-11 08:45:23 PM
1 votes:
Crump is such a moron.
2013-07-11 07:56:35 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: So let's say Zimmerman walks, where does he go and what does he do with his life?


Where does he go? I'm thinking somewhere like Idaho, Wyoming, the Dakotas, Montana.

What does he do? Gets a book deal. Does some speaking engagements. Maybe does appearances at gun shows. Becomes a guest on talk shows. Sues whoever he can.

I'm old enough to remember when Bernie Goetz was the poster boy for standing up to criminals. But Goetz never really came across as very stable. Zimmerman has a much higher Q rating. I'm thinking he'll be a hero for gun rights advocates, vigilantes, etc. It might not be the life he imagined for himself but he might as well make lemonade out of lemons.
2013-07-11 06:56:33 PM
1 votes:
I'm thinking a George Zimmerman and Casey Anthony porno could be huge.
2013-07-11 06:30:29 PM
1 votes:

Giltric: PC LOAD LETTER: s2s2s2: Just saw a report of a home invasion stopped because daddy was home, and armed.

Great, that's the right way it should work.

Meanwhile, if you are black, well, good luck:
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/11/stand_your_ground_law_helps_white_de fe ndants_a_lot_more_than_black_ones/

That's the woman who left the scene went to get a firearm and came back to shoot?

That's not stand your ground.

She retreated.


Another Florida case being falsely reported on a racial narrative rather than facts.

Marissa Alexander went over to her boyfriend's house - who she had a restraining order against - to get some of her stuff, thinking he wasn't home. Technically, as she did not live there at the time, she was breaking and entering.

Her boyfriend was home.

There was an argument.

She left, walked to her car, got her gun, and returned.

She then claims she fired a "warning shot" while her boyfriend was standing next to her kids, who were also in the house. Firing warning shots is highly illegal and there is NO provision for them under any state's laws, as a warning shot is recklessly endangering any innocent bystanders who might be around.

She was charged with reckless endangerment of children and threatening with a deadly weapon. She was offered a 3 yr plea bargain, but rolled the dice on a SYG defense and lost. Because Florida has mandatory sentences for any felony involving a firearm, she was sentenced to 20 years.

Another fun fact: the prosecutor responsible for prosecuting Marissa Alexander was none other than Angela Corey.

The reporting on the Marissa Alexander case has been even worse than the Zimmerman case. The media was claiming she was sentenced because she was black, or because SYG doesn't apply to domestic violence cases, neither of which is true. She was sentenced because she got her gun and returned to confront her boyfriend in his own house, and because she endangered her children's lives when she fired a warning shot with them in the room.

If you want a case where SYG actually worked for a legitimate victim of domestic violence, who stabbed her attacker to stop an attack, check out the Arruda case.
2013-07-11 06:26:23 PM
1 votes:
Interesting that the prosecution decided to play part of the Hannity interview, but selectively decided not to include it all.  Here is how it actually ended:

HANNITY: I asked you if you wanted to -- if you could speak to Trayvon Martin's family. I asked you if you could speak to even the American public, there's so many people that have so many opinions that vary so much. You know, if you wanted to look into that camera and tell the American public something about George Zimmerman and about -- this case with Trayvon Martin that has gotten such media attention, what would you want to tell them?

ZIMMERMAN: First, I would like to readdress your question when you asked if I would have done anything differently. When you asked that I thought you were referring to if I would not have talked to the police, if I would have maybe have gotten an attorney, if I wouldn't have taken the CVSA and that I stand by, I would not have done anything differently.

But I do wish that there was something, anything I could have done that wouldn't have put me in the position where I had to take his life. And I do want to tell everyone, my wife, my family, my parents, my grandmother, the Martins, the city of Stanford, and America that I am sorry that this happened.

I hate to think that because of this incident, because of my actions it's polarized and divided America and I'm truly sorry.


Rest here:  http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2012/07/18/exclusive-george-zim m erman-breaks-silence-hannity?page=1
2013-07-11 06:04:07 PM
1 votes:

Cletus C.: Wow. Any reports on kids "accidentally" killing each other with daddy's gun. I hear that happens far more often than the home invasion thingy.


You pretty much heard wrong.

In 2010, only 606 people of all ages were killed accidentally.

http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-deaths-and-injuries-statistics/#footnote _1 7_5975

Meanwhile, roughly 1,000,000 'home invasions' (burglary where at least one resident was present) occurred in the same year with 266,000 of those residents becoming a victim of a violent crime like assault or rape.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/vdhb.txt.
2013-07-11 05:56:47 PM
1 votes:

PC LOAD LETTER: IRQ12: PC LOAD LETTER: So, this is what's in the NY Self Defense Statue:

Such conduct is necessary as an emergency measure to avoid an imminent public or private injury which is about to occur by reason of a situation occasioned or developed through no fault of the actor

See that bold part? That's what's missing in FL. That's why folks like me don't get why GZ gets to walk and why this case was so hard to prosecute. Following a person after they move away from you? With corroborating evidence from the person he was on the phone with showing he considered him a threat? Yeah, that's called occasioning and developing the situation. The NY Statue is designed to protect victims who defend themselves. Not folks who voluntarily put themselves in danger and then defend themselves.

This is the exact problem.

I don't know that the prosecution really proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman was even following him.  And if they did I don't think walking behind someone is developing a situation where and assault occurs.

Following me in a car in a slow roll and then getting out and following me on foot would mean that I may be in danger and need to consider what to do next about that danger. It's not hard to see that Z's actions led to TM deciding to take action. It may not have been the right action, but it was certainly a predictable action. GZ thought he was a criminal. Why the hell get out of the car and place yourself in danger. The NY statue specifically addresses this in the correct way. If you put yourself in danger and then the danger becomes real, you do not have the right to lethal force. This is correct because it limits self defense to actual victims. There's a reason why neighborhood watches are told to keep in their vehicles and let the cops do the real work. This is that reason. You are free to follow someone, but reactions to that are not something you can predict.


See, in sane places that haven't been infected with Statism, the police derive their authority to act from them that hired them.

This is the way it has to be, because no one can delegate authority to another that you do not first have yourself.

Plus, a legislated rule that says the little people, when threatened, are legally obligated to: (1) cower, (2) piss their pants (3) CALL DADDY and (4) only lift a finger to defend yourself from lethal aggression if you've done everything to spare the aggressor from getting hurt just has an overly paternalistic feel to it.

Maybe these rules help explain New York City's general ethos as an oversized above-ground sewer.
2013-07-11 05:35:53 PM
1 votes:

s2s2s2: Just saw a report of a home invasion stopped because daddy was home, and armed.


Great, that's the right way it should work.

Meanwhile, if you are black, well, good luck:
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/11/stand_your_ground_law_helps_white_de fe ndants_a_lot_more_than_black_ones/
2013-07-11 05:35:31 PM
1 votes:

JuggleGeek: If Zimmerman never got close to Martin, there wouldn't have been a fistfight.


And if Lincoln hadn't gone to that theater he wouldn't have a canoe for a head!
2013-07-11 05:12:21 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: This whole affair has shown me that the "good guys" are just as sleazy as any defense attorney.


To be fair this case was forced upon them by outside forces because of the politics of race. I'm quite sure that they know that they were given a huge pile of shiat case and that the best that they were going to do is make a shiat sandwich. All they can do is try and use fancy bread, Dijon mustard, a lot of veggies and some salt and pepper to try and disguise it.

But at the end of the day they are still stuck with a shiat sandwich to feed the jury. Unless those jurors like reenacting 2 girls, 1 cup at home it's not looking too good for the prosecution. I kinda feel sorry for them for getting stuck with this.

Now the judge on the other hand is a bad person and she should feel bad for how she's acted in this case. There's being "Tough on crime" and then there's being an overzealous advocate for the prosecution. She almost acted like a member of the prosecution team at times.
2013-07-11 04:53:27 PM
1 votes:

tripleseven: A shiatnado?


A tropical shiatpression, at least.
2013-07-11 04:52:52 PM
1 votes:

Treygreen13: Carth: Treygreen13: BarkingUnicorn: I didn't read the whole thread, but it looks like the mods had a pretty easy day for a change.

I imagine everyone who has deserved a ban has gotten one.

yea but assuming they were 48 hour bans tomorrow could be hilarious.

I think tomorrow will be hilarious regardless. The verdict thread should be a full on shiatstorm. A shiat typhoon. A shiat squall.


A shiatnado?
2013-07-11 04:50:49 PM
1 votes:

Southern100: Sadly, I agree. I don't plan on going ANYWHERE after jury deliberations start, just on the chance a verdict is delivered while I'm not at home. And I'm being 100% serious here, no farking around. I do not want to be caught in the middle of something, should "something" start. Not saying it would or will, just being cautious.


I didn't mean out in the meat world. I meant in the Fark thread. Either way there are going to be very angry racists, gloating happy racists, and 10,000 idiots making up the entire spectrum in-between. I'm thinking 1500 posts easy.

I mean, there could be real world consequences. Maybe riots. But I won't assume that.
2013-07-11 04:39:51 PM
1 votes:
Reprinted for BDLR's benefit --

Saint Trayvon of the Holy Hoodie had gone out that evening to deliver food to the hungry, make shoes for the shoeless, read to the blind, and find homes for lost puppies. He had been working his fingers to the bone ladling soup to the homeless and dispossessed masses as a result of the failed policies of the Bush administration, which is why St. Trayvon HH had injuries to his knuckle.

St. Trayvon had been overcome with hunger that evening, after spending 27 straight hours building houses for orphans, such that His Hoodieness had reached a point of exhaustion. A devoted follower had insisted that HH take sustenance, but St. Trayvon refused, since anything he might eat would only deprive a rescued kitten of a meal. But the follower surreptitiously put a bag of Skittles and a fruit drink into the sacred hoodie, so that His Hoodieness might not pass out due to low blood sugar.

As St. Trayvon was returning home to his father's girlfriend's apartment, the woes and tribulations of the world momentarily overcame Him, and he became a bit wobbly in the knees. He did not know that, at that moment, that a demon in human form, filled with hate and rage and not very nice at all, was watching HH from the shadows.

George the Demon bore false witness, calling the police to accuse the saintly Trayvon of "wandering around" and "being on drugs or something," either not knowing or not caring that St. Trayvon was near exhaustion from his works of charity. George the Demon then pursued St. Trayvon, who took flight, not to save Himself, but to selflessly lure George away from some homes nearby where infants were being nursed and the elderly were watching their favorite prime time TV shows, since St. Trayvon didn't want them to be disturbed.

When St. Trayvon HH could run no farther, he paused near a humble, spindly tree, which reminded HH of human frailty. St. Trayvon prevailed upon the last remnants of humanity buried deep within George, and asked "Why are you following me?," hoping against hope that the interrogatory would awaken a spark within the lost man's soul, that he might reflect upon his evilness. But the demon within George was a trickster, and he used George's mouth to answer a question with a question: What are you doing here?

St. Trayvon opened his mouth to utter a few gentle words, but owing to his near-exhaustion, he paused but a moment. And in that moment, George lashed out at His Hoodieness, called him all sorts of horrible racist names, then clasped St. Trayvon violently by the throat, and began to beat HH to his death. But St. Trayvon would not fall. His goodness kept him upright, even as the demon George himself began to exhaust himself with the blows he rained down upon His Hoodieness. George then slipped upon the dew, and struck his head on the sidewalk, receiving the very evil that he was trying to inflict.

Enraged, George realized he could not defeat St. Trayvon with his bare hands, as all his attempts to batter the gentle martyr resulted in the blows landing only upon himself. So, in his desperation, George drew his unholy weapon, and aimed it directly at St. Trayvon.

And in that final moment, St. Trayvon forgave George, although he didn't really deserve it.

fin
2013-07-11 04:30:40 PM
1 votes:

Dented Ford: ztrom: Does anyone know how much longer the State has for their rebuttal?

Defense gets three hours tomorrow followed by a final hour of prosecution rebuttal.  I think.


Three hours? Why not just go with:

"Everything that guy just said is bullshiat."
2013-07-11 04:23:55 PM
1 votes:

ObeliskToucher: "You are not to text"

Why not?  Since there's evidently no way to prove that a juror sent the text...


www.automizeit.com
2013-07-11 04:21:07 PM
1 votes:
How DROxINxTHExWIND sees the night in question:

It was an unremarkable night as Trayvon set out for home after his purchase at the corner store. He had picked up a bag of Skittles, a favorite treat among children, and an Arizona drink of a wonderful and wholesome fruit flavor. These snacks, endeared by all children, were the simple, yet sinister tools that would ultimately end with him being cut down in cold blood in the dark of the night.

With a Bible in one hand, and his treats in another, he walked the streets, fearful, as any small child would be on the streets after dark, of what dangers lurk; and lurk they did. Unbeknownst to this poor innocent child was a killer was prowling the neighborhoods. Deep in the beast, that was George Zimmerman, was a lust for killing, and tonight it would be sated. Mr. Zimmerman must kill! Kill! Kill! It was an electric pulse in his brain, each beat of his heart pushing him ever onward in his spiritual need to end a life. It would be the greatest hunt with the greatest prey: Man!

In his sinister automobile, combing the streets for a victim, Mr. Zimmerman put his car into Stalk Mode. It crept on it's hind tires, peering with it's evil headlights around corners till the victim was found. One Trayvon Martin. Skulking ever so quietly, the car quietly sneaking, one tire in front of the other across the back alleys and sidewalks, with his trusty sidearm just itching for action, he pursued the prey like a lion would a gazelle fawn fumbling it's way through the city jungle.

Ever closer the car crept towards it's victim with the primeval predator behind the wheel guiding it's every skulking, pursuing and armed move. Trayvon, having seen this from the corner of his eye, clutched his Bible tighter, his faith in God empowering to walk through this veritable Valley Of Death. In his mind, the possibilities of his future rang clear, but a choice would need to be made: Work in the name of the Lord, or cure Cancer. Sadly, we will never know his ultimate choice, because in that cold, rainy Florida night, he was struck down with nary a whimper by this White-Minority.

You've seen this man! His head shaved in similar style to many of the modern Neo-Fascists of our time, true monsters that roam free among us. He lunged viciously at the child and was caught by a miracle punch guided by our Lord and Savior to connect with Mr. Zimmerman's nose. In a fit of rage that his victim would dare defend itself, he drew his sidearm, and in point blank range, with his hot, humid, fetid breath flowing into the face of this defenseless child, pulled the trigger, ending his life.

Mr. Zimmerman felt the immediate rush coursing through his veins, his soul giving a primordial squeal of joy as the childs eyes glossed over, bereft of light and life. He had carried out his dark Lord's will. He had spent months, possibly years building up to this point with his Martial Art and Handgun training which started shortly after the Stand Your Ground laws were enacted. He knew he would only get one chance at invoking this law while actively committing murder. It was his one true goal, the culmination of his life, and the true purpose he was put on this Earth: To end the life of this child; this poor, defenseless, innocent, virgin child...
2013-07-11 04:14:20 PM
1 votes:

TheSup3rN0va: Southern100: WillofJ2: WHY IS HE YELLING

I dunno.. I've always asked myself that same question when I happen to stumble across Al Sharpton on MSNBC.. WHY is he always yelling? Does he think it makes people take him more seriously? Just makes me want to change the channel, regardless of whatever he's talking about.

I did the same thing with BLDR, he's muted. I couldn't take the yelling.

To play the devil's advocate, he's using the dynamics of sound as theatrics, to give the element of drama.


And that's my major problem with all of this.  Court shouldn't have any "theatrics". It should be Just the facts ma'am, nothing but the facts. Not all this outright lying, supposition and conjecture.
2013-07-11 03:50:00 PM
1 votes:

s2s2s2: WillofJ2: He stumbled and fell near that tree, the tree attacked him and he shot trayvon by mistake, trayvon was just trying to help him up

The tree thought he was a kite. It was just hungry.



Hungry for some of dat ass

3.bp.blogspot.com
2013-07-11 03:49:23 PM
1 votes:

mayIFark: TheSup3rN0va: fredklein: Facetious_Speciest: fredklein

The fact that he was racist and suspicious of Trayvon for no real reason.

The only documented racism between the participants lies with Martin.

Being suspicious of a black youth, simply because he is a black youth, IS racism.

I know you're an idiot, but I'll play.

Z was suspicious of the deceased because:
1) he was walking slowly in the rain
2) he was looking into houses
3) Z did not recognize Martin as a resident of the neighborhood
4) there had been a rash of recent burglaries in the neighborhood
5) the suspected burglars were black male teens

Z did not think, Oh crap, a "Certain Person", clearly he's up to no good. People of any and all races can look shady. I saw a white guy at lunch I wouldn't go within ten feet of.

Regarding 1) and 2), how do we know this again? Disregarding what GZ says?


Well it took him 30 minutes to leave the store and get to the spot where he was shot.   Something tells me he was doing something other than walking straight home.
2013-07-11 03:34:23 PM
1 votes:
fredklein

Being suspicious of a black youth, simply because he is a black youth, IS racism.

The supposition that Zimmerman must have been suspicious of Martin because he was black is just that...a supposition.
2013-07-11 03:33:45 PM
1 votes:

RaiderFanMikeP: if TM was able to bash in GZ skull against the cement and killed him    would this trial being going on?


Well, not THIS trial.
2013-07-11 03:31:56 PM
1 votes:

fredklein: Being suspicious of a black youth, simply because he is a black youth, IS racism.



Racism is not a crime.
2013-07-11 03:30:06 PM
1 votes:
Why wasn't the 17 year old boys cardio and aggression training at football practice not included?

Why wasn't his history of school fights and suspensions?
2013-07-11 03:29:52 PM
1 votes:
www.dispatch.com

"I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here!"
2013-07-11 03:25:16 PM
1 votes:
So now we have ... Trayvon Martin was afraid of George Zimmerman because it was armed pursuit, but the gun is so small that how did Trayvon Martin know it was there while he was on top of George Zimmreman.

Wowza.
2013-07-11 03:22:10 PM
1 votes:

MFAWG: BraveNewCheneyWorld: MFAWG: Phinn: JustGetItRight: He was also the target of an intentional smear by at least one worldwide news organization and had his guilt implied by none other than the POTUS.

Don't forget the squad of professional protest coordinators employed by the US Department of Justice who were sent by Obama and Holder to Sanford to re-open a closed, non-charged case, get the police chief fired, a new prosecutor appointed and murder charges filed.

I've been watching Fox News set this up for a couple of days. It's pretty damn funny, in a really sad way.

Red meat for the mouthbreathers.

statement ..(something bad about Obama) - response..(insult anyone who's following the story)

Have you read the stories?

'Some people are saying the DOJ funded the protests'.

That's it. More Beckhead BS.


Judicial Watch - complete with documents

That's a bit more than your "some people are saying" story.
2013-07-11 03:18:43 PM
1 votes:
fredklein

The fact that he was racist and suspicious of Trayvon for no real reason.

The only documented racism between the participants lies with Martin.
2013-07-11 03:15:23 PM
1 votes:

MFAWG: Phinn: JustGetItRight: He was also the target of an intentional smear by at least one worldwide news organization and had his guilt implied by none other than the POTUS.

Don't forget the squad of professional protest coordinators employed by the US Department of Justice who were sent by Obama and Holder to Sanford to re-open a closed, non-charged case, get the police chief fired, a new prosecutor appointed and murder charges filed.

I've been watching Fox News set this up for a couple of days. It's pretty damn funny, in a really sad way.

Red meat for the mouthbreathers.


statement ..(something bad about Obama) - response..(insult anyone who's following the story)
2013-07-11 03:09:45 PM
1 votes:

fredklein: Um, no. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is not the same as "possible".



Self-defense must be DISPROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt.

That means, if you have a reason (based on evidence) to believe that the defendant acted in self-defense, he may not be convicted.

When you, the prosecutor, and all of the other anti-Zimmerman Obama-puppets keeps saying "We don't know what happened," that's equivalent to admitting that the State has not and cannot meet its burden.

I'll say it again, so it will sink in a little more -- Self-defense must be DISPROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt.

Furthermore, in a circumstantial evidence case, the State's guilty hypothesis must be the ONLY one that can be reasonably drawn.

If a reasonable hypothesis still exists, whereby the defendant acted in self-defense, then that's it -- Game Over.  He walks.
2013-07-11 03:07:28 PM
1 votes:

fredklein: of course, he meant it about Zimmerman. But it should apply to Trayvon, too, right?


Do you think Zimmerman's injuries were sufficient to warrant a reasonable fear?

The law applies to everyone, and it can shift weight in the course of a struggle. That being the case, do you think Martin's injuries(before the shot) were sufficient to warrant the same fear?
2013-07-11 03:02:22 PM
1 votes:
Trayvon Martin kept his nails very short:

www.federalobserver.com
2013-07-11 03:01:47 PM
1 votes:

I Browse: The guy will be fine.


He killed someone.

The evidence has shown he did so legally, but he still took a human life.

He was also the target of an intentional smear by at least one worldwide news organization and had his guilt implied by none other than the POTUS.

His face is now known worldwide and hundreds have threatened to take his life on social media sites.

Being fine is probably going to be somewhat difficult to achieve.
2013-07-11 03:01:43 PM
1 votes:
I'm going to watch Russian car crash videos for a while, they make more sense than the prosecutors statements.
2013-07-11 02:52:12 PM
1 votes:

Oh_Enough_Already: 9,241 black teens killed since Trayvon . . . .

0 farks given by any of you . . . .


I don't understand. Why aren't you at their funerals right now? I mean, since you care. Right? Shouldn't you be jetting around the country weeping on caskets?
2013-07-11 02:35:38 PM
1 votes:
Future quote: "This prosecution team of white men purposely threw the case to allow their fellow klan members to hunt more black teenagers!"
2013-07-11 02:35:05 PM
1 votes:

parasol: I have a question and would, if possible, like an answer from someone who knows and with a minimum of snark...

If someone (i know, i know GZ will never be found guilty of anything because blah, blah) is found guilty of homicide/manslaughter (i know, I know, GZ never committed either because blah,blah) are they ever allowed to legally have a CCW permit again?

Just curious what the law is (I know, I know, GZ will never not have a legal permit because, blah, blah)

Tx


your going to request no snark, then snark the fark out of the question?
2013-07-11 02:32:47 PM
1 votes:

fredklein: Abuse Liability: fredklein: Treygreen13: [media-2.web.britannica.com image 363x450]
Harry Houdini just got punched once and died of internal bleeding.

Actually, he died of peritonitis, secondary to a ruptured appendix.

When people can't even get known facts about famous figures correct, what hope is there when they need to actually THINK and use LOGIC to put together what happened in a case like this??

keep responding people that aren't smashing your points to bits.  It makes it appear as though you have some form of cohesive argument.

/oh wait.

Case in point.

If people can't even use proper grammar or capitalization, what hope is there when they need to actually THINK and use LOGIC to put together what happened in a case like this??


mobile phones are a biatch. you still haven't made a point
2013-07-11 02:31:35 PM
1 votes:
Wow this is a pathetic closing argument.
2013-07-11 02:20:59 PM
1 votes:
i.imgur.com
2013-07-11 02:19:45 PM
1 votes:

Vermithrax Perjorative: BDLR is putting on a surprisingly weak and borderline hysterical closing. I am not sure what his strategy is. He is outright lying to the jury about facts that are in evidence.


i.imgur.comclick to embiggen
2013-07-11 02:18:18 PM
1 votes:
"Who followed who?"

Still waiting on that legal citation showing where following someone is a crime, Poindexter.
2013-07-11 02:13:24 PM
1 votes:

ztrom: Hahaha, can I give you a ride.

Someone's never, ever been in a threatening situation in their entire life.


He's arguing Zimmerman shouldn't have approached, followed, or observed Trayvon, but should have confronted him and spoke to him.

His head is buffed well from being up his ass so much.
2013-07-11 02:10:33 PM
1 votes:
Does this guy know what happens when you try to make women think they dont know whats going on.  Good luck with that dude
2013-07-11 01:58:17 PM
1 votes:

Giltric: Carth: Why the hell would you give CPR to someone who was just beating you?

Could complicate the legal process especially if you were defending yourself from his assault.

But you shot him...why would you give him CPR?

Are you claiming you made a mistake by shooting him?


Because, just perhaps, he realized the kid was no longer a threat and was doing the right thing?
2013-07-11 01:53:11 PM
1 votes:
Was it watermelon, tea, or drink!?  Get your facts straight!
2013-07-11 01:48:47 PM
1 votes:
Zims is guilty of being an irresponsible gun owner.  The charges should reflect this.
2013-07-11 01:35:54 PM
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: halB: Hobodeluxe: WiredMann: whizbangthedirtfarmer: TrixieDelite: Facetious_Speciest: whizbangthedirtfarmer


2) He was the aggressor?  Then how did Zimmerman get out of the truck?  Or did Martin pull him out of the truck?  The moment Zimmerman decided to follow the vigilante shtick, he was the aggressor at that moment.

Since when is observing someone an act of aggression?  Come on, do you really now have a better argument than that?

when you bring a loaded weapon with you and get in close proximity with them. when you refuse to identify yourself and your intentions. when you ignore all your training and advice. when you refuse to meet with the police at your vehicle or the mailboxes. when within that close proximity you reach for your pocket.


What would be the use of an unloaded weapon?

I've never needed one (loaded or unloaded)  to go grocery shopping.  What is this mindset of someone who is afraid to go outside without one? Do they have a warped sense of constant peril in their lives? Or are they looking for trouble? This guy has an authority complex driven by insecurity.


I've taken a gun to go grocery shopping.  I didn't feel like I was in danger, I simply wanted to get used to carrying a gun, as is my right as a CCW holder.  Had something happened where I actually needed it, I'd be very pleased I wore it.
2013-07-11 01:34:03 PM
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: I've never needed one (loaded or unloaded)  to go grocery shopping.  What is this mindset of someone who is afraid to go outside without one? Do they have a warped sense of constant peril in their lives? Or are they looking for trouble? This guy has an authority complex driven by insecurity.


Yeah, and given the onslaught of concealed carry laws over the last 28 years:

upload.wikimedia.org

The streets should be just *RUNNING* with blood.

But they ain't.  Crime is in fact *DOWN*, to it's lowest point since the early 1960's.  Correlation is, of course, not causation, but *NEGATIVE* correlation does disprove causation.

How do you square your characterization of people who lawfully carry a gun for protection with these facts?
2013-07-11 01:27:51 PM
1 votes:

halB: Hobodeluxe: WiredMann: whizbangthedirtfarmer: TrixieDelite: Facetious_Speciest: whizbangthedirtfarmer


2) He was the aggressor?  Then how did Zimmerman get out of the truck?  Or did Martin pull him out of the truck?  The moment Zimmerman decided to follow the vigilante shtick, he was the aggressor at that moment.

Since when is observing someone an act of aggression?  Come on, do you really now have a better argument than that?

when you bring a loaded weapon with you and get in close proximity with them. when you refuse to identify yourself and your intentions. when you ignore all your training and advice. when you refuse to meet with the police at your vehicle or the mailboxes. when within that close proximity you reach for your pocket.


What would be the use of an unloaded weapon?


I've never needed one (loaded or unloaded)  to go grocery shopping.  What is this mindset of someone who is afraid to go outside without one? Do they have a warped sense of constant peril in their lives? Or are they looking for trouble? This guy has an authority complex driven by insecurity.
2013-07-11 01:20:52 PM
1 votes:

Facetious_Speciest: Hobodeluxe

Zimmerman and his decisions put them both in that place.

Martin and his decisions put them both in that place.

And more to the point, the allegation is that Martin attacked Zimmerman. That's what an "aggressor" is, someone who attacks first.


but that's if you only take the word of a known liar who's ass is on the line and who has a thorough knowledge of self defense law.
for all we know Zimmerman tackled Trayvon who then got on top and punched him in the nose.
2013-07-11 01:16:50 PM
1 votes:

Thunderpipes: nekom: Thunderpipes: 3rd degree out is good, but that would be even more bizarre than the jury instruction issue.

Still easily convicted based on what the prosecution can tell the jury about following someone being an illegal act.

That's just in the jury instruction.  I don't see any reason why the defense won't be able to mention that several times in closing.

They can, but the point is, the judge should have taken that out right away. Now the prosecution can say it is illegal, and 5 mothers can evaluate whatever they want, based on that. The entire conviction of manslaughter depends on George doing something illegal before the shooting. Now the prosecution has an in, where they should not. It is so blatant.


I am literally in shock at what has happened today.  In the end he will win the appeal but he is screwed now.  This is the first day I have actually felt like he is going to be convicted.  GZ is like the Patriots circa 2007, perfect record right until the last two minutes of the final game
2013-07-11 01:15:11 PM
1 votes:

DROxINxTHExWIND: Popcorn Johnny: DROxINxTHExWIND: This is about African-American's distrust of the American legal system.

This is about ignorant people not taking the time to evaluate the facts of the case based on the evidence. Most African-Americans declared Zimmerman guilty of murder from the moment they heard that there had been a shooting, based solely on the skin color of the two parties. Even a year later, most African-Americans I've seen comment on the case, whether it be on Facebook, Twitter, or even those being interviewed on TV, are still using information proven to be false many months ago. Zimmerman was ordered by police to stay in his car, Zimmerman chased down and started the confrontation, Zimmerman was on top of Trayvon, Zimmerman didn't have any injuries, there were no witnesses that saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman. I could go on all day, but you get the point I'm making.

Perhaps if people actually took the time to learn the facts of the case, instead of coming to a conclusion based on the race of the victim, we wouldn't have people chomping at the bit to start rioting.


So, are the white people who have reviewed the facts of the case and determined that Zimmerman should be found guilty also motivted by race or is it just all of the black people? Is it possible, in your opinion, that there are black people who simply diagree with you interpretation of the evidence or are we all spoiling for a race war?


I think anyone of any race who has looked at this and thinks the prosecution had established murder two is ignorant of the law, the facts, or both.
2013-07-11 01:15:03 PM
1 votes:

whizbangthedirtfarmer: TrixieDelite: Facetious_Speciest: whizbangthedirtfarmer


2) He was the aggressor?  Then how did Zimmerman get out of the truck?  Or did Martin pull him out of the truck?  The moment Zimmerman decided to follow the vigilante shtick, he was the aggressor at that moment.


Since when is observing someone an act of aggression?  Come on, do you really now have a better argument than that?
2013-07-11 01:13:58 PM
1 votes:

Treygreen13: whizbangthedirtfarmer: Then how did Zimmerman get out of the truck?

Good lord I've gotten out of my car three times today! I've been an aggressor!


I'll bet there's a good chance you walked behind someone just after you did.  You're lucky, because they had every right to kill you.
2013-07-11 01:12:30 PM
1 votes:

whizbangthedirtfarmer: Then how did Zimmerman get out of the truck?


Good lord I've gotten out of my car three times today! I've been an aggressor!
2013-07-11 01:06:36 PM
1 votes:

Facetious_Speciest: whizbangthedirtfarmer

Yep, but this is a GUN RIGHTS! case now, and no one is willing to admit that a thirtysomething year old guy has to act with better common sense.

It's not a GUN RIGHTS! case, though, it's a self-defence case.

In a throwdown between a thirtysomething guy and a young teen, who is supposed to be the mature one who says: "hey, I'll let the cops handle this"?

Dude..."in a throwdown." He's supposed to just let himself be beaten until the cops show up because he's older and letting yourself be beaten is "mature?" I simply disagree.


Hey, maybe the "adult" should have worked to avoid the throwdown in the first place, which was my point all along.  Unless, of course, you're going to argue that he was in his truck, made the call, and was then accosted by TM almost immediately.  In reality, the "adult" in the situation made a series of immature errors that led to his beating and then, ultimately, someone else's death.
2013-07-11 01:05:39 PM
1 votes:

Boojum2k: Mi-5: can equate rape with this situation.

No, asshole, it's that you cannot justify committing a crime against someone (Trayvon attempting to mutilate or murder Zimmerman) by that persons lawful actions (following, observing, and reporting to police). It is the exact same principle of law that says a short skirt is not an excuse for rape.

Trayvon did not have a special right to beatdown any "crazy-ass cracker" that was looking at him. Period.

Please hold your head under water until the trial is over.


And please, kindly,  shove a tampon up your sandy vagina and light it on fire.

  Posting about rape and this situation is the height of stupidity.  Stay on topic and try to logically discuss what we know and don't know and try to divest your emotions out of this case.

1.  I never said TM had a special right to beatdown anyone.
2.  I don't know who started the fight, beyond obvious accused self-serving statements. NO ONE knows who started the fight, but plenty of people are jumping to conclusions
3.  The key to me is who was the genesis of this problem, and where does fault lie.
4.  You are being silly with your emotional tie-in with this case.
5.  At the end of the day, I think GZ will get hooked up with a conviction, and the sentence will likely be relatively light.
6.  If that happens, I know you and a whole lot of people will lose their minds.
2013-07-11 01:05:25 PM
1 votes:

legion_of_doo: Hobodeluxe: lantawa: frepnog: The lesson here is this - do not physically attack someone.  That someone might have a gun and might end your goddamned life.

WINNAR, WINNAR..........CHICKEN DINNAR!

so in your opinion self defense is not a justifiable defense?
if someone follows you into a dark alley and approaches you , then when asked what their problem is and they respond by reaching for their pocket then you shouldn't defend yourself by attempting to disrupt them and disarm them? You deny Trayvon the right that Zimmerman is using as his defense.

we don't have Trayvon's testimony. even parts of his history weren't admissible, as I recall. so we don't know.

somehow, this proves GZ is guilty?


What would be your reasonable thought if someone of a different race did that to you? Watched you from their vehicle. You approached the vehicle and tried to talk to the person and they rolled up their window. Then they follow you in the vehicle. You run a short distance and go around the building. Unknown to you they get out of the vehicle and pursue ( I believe he ran after him you can hear it on the call) you think you lost them or they didn't follow so you relax and continue to walk ,while talking on the phone and then all of sudden this person is standing behind you ,close and when you ask them what their problem is they reach for their pocket. Zimmerman is lucky Trayvon didn't have a gun. All he had was his fists.
2013-07-11 01:03:41 PM
1 votes:
YES!! No 3rd Degree murder via Child Abuse.
2013-07-11 01:01:20 PM
1 votes:
Imagine if the races were reversed, and the judge was an old White guy? Can you imagine the outrage from the President on down? Holder himself would be in the courtroom with his goon squad. Judge would be arrested.

Any rational person is upset right now how screwed up this case is, and the outright miscarriage of justice going on, on national TV.
2013-07-11 01:00:46 PM
1 votes:

Government Fromage: Headso: Frank N Stein: Can anyone explain why this woman is a judge? She's absolutely terrible and should probably be disbarred

Under normal circumstances people like the fact that she is tough on crime.

I wonder how many people she's put away unfairly. Watching this trial really makes you think.


I'm unable to stream the trial at work, but I heard enough live coverage on my way to work that I almost rear-ended the car in front of me. When the prosecution was arguing that Murder 3 should be considered because the killing of TM was "child abuse," I was as pissed as West was. And then for DN to squelch West the way she did--and the way she has--is unbelievable.

As another Farker said, I might riot due to how badly DN has handled this case. Christ, Chamberlain Haller could have served up some fair justice with a blind old lady, dirty screen and a side of 5-minute grits.
2013-07-11 01:00:38 PM
1 votes:
This case is just bizarre. All the evidence points to self-defense and now new bogus charges are being railroaded by an obviously biased judge. This is unbelievable.
2013-07-11 12:55:46 PM
1 votes:

chapman: Cletus C.: Martin wasn't doing anything wrong.

Except for being under the influence of drugs and acting suspicious in an area with a problem with break ins.

Zimmerman is now the pot usage enforcement guy. And acting suspicious? Only by Deputy Zimmerman's estimation.

Zimmerman followed him.

Which is legal and perfectly within his rights
And creeps people out, rightfully. Puts them on guard. Instigates a reaction. Be ready to shoot them, if you're going to follow people at night.

Zimmerman had a gun.

Which is legal and perfectly within his rights
But he's a bad gun owner. It gave him a power trip. He shot an unarmed guy after initiating a confrontation.

Martin did not.

Martin confronted and then beat the everloving crap out of someone who wasn't doing anything illegal.
Martin was protecting himself from whatever evil intentions the creep who was following him had. Zimmerman earned that beatdown.

Zimmerman shot him dead with that gun.
2013-07-11 12:52:44 PM
1 votes:

zeroman987: Treygreen13: The My Little Pony Killer: If you were to follow me around my neighborhood, you bet your ass I would give you fair warning, and then I would come back with pepperspray.

You would not be the victim when I do get around to spraying you, btw.

Actually, I would. But don't let that stop you from trying to pepper spray someone for following you and see how it goes.

ChaosStar: To be fair, it wouldn't be assault on Mars, as Mars has no established governmental laws.
It would just be you attacking a dude, on Mars.

I just assume that Russian law applies on Mars. Seems reasonable.

If anyone pepper sprayed me they would be the defendant in a civil suit and I would press charges. Using pepper spray (except in self defense) is a civil battery and criminal assault.


And you'd likely lose, because, in reality land, being followed by a stranger is a credible threat.
2013-07-11 12:52:33 PM
1 votes:

Cletus C.: Boojum2k: Cletus C.: Martin wasn't doing anything wrong.

Assault and battery is wrong by most rational people's definitions. It is wrong to beatdown someone for looking at you. Rest of your argument falls apart with that simple fact, backed by all the available evidence.

Uh, looking at you? Following you in the night.
Assault and battery? More like dealing with an obvious threat.


Nope. The law does not allow that. Common sense doesn't even allow it. Trayvon had three legal options
1) Go home, or elsewhere. Result - no confrontation
2) Ask Zimmerman what he was doing, without then punching him in the face and pounding his head into the ground. result - Zimmerman explains there's been trouble in the neighborhood, please watch out for suspicious people, no confrontation
3) Call the cops.- cops explain they are on the phone with neighborhood watch, no confrontation

Once again for the slow-witted: There is no right to beatdown people for looking at you.
2013-07-11 12:50:45 PM
1 votes:

tripleseven: Boojum2k: Cletus C.: Martin wasn't doing anything wrong.

Assault and battery is wrong by most rational people's definitions. It is wrong to beatdown someone for looking at you. Rest of your argument falls apart with that simple fact, backed by all the available evidence.

Looking at you, and deliberately following you in a vehicle and on foot as to cause alarm are two entirely different things, but keep pretending they are not.

I'm not a lawyer or cop or anything, but sounds like a good case of menacing on GZ's part.


And this is why you are not a lawyer or a cop.
2013-07-11 12:50:43 PM
1 votes:

Facetious_Speciest: whizbangthedirtfarmer

For me, the measure of manliness would be not confronting/following someone in the first place.

So both participants failed. Zimmerman followed, Martin confronted. Both seem to be derps hopped up on idiocy, IMO.


Yep, but this is a GUN RIGHTS! case now, and no one is willing to admit that a thirtysomething year old guy has to act with better common sense.  In a throwdown between a thirtysomething guy and a young teen, who is supposed to be the mature one who says: "hey, I'll let the cops handle this"?
2013-07-11 12:49:03 PM
1 votes:

Boojum2k: Cletus C.: Martin wasn't doing anything wrong.

Assault and battery is wrong by most rational people's definitions. It is wrong to beatdown someone for looking at you. Rest of your argument falls apart with that simple fact, backed by all the available evidence.


Looking at you, and deliberately following you in a vehicle and on foot as to cause alarm are two entirely different things, but keep pretending they are not.

I'm not a lawyer or cop or anything, but sounds like a good case of menacing on GZ's part.
2013-07-11 12:45:51 PM
1 votes:

Abuse Liability: Cletus C.: Popcorn Johnny: DROxINxTHExWIND: This is about African-American's distrust of the American legal system.

This is about ignorant people not taking the time to evaluate the facts of the case based on the evidence. Most African-Americans declared Zimmerman guilty of murder from the moment they heard that there had been a shooting, based solely on the skin color of the two parties. Even a year later, most African-Americans I've seen comment on the case, whether it be on Facebook, Twitter, or even those being interviewed on TV, are still using information proven to be false many months ago. Zimmerman was ordered by police to stay in his car, Zimmerman chased down and started the confrontation, Zimmerman was on top of Trayvon, Zimmerman didn't have any injuries, there were no witnesses that saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman. I could go on all day, but you get the point I'm making.

Perhaps if people actually took the time to learn the facts of the case, instead of coming to a conclusion based on the race of the victim, we wouldn't have people chomping at the bit to start rioting.

These basic facts remain.

Martin wasn't doing anything wrong.
Zimmerman followed him.
Zimmerman had a gun.
Martin did not.
Zimmerman shot him dead with that gun.

People can go ahead and be pissed if Zimmerman walks.

I pretend Zimmerman wasn't assaulted because mitigating circumstances are stupid.


I pretend Zimmerman wasn't being creepy, because it hurts my narrative.
2013-07-11 12:45:46 PM
1 votes:

TheDumbBlonde: Hobodeluxe: Thunderpipes: 99% of Farkers wanted George to burn for a long time. The fact that most people now seem to realize how weak the case against him is shows why this was pushed with the wrong intentions completely.

100% of thunderpipes' statistics come from his ass

We seem to moving toward the Personal Attack area, which invariably leads to the dreaded Thread Riot.


I am used to it. Anyone with a brain remembers the early threads here. To suggest George may be innocent was to invite the wrath of Fark. Now people seem to realize how stupid the case against him really is. Knee jerk reactions from the left made it this way. Why are we all even talking about, every day, a pretty typical case that happens all over the country, all the time? Because public figures made it into an issue for points.
2013-07-11 12:45:27 PM
1 votes:
Gawd, I'd love to be a Korean Store owner in Sanford when the verdict is rendered. Free target practice.

i1.ytimg.com
2013-07-11 12:44:57 PM
1 votes:

The My Little Pony Killer: Treygreen13: The My Little Pony Killer: I still don't see how people are getting "dude following around somebody else" with "victim" of anything.

It's because following somebody isn't illegal, but punching somebody in the face is. If I were to go to your house and punch you in the face, you'd be the "victim" of an assault. Regardless of whether I have a gun or you have skittles or we're both on Mars, it's an assault.

This isn't anything anyone should ever argue.

If you were to follow me around my neighborhood, you bet your ass I would give you fair warning, and then I would come back with pepperspray.

You would not be the victim when I do get around to spraying you, btw.


Remember: Zimmerman didn't just magically show up wherever Martin happened to be. He was purposely following that kid, and following him made him feel unsafe.
2013-07-11 12:43:09 PM
1 votes:

lantawa: frepnog: The lesson here is this - do not physically attack someone.  That someone might have a gun and might end your goddamned life.

WINNAR, WINNAR..........CHICKEN DINNAR!


so in your opinion self defense is not a justifiable defense?
if someone follows you into a dark alley and approaches you , then when asked what their problem is and they respond by reaching for their pocket then you shouldn't defend yourself by attempting to disrupt them and disarm them? You deny Trayvon the right that Zimmerman is using as his defense.
2013-07-11 12:41:53 PM
1 votes:

The My Little Pony Killer: I still don't see how people are getting "dude following around somebody else" with "victim" of anything.


It's because following somebody isn't illegal, but punching somebody in the face is. If I were to go to your house and punch you in the face, you'd be the "victim" of an assault. Regardless of whether I have a gun or you have skittles or we're both on Mars, it's an assault.

This isn't anything anyone should ever argue.
2013-07-11 12:38:51 PM
1 votes:

s2s2s2: Hobodeluxe: prove that he doubled back.

Stop demanding proof in response to your conjecture.


you're the one saying there was evidence he doubled back. as said it was from the girl's testimony.
now back it up with said evidence and not your own conjecture
2013-07-11 12:38:13 PM
1 votes:
99% of Farkers wanted George to burn for a long time. The fact that most people now seem to realize how weak the case against him is shows why this was pushed with the wrong intentions completely.
2013-07-11 12:37:42 PM
1 votes:

The My Little Pony Killer: Boojum2k: The My Little Pony Killer: Boojum2k: Latinwolf: Well GZ could have avoided that by not following that suspicious person in the first place.

Well, she could have avoided that rape by not wearing that skirt.

You could have avoided looking stupid, but we're all glad you didn't.

Oh look, another member of the Insane Troll Posse.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InsaneTrollLogic

Buh-bye.

You just compared some douchebag stalking a child in the streets to a victim of sexual assault. I am not the troll here, silly.


They've been doing this for days, and it's really offensive.
2013-07-11 12:36:16 PM
1 votes:

Mi-5: You really need to take a knee and punch yourself in the face by equating the two.


A self knee punch requires some real dedication.  It would take a person of conviction to do it.
2013-07-11 12:35:56 PM
1 votes:

The My Little Pony Killer: No matter what happens, I take solace in the fact that Zimmerman will never be able to lead a normal life for the rest of his miserable days.





Why should he be hounded? He's done nothing wrong. I would welcome a Zimmerman into my neighborhood. He seems like a valuable member of society. Martin on the other hand wasn't going to amount to much of anything and was headed down a bad path
2013-07-11 12:35:05 PM
1 votes:

Boojum2k: The My Little Pony Killer: Boojum2k: Latinwolf: Well GZ could have avoided that by not following that suspicious person in the first place.

Well, she could have avoided that rape by not wearing that skirt.

You could have avoided looking stupid, but we're all glad you didn't.

Oh look, another member of the Insane Troll Posse.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InsaneTrollLogic

Buh-bye.


You just compared some douchebag stalking a child in the streets to a victim of sexual assault. I am not the troll here, silly.
2013-07-11 12:35:03 PM
1 votes:

DROxINxTHExWIND: This is about African-American's distrust of the American legal system.


This is about ignorant people not taking the time to evaluate the facts of the case based on the evidence. Most African-Americans declared Zimmerman guilty of murder from the moment they heard that there had been a shooting, based solely on the skin color of the two parties. Even a year later, most African-Americans I've seen comment on the case, whether it be on Facebook, Twitter, or even those being interviewed on TV, are still using information proven to be false many months ago. Zimmerman was ordered by police to stay in his car, Zimmerman chased down and started the confrontation, Zimmerman was on top of Trayvon, Zimmerman didn't have any injuries, there were no witnesses that saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman. I could go on all day, but you get the point I'm making.

Perhaps if people actually took the time to learn the facts of the case, instead of coming to a conclusion based on the race of the victim, we wouldn't have people chomping at the bit to start rioting.
2013-07-11 12:34:36 PM
1 votes:

chapman: Hobodeluxe: prove that he doubled back. there is no proof that he went farther than where the altercation began.

Proof?  I think the word you are looking for is evidence.  There is evidence that he was near his father's place and doubled back.  This came from the nice young lady's testimony about their phone call, sir.


no it didn't. I've read the transcript. she said she told him to run and he said no he would just walk, that he didn't see him anymore. nowhere does she say he told her he was going back to look for Zimmerman.
2013-07-11 12:32:32 PM
1 votes:
For the first time in this trial I am thinking there is a good chance GZ will be convicted. IMHO I do not think the evidence supports a conviction, but the cumulative effects of this judge's rulings and the questionable actions on the prosecution end bode ill for GZ.

I can't help but wonder if the state and judge are going for a conviction knowing full ell it will be reversed on appeal. It jibes with the former Sanford Police Chief alleging that he was told by his boss just to arrest GZ even if it is reversed later, just to appease the mob.

I just hope for his sake that GZ is allowed to be free pending appeal. He is going to be a huge target (ba dum!) in prison if he has to spend even 10 minutes with the general population.
2013-07-11 12:29:58 PM
1 votes:

Mi-5: Thunderpipes: Gross miscarriage of justice, all because of liberals.

I don't know if this is a deliberate troll attempt or you are being serious.

Either way, I'm going to laugh at you and your embarrassment!

/I don't see liberal or conservative in this case.  Care to point out the liberal vs. conservative stuff?


Laugh all you want. This case never would have went to trial without Obama, Holder, Al, Jesse, and liberal media, and you know it.
2013-07-11 12:29:36 PM
1 votes:

tripleseven: Abuse Liability: tripleseven: I'm just glad that I don't go through life trembling when I see a high, black teen walking through my neighborhood.

Good, that makes all of us.

Except maybe Zimmerman, and you seem to agree with him, but don't let your previous statements get in your way or anything.


Ever notice how in one post, Zimmerman is a trembling sissy over Martin and the next post he's a cold blooded killer who stalked him and shot him down?
Funny how that works out.
2013-07-11 12:29:06 PM
1 votes:

Abuse Liability: Oh wait, the judge said because there isn't a specific law making it legal to follow people, it is illegal


If she manages to stay on the bench after this gets reviewed, there is no justice in this country.
2013-07-11 12:28:00 PM
1 votes:

Into the blue again: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Into the blue again: Headso: Treygreen13: Headso: How many people here who think she is railroading Zimmerman also love that texas killed the most people via the death penalty and see nothing wrong with it? It's probably an exact match.

I think my eyes just rolled out of my head. Somebody help me find them. I think they're under my desk, I can see my feet.

Not a supporter of the death penalty?
You might be on to something here....

What might he be into? Please state the connection you see between people's views on capital punishment with their view that the Zimmerman trial is a farce.

For the record, I'm not a huge death penalty supporter.

It would be a matter to pursue to see if there is any connection. My suspicion is that there would be a connection. Those that think murder is justified (not calling GZ a murderer) and those that think GZ was more than justified in shooting the thug. So saying you might be on to something here shows my support that this is a possibility, and I think it would be interesting to see if there is any correlation. And you stating that you are not a huge death penalty supporter shows that you support the death penalty. I am anti death penalty.


Can someone translate this please? What in the holy hell...
2013-07-11 12:27:14 PM
1 votes:
FoxNews is reading the caselaw and citing it stating that the 3rd degree murder due to child abuse can only be charged against someone who is "parent or other person responsible for the childs welfare".  Doesn't sound like that will fit the State's argument.
2013-07-11 12:27:14 PM
1 votes:

BeatrixK: I got a question:  I could have sworn that, when the HOA president guy was testifying, that one of the talking heads mentioned that the Martin family was suing the HOA, since Zimmerman was head of the 'neighborhood watch at the time of the shooting, and they assert he was acting on behalf of the HOA

Is that right?



You're in front of a computer, love. Why are you asking someone else to do your homework? Open a new window and type your question into Google.
2013-07-11 12:26:32 PM
1 votes:

DROxINxTHExWIND: This is about African-American's distrust of the American legal system.


And a conviction here should further that fear. This is what we on "team zimm" have been saying.
It seems to me this is like* saying because a ref called a no-fault play a foul, that on the other end of the court, he should just give up a make up call and penalize the other team to make up for it. What we should be looking for is no bad calls.

*obviously a different scale.
2013-07-11 12:21:09 PM
1 votes:

DROxINxTHExWIND: They claim they just want to see justice but their dog whistles (Trayvon was a "thug", etc.) betray them.


Could you define "Thug" for us?

I mean, could be we got it all wrong.  Thug to me could possibly mean a young male with multiple suspensions from school, drug user, likes to fight and was actively pursuing an illegal firearm for himself...

Now since that doesn't mean "Thug" to you, enlighten all us "prejudiced" people (because we can read a statute and know what is "self defense" and what isn't) as to what qualifies as a thug to you.
2013-07-11 12:17:55 PM
1 votes:

lantawa: The Haberdasher: Maybe this has been metioned before, but why is this trial even news. I don't get the infactuation with this trial.

DOJ, per Obama guidance, sent activists to assist in organizing protests, and hired publicity specialists were employed to loudly call National attention to this case.  This case is an orchestrated dog and pony show that has been cast forward into the larger public domain in a brazenly foolish misuse of this FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION'S political power.  Disgusting and stupid braincramped idiots working their mindless dogmatic "magic" on Low Information Citizens....this monkey trial should have NEVER occurred.




I think I agree with you. The ability for the national media with the aid of politians to create a news story or to vilify a citizen to me is more unnerving than the wiretapping and surveillance issues surrounding this administration. And then it's bizzare that everyong is picking sides like the is a liberal or conservative issue.

I can't stand this story and can't wait for it to go away. Every time I hear anything about it, i just get angry that it's even a story. I can't watch the big news stations anymore, it's all a bad joke. Especaily when you can read the AP article that they are reporting from and you hear them get stuff wrong from the same info you just read online. But we get the coverage that sells. If you think this case has anything to do with race or the Florida stand your ground law, then your the person the story is marketed to. And guess what, it has nothing to do with either. Stupid consumer.

2013-07-11 12:15:55 PM
1 votes:
George will be convicted now. That ruling made this clear. Following someone is illegal, judge is allowing the jury to hear that. All any charges against George needs, is to show he did something criminal. Now he has, by getting out of his car.

Jury should be told, flat out, like the defense wants, that following someone is not a crime. How could a judge not allow them to hear that? WTF?
2013-07-11 12:10:42 PM
1 votes:

DROxINxTHExWIND: They claim they just want to see justice but their dog whistles (Trayvon was a "thug", etc.) betray them.


He was a thug, but nobody is saying that's why his death is justified.  His death is justified because brought a 40 second attack on another person, unprovoked.  If you don't want to get shot, don't attack people.
2013-07-11 12:06:38 PM
1 votes:

Treygreen13: [media-2.web.britannica.com image 363x450]
Harry Houdini just got punched once and died of internal bleeding.


Actually, he died of peritonitis, secondary to a ruptured appendix.

When people can't even get known facts about famous figures correct, what hope is there when they need to actually THINK and use LOGIC to put together what happened in a case like this??
2013-07-11 12:01:32 PM
1 votes:

fredklein: Cops have a history of hassling minorities when called by them. If I were black, I sure as hell wouldn't call them.


Really?  Would you say its over 50% of the time?  Even minority cops?  Got some statistics?  So does this count for Hispanics too, like Zimmerman?  So you believe that minorities shouldn't call cops in the U.S. and that if you were black you would absolutely not call a cop?
2013-07-11 11:59:59 AM
1 votes:
I just feel sorry for George now. He will probably be convicted of something, and will have to wait a long time to get his appeal won. Probably will be killed in prison.

Gross miscarriage of justice, all because of liberals.
2013-07-11 11:58:55 AM
1 votes:

fredklein: zeroman987: fredklein: tenpoundsofcheese: Also, if he called Precious instead of the police or a male friend to help him out when he saw this creepy ass cracker, how scared could he have been?

Yeah, because minorities have such good experiences calling the cops. it's not like the cops would hassle him or anything.

I'm hispanic and live in a large city. So when I skulk around your neighborhood and you are watching me, I have the right to leave and then come back and beat you up? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?

Yes, that sounds ridiculous.

Of course, you haven't proven that that is what actually, you know, happened.

My theory is (for the 40th time) is that Trayvon hid. Zimmerman passed by him while on the phone with the cops (oh, excuse me- "the police dispatcher"). Zimmerman hung up, turned around, and started back to his car. Trayvon, seeing Zimmerman turn around and come back toward him suddenly, thought his hiding place was discovered, and at that point, confronted Zimmerman... in self defense. This theory fits all the known facts.

TM escalated the situation by using force that was unnecessary given the situation,

You don't know the situation, and thus cannot know what level of force was necessary.

and continued to use that force after the threat was neutralized.

As I've said before- you cannot 'neutralize' the threat of a man with a gun, unless you take the gun, or make it so they cannot fire it (ie: knock them out). Trayvon's actions (grabbing at the gun, banging Zimmerman's head) are consistent with this.

Simply knocking them down is not sufficient.

He was a vigilante and finding GZ guilty will encourage vigilante justice.

And finding Zimmerman Not Guilty will mean that any self-appointed 'neighborhood watch' member can gun down [insert race here] people, and simply claim they were in fear of their life. I mean, it's not like the dead guy can dispute it, can they?

If TM had done the right thing and called the cops when he felt threatened, none of this would have happened.

Cops have a history of hassling minorities when called by them. If I were black, I sure as hell wouldn't call them.


So because a black person is afraid of the cops, they can beat people up without consequences? Are you serious?

Have you ever been outside the suburbs? It would mean that I couldn't ever walk home! I walk behind other minorities when I walk home from work everyday, and it is about a mile walk. Sometimes we are going to the same general area and I end up "following" them a long distance. So now they are allowed to "confront" me and beat me up because they feel threatened? So under your rules, I don't get to defend myself because they are afraid to call the cops and I have to take it? I have to let them slam my head into the concrete?

Admit it, you were outraged at first and then the new evidence came out and you are grasping at straws trying to hold on to your outrage.
2013-07-11 11:58:31 AM
1 votes:

Elegy: The wailing and gnashing of teeth about her rulings really makes me laugh. It's almost impossible to impeach a judge for their rulings - it's kind of like arguing with the tide.


she isn't Judge Dredd.  At some point someone somewhere needs to watch her in action and say "dear god.  this woman will do anything to get a conviction....  even things that are clearly unethical, even when the prosecution clearly has no case".

this case alone I will guarantee you will have someone somewhere watching her.  She has no business on the bench.
2013-07-11 11:52:46 AM
1 votes:

Thunderpipes: None of you seem to realize the  unbelievable importance of the one ruling by Judge biatchpants.

Jury can be led to believe following somone is illegal. That alone means an easy conviction, because since George broke the law by leaving his car, everything he did afterwards can be illegal.

This is bad. Chicks are not rational people, this is all they need to convict, regardless of evidence. "Oh, he broke the law by leaving his car? Must be guilty then."


And with that, you just lost all rights to have an opinion on this case.
2013-07-11 11:46:56 AM
1 votes:

Facetious_Speciest: whizbangthedirtfarmer

Again, what's amusing is that the GUN RIGHTS! people are all rallying around this case, where the main defense is: I am incapable of defending myself against a slightly doughy teenager, and thus I had to use my gun to get him off of me.

When did the measure of manliness become "I let someone stronger beat the shiat out of me?"


A large part of the J4T crowd are in favor of the "right to beat down people who look at you funny" rule of street law. You know, thugs.
2013-07-11 11:46:02 AM
1 votes:

I_C_Weener: Headso: Frank N Stein: Can anyone explain why this woman is a judge? She's absolutely terrible and should probably be disbarred

Under normal circumstances people like the fact that she is tough on crime.

Until they see that "tough on crime" sometimes mean railroading people.  So, in that sense, cameras in the courtroom and high profile cases can help.  But usually high profile cases are so far from the norm that people get a misconstrued sense of how cases really work.


Most of the people who believe he is being railroaded will be back to wanting to be tough on crime the day this trail is over. I don't think they see a connection, they believe she is railroading him specifically not that this is the same type of shiat that happens to defendants all day everyday and mostly for nonviolent crimes.
2013-07-11 11:45:57 AM
1 votes:
None of you seem to realize the  unbelievable importance of the one ruling by Judge biatchpants.

Jury can be led to believe following somone is illegal. That alone means an easy conviction, because since George broke the law by leaving his car, everything he did afterwards can be illegal.

This is bad. Chicks are not rational people, this is all they need to convict, regardless of evidence. "Oh, he broke the law by leaving his car? Must be guilty then."
2013-07-11 11:44:22 AM
1 votes:

BigNumber12: s2s2s2: fredklein: Zimmerman claims he was in fear of his life, but his wounds were minor

This is immaterial. He reasonably believed grievous bodily harm was IMMINENT. This means it was likely to happen if the assault continued. That is all he needs to justify the use of deadly force.


As Heath Ledger once said, "Never start with the head, the victim gets all fuzzy."

Smashing GZ's head into the concrete was a surefire way of farking with his very consciousness, his ability to think clearly and sense what was happening to him. That's a guaranteed way to induce panic, if someone believes that they're about to be knocked completely unconscious and placed completely at the mercy of the other person.


Not to mention the blood I'm sure he tasted. He probably thought, " Oh, I'm probably Ok, he'll stop pounding me in a second and we'll all have a good laugh over a beer."

/this is for the idiot that think that playing basketball with friends/acquaintances is the same as fighting a stranger in the dark.
2013-07-11 11:15:06 AM
1 votes:
Hobodeluxe

so now he was crouching behind a 2 ft hedge while talking on the phone planning an ambush?

So now there are hedges there? You said there weren't. At all.
2013-07-11 11:14:43 AM
1 votes:
Can anyone explain why this woman is a judge? She's absolutely terrible and should probably be disbarred
2013-07-11 11:13:35 AM
1 votes:
" You continually disagree with this court when the court disagrees, you CANNOT argue with me anymore once I rule something, just appeal the case, until then shut the fark up'.  "

And again, MOTION DENIED

Wow, we are literally watching a complete miscarriage of justice.
2013-07-11 11:11:00 AM
1 votes:

Tatsuma: I would ask this judge to please show me where it says that it's legal for a man to masturbate in the confines of his own domicile while watching pornography.

Wait, no law specifies that? Then I would ask that please every single male in America be arrested and put on the sex offenders' registry.


The judge just switched the entire concept of proving a negative around.
2013-07-11 11:09:39 AM
1 votes:
Motherfarking miscarriage of justice. 'Show me where this perfectly legal behavior is codified as legal'?

'Armed with a pack of skittles' FARK YOU.
2013-07-11 11:07:53 AM
1 votes:

BeatrixK: I got a question:  I could have sworn that, when the HOA president guy was testifying, that one of the talking heads mentioned that the Martin family was suing the HOA, since Zimmerman was head of the 'neighborhood watch at the time of the shooting, and they assert he was acting on behalf of the HOA

Is that right?


That seems like a reasonable legal strategy.  If somebody is working on behalf of an organization with deeper pockets than the person themselves, it makes sense to sue to the organization as well as the individual.  Of course, this requires the "Neighborhood Watch" to actually be part of the HOA.
2013-07-11 11:07:34 AM
1 votes:
Hobodeluxe

but those small hedges were down the alley from where Zimmerman said he was attacked. Zimmerman later changed his story to Trayvon jumped out of the darkness once the investigator asked him where are the bushes?

No. There are hedges running along the end of both building blocks, and every unit has another hedge behind it that conceals its air-conditioning unit. That puts four separate concealing hedges within twenty feet of the T.
2013-07-11 11:07:01 AM
1 votes:
The judge is asking Don West to show where in the law books it says that you can actually follow someone on foot or by car. What the faaaark.


PROVE TO ME ITS LEGAL
'Well it's not in the law books because it's lawful behavior'
OVERRULED
2013-07-11 11:05:25 AM
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: if Trayvon had time to get home does it not stand to reason that George had more than enough time to get back to his truck? He said he walked over to the next street( to get an address) . then back to his truck, fiddled with his flashlight trying to get it to work while at his truck then went back out, didn't see anything and was on his way to the truck for the 2nd time when Trayvon jumped out of the bushes (that weren't there) and attacked him.


Zimmerman stayed in the same general area.  Martin went out of sight and then returned, meaning he is the aggressor.  How do you not get this by now?
2013-07-11 11:04:06 AM
1 votes:

Facetious_Speciest: Hobodeluxe

if Trayvon had time to get home does it not stand to reason that George had more than enough time to get back to his truck? He said he walked over to the next street( to get an address) . then back to his truck, fiddled with his flashlight trying to get it to work while at his truck then went back out, didn't see anything and was on his way to the truck for the 2nd time when Trayvon jumped out of the bushes (that weren't there) and attacked him.

I would say it does stand to reason. They both could have withdrawn. They didn't.

And by the by, you obviously missed where the police pointed out the bushes in question. In court. With photos.


but those small hedges were down the alley from where Zimmerman said he was attacked. Zimmerman later changed his story to Trayvon jumped out of the darkness once the investigator asked him where are the bushes?
2013-07-11 11:02:37 AM
1 votes:
This case is going to oepn a floodgate when it comes to future court cases citing the ZImmerman trial during all the sidebars
2013-07-11 11:00:12 AM
1 votes:

NightOwl2255: WTF happened to you? You used to be this articulate, thoughtful, well-reasoned guy, even if I didn't always agree with you. This case has reduced you to, well, this.

Now, you're the polar opposite of the people screaming that Zimmerman hunted and killed some poor, innocent kid. And you're just as ridiculous.


I am expressing my frustration with the judge, I am not arguing anything. She has been consistently using the bench to follow her agenda, making completely obnoxious decisions based on her own views and not the law.

This whole trial is a gross miscarriage of justice and will become a textbook example of perverted justice and everything wrong with the justice system today.
2013-07-11 10:56:47 AM
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: Tatsuma: I'm going farking insane I HATE that judge.

she's being fair. West is all like "you sprang this on us" "this is totally unexpected" when he knows damn well that these lesser charges were going to be asked for. He knows what they could and couldn't try to charge. And now it's the state's problem they weren't prepared?  bullshiat. this is all theatre. they knew. they have counter arguments ready. they just want to appear oppressed


If there's no jury in the room what would grandstanding server to do except risk him getting found in contempt?
2013-07-11 10:55:19 AM
1 votes:

AngryDragon: Elegy: Now the state is trying to keep out self-defense and justifiable use of deadly force as an instruction.

Isn't that what the whole goddamn case is about?!



The confusion is that there are two self-defense statutes in Florida:  776.012, and 782.02.

776.012 is what controls this case.  It says that self-defense is justified when you're in imminent fear of serious injury or death.

782.02 is applicable to situations where an aggressor is in your house or dwelling.

The State is trying to include the instruction about Houses and Dwellings.  It's totally out of place.

And, the judge is too FARKING STUPID to understand the basic rules here.
2013-07-11 10:54:33 AM
1 votes:

fredklein: Others would have you believe that Trayvon, who was running away, suddenly did a psychological 180 and turned to attack.


Like the prosecution witness who was on the phone with Martin testified to?
2013-07-11 10:50:58 AM
1 votes:
Pretty sure folks know were I stand on Zimmerman's guilt, but the judge counting his lawyers to make the argument that they should be able to study case law quickly in a murder trial is farking ridiculous.
2013-07-11 10:50:42 AM
1 votes:

fredklein: Zimmerman claims he was in fear of his life, but his wounds were minor


This is immaterial. He reasonably believed grievous bodily harm was IMMINENT. This means it was likely to happen if the assault continued. That is all he needs to justify the use of deadly force.

That picture is YOU.
2013-07-11 10:50:25 AM
1 votes:

AngryDragon: Elegy: Now the state is trying to keep out self-defense and justifiable use of deadly force as an instruction.

Isn't that what the whole goddamn case is about?!


No, it's about being able to walk the streets safely at night.

Really.
2013-07-11 10:50:24 AM
1 votes:

heili skrimsli: Tatsuma: I'm going farking insane I HATE that judge.

She is now trying to argue that justifiable deadly force only applies to being in your own home?


There's a certain kind of stand-your-ground setup where that's true, though it's usually called the castle doctrine. Florida's SYG implementation is more general than that.
2013-07-11 10:48:54 AM
1 votes:

indylaw: Southern100: Keep in mind if they find him guilty of ANYTHING, even Child Abuse, that's going to open him up to civil lawsuits by TMs family. Only an acquittal on all charges will shield him

Acquittal doesn't shield him. Civil suits have a lower burden of proof. OJ Simpson still lost on his wrongful death suit after he was acquitted of murder.


You must be new here. The Florida law that states anyone acquitted by reason of self defense is immune from civil action has been cited about a hundred times in the last two weeks.
2013-07-11 10:46:30 AM
1 votes:

AngryDragon: fredklein: AngryDragon:
No.  He had no idea Zimmerman had a gun.
No.  Following someone is not a reason to assault them.
No.  He was reporting to the police what he was seeing and stopped following when it was suggested.
No.  He also assaulted a person (for racist reasons if you believe his girlfriends testimony) and took things way too far.


Unless you can read dead people's minds, you don't know if Trayvon knew about the gun.

While you are technically correct that "Following someone is not a reason to assault them", you don't know what else happened.

As for 'reporting to the police'- some people here are very anal about the fact the was not speaking to 'the police', but rather a 'police dispatcher'. As for turning around, you only have Zimmerman's word on that.

And, again, unless you have additional evidence, you don't know who assaulted who first. You only know what one person testified they heard.


Some people seem insistent that the facts fit their narrative, rather then making their narrative fit the facts.
[imageshack.us image 800x302]

There is no narrative.


On the contrary, this thread (among others) is filled with statements like "Trayvon jumped Zimmerman".

You admit yourself that no one really knows what happened before Martin ended up on top of Zimmerman beating his head in to the sidewalk and getting shot as a result.  That last part is undisputed.  If no one knows what else happened, you know what that's called, right?

Reasonable doubt.  Not guilty.


Um, no. If you lack direct evidence, then you use your brain and look at what you DO know, and extrapolate from there.

We know Zimmerman was chasing (following/pursuing/whatever) Trayvon. Supposedly just to provide his location to the police. The police he refused to meet up with, or to tell where he was. This is suspicious. If you have information for the cops, why wouldn't you arrange to meet them somewhere, and pass on that information? Why "have them call me when they get here"? The only reason for that is because you are still in pursuit, and don't know where you will be, and thus can't tell then where to meet you. In other words, Zimmerman meant to keep following Trayvon.

We know that Zimmerman was armed. Being armed makes people more confident, and they do things- take risks- they ordinarily wouldn't. Like following people around. Like starting fights. because they know they are armed, and can use that weapon if they start losing.

Zimmerman showed his ... dislike... for Trayvon when he referred to Trayvon as part of "these assholes" who "always get away". Someone who dislikes someone is more likely to start a fight with them.

Zimmerman claims he was in fear of his life, but his wounds were minor. I think I have literally cut myself shaving worse than that.

...and so on. Each little bit of logic means little, but when added up, it shows a pattern. Zimmerman wanted to get Trayvon. Trayvon wanted to get away. Other people's narratives have them suddenly reversing roles- Trayvon the assaulter, and Zimmerman the poor prey trying to flee. This makes no sense.

imageshack.us
2013-07-11 10:43:49 AM
1 votes:
I'm going farking insane I HATE that judge.
2013-07-11 10:43:34 AM
1 votes:

TheDumbBlonde: I don't know how you lawyers aren't pulling your hair out right now.


Why do you think Don West is bald?
2013-07-11 10:41:58 AM
1 votes:

tripleseven: Treygreen13: tripleseven: It would depend on context concerning the legality of following someone, but if you are stating that being followed at night by a stranger in a car, and on foot doesn't pose a threat or a basic human emotional response of fear or danger, then you are totally lying to yourself.

Still not illegal.

Sure, I guess not.

But if you are so firm in your conviction, try this experiment:

Go buy a windowless van.

Paint "Safety Patrol" on it or something.

Wait around schools and follow the kids home.

When confronted by the police, explain to them you're doing nothing wrong, and as a "safety Patrol" member, you are just ensuring that the kids get home safe, or that they don't damage the neighborhood, you know how those kids like to get into trouble.

Good luck with that.


The way it works is the police will check you out, determine if you are a threat, determine if they want you to continue to do that and possibly have a judge issue a restraining order for you to stop.

What they will not do is punch you in the nose, ground and pound and smash your head in the concrete several times.

Do you really not understand that?

I know there are people here who want to convict a Hispanic man no matter what the evidence says, but come on.
2013-07-11 10:41:35 AM
1 votes:

Treygreen13: tripleseven: It would depend on context concerning the legality of following someone, but if you are stating that being followed at night by a stranger in a car, and on foot doesn't pose a threat or a basic human emotional response of fear or danger, then you are totally lying to yourself.

Still not illegal.


It's not illegal to use fighting words either, but even the Supreme Court acknowledged that it can likely lead to violence. If I call someone a n***er and they beat the crap out of me, yeah, it was legal to call them that (in most jurisdictions), but you can actually lower the severity of the charge just based on that fact alone, since there was a mitigating circumstance.

I don't understand why it's so hard to see that TM had a good reason to believe that he was being racially targeted. I get why GZ thought that TM might be up to no good, though if you compare the two, TM had far more reason to believe what he thought that GZ did what he thought.
2013-07-11 10:40:29 AM
1 votes:

bborchar: It should have been negligent homicide.  Zimmerman's reckless conduct led to a deadly confrontation.  It's not self-defense if you go stalking after someone when you're armed (at least it shouldn't be), but I don't think he meant to kill him.


That word I do not think it means what you think it means.
2013-07-11 10:40:06 AM
1 votes:

tripleseven: You'll never convince the Zimmerman cheerleaders.



What about us Due Process cheerleaders?

I have a simple question, and I hope you try to answer it honestly.

Do you believe that there is no reason, based on this evidence, to believe that Zimmerman acted in self-defense?  In other words, do you believe that self-defense is not at least one of the plausible hypotheses that could be true, in light of this evidence?
2013-07-11 10:39:44 AM
1 votes:
"If that's what they want, that's what I'm going to do" - Judge DeeDeeDee referencing the prosecution

Pretty much sums up this trial, right there.
2013-07-11 10:38:20 AM
1 votes:

ChipNASA: "Your"    mutherfarkers!....not You ARE=You're

/can't believe I have to be the grammar nazi.


My wife and I don't correct other peoples grammar,
because, frankly, we're better than you people.
I also don't own a TeeVee and I use a non-ironic rotary phone
Pretty much King Sh*T of F*ck Island over here.

/amidoinitrite?
2013-07-11 10:38:16 AM
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: Nabb1: s2s2s2: Hobodeluxe: and trayvon had the right to defend himself from a perceived threat

What threat?

A creepy ass cracker was following him, so he felt so threatened, he called a friend instead of the police and decided not to continue on to his father's apartment.

he was still on the path to his Father's apt. and he thought he had lost Zimmerman. The phone call was ongoing. he had been talking to her all evening


So then you admit he was on the phone with her the entire time?  That would destroy your conclusion that Zimmerman "found" Trayvon hiding and forced the confrontation.  No person in their right mind would hide and still be talking to another on the phone (hint: she never said he whispered).  The obvious conclusion to draw from this is that TM initiated contact.  He spoke first and likely walked up to Zimmerman.  Just more evidence stacking up in favor of not guilty
2013-07-11 10:37:37 AM
1 votes:

Tatsuma: Hahahaha holy farking shiat Don West just told the biatch to shut up. He was talking, she tried to say something and told her 'LET ME FINISH'


he's lucky she didn't get him for contempt yesterday over his continuous objection to the same ruling.
2013-07-11 10:37:29 AM
1 votes:

tripleseven: Treygreen13: tripleseven: It would depend on context concerning the legality of following someone, but if you are stating that being followed at night by a stranger in a car, and on foot doesn't pose a threat or a basic human emotional response of fear or danger, then you are totally lying to yourself.

Still not illegal.

Sure, I guess not.

But if you are so firm in your conviction, try this experiment:

Go buy a windowless van.

Paint "Safety Patrol" on it or something.

Wait around schools and follow the kids home.

When confronted by the police, explain to them you're doing nothing wrong, and as a "safety Patrol" member, you are just ensuring that the kids get home safe, or that they don't damage the neighborhood, you know how those kids like to get into trouble.


Good luck with that.


Has nothing to do with this case. Zero.
2013-07-11 10:36:36 AM
1 votes:
whizbangthedirtfarmer:

Hyperbole much?  I've looked worse after a game of pickup basketball.  It COULD have been a vicious assault (if it is happening the way the alive guy is saying), but I didn't see anything extraordinary.


now if someone punches your wife in the nose to cause that swelling and bleeding, and then was grounding and pounding, hitting her head on the sidewalk, and causing the other bruises on her face, you would just say, "oh, that's okay.  that wasn't vicious.  I have had worse in a basketball game".

Good luck with that.
2013-07-11 10:36:27 AM
1 votes:
t3.gstatic.com
2013-07-11 10:36:18 AM
1 votes:

AngryDragon: Tatsuma: He's going to be suing the shiat out of the state and rake in farking millions.


Don West: Child abuse. Really?

Holy shiat!  You guys aren't kidding?  They're trying to add a child abuse charge?


Felony Murder 3 because of Child Abuse. Or something. They're doing their best to get him on *something* by any way possible.

The appeal for this case should be hilarious.
2013-07-11 10:34:46 AM
1 votes:

NeoCortex42: Win or lose, the defense needs to file a grievance about this judge with the bar.


The bar should act on its own.  It's not like they're unaware.
2013-07-11 10:32:04 AM
1 votes:

PC LOAD LETTER: KellyX: TM should have stayed in his damn home. FACT

or

TM should have ran home and not confront GZ. FACT

Stayed home? Yes, because that's reasonable. GZ should have stayed home in that case as well.

Ran home? Seriously? If you think you are being chased by a white dude out to get a negro, why the hell would you lead him directly to your home?

Black people's worst nightmare is being killed by white racists*: FACT

*not that GZ was one, but he sure made every effort to make TM think that might be the case.


Their worst nightmare should be being killed by other black folk, because they kill a lot more black people than white racists do
2013-07-11 10:32:02 AM
1 votes:
Win or lose, the defense needs to file a grievance about this judge with the bar.
2013-07-11 10:31:35 AM
1 votes:
Child abuse?  Why not littering with a formerly living body?
2013-07-11 10:31:19 AM
1 votes:

probesport: I don't believe in Zimmerman.


That's ok, he believes in you.  And that's all that matters.
2013-07-11 10:30:58 AM
1 votes:
West: "Really?"
2013-07-11 10:28:05 AM
1 votes:

Mjeck: Zims went into a confrontation with the ability to kill a person

that might intentionally or incidentally kill him. Then used it for exactly that reason, legally.
2013-07-11 10:26:58 AM
1 votes:

tripleseven: Carth: tripleseven: s2s2s2: tripleseven: Yeah, people have NO RIGHT to be in the streets or anything.

So then we agree, George had a right to get out of his car. Thank you.

I'm never going to convince you, but, lets look at reality:

There is a vast difference between walking down the street, and following another human being.

Which one is illegal?

It would depend on context concerning the legality of following someone, but if you are stating that being followed at night by a stranger in a car, and on foot doesn't pose a threat or a basic human emotional response of fear or danger, then you are totally lying to yourself.


I've been followed at night walking home. it is terrifying. You know what i did? I ran (not walked) home locked the door and called the police reporting a suspicious person.

You know what I didn't do? Confront them since following someone isn't illegal and nothing good would come out of it.
2013-07-11 10:25:39 AM
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: And lets remember when this initiated Trayvon was on the phone.


And that the person he was on the phone with says that it was Trayvon who initiated the confrontation.
2013-07-11 10:23:20 AM
1 votes:

the_rev: Did Zimmerman jaywalk at any point during the incident? Maybe they can give him 15 years for that. Wait... I guess he was guilty of littering. Maybe they will convict him of that.


"Your Honor, we also believe the defendant parked his vehicle in front of a fire hydrant on the night of the incident, so we would seek to have a citation written against him for that egregious offense as well."

What a joke.
2013-07-11 10:23:02 AM
1 votes:

fredklein: AngryDragon:
No.  He had no idea Zimmerman had a gun.
No.  Following someone is not a reason to assault them.
No.  He was reporting to the police what he was seeing and stopped following when it was suggested.
No.  He also assaulted a person (for racist reasons if you believe his girlfriends testimony) and took things way too far.


Unless you can read dead people's minds, you don't know if Trayvon knew about the gun.

While you are technically correct that "Following someone is not a reason to assault them", you don't know what else happened.

As for 'reporting to the police'- some people here are very anal about the fact the was not speaking to 'the police', but rather a 'police dispatcher'. As for turning around, you only have Zimmerman's word on that.

And, again, unless you have additional evidence, you don't know who assaulted who first. You only know what one person testified they heard.


Some people seem insistent that the facts fit their narrative, rather then making their narrative fit the facts.
[imageshack.us image 800x302]


There is no narrative.  You admit yourself that no one really knows what happened before Martin ended up on top of Zimmerman beating his head in to the sidewalk and getting shot as a result.  That last part is undisputed.  If no one knows what else happened, you know what that's called, right?

Reasonable doubt.  Not guilty.
2013-07-11 10:21:31 AM
1 votes:
Zims went into a confrontation with the ability to kill a person. Why wouldn`t that foreknowledge weigh heavily on his conscious, before the confrontation?

//Manslaughter
2013-07-11 10:20:18 AM
1 votes:

Raharu: So it your mind what happened?


I can't parse this.  Do you mean "So in your mind what happened"?

If that's the case, I can only go by what the law says, and the law says that even if you are the initial aggressor, if you are in fear of your life or serious injury and you can't escape, you can use deadly force to protect yourself.

But don't trust me, check it out for yourself:   Florida Statute 776.041:  Use of force by agggressor

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.-The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant
; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.


That's eminently reasonable, too, because the law recognizes that just because you get into a fight it shouldn't be suicide.  If you make a real effort to escape, or, as in this case, if you *CAN'T* escape, even if you started the physical fight, you still have the right to defend yourself.

It's a very narrowly tailored and sensible exception to the general rule of self-defense, and even *IF* you believe the prosecution case that Zimmerman started it (for which they've presented *ZERO* credible evidence), then you have to concede that under the law, based upon the evidence and eyewitness testimony, that Zimmerman did indeed defend himself under the law.
2013-07-11 10:20:10 AM
1 votes:

AngryDragon:
No.  He had no idea Zimmerman had a gun.
No.  Following someone is not a reason to assault them.
No.  He was reporting to the police what he was seeing and stopped following when it was suggested.
No.  He also assaulted a person (for racist reasons if you believe his girlfriends testimony) and took things way too far.


Unless you can read dead people's minds, you don't know if Trayvon knew about the gun.

While you are technically correct that "Following someone is not a reason to assault them", you don't know what else happened.

As for 'reporting to the police'- some people here are very anal about the fact the was not speaking to 'the police', but rather a 'police dispatcher'. As for turning around, you only have Zimmerman's word on that.

And, again, unless you have additional evidence, you don't know who assaulted who first. You only know what one person testified they heard.


Some people seem insistent that the facts fit their narrative, rather then making their narrative fit the facts.
imageshack.us
2013-07-11 10:19:49 AM
1 votes:

PC LOAD LETTER: But why would you do that if you think some nutter is following you? Maybe they wouldn't see where you live. But if they do and they want to do harm, well...


Oh well. We know that if he had gone home, Zimmerman would not have followed him to the house.
We know Trayvon chose unrelenting assault, instead. SYG doesn't allow for that. I'm sorry if that bothers you, but it is the truth.
2013-07-11 10:19:47 AM
1 votes:

tripleseven: s2s2s2: tripleseven: Yeah, people have NO RIGHT to be in the streets or anything.

So then we agree, George had a right to get out of his car. Thank you.

I'm never going to convince you, but, lets look at reality:

There is a vast difference between walking down the street, and following another human being.


Which one is illegal?
2013-07-11 10:18:46 AM
1 votes:
Did Zimmerman jaywalk at any point during the incident? Maybe they can give him 15 years for that. Wait... I guess he was guilty of littering. Maybe they will convict him of that.
2013-07-11 10:18:40 AM
1 votes:
Regarding totallt inappropriateFederally directed activism and  DOJ intervention in this case:

t seems like we're really starting to get into Banana Boat politics, a farcical apeing of the true rules of law, a blighted law-breaking political landscape of lockstep dogmatic and nonsensical grubbing for more and more money grabs and controls of municipalities and public domains. Pathetic, pathetic dull and stupid creatures of pure, unadulterated mindless narrative.are hard at work. So Sad.

On another note, Zimmerman is absolutely innocent of ANY wrongdoing, and the jury WILL vote for his innocence.  I'll take up to $20.00 bets with anyone that wants to take that bet. (Of course, this pretty much can't be done, since this IS Fark, afterall, but you get my drift). You Obama partisans remember to pop and snap to attention and OBEY those orders that come from the current Death Star Emperor.once this trial is over.  OBEY, I say.  It's what YOU voted for, FFS..
2013-07-11 10:16:51 AM
1 votes:
I don't believe in Zimmerman.
2013-07-11 10:16:38 AM
1 votes:

s2s2s2: Hobodeluxe: and trayvon had the right to defend himself from a perceived threat

What threat?


A creepy ass cracker was following him, so he felt so threatened, he called a friend instead of the police and decided not to continue on to his father's apartment.
2013-07-11 10:16:13 AM
1 votes:

TheDumbBlonde: CHILD ABUSE? WTF?


Prosecution:  We'd like the jury to be instructed on the lesser included offense of The Kitchen Sink, a felony of the 2nd degree.

Judge:  I'll allow it.
2013-07-11 10:15:06 AM
1 votes:
whizbangthedirtfarmer:
Hyperbole much?  I've looked worse after a game of pickup basketball.  It COULD have been a vicious assault (if it is happening the way the alive guy is saying), but I didn't see anything extraordinary.

So reasonable doubt then.  Not guilty.
2013-07-11 10:14:19 AM
1 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.


No, you don't have the right to attack people on the basis that they're following you.

Yeah well, apparently that wasn't all Trayvon was trying to do. Nothing prevented him from going inside with his snacks.
2013-07-11 10:14:03 AM
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: Nabb1: Hobodeluxe: Fark It: Darth_Lukecash: If Zimmerman had been killed by Trayvon, would he not actually been in self defense? After all, Zimmerman had a gun and was following him!

Well, Trayvon didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until he started beating his head into the concrete.  So is it self defense to attack somebody who is following you?  Is 'following' a crime?

if it provokes a reasonable fear of imminent harm then yes. do you think being followed in the dark and the rain (after you tried to engage the man in conversation while he was in his vehicle) then suddenly confronted in a dark alley after you thought you had avoided a confrontation with him would provoke a fear? What if after you ask him why he's following you he very quickly reaches for his pocket?? (Zimmerman said it was his phone but it could have just as easily been a weapon) Do you think you have the right to punch this guy and keep him from reaching what you think is his weapon? He hasn't identified himself or his intentions. And lets remember when this initiated Trayvon was on the phone. Zimmerman refused to meet the cops back at his truck and told them to call him and he would tell them where he was at. So Zimmerman's story about being ambushed doesn't make sense. If you were hiding and trying to be quiet so you could ambush someone you wouldn't be talking to someone on the phone. Zimmerman ignored all his training. He ignored the instructions by the dispatcher. He profiled and convicted Martin in his mind. To George this was the burglar. And he was going to be the hero and not let him get away this time.

Erroneous statements of the law aside, you speculate about facts not in evidence quite imaginatively.

no I didn't. all those are facts.


Your legal conclusion is still deeply flawed even if the facts were accurate as you painted them.
2013-07-11 10:13:07 AM
1 votes:

PC LOAD LETTER: Carth: whizbangthedirtfarmer:

Hyperbole much?  I've looked worse after a game of pickup basketball.  It COULD have been a vicious assault (if it is happening the way the alive guy is saying), but I didn't see anything extraordinary.

If you get a broken nose and need to go to the doctor for head wounds after a game of basketball you need to play with different people.

GZ didn't need to go to the doctor.


Sorry he went to a registered nurse as was required to return to work.
2013-07-11 10:12:22 AM
1 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: But to say Zimmerman is innocent is rediculous.


I don't know what that word means, but I assume it means accurate.
2013-07-11 10:11:08 AM
1 votes:
img834.imageshack.us
2013-07-11 10:10:09 AM
1 votes:

Keeve: Fark It: Darth_Lukecash: If Zimmerman had been killed by Trayvon, would he not actually been in self defense? After all, Zimmerman had a gun and was following him!

Well, Trayvon didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until he started beating his head into the concrete.  So is it self defense to attack somebody who is following you?  Is 'following' a crime?

Help, help I'm being followed to death! Oh no, come quick I think they're eavesdropping with a knife as well!


Standard scenarios: Black guy follows white guy. White guy might think he's going to be robbed or killed. White guy follows black guy. Black guy might think he's going to be beaten or killed.

I dunno, I live in NYC. This is painfully obvious to me. Maybe it's because I am used to this mindset and have talked to lots of black folks who describe what goes through their mind in various scenarios like this. It's not hard to understand, just easy for some folks to laugh it off with "so someone was following you, what's the problem?" line of thinking, and that depends on where they are from and what they have experienced. It's not so simple. I have been followed by folks. I didn't like it. I got to a grocery store and hung out for a half hour and left, hoping they were gone. They were. Maybe it was nothing. I don't take chances. Did TM have better options than confront his pursuer? Probably, but I can see where this can go bad quickly.
2013-07-11 10:09:46 AM
1 votes:

Sline: Lo and behold, she's allowing manslaughter.


You can't have "Zimmermans Laughter" without "manslaughter".
2013-07-11 10:08:30 AM
1 votes:

Thune: Zimmerman was neighborhood watch.

Martin was neighborhood thug.

Martin decided he didn't like Zimmerman watching him and decided to administer a beat down.

Martin got shot for it.

And Martin had it coming.


img180.imageshack.us
2013-07-11 10:05:18 AM
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: if it provokes a reasonable fear of imminent harm then yes. do you think being followed in the dark and the rain (after you tried to engage the man in conversation while he was in his vehicle)


Weather isn't climate. Stop speculating out of thin air, just because the facts don't please you.
2013-07-11 10:03:04 AM
1 votes:

Into the blue again: So his crime was being a young black kid?


LOL

No, it was criminal assault. I will only mention the additional crime of being a pothead, because he was a minor.
2013-07-11 10:03:03 AM
1 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.


Just let it go.

You'll never convince the Zimmerman cheerleaders.

In their minds, getting followed down a dark street by a stranger in a car is no cause for alarm.  Neither is it cause for alarm if he gets out of the car and follows you.

You should just let them follow you, I mean, they aren't breaking any laws or anything.

This is their actual reasoning.  even though one admitted he would have confronted the guy as well, if he thought he could "take" him.
2013-07-11 10:02:49 AM
1 votes:
They have to let Zimmerman walk because of OJ.
2013-07-11 10:00:22 AM
1 votes:

Elegy: The Muthaship: Popcorn Johnny: I'm betting on the defense trying to draw things out as much as possible today so they don't have to present their closing argument until Friday morning.

If the jury gets this after lunch Friday, I am rescinding my bet.  I bet the over on a 2 hour deliberation, but if they get it Friday afternoon I don't want any part of that action.

That brings up an excellent point - get your predictions about the length of jury deliberations in now, people.

/an hour or less


I think 5 hours. Enough time to get a free lunch.

/ not guilty
2013-07-11 09:58:42 AM
1 votes:
I'm not going to say that I think he's guilty or not because it is in the realm of possibility that he may be, but I (unlike a lot of people in these threads) can honestly say I don't know.  I think if justice is served then Zimmerman will walk - there's just no evidence to put him away.

I will also say I'm a firm believer of that old "I'd rather see 1000 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man convicted" cliche.  If you really, truly believe he's guilty, well, you've got 999 to go before you should really be upset.
2013-07-11 09:58:36 AM
1 votes:

Nabb1: I half expect the judge to do the state's closing argument herself.


I mean what is the country coming to when you can't stalk and chase down a Negro and then shoot him if he gets all uppity.
2013-07-11 09:53:09 AM
1 votes:

ACunningPlan: And CNN are still banging the race drum.....

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/11/opinion/francis-zimmerman-trial/index. ht ml?eref=igoogledmn_topstories


Roxanne jones had an article there yesterday implying racism was the cause of such a crappy prosecution. Has CNN had one article that actually even discussed actual facts?
2013-07-11 09:52:54 AM
1 votes:
ACunningPlan

And CNN are still banging the race drum.....

With fake stories, no less.

Where do people get the idea that Zimmerman confronted Martin? No one involved has ever suggested that. It only comes from people who want to believe Martin didn't do anything wrong. Even Martin's friend said he confronted Zimmerman. I just don't get it.
2013-07-11 09:50:40 AM
1 votes:

tricycleracer: Zimmerman will be back protecting the streets of his apartment complex by lunchtime tomorrow.

Maybe he'll stop by 7-11 to pick up a cool drink and a snack before he starts his shift as a proud defender of freedom.


i.imgur.com
2013-07-11 09:48:41 AM
1 votes:

PC LOAD LETTER: s2s2s2: Nabb1: Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?

For the millionth time, this does not matter under the law.  The evidence established Trayvon Martin had Zimmerman on the ground and was beating him when he got shot.  Following someone for a few minutes because you believe them to be a criminal, even if you are wrong, is not against the law.  Period.

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

Martin escalated the situation even more when he was punching Zimmerman in the face.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.

And if he had kept on going and gone inside, that's exactly what would have happened.

And let's be clear. If he had gone straight home, instead of hanging out for 30 minutes, he would have NEVER even been seen by Zimmerman.

Agreed, but if one thinks some white dude is stalking you because you are black, why would you let them know where you live? TM should have just hid until GZ went away. GZ should have stayed in his damn car.


TM should have stayed in his damn home. FACT

or

TM should have ran home and not confront GZ. FACT

/those are just as valid as the above bolded shiat
2013-07-11 09:46:14 AM
1 votes:

jso2897: I find both "sides" of this argument so distasteful that I hope the jury somehow manages to reach a verdict that enrages both "sides".


Guilty of aggravated assault with a firearm, sentenced to time served.
2013-07-11 09:46:00 AM
1 votes:

ChaosStar: kimwim: ChaosStar: You don't want to see justice done?

I do. According to the laws of the state, he will be a free man when this is over, that is, he won't be in jail. Whether he'll be free in his mind is another matter.

kimwim: Much as I don't want to see it, he's going to walk.

You're confusing my friend.


Who is your friend, and why is he confused?
2013-07-11 09:45:47 AM
1 votes:
T-Minus 120 hrs until Televisions and sneakers feel the wrath of a 'not guilty' verdict.
2013-07-11 09:45:44 AM
1 votes:

TOSViolation: Your an idiot, subby.


If you are going to make a joke, please use the correct joke.


Your a idiot
2013-07-11 09:44:52 AM
1 votes:

dittybopper: Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.

"I misunderstand what actually happened, and I make suppositions that support my misunderstandings".

FTFY.


If Zimmerman had been killed by Trayvon, would he not actually been in self defense? After all, Zimmerman had a gun and was following him!

Had Zimmerman just called it in, and stayed in the car, no one would have been killed.

Had Trayvon just gone back to his dads place, he'd been fine.

But you had two farking hotheads who brought this avoidable situation to a head. One paid for it with his life. What will happen to the other, will be seen soon.
2013-07-11 09:42:43 AM
1 votes:

Carth: Phinn: tripleseven: They should have gone with manslaughter.

Legal question for you -- Does self-defense also negate a manslaughter allegation?

Isn't that was they are set to argue at 945? Whether the jury instructions will include lesser charges.



That's a separate question.

Today they are arguing whether the evidence is sufficient to justify asking the jury to consider both murder and manslaughter convictions as possible verdicts.  Some cases are either murder or nothing.  Some cases could be one or the other, depending on the jury's interpretation of the evidence as to the defendant's mental state.

My question is different -- If a defendant successfully asserts self-defense, and he's facing both murder and manslaughter charges, does self-defense negate both of those charges?
2013-07-11 09:36:10 AM
1 votes:

Darth_Lukecash: Here's my problem: didn't Trayvon have a right to defend himself against a man who was following him with a gun?

A guy who was following him for no other reason than a false assumption that Trayvon was a criminal?

Zimmerman escalated the situation. He left his car to pursue on foot.

All Trayvon was trying to do was get some snacks and go to his Dads place.


Trayvon had ample time to go home. He chose to see why the creepy ass cracker was following him. Following someone is not a crime. You can not assault someone for following you. Cleared up now?
2013-07-11 09:35:08 AM
1 votes:
O'Mara the ass man and other trial cuties:
i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com
2013-07-11 09:34:15 AM
1 votes:

SpankMeJohnny: Nabb1: I half expect the judge to do the state's closing argument herself.

Nailed it. This woman is doing everything in her power to ensure that the man who killed Obama's son is found guilty of something.


Oh, goody, yet another "Johnny" troll.
2013-07-11 09:33:07 AM
1 votes:

Nabb1: kimwim: He's going to walk. Much as I don't want to see it, he's going to walk.

No one should get convicted of murder on evidence this thin.


Yeah, he should have gotten negligent homicide. He's going to walk.  Terrible case. And Precious wrecked what was left of it on day one. 

On the other hand, she served as a valuable reminder of how pathetic our public education system is.
2013-07-11 09:30:52 AM
1 votes:

Mike_LowELL: If Trayvon didn't kill anyone, then why did he go into hiding?


Trayvon did go into hiding. He's 6 feet under the ground. I think that's a pretty good hiding spot, don't you?


Also, to  Dumbmitter:  "you're last"≠  "your last" (this will probably be fixed by the admins though.)
2013-07-11 09:30:33 AM
1 votes:
Really subby, you're? Goddamn you're stupid.
2013-07-11 09:30:28 AM
1 votes:

kimwim: He's going to walk. Much as I don't want to see it, he's going to walk.


Why don't you want to see it? Tgat is how the American justice system works. You have to find not guilty when the prosecutions whole case is repeating "these assholes" as many times as they can.
2013-07-11 09:29:09 AM
1 votes:

kimwim: He's going to walk. Much as I don't want to see it, he's going to walk.


/Meh, depends on if the jury thinks the populace will riot if he is set free.  They don't really care if a black guy was innocent or not, or deserving of what he got, they just want to see zimmerman fry.  fark the facts or if he deserved it or not. Look at OJ, guilty as hell, and they still celebrated when they let him go.  They even admitted  they found him innocent but didn't want to cause riots.  Hell, most black people i know knew he was guilty as sin, but were happy to see a black guy get away with a crime.  fark the facts.

/My take? They don't have enough evidence to prove that it was murder, let alone manslaughter.  He's gonna walk. Riots, clubbins, korean shop owners shooting at looters. you know the drill.  Any excuse to rob burn and pillage.
2013-07-11 09:29:02 AM
1 votes:
We're gonna have these threads everyday until Zimmerman's been dead for six years

www.pedigreedatabase.com

This just in:  George Zimmerman is still not guilty of murder.
2013-07-11 09:26:52 AM
1 votes:

tripleseven: They should have gone with manslaughter.


As usual, they should've stuck with their first conclusion.
2013-07-11 09:25:58 AM
1 votes:

Nabb1: kimwim: He's going to walk. Much as I don't want to see it, he's going to walk.

No one should get convicted of murder on evidence this thin.


They should have gone with manslaughter.
Pud [TotalFark]
2013-07-11 09:01:39 AM
1 votes:
www.reactiongifs.com
2013-07-11 08:32:56 AM
1 votes:

ChaosStar: You don't want to see justice done?


I do. According to the laws of the state, he will be a free man when this is over, that is, he won't be in jail. Whether he'll be free in his mind is another matter.
2013-07-11 08:30:02 AM
1 votes:
Until he's dead? Maybe he will get shot dead while trying to walk home with some Skittles.
2013-07-11 07:55:48 AM
1 votes:

ChaosStar: The Muthaship: ChaosStar: Anyone else working on a thread badge?
I'd hate to do it only to have someone else make a better one than my under-developed image manipulation skills can produce.
/though I have a great concept for one

You forgot to say "Drink!"

Now someone needs to submit another thread.....

/sigh
It's early, ok? My liver just can't handle this anymore and has finally swayed my brain to cross the aisle.
Much like these threads have swayed the, what do you call them, J4T people?


Apparently he attacked the wrong man, and got instant justice.
 
Displayed 289 of 289 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report