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.

(MSN)   Zimmerman worried about vigilantes who may try to take the law into their own hands   (news.msn.com) divider line 825
    More: Ironic, George Zimmerman, attorney-in-fact, Latin phrases, Mark O'Mara, manslaughter  
•       •       •

7839 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Jul 2013 at 4:06 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-14 06:47:18 PM

TuteTibiImperes: FTA: "He's going to be looking over his shoulder the rest of his life," Robert Zimmerman Jr. said during an interview on CNN.


Good. That arrogant pendejo brought this upon himself.

I wonder how he'll react the first time a black guy starts following him around his neighborhood at night.

The coward, if he's smart, will leave this country for one that doesn't have many black people.
 
2013-07-14 06:49:13 PM
ununcle: The word has lost all meaning the last couple of decades for anyone with common sense.. Mainstream media legitimizing the constructs of "institutional racism" and "white privilege" has imbedded in the minds of a whole generation of blacks that ALL whites are racist. So what farking difference does it make? After this trial we may start hearing terms like "Hispanic privilege".


Pretty sure I heard "hispanic privilege" in the discussion over immigration reform already
 
2013-07-14 06:49:24 PM

clowncar on fire: Treygreen13: Mouser: teenage mutant ninja rapist: So just for future refrence guys I have to ask a simple question. Are mexicans white people now?

Relatively speaking.  For good or ill, people may begin to realize that racism is not a binary scheme, but a sliding scale of demeaning the person of darker shaded skin than yours.

Or lighter. It isn't fair to claim that racism is against darker people only. You should hear my Vietnamese mother in law talk about Chinese people.

Japanese use to talk that way about the Koreans as well.  Funny thing is now, Koreans are the bomb with the Japanese youth.  Most Japanese drama these days are really dubbed in Korea shows


Not sure how this ties in with Trey/George, though. What was the question again?


I dunno. Just wanted to note that racism isn't strictly a matter of melanin density.
 
2013-07-14 06:49:39 PM

genner: clowncar on fire: seadoo2006: hardinparamedic: seadoo2006: There's also no legal prohibition either.

Actually, there is. It's called impersonating a police officer. Your HCP does not make you the po-po.

Treygreen13: You should also note that is irrelevant to this case, which had been resolved with a fair trial.

The criminal case has been resolved. The civil case, if allowed under Florida law, will hinge on that fact, among many others.

There's no proof the weapon was ever brandished or exposed until Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, thus giving him the legal right to shoot the little bastard.

No proof that he didn't brandish it causing Trey to go into self defense mode either.

That's where the whole innocent until proven guilty thing comes in.


Oh.
So defending yourself against a brandished weapon vs he didn't know I was carrying has no bearing on this case?
 
2013-07-14 06:49:51 PM

Elegy: Now you're just being silly. Silly, silly man.


i1.ytimg.com

That's silly sah. Silly!
 
2013-07-14 06:50:32 PM

Mouser: teenage mutant ninja rapist: So just for future refrence guys I have to ask a simple question. Are mexicans white people now?

Relatively speaking.  For good or ill, people may begin to realize that racism is not a binary scheme, but a sliding scale of demeaning the person of darker diffrent shaded skin than yours.


FIFY
 
2013-07-14 06:51:01 PM

clowncar on fire: genner: clowncar on fire: seadoo2006: hardinparamedic: seadoo2006: There's also no legal prohibition either.

Actually, there is. It's called impersonating a police officer. Your HCP does not make you the po-po.

Treygreen13: You should also note that is irrelevant to this case, which had been resolved with a fair trial.

The criminal case has been resolved. The civil case, if allowed under Florida law, will hinge on that fact, among many others.

There's no proof the weapon was ever brandished or exposed until Trayvon was on top of him, beating him, thus giving him the legal right to shoot the little bastard.

No proof that he didn't brandish it causing Trey to go into self defense mode either.

That's where the whole innocent until proven guilty thing comes in.

Oh.
So defending yourself against a brandished weapon vs he didn't know I was carrying has no bearing on this case?


Of course it does.......if there was any evidence indicating that. The lack of evidence either way means Zimmerman walks.
 
2013-07-14 06:51:26 PM
"Hey, I got away with it *once*... I'll bet I can do this a dozen times, now!"
 
2013-07-14 06:51:28 PM

Befuddled: Why do so many quote Zimmerman's BS account of what happened as if it were proven fact? His account is totally unbelievable. Zimmerman was incredibly lucky that there were no other witnesses to his crime so he could make up a story that would vindicate him and that the investigators to his crime were incompetent.


You're right, not one other witness substantiated his claims.

Except the majority of the witnesses provided testimony that did, in fact, support his story.

And the physical evidence substantiated those his story, including his injuries.

And the forensic evidence detailing the circumstances of the shot.

But you're right, there was no way to substantiate Zimmerman's claims, other than his own word.
 
2013-07-14 06:52:04 PM

Befuddled: Why do so many quote Zimmerman's BS account of what happened as if it were proven fact? His account is totally unbelievable. Zimmerman was incredibly lucky that there were no other witnesses to his crime so he could make up a story that would vindicate him and that the investigators to his crime were incompetent.


You are aware there was a witness to the attack, right?

Oh, what does it matter? Even if you did look it up you'd never come back. Why do I even bother?
 
2013-07-14 06:53:11 PM

Elegy: I see this thread has brought out the ugly side of Fark.

Clamoring for mob justice against a man who was found not guilty by the American judicial system.

Stay classy, guys.


Yeah, it came out in full force after the verdict and getting progressively worse in each thread.  Same people who don't know the meanings of the words they use, what the evidence is, or are lying through their teeth(or fingers on the internet I guess) so that they can further a pet cause.

Only now with the verdict out their indignations is more righteous, in their mind's eye anyhow.

I came to the conclusion in one of the other threads.  This is a unifying cause.  It really brings together people from all walks of life to be ignorant as a populace.

Anti-gun, pro-violence, traditionally reversed racists, white-guilt liberal dupes, that good ol' catholic "killing is always a sin" type of conservative, soccer moms who deny the faults in their own kids(such as violence, drug use, attempting to buy guns illegally), internet modmins who will label people's posts as "hatespeech", anti-fat people(in GZ's case), pro-fat people(In Rachel Jenteals case), cop-haters as well as those who seek to remove power from everyone and revel in the security of the nanny state, the list goes on and on.

All types really, all brought under one huge umbrella of ignorance with an agenda to speak out against the intellectual's they falsely perceive as racists and the few racists that happen to ally with us.

Mrbogey: TuteTibiImperes: FTA: "He's going to be looking over his shoulder the rest of his life," Robert Zimmerman Jr. said during an interview on CNN.

I wonder how he'll react the first time a black guy starts following him around his neighborhood at night.

He'll probably call the cops instead of a slow girl in Miami.

i1.ytimg.com
/doesn't see what you did there
//even though she's looking right at it
___________________________________________________________

I really don't get it, all of the outrage and complaining and fabricating or willful ignorance of the evidence and the law.

There are plenty of cases where race actually was involved in the motive to campaign against.  Apparently that's not important to the people complaining here(or simply not understood...). They then wonder why people dislike them as an individual...well not really, some just call it racism, even though it's an individual judgement of character based on action.  In any other thread it's labeled as the repercussions of idiot's practicing free speech(ie Paula Dean threads).

I know it boils down to ineptitude or cognitive dissonance, but it's still amazing to see it, like the path of a devastating storm.  Awe inspiring destruction.
 
2013-07-14 06:53:13 PM

Mrtraveler01: So Martin attacked Zimmerman from his truck?


I'm curious, how buff are you after more than a year of moving the goal posts?
 
2013-07-14 06:53:15 PM

Befuddled: Why do so many quote Zimmerman's BS account of what happened as if it were proven fact? His account is totally unbelievable. Zimmerman was incredibly lucky that there were no other witnesses to his crime so he could make up a story that would vindicate him and that the investigators to his crime were incompetent.


Ok, I'll bite.

What do you think happened.
Keep in mind what happened the other 46 times he called 911, his 1/10 rating from the MMA instructor, his history of working across racial lines to help people (the black homeless person, the tutoring), the bruises he had and the lack of any on Martin.
Throw in his reenactment for the police (he didn't lawyer up) and the consistency of all the prosecution witnesses.

Go ahead, tell me what happened and be specific.
 
2013-07-14 06:53:16 PM

genner: The lack of evidence either way melaninmeans Zimmerman walks.


There we go.
 
2013-07-14 06:53:52 PM

jaytkay: Carth: jaytkay: reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm

I think you'd have a very hard time proving to a jury that a person following you makes you "in imminent peril of death or great bodily" harm. And considering Martin was on the phone and flat out said he wasn't afraid of Zimmerman we know that isn't the case here.

I'm not making any claims about the Zimmerman case. I was just pointing out that Florida law actually does allow self defense, even deadly self defense, based on fear alone.


Only if the fear is reasonable, and according to the law you quoted only if someone is trying to break into your house. But like you said the law you quoted has nothing to do with the case or whether someone following you is grounds for self defense.

You're right I should have been more specific when I was talking about whether fear was a justification as i meant with regards to the case and didn't say so.
 
2013-07-14 06:54:38 PM
Okay - I am satisfied - been waiting since the verdict for the more vocal Zimmerman defenders, whose chorus has been absolute assertion they KNOW exactly what happened, to the current: "there was no evidence, so he walks" as posted here several times.

Sometimes, it's painful to see ahead and not be in Vegas.

Goodnight everyone
 
2013-07-14 06:54:53 PM

Lenny_da_Hog: genner: The lack of evidence either way melaninmeans Zimmerman walks.

There we go.


If Zimmerman was black no one would care about this case and he would have walked away months ago.
 
2013-07-14 06:54:57 PM

Treygreen13: Dimensio: jaytkay: Carth: I've never seen a law that says you can hit someone for being afraid of them

The Florida self defense statute states, "A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another...

Fear. That's the standard. You can attack someone if you are afraid they will harm you.

Link

I do not understand how hou have failed to comprehend the law that you have quoted directly. Based upon the wording of the law, an unreasonable fear is not legal justification for the use of deadly force.

Dimensio, you have the patience of Buddha. How do you remain so diplomatic?


I have learned to disable my emotional processing.
 
2013-07-14 06:55:00 PM

Treygreen13: clowncar on fire: Treygreen13: Mouser: teenage mutant ninja rapist: So just for future refrence guys I have to ask a simple question. Are mexicans white people now?

Relatively speaking.  For good or ill, people may begin to realize that racism is not a binary scheme, but a sliding scale of demeaning the person of darker shaded skin than yours.

Or lighter. It isn't fair to claim that racism is against darker people only. You should hear my Vietnamese mother in law talk about Chinese people.

Japanese use to talk that way about the Koreans as well.  Funny thing is now, Koreans are the bomb with the Japanese youth.  Most Japanese drama these days are really dubbed in Korea shows


Not sure how this ties in with Trey/George, though. What was the question again?

I dunno. Just wanted to note that racism isn't strictly a matter of melanin density.


Nips pale. Chosenjin paler.  Got it.
 
2013-07-14 06:55:22 PM

Dimensio: jaytkay: Carth: I've never seen a law that says you can hit someone for being afraid of them

The Florida self defense statute states, "A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another...

Fear. That's the standard. You can attack someone if you are afraid they will harm you.

Link

I do not understand how hou have failed to comprehend the law that you have quoted directly. Based upon the wording of the law, an unreasonable fear is not legal justification for the use of deadly force.


You're arguing against a claim I did not make.

I simply said that self defense can be based on fear.
 
2013-07-14 06:55:49 PM

parasol: Okay - I am satisfied - been waiting since the verdict for the more vocal Zimmerman defenders, whose chorus has been absolute assertion they KNOW exactly what happened, to the current: "there was no evidence, so he walks" as posted here several times.

Sometimes, it's painful to see ahead and not be in Vegas.

Goodnight everyone


Well, bye.
 
2013-07-14 06:56:24 PM

omeganuepsilon: He'll probably call the cops instead of a slow girl in Miami.


Colorful you damn racist, colorful!!!
 
2013-07-14 06:57:06 PM

stiletto_the_wise: Sofa_king_kewl: This is why I love Fark so much, it's a site inion dated with arm chair lawyers, self righteous  liberals and a bunch of just plan old assholes. He was found not guilty, I hope he still carries his weapon, he may need it.

I'd like to see the same people who believe O.J. "obviously" did it come here to explain to us all how Zimmerman can't possibly be a murderer because he was found not guilty.


Since you asked, okay.

Just because you think somebody is following you does not give you the right to ambush them and start being them up. Instead of running your mouth and uttering racial epithets to your girlfriend you could... Hang up the phone and call the cops.

When somebody is on top of you beating you up and hitting your head against the ground may I ask what the appropriate level of force to defend yourself is? I realize that people got hung up in the BS story that he just walked up and shot somebody in cold blood but the facts and evidence supported precisely what he said... That Martin was on top of him, pummeling him, and that Zimmerman shot him in self defense.

It was almost a riot to read here on Fark. First it was a white guy just walked up and shot a black kid. Okay, it was actually a 'white hispanic' guy. The kid attacked him? This was called a lie. Oh wait, pictures of his injuries. Well um... it's still Zimmerman's fault SOMEHOW... Right? Come on right?
 
2013-07-14 06:57:33 PM

seadoo2006: http://weaselzippers.us/2013/07/14/the-picture-of-trayvon-on-night-he - was-shot-that-the-msm-didnt-show/

[weaselzippers.us image 548x346]


Yeah,, but the camera adds 5 inches.
 
2013-07-14 06:58:10 PM

parasol: Okay - I am satisfied - been waiting since the verdict for the more vocal Zimmerman defenders, whose chorus has been absolute assertion they KNOW exactly what happened, to the current: "there was no evidence, so he walks" as posted here several times.

Sometimes, it's painful to see ahead and not be in Vegas.

Goodnight everyone


Well, I'm glad that you feel you proved.... something.

Whatever, as long as your smug sense of superiority remains intact, this was a win, amirite?
 
2013-07-14 06:58:22 PM

ununcle: seadoo2006: http://weaselzippers.us/2013/07/14/the-picture-of-trayvon-on-night-he - was-shot-that-the-msm-didnt-show/

[weaselzippers.us image 548x346]

Yeah,, but the camera adds 5 inches.


So that's how the porn industry does it....
 
2013-07-14 06:58:58 PM
I sense a "To Kill A Mockingbird" outcome in some near future.

No one's going to give a damn when poor Zimmermann "accidentally" falls on his "knife".
 
2013-07-14 06:59:15 PM

Representative of the unwashed masses: true that may be but the spate of pictures intending to paint the kid as a lowlife is spitting in his families face.


they've reaped what they sowed.
 
2013-07-14 06:59:50 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Or maybe Drew is just allowing inflammatory shiat to be posted because it generates page views.


You would know.
 
2013-07-14 07:00:33 PM

ggecko: THIS GUY has it right:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXFi0l--NPI


You should have read the rest of that thread.
That dude is an insane black self-supremacist that hates everyone, but mostly black women.
His blog is insane. He's severely mentally ill.
 
2013-07-14 07:02:08 PM

jaytkay: Dimensio: jaytkay: Carth: I've never seen a law that says you can hit someone for being afraid of them

The Florida self defense statute states, "A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another...

Fear. That's the standard. You can attack someone if you are afraid they will harm you.

Link

I do not understand how hou have failed to comprehend the law that you have quoted directly. Based upon the wording of the law, an unreasonable fear is not legal justification for the use of deadly force.

You're arguing against a claim I did not make.

I simply said that self defense can be based on fear.


You quoted a Florida statute relating to the justified use ofdeadly force anf concluded that fear is a reason to use deadly force, when in fact the statute that you quoted only justifies deadly force when a fear is reasonable. Not all fear is reasonable, thus your conclusion is not universially applicable.
 
2013-07-14 07:02:57 PM
why does a Mexican dude have a Jewish name? has no one noticed this?
 
2013-07-14 07:03:18 PM

hardinparamedic: Molavian: 776.012 is:

You might want to go back and read 776.032. The shooting was never ruled a justified use of force under that statute. He was acquitted of Manslaughter and Second Degree murder charges.


From my understanding, he was found "not guilty" even though he incontrovertibly did do the shooting.  That means, as a concept, it was justified use of force, otherwise it would have been "guilty".(and hence the irrelevance of OJ's 2 trial outcomes)

Whether it provides immunity, no one seems to have a clear answer, but it may be that it's a matter of paperwork after the  unanimous verdict is out.  I'm sure we'll hear more on Monday and after.

The Defense team did say they'd seek and get immunity if any suits are filed.
 
2013-07-14 07:03:27 PM
For no reason at all, Mark O'Mara's wife.

unitedstatespilatesassociation.com
 
2013-07-14 07:04:47 PM

Popcorn Johnny: Every African American in the United States need to move their money, family, knowledge back to Africa... http://t.co/gYiO6y8zjB- AKON (@Akon) July 14, 2013


Who wants a coke?
 
2013-07-14 07:05:03 PM

Mouser: teenage mutant ninja rapist: So just for future refrence guys I have to ask a simple question. Are mexicans white people now?

Relatively speaking.  For good or ill, people may begin to realize that racism is not a binary scheme, but a sliding scale of demeaning the person of darker shaded skin than yours.


Or lighter, if you live in Asia or Hawaii.
 
2013-07-14 07:06:17 PM
So, has anyone seen the Kill Zimmermanfacebook page that Facebook has declined to take down because "It doesn't constitute hate speech"?
 
2013-07-14 07:06:19 PM

Popcorn Johnny: For no reason at all, Mark O'Mara's wife.

[unitedstatespilatesassociation.com image 298x448]


OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR!!!!
 
2013-07-14 07:06:58 PM
He walked, it was the right thing legally, but probably not the right thing morally. I honestly hope he gets ass cancer and dies a slow, horrible death.
 
2013-07-14 07:07:47 PM

stiletto_the_wise: Sofa_king_kewl: This is why I love Fark so much, it's a site inion dated with arm chair lawyers, self righteous  liberals and a bunch of just plan old assholes. He was found not guilty, I hope he still carries his weapon, he may need it.

I'd like to see the same people who believe O.J. "obviously" did it come here to explain to us all how Zimmerman can't possibly be a murderer because he was found not guilty.


Good luck with that.  Hypocrisy knows no bounds...
 
2013-07-14 07:08:46 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Azlefty: I hear he has made quite a tidy profit, with at least one book deal to come. On the other hand, the civil suits haven't even started yet

That was covered pretty well in last nights thread; under Florida law he is immune from civil suits since he was acquitted.

While that sucks for the Martin family, I do agree with that - if you're acquitted in a criminal case you shouldn't face civil liability for the same incident.


Why? The standard of proof is completely different and the defendant cannot refuse to testify in a civil suit. There's a much greater likelyhood of getting to the truth in a civil suit.
 
2013-07-14 07:10:00 PM

Madbassist1: Popcorn Johnny: For no reason at all, Mark O'Mara's wife.

[unitedstatespilatesassociation.com image 298x448]

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR!!!!


On what mounds?
 
2013-07-14 07:10:03 PM
Fark me you guys are way off on racism. Everybody has a little racist in them. Hell black folks are some of the most racist people around. Ever wonder why they keep calling eachother ni**er? Most white folks are racist to. But because of the college "enlightend" crowd, they cant just come out and say it.

calling george a white racist is pretty off base being as he was pretty much a heinz 57. Looking like a mexican.

yeah I am a white guy. Dont hate anyone specifically because of race. I mean an idiot is an idiot regardless of color. But you have to judge someone on a first impression. Race is a factor in that impression. It just is.

my ex wife is black like eddie and charlie murphy. My boy is somewhere in between my pasty white ass and wesley snipes black. He is a brown boy.

geuss who caused our realationship the most problems?
her racist ass mother hates white folks.


so yeah no group gets to be self righteous in the racism discussion. Cause there is lots of blame for everyone to share in.
 
2013-07-14 07:10:27 PM

markb289: TuteTibiImperes: Azlefty: I hear he has made quite a tidy profit, with at least one book deal to come. On the other hand, the civil suits haven't even started yet

That was covered pretty well in last nights thread; under Florida law he is immune from civil suits since he was acquitted.

While that sucks for the Martin family, I do agree with that - if you're acquitted in a criminal case you shouldn't face civil liability for the same incident.

Why? The standard of proof is completely different and the defendant cannot refuse to testify in a civil suit. There's a much greater likelyhood of getting to the truth in a civil suit.


Personally I believe the standard of proof for civil suits is too low, and they don't require unanimous verdicts.  The criminal system get's it right, IMO, and the burden of proof shouldn't be less just because it's a civil case.
 
2013-07-14 07:10:51 PM

Mouser: For good or ill, people may begin to realize that racism is not a binary scheme, but a sliding scale of demeaning the person of darker shaded skin than yours.


Your bias is revealed in your assumptions.
 
2013-07-14 07:11:20 PM

Owangotang: He walked, it was the right thing legally, but probably not the right thing morally.


what did he do that was immoral?
How long should he have been beaten before he tried to stop it with more than yelling for his life?
 
2013-07-14 07:11:25 PM
Lorelle:  if he's smart, will leave this country for one that doesn't have many black people.

oi40.tinypic.com

It's... beautiful.
 
2013-07-14 07:11:44 PM

randomjsa: It was almost a riot to read here on Fark. First it was a white guy just walked up and shot a black kid. Okay, it was actually a 'white hispanic' guy. The kid attacked him? This was called a lie. Oh wait, pictures of his injuries. Well um... it's still Zimmerman's fault SOMEHOW... Right? Come on right?


Yeah, the evolution of their arguments over time is almost stunning.  As we saw with the prosecution, people will resort to pleas of emotion when lacking any and all evidence.

Religion is perceived as dying out, I think People appear to be just shifting the direction of their BeliefsTM.  This is evidenced by a great many atheists that tend to just happen to be atheist but haven't put much thought into it, and how some are every bit as bad as vehemently religious types.  Same for liberals/conservatives.  Same faults in logic, just different dogma or moral perception of right/wrong, still shooting from the gut.

Sad really.
 
2013-07-14 07:15:04 PM
"I do believe that where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence I would advise violence,"

When my eldest son asked me what he should have done, had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908, whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defended me, I told him that  it was his duty to defend me even by using violence.

Gandi:  Doctrine of the Sword.
 
2013-07-14 07:15:09 PM

Dimensio: You quoted a Florida statute relating to the justified use ofdeadly force anf concluded that fear is a reason to use deadly force, when in fact the statute that you quoted only justifies deadly force when a fear is reasonable. Not all fear is reasonable, thus your conclusion is not universially applicable.


I did not say it was "universally applicable" or imply anything about unreasonable fear being a valid defense.

Stop injecting arguments I did not make. Your "emotional processing" is clouding your reading comprehension.
 
Displayed 50 of 825 comments

First | « | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report