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.

(Yahoo)   Authorities report widespread not rioting all over the country in the wake of the Zimmerman trial verdict, as many as zero people have been killed or injured in the lack of violence so far   (gma.yahoo.com) divider line 880
    More: Followup, KABC-TV, WABC-TV, marchers, Manhattan neighborhoods, acquittals, verdicts, riots, violence  
•       •       •

2946 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jul 2013 at 10:14 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



880 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
 
2013-07-15 12:05:33 PM  
I agree with the jury.

Only because of the facts I've read. Not the opinions of emotional derp spreaders.
 
2013-07-15 12:05:59 PM  

Carth: Are you allowed to carry guns in Target? I know some stores post "no gun" signs but I never checked if you're allowed to CCW in Target.


I think Target carries CCW on CD.

longshotsblues.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-07-15 12:06:17 PM  
DROxINxTHExWIND:
I think I found your problem. You and a lot of others here. Zimmerman's account of the incident is not and should not be viewed as "fact".

But how else are they going to definitively state that Martin started it while admonishing others for definitively stating Zimmerman shared blame.
 
2013-07-15 12:06:46 PM  

Dimensio: Millennium: Dimensio: According to Florida statutes regarding the justified use of force:

776.041Use 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.
History.-s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.

An instigator of a physical confrontation cannot claim justification for use of deadly force unless the instigator attempts but is unable to disengage from the confrontation and is also unable to end the confrontation with lesser force or the instigator has withdrawn from the confrontation but is pursued by the assailant.

Even an instigator can claim self-defense if the other person goes deadly, or presses the attack after the instigator withdraws. I still deny that it is reasonable to call Zimmerman an instigator based solely on what we know, but even if we assume that he was, it would seem that self-defense still applies.

I concur with your assessment, but evidence indicating that Mr. Zimmerman had instigated the physical confrontation would warrant charges based upon the instigation. An individual who commits assault and battery, and then justifiably uses deadly force when an attempt to escape the ensuing physical confrontation fails, has still committed assault and battery. ...


Battery requires injury, simple assault does not
 
2013-07-15 12:06:46 PM  

I_C_Weener: [www.bet.com image 628x353]

What if Trayvon were white?
What if Zimmerman were a black Hispanic?


What is Zimmerman were white?
 
2013-07-15 12:07:35 PM  
Know Justice. Know Peace
 
2013-07-15 12:08:05 PM  

justtray: bulldg4life: justtray: Check your facts if you're going to make the basis of your beliefs on them.

I believe I indicated going off of Jeantel's course of events.

I mean, it is in the post that you quoted and admonished me for.

Zimmerman states that it went:
- Martin says "you got a problem" and hits him

Jeantel states that it went:
- Martin says "why are you following me" while Zimmerman asks "what are you doing here"
- Then there is a struggle.

I'm of the opinion that we don't know which of those is true.

Fair enough. I think both could be true. Very possible neither of them accurately remember what was said or all of what was said.

Based on Jeantel testifying that Trayvon referred to Zimmerman as a creepy ass cracka, it seems very unlikely to me he would then politely start a conversation with "why are you following me[, good sir]?" In my opinion it seems much more likely he would have said the "[Yo] You got a problem??"

Again that's my opinion. We will definitely never know for sure.


Small correction, Tray said "What you followin' me fo'?"
 
2013-07-15 12:08:15 PM  

QueenMamaBee: Marine1: Carth: Are you allowed to carry guns in Target? I know some stores post "no gun" signs but I never checked if you're allowed to CCW in Target.

Depends on state and local laws.

Most "no gun" stores/businesses have the local statute written on them, it should define what places are exempt from the concealed carry law.

Not that everyone listens. I had a guy come in for a drug screen carrying concealed. He had to pass TWO signs saying "no weapons" and the Ky statute number. He said "I didn't think that applied to me." Well, genius, you can take NOTHING in with you when you do the test, what's keeping one of us from taking your gun? Or if he wants the hero scenario, if someone busts in with guns blazing, will he ask them to wait while he retrieves his gun from a locked locker? The only people allowed to carry in the office are the police officers when they come in for their randoms, other than than that.... gotta leave your crap in the car.


In Florida it does not appear that private property owners can bar people from coming in with a concealed weapon but it is highly frowned upon doing so if asked not to.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statut e &Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.06.html">http://www. leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute &Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.06.html

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/florida.pdf
 
2013-07-15 12:08:29 PM  

Cletus C.: justtray: Cletus C.: justtray: Phil McKraken: Marine1:  Is it dickish? Yeah. Should Zimmerman be acting like the cop in the story I told? No. However, punching someone is not the way to go in that situation, no matter what.

There's evidence that Martin swung first?

There's evidence Martin did ALL the swinging. First, middle, and last.

No there isn't. There's evidence Martin is the only one who connected. Considering Zimmerman's fighting skills that's no surprise.

It really makes no practical difference.

If Zimmerman took a swing and missed, Trayvon was still not justified in continuing the assault on the ground while Zimmerman was calling for help, desperately.

What you described is literally the best possible light for Trayvon that could have reasonably occurred. However, it's not supported by any facts or evidence.

And you dutifully mouth unsubstantiated "facts" from the Zimmerman version.


Such as?
 
2013-07-15 12:08:53 PM  

justtray: Based on Jeantel testifying that Trayvon referred to Zimmerman as a creepy ass cracka, it seems very unlikely to me he would then politely start a conversation with "why are you following me[, good sir]?" In my opinion it seems much more likely he would have said the "[Yo] You got a problem??"


Considering Zimmerman's violent past, do you feel that he politely engaged in a conversation?
 
2013-07-15 12:09:09 PM  
The lesson to take away from all of this: If you want a bit of excitement in your life, go out at night in Florida, follow someone around until they get agitated enough to confront you, then shoot them dead.

No evidence necessary.  Your word against a dead person's.  You get off Scot free.

Meanwhile, if you sneeze while driving and run someone over who is crossing the street, enjoy your manslaughter conviction.
 
2013-07-15 12:09:55 PM  

Facetious_Speciest: Cletus C.

Oh no. Just cut and paste where you think her testimony indicated Martin confronted Zimmerman.

Sure. Which transcript are you using?


She testified that Martin said "why are you following me?" In her deposition, she said Zimmerman responded "what are you talking about." In her courtroom testimony she said Zimmerman responded "what are you doing around here?"

Either way, she said Martin said "why are you following me?" This, according to you is Martin initiating a confrontation. Others may see it as a guy wanting to know why some creep is following him around.
 
2013-07-15 12:09:56 PM  

INeedAName: Yes. Some of us actually work with black urban youth, and the non-verbal responses I see in grown adults, every day, when a young black man walks up to them and begins a conversation is repulsive. People grab their purses or pat their pockets to check for their wallets, they step back, they close off their body language, they start to look around for some reason to leave the conversation. It's amazing.


I check my wallet whenever anyone I don't know reasonably well walks too close to me :\
I just get paranoid that someone might take all of my nothing.
 
2013-07-15 12:10:22 PM  

TheSup3rN0va: justtray: bulldg4life: justtray: Check your facts if you're going to make the basis of your beliefs on them.

I believe I indicated going off of Jeantel's course of events.

I mean, it is in the post that you quoted and admonished me for.

Zimmerman states that it went:
- Martin says "you got a problem" and hits him

Jeantel states that it went:
- Martin says "why are you following me" while Zimmerman asks "what are you doing here"
- Then there is a struggle.

I'm of the opinion that we don't know which of those is true.

Fair enough. I think both could be true. Very possible neither of them accurately remember what was said or all of what was said.

Based on Jeantel testifying that Trayvon referred to Zimmerman as a creepy ass cracka, it seems very unlikely to me he would then politely start a conversation with "why are you following me[, good sir]?" In my opinion it seems much more likely he would have said the "[Yo] You got a problem??"

Again that's my opinion. We will definitely never know for sure.

Small correction, Tray said "What you followin' me fo'?"


Actually, Tray said "Why you followin' me fo'?"
 
2013-07-15 12:10:37 PM  

Elegy: Magorn: soupafi: I_C_Weener: What if Trayvon were white?
What if Zimmerman were a black Hispanic?

Zimmerman would face captial murder charges

In FL,  this black woman got twenty years for shooting a <i> Ceiling</i> WHILE she was being attacked by her husband

Why do I have you farkied as a lawyer? That can't be right, a lawyer would be better acquainted with legal facts before opening his or her mouth.


There are additional facts in that case, but the point I was making, a correct one, was that the woman fired a gun into an inanimate object, and still got a 20 year minimum sentence.  That's insane to me, especially in a state that seems to be ENCOURAGING people to resort to violence by passing a SYG law.   I understand subtlety is a difficult concept for you but....
 
2013-07-15 12:10:54 PM  

bulldg4life: justtray: Based on Jeantel testifying that Trayvon referred to Zimmerman as a creepy ass cracka, it seems very unlikely to me he would then politely start a conversation with "why are you following me[, good sir]?" In my opinion it seems much more likely he would have said the "[Yo] You got a problem??"

Considering Zimmerman's violent past, do you feel that he politely engaged in a conversation?


Citation needed
 
2013-07-15 12:10:55 PM  
Phillip J.Fry This just in: This case does not in any way effect you nor is it any statement at all on "society"

What're the odds double99 is a white male?



I thought racial profiling was wrong.
 
2013-07-15 12:11:07 PM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: justtray: Check your facts if you're going to make the basis of your beliefs on them.

Mr. Zimmerman said that as he walked back to his vehicle,  Mr. Martin appeared and said, "You got a problem?" Mr. Zimmerman told him he didn't.
"Well you do now," the teenager replied, according to Mr. Zimmerman's account. Mr. Zimmerman said Mr. Martin punched him in the face as he fumbled for his mobile phone to call 9/11. Mr. Zimmerman said he fell backward and Mr. Martin got on top of him and slammed his head on the concrete sidewalk.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/06/21/zimmermans-version-of-events-mad e- public/


I think I found your problem. You and a lot of others here. Zimmerman's account of the incident is not and should not be viewed as "fact".


It's a fact that he said that, that he's on the recorded call saying it. You seem mad.

It is a fact that you selectively editted my post to remove the portion where I was proving Zimmerman did not say he was hit from behind with no speaking beforehand.

What a shocker that you're a totally dishonest person.
 
2013-07-15 12:11:25 PM  
Cletus C.

This, according to you is Martin initiating a confrontation. Others may see it as a guy wanting to know why some creep is following him around.

[whynotboth.jpg]
 
2013-07-15 12:12:02 PM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: I think I found your problem. You and a lot of others here. Zimmerman's account of the incident is not and should not be viewed as "fact".


Yes, his is the only full story, so it is suspect but only that.  It does not directly necessitate that he is lying.  Much of his story is backed up by things that are fact and even a vast amount of testimony from other witnesses, even some of what Rachel Jeantel said corroborates what Zimm said.  Zimm's story came before he ever had exposure to said witness testimony and even some of the evidence.

Once occam's razor has it's way, Zimm's not discredited in the least.  Problematic for your perception of reality, sure, that's a problem many mentally challenged people with daily.  You'll get over it.

Elegy: That can't be right, a lawyer would be better acquainted with legal facts before opening his or her mouth.


A lot of guest lawyers on TV push similarly ignorant agenda's.  Education =\= Intelligence
 
2013-07-15 12:12:14 PM  
If Trayvon had turned around and aid, "Why you be followin' me?" instead of attacking him, Trayvon woud be alive today.

i1308.photobucket.com

NO JUSTICE, NO GEORGE!
 
2013-07-15 12:12:15 PM  
I'm glad Zimmerman was found not guilty.  And since most of Fark, who was at the scene of the killing every bit as much as I was, can say Zimmerman stalked Martin, I can say Martin was a no good thug that attacked Zimmerman and got his thug ass killed for it.  Good.  Another piece of shiat low life criminal off the streets,

Won't somebody think of the Skittles?

keepcalmandtrayvon.com
 
2013-07-15 12:12:41 PM  

justtray: Cletus C.: justtray: Cletus C.: justtray: Phil McKraken: Marine1:  Is it dickish? Yeah. Should Zimmerman be acting like the cop in the story I told? No. However, punching someone is not the way to go in that situation, no matter what.

There's evidence that Martin swung first?

There's evidence Martin did ALL the swinging. First, middle, and last.

No there isn't. There's evidence Martin is the only one who connected. Considering Zimmerman's fighting skills that's no surprise.

It really makes no practical difference.

If Zimmerman took a swing and missed, Trayvon was still not justified in continuing the assault on the ground while Zimmerman was calling for help, desperately.

What you described is literally the best possible light for Trayvon that could have reasonably occurred. However, it's not supported by any facts or evidence.

And you dutifully mouth unsubstantiated "facts" from the Zimmerman version.

Such as?


There you go. No definitive proof Martin was "continuing the assault" and certainly no definitive evidence it was Zimmerman's voice calling for help.
 
2013-07-15 12:12:57 PM  

AngryDragon: Bontesla: joness0154: AngryDragon: Meanwhile in Chicago...

[i847.photobucket.com image 401x317]

That's the thing that really drives me crazy.  We have children and teenagers (mostly black) getting shot and dying on the streets of Chicago on a nightly basis, yet one unfortunate event in Florida gets everyone's panties in a bunch?

What gives?

The issue wasn't the murder as much as it was the inadequate investigation and the lack of charges brought. We know who killed Martin and nothing much was done.

Two different law enforcement agencies, one local and one federal, found no cause to bring charges.  The State Prosecutor even bypassed a grand jury specifically to get the charges filed.  Ostensibly because she KNEW a grand jury would never send it to trial.

Turns out they were right all along.  This case should never have gone to a trial and the circus surrounding it is a complete travesty.


I think the legal outcome was consistent with the law based on what was presented. The jurors did their job.

With that said - anyone who thinks that the investigation was thorough probably has a poor understanding of how that process works.

There's some evidence that cannot be collected during a secondary investigation and was not preserved or collected during the first.

It really doesn't matter how many subsequent investigations were conducted if the first was inadequate .
 
2013-07-15 12:14:10 PM  

bulldg4life: justtray: Based on Jeantel testifying that Trayvon referred to Zimmerman as a creepy ass cracka, it seems very unlikely to me he would then politely start a conversation with "why are you following me[, good sir]?" In my opinion it seems much more likely he would have said the "[Yo] You got a problem??"

Considering Zimmerman's violent past, do you feel that he politely engaged in a conversation?


Please cite this violent past. I'll wait.

And considering his NON-violent past calls of suspicious behaviors to police, yes, I don't think he likely said anything close to 'fighting words' that would justify an attack. I'm open to changing my opinion if you give me some plausable scenarios. Do you think he said, 'hey ni-bong im gonna shoot you in a minute!?'
 
2013-07-15 12:16:08 PM  

justtray: bulldg4life: justtray: Based on Jeantel testifying that Trayvon referred to Zimmerman as a creepy ass cracka, it seems very unlikely to me he would then politely start a conversation with "why are you following me[, good sir]?" In my opinion it seems much more likely he would have said the "[Yo] You got a problem??"

Considering Zimmerman's violent past, do you feel that he politely engaged in a conversation?

Please cite this violent past. I'll wait.

And considering his NON-violent past calls of suspicious behaviors to police, yes, I don't think he likely said anything close to 'fighting words' that would justify an attack. I'm open to changing my opinion if you give me some plausable scenarios. Do you think he said, 'hey ni-bong im gonna shoot you in a minute!?'


I heard somewhere he almost beat a police officer unconscious but wasn't convicted because of some quick lawyering by his family. I don't know if it is true but people keep saying it so there must be something behind it.
 
2013-07-15 12:16:26 PM  

justtray: DROxINxTHExWIND: justtray: Check your facts if you're going to make the basis of your beliefs on them.

Mr. Zimmerman said that as he walked back to his vehicle,  Mr. Martin appeared and said, "You got a problem?" Mr. Zimmerman told him he didn't.
"Well you do now," the teenager replied, according to Mr. Zimmerman's account. Mr. Zimmerman said Mr. Martin punched him in the face as he fumbled for his mobile phone to call 9/11. Mr. Zimmerman said he fell backward and Mr. Martin got on top of him and slammed his head on the concrete sidewalk.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/06/21/zimmermans-version-of-events-mad e- public/


I think I found your problem. You and a lot of others here. Zimmerman's account of the incident is not and should not be viewed as "fact".

It's a fact that he said that, that he's on the recorded call saying it. You seem mad.

It is a fact that you selectively editted my post to remove the portion where I was proving Zimmerman did not say he was hit from behind with no speaking beforehand.

What a shocker that you're a totally dishonest person.



Thats not true, sir.

/My post has nothing to do with Zimmerman being hit from behind, so that part of your post was immaterial.
 
2013-07-15 12:16:44 PM  

creepy ass-cracka: TheSup3rN0va: justtray: bulldg4life: justtray: Check your facts if you're going to make the basis of your beliefs on them.

I believe I indicated going off of Jeantel's course of events.

I mean, it is in the post that you quoted and admonished me for.

Zimmerman states that it went:
- Martin says "you got a problem" and hits him

Jeantel states that it went:
- Martin says "why are you following me" while Zimmerman asks "what are you doing here"
- Then there is a struggle.

I'm of the opinion that we don't know which of those is true.

Fair enough. I think both could be true. Very possible neither of them accurately remember what was said or all of what was said.

Based on Jeantel testifying that Trayvon referred to Zimmerman as a creepy ass cracka, it seems very unlikely to me he would then politely start a conversation with "why are you following me[, good sir]?" In my opinion it seems much more likely he would have said the "[Yo] You got a problem??"

Again that's my opinion. We will definitely never know for sure.

Small correction, Tray said "What you followin' me fo'?"

Actually, Tray said "Why you followin' me fo'?"


Surprisingly, her testimony saying that led me to believe she was being more truthful there. I wonder if that makes me racist...

Also, lets not call him Tray, it confuses me.... (see screenname)
 
2013-07-15 12:16:53 PM  

Magorn: Elegy: Magorn: soupafi: I_C_Weener: What if Trayvon were white?
What if Zimmerman were a black Hispanic?

Zimmerman would face captial murder charges

In FL,  this black woman got twenty years for shooting a <i> Ceiling</i> WHILE she was being attacked by her husband

Why do I have you farkied as a lawyer? That can't be right, a lawyer would be better acquainted with legal facts before opening his or her mouth.

There are additional facts in that case, but the point I was making, a correct one, was that the woman fired a gun into an inanimate object, and still got a 20 year minimum sentence.  That's insane to me, especially in a state that seems to be ENCOURAGING people to resort to violence by passing a SYG law.   I understand subtlety is a difficult concept for you but....


She fired a shot into an inanimate object in the same vicinity as her ex and two children while not fearing for her life and violating a restraining order. I mean she was caught on tape saying "I have something for you."

If you actually read the case, there's not much dispute. She's as guilty as water is wet. They offered her 3 years with time served. She turned it down. Now 20 years is a ridiculous sentence for a crime where no one was hurt, but that's what you often get with mandatory minimums.
 
2013-07-15 12:17:09 PM  

TheSup3rN0va: Citation needed


justtray: Please cite this violent past. I'll wait.


He was arrested and charged with resisting a police officer with violence. He agreed to enter an alcohol education program and the charges waived.

I guess we could even ignore the "run of the mill" domestic violence issues.

Do you feel that both of those are completely explainable and give no indication of his temperament?
 
2013-07-15 12:17:56 PM  

Rueened: someonelse: Rueened: It was more like about 5 aging hippies and a scruffy dog than the 'million' they were claiming.

Demonstrably untrue, and everything you say from here on out should be distrusted.

Please proceed.


For the record, you are claiming that the below pics are "more like about 5 aging hippies and a scruffy dog than the 'million' they were claiming." Even if the "million" estimates were way high and exaggerated, you are still laughably, demonstrably wrong. Although, I suppose we could ask people to look at the pictures and answer the question: Do these look more like "millions" or "5 aging hippies and a scruffy dog." You know, to be scientific about it.

upload.wikimedia.org

i.huffpost.com

img.dailymail.co.uk

i.huffpost.com
 
2013-07-15 12:18:24 PM  
 
2013-07-15 12:19:18 PM  

Bontesla: redmid17: Bontesla: joness0154: AngryDragon: Meanwhile in Chicago...

[i847.photobucket.com image 401x317]

That's the thing that really drives me crazy.  We have children and teenagers (mostly black) getting shot and dying on the streets of Chicago on a nightly basis, yet one unfortunate event in Florida gets everyone's panties in a bunch?

What gives?

The issue wasn't the murder as much as it was the inadequate investigation and the lack of charges brought. We know who killed Martin and nothing much was done.

The investigation was so inadequate that the 2nd investigation including federal authorities and a new prosecutor found nothing new? Where they more or less lied in the affidavit of probable cause? Where the defense was denied information during the discovery phase by the state attorney's office?

The original investigation was inadequate. We're talking about the preservation of forensic evidence, toxicology of the suspect, and so on. The second review was merely a reexamination of the previously collected evidence and a few additional interviews. The first investigation was problematic.


What would the toxicology report have shown that would have changed the outcome of the trial? Even if Martin was under the influence of drugs that affected the jury, Zim already walked.

Preserving the evidence would and should have been done in a better manner, but the lack of good forensic evidence hurt Zimmerman more than it helped him.
 
2013-07-15 12:19:42 PM  

Cletus C.: justtray: Cletus C.: justtray: Cletus C.: justtray: Phil McKraken: Marine1:  Is it dickish? Yeah. Should Zimmerman be acting like the cop in the story I told? No. However, punching someone is not the way to go in that situation, no matter what.

There's evidence that Martin swung first?

There's evidence Martin did ALL the swinging. First, middle, and last.

No there isn't. There's evidence Martin is the only one who connected. Considering Zimmerman's fighting skills that's no surprise.

It really makes no practical difference.

If Zimmerman took a swing and missed, Trayvon was still not justified in continuing the assault on the ground while Zimmerman was calling for help, desperately.

What you described is literally the best possible light for Trayvon that could have reasonably occurred. However, it's not supported by any facts or evidence.

And you dutifully mouth unsubstantiated "facts" from the Zimmerman version.

Such as?

There you go. No definitive proof Martin was "continuing the assault" and certainly no definitive evidence it was Zimmerman's voice calling for help.


Actually, it's pretty definitive. The witness Good testified to it, the defense trouted out about 6-8 people who testified it was absolutely Zimmerman when having heard the call the first time alone, and that even Trayvon's own father at the very least implied it was not his son to police officers, who testified to it. The Martin family that said it was Trayvon had absolutely no credibility and did not follow any legal procedure when identifying it as him.

It's not proof, but if you watched the case, it was definitive, in my opinion.
 
2013-07-15 12:20:21 PM  

urbangirl: The Muthaship: urbangirl: What precise part of my comment is factually incorrect?

All of it.

But, you aren't alone.

Perhaps you can tell me by number which of my statement is factually incorrect:

1) Police tell Zimmerman to stay in his car.
2) Zimmerman gets out of his car anyway.
3) Zimmerman getting out of his car escalated the situation.
4) Martin had not been violent with Zimmerman before Zimmerman got out of his car.



Police never told Zimmerman to stay in his car. He called 911, the civilian who answers the phone call is not a duly sworn law enforcement officer, therefore they can not tell anyone what to do legally. In fact if they do tell or try to order someone to do something, they are opening themselves and the 911 dispatch center open to liability and to set themselves up for a lawsuit.
 
2013-07-15 12:21:49 PM  

redmid17: Bontesla: Abuse Liability: Bontesla: joness0154: AngryDragon: Meanwhile in Chicago...

[i847.photobucket.com image 401x317]

That's the thing that really drives me crazy.  We have children and teenagers (mostly black) getting shot and dying on the streets of Chicago on a nightly basis, yet one unfortunate event in Florida gets everyone's panties in a bunch?

What gives?

The issue wasn't the murder as much as it was the inadequate investigation and the lack of charges brought. We know who killed Martin and nothing much was done.

Do you still really believe the investigation was inadequate?  Even after they reopened the case and found no new evidence.  I mean, I'll grant you some of the forensics was botched, but that's hardly the primary investigators fault.  For the most part, it really helped Martin's case.  They couldn't find DNA or fingerprints of his anywhere.  Almost as if he wasn't even there that night.

Was Martin's hands bagged?

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/medical-examiner-says-trayvon-marti n- suffered-after-being-shot-by-george-zimmerman/-/1637132/20851274/-/156 rxi6z/-/index.html


So we both agree that the investigation was inadequate. Excellent!
 
2013-07-15 12:21:52 PM  

justtray: Surprisingly, her testimony saying that led me to believe she was being more truthful there. I wonder if that makes me racist...

Also, lets not call him Tray, it confuses me.... (see screenname)


According to the media, when she spoke like that it made her sound "more authentic," so I don't think it makes you racist.

Okay, I won't call him just 'tray' any longer.
 
2013-07-15 12:22:10 PM  

bulldg4life: TheSup3rN0va: Citation needed

justtray: Please cite this violent past. I'll wait.

He was arrested and charged with resisting a police officer with violence. He agreed to enter an alcohol education program and the charges waived.

I guess we could even ignore the "run of the mill" domestic violence issues.

Do you feel that both of those are completely explainable and give no indication of his temperament?


Did you see the testimony from his trainer, who said Zim would be lucky to be able to fight his way out of a wet paper sack?
 
2013-07-15 12:22:14 PM  

Bontesla: AngryDragon: Bontesla: joness0154: AngryDragon: Meanwhile in Chicago...

[i847.photobucket.com image 401x317]

That's the thing that really drives me crazy.  We have children and teenagers (mostly black) getting shot and dying on the streets of Chicago on a nightly basis, yet one unfortunate event in Florida gets everyone's panties in a bunch?

What gives?

The issue wasn't the murder as much as it was the inadequate investigation and the lack of charges brought. We know who killed Martin and nothing much was done.

Two different law enforcement agencies, one local and one federal, found no cause to bring charges.  The State Prosecutor even bypassed a grand jury specifically to get the charges filed.  Ostensibly because she KNEW a grand jury would never send it to trial.

Turns out they were right all along.  This case should never have gone to a trial and the circus surrounding it is a complete travesty.

I think the legal outcome was consistent with the law based on what was presented. The jurors did their job.

With that said - anyone who thinks that the investigation was thorough probably has a poor understanding of how that process works.

There's some evidence that cannot be collected during a secondary investigation and was not preserved or collected during the first.

It really doesn't matter how many subsequent investigations were conducted if the first was inadequate .


That's already been agreed upon.  But the initial reason this was brought to light was because Melissa Harris Perry believed Sanford "swept this investigation under the rug", which was untrue.  Many defense lawyers (including Zimmerman's) found the investigation to be quite thorough, barring the forensic screw up (which I repeat, is not the lead investigators fault, but rather the technician that failed to bag the hands).  All the correct tests were ordered (DNA, firearm prints, forensics on the sweatshirt, etc...), but some of that evidence was beyond salvaging or incorrectly collected (like dusting for prints on the scene before bagging everything and protecting the evidence).  Once again, the officer responsible for leading the investigation can't monitor every single person to make sure they're doing their job correctly.
 
2013-07-15 12:22:15 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: We also had some not rioting in our city.

What happened to all those farkers who were predicting (hoping for) riots all over?


Those racists are left limp once again. Let us all take a moment and pity them.
 
2013-07-15 12:22:50 PM  

bulldg4life: TheSup3rN0va: Citation needed

justtray: Please cite this violent past. I'll wait.

He was arrested and charged with resisting a police officer with violence. He agreed to enter an alcohol education program and the charges waived.

I guess we could even ignore the "run of the mill" domestic violence issues.

Do you feel that both of those are completely explainable and give no indication of his temperament?


I'm sorry but I'm not seeing any citations. It was my understanding that the officer was off duty and had grabbed one of his friends, and that the 'violence' was not major in any way. Some here have described it as a 'police saving face' ruling.

I also don't think there was any credibility to the domestic violence issues, as non resulted in any legal action (as far as I know, I didn't investigate these).

I would honestly like to know more if you have some sources.
 
2013-07-15 12:23:17 PM  

5minutes: Here's a video of people not getting hurt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=v7RXJpLqtpY


The WWE pay per view last night was more realistic than that.
 
2013-07-15 12:24:27 PM  

TheSup3rN0va: Did you see the testimony from his trainer, who said Zim would be lucky to be able to fight his way out of a wet paper sack?


Being a bad fighter or lacking fighting prowess doesn't indicate temperament, does it?
 
2013-07-15 12:24:34 PM  

TheSup3rN0va: bulldg4life: TheSup3rN0va: Citation needed

justtray: Please cite this violent past. I'll wait.

He was arrested and charged with resisting a police officer with violence. He agreed to enter an alcohol education program and the charges waived.

I guess we could even ignore the "run of the mill" domestic violence issues.

Do you feel that both of those are completely explainable and give no indication of his temperament?

Did you see the testimony from his trainer, who said Zim would be lucky to be able to fight his way out of a wet paper sack?


Speaking of the trainer did he ever send out emails about zimmerman's training program people couild sign up for on his website?
 
2013-07-15 12:25:57 PM  

Magorn: Elegy: Magorn: soupafi: I_C_Weener: What if Trayvon were white?
What if Zimmerman were a black Hispanic?

Zimmerman would face captial murder charges

In FL,  this black woman got twenty years for shooting a <i> Ceiling</i> WHILE she was being attacked by her husband

Why do I have you farkied as a lawyer? That can't be right, a lawyer would be better acquainted with legal facts before opening his or her mouth.

There are additional facts in that case, but the point I was making, a correct one, was that the woman fired a gun into an inanimate object, and still got a 20 year minimum sentence.  That's insane to me, especially in a state that seems to be ENCOURAGING people to resort to violence by passing a SYG law.   I understand subtlety is a difficult concept for you but....


sigh... this has been covered a bunch.

The girl discharged a firearm in a populated dwelling with no intended target. Dumb biatch.

SYG laws do not include warning shots. Even the police cannot legally fire warning shots.
Just ask anyone who's familiar with firearms when is it ok to fire a gaddam warning shot?
I'll give you a hint... It's never farking ok to fire a farking warning shot.
 
2013-07-15 12:26:37 PM  

Abuse Liability: Bontesla: Abuse Liability: Bontesla: joness0154: AngryDragon: Meanwhile in Chicago...

[i847.photobucket.com image 401x317]

That's the thing that really drives me crazy.  We have children and teenagers (mostly black) getting shot and dying on the streets of Chicago on a nightly basis, yet one unfortunate event in Florida gets everyone's panties in a bunch?

What gives?

The issue wasn't the murder as much as it was the inadequate investigation and the lack of charges brought. We know who killed Martin and nothing much was done.

Do you still really believe the investigation was inadequate?  Even after they reopened the case and found no new evidence.  I mean, I'll grant you some of the forensics was botched, but that's hardly the primary investigators fault.  For the most part, it really helped Martin's case.  They couldn't find DNA or fingerprints of his anywhere.  Almost as if he wasn't even there that night.

Was Martin's hands bagged?

I just admitted the forensics were screwed up. I hardly think that was out of malice, but rather simple incompetence.  That's also not something you can go back and fix, so I don't see why they felt they had to charge Zimmerman in the first place.


I don't think the investigation was maliciously tanked. I have no evidence of that.

I think it certainly hurt the investigation (which was my point). It could have helped or hurt Zimmerman. That's why I attributed the outcome of the case partially to the inadequate investigation.

I'm not wrong in this.
 
2013-07-15 12:26:41 PM  

redmid17: QueenMamaBee: Marine1: Carth: Are you allowed to carry guns in Target? I know some stores post "no gun" signs but I never checked if you're allowed to CCW in Target.

Depends on state and local laws.

Most "no gun" stores/businesses have the local statute written on them, it should define what places are exempt from the concealed carry law.

Not that everyone listens. I had a guy come in for a drug screen carrying concealed. He had to pass TWO signs saying "no weapons" and the Ky statute number. He said "I didn't think that applied to me." Well, genius, you can take NOTHING in with you when you do the test, what's keeping one of us from taking your gun? Or if he wants the hero scenario, if someone busts in with guns blazing, will he ask them to wait while he retrieves his gun from a locked locker? The only people allowed to carry in the office are the police officers when they come in for their randoms, other than than that.... gotta leave your crap in the car.

In Florida it does not appear that private property owners can bar people from coming in with a concealed weapon but it is highly frowned upon doing so if asked not to.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statut e &Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.06.html">http://www. leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute &Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.06.html

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/florida.pdf


Like many states, Florida simply does not criminalize the act of carrying a concealed firearm into a business that prohibits the carrying of firearms on the premises by policy. However, a business may ask an armed individual to leave the premises, and failure to leave constitutes an act of criminal trespass.
 
2013-07-15 12:27:00 PM  

5minutes: Here's a video of people not getting hurt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=v7RXJpLqtpY


By your logic, "riots" break out at nearly every professional sporting event ever.
 
2013-07-15 12:27:34 PM  

Magorn: soupafi: I_C_Weener: What if Trayvon were white?
What if Zimmerman were a black Hispanic?

Zimmerman would face captial murder charges

In FL,  this black woman got twenty years for shooting a <i> Ceiling</i> WHILE she was being attacked by her husband


You know that article is total farking bullshiat right?  Do some research before you believe everything on the interwebs
 
2013-07-15 12:27:47 PM  

This text is now purple: Latinwolf: Funny how people who normally say "innocent until proven guilty" are quick to keep labeling Trayvon Martin as a criminal who deserved to die when there's never been any proof he was up to no good that night.

That's an interesting strawman, but most of the Zimmerman supporters here take the position that he was innocent of the charges, as opposed to merely acquitted (which is a factual, if not legal, distinction).

In the same trial, however, there was both forensic and eyewitness testimony that Martin did commit a crime.


And there's the strawman the Zimmerman supporters keep using.
 
Displayed 50 of 880 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