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.

(Examiner)   George Zimmerman's wife Shellie's 911 call to Lake Mary, Florida police. After saying he threatened him with a gun, she admits she never saw a gun   (examiner.com) divider line 474
    More: Followup, George Zimmerman  
•       •       •

3288 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Sep 2013 at 9:16 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-10 12:16:02 PM  

frepnog: MFAWG: And we get back to the heart of the matter: under Florida law Messr. Martin has no duty to retreat and call anyone.

but he did in fact "retreat" to his current home and then return to beat Zimmerman up.

reality is what it is, dude.


Do you have a credible source that says he went home?
 
2013-09-10 12:16:09 PM  

LasersHurt: frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.

So you do not have such a source, or will not provide it?

That which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence, and all. You clearly like to assume whatever you feel is correct about Martin; it would be nice if you ever tried to justify it with facts instead of "because duh I'm right."


as i said to the last person, my screen name is not google.  do your own research.  it is all out there, was easy to find, and not really even needed if you bothered at all to pay attention to this case.
 
2013-09-10 12:16:21 PM  

diddletwat: Nabb1: Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.

Interesting interpretation of the law you've got there.

No worse than a judge and jury in Florida.


I'm sorry you feel that way, but they got it right. The only people who are still lost on that are either ignorant of the facts, ignorant of the law, or just plain ignorant. Or they are using other people's ignorance to push something that doesn't really factor into this case. I'm not trying to be to harsh, but the facts have been out there long enough that anyone who still clings to the Trayvon Martin fan-fiction version of events or keeps parroting misstatements of the law has to be willfully ignorant at this point.
 
2013-09-10 12:17:49 PM  

frepnog: LasersHurt: frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.

So you do not have such a source, or will not provide it?

That which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence, and all. You clearly like to assume whatever you feel is correct about Martin; it would be nice if you ever tried to justify it with facts instead of "because duh I'm right."

as i said to the last person, my screen name is not google.  do your own research.  it is all out there, was easy to find, and not really even needed if you bothered at all to pay attention to this case.


What if I told you we DID pay attention, which is precisely why we know he was never convicted of stealing anything (let alone "liked" it), and there is no evidence that his liver issues were caused by drugs? And no evidence that he was "casing properties"?

As you said earlier, he was not on trial. How is it that you're so sure of these things?
 
2013-09-10 12:18:44 PM  

frepnog: LasersHurt: frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.

So you do not have such a source, or will not provide it?

That which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence, and all. You clearly like to assume whatever you feel is correct about Martin; it would be nice if you ever tried to justify it with facts instead of "because duh I'm right."

as i said to the last person, my screen name is not google.  do your own research.  it is all out there, was easy to find, and not really even needed if you bothered at all to pay attention to this case.



Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.


/Cue dramatic music
 
2013-09-10 12:19:06 PM  

Nabb1: The only people who are still lost on that are either ignorant of the facts, ignorant of the law, or just plain ignorant.


You missed self loathing whites that think "White Mexican" comes complete with so called white privilege.
 
2013-09-10 12:19:11 PM  

MyRandomName: All we have learned in regards to zimmerman is that when MSNBC reports on him, the truth is opposite of what they say. They are determined to make George a Bmillionaire in his lawsuit.


Fixed that for you

The case has already surpassed "millionaire status" I would say he shouldn't settle for anything less than a 100 million dollars, his attorney should be seeking 1 billion dollars.

Before the shooting of Trayvon Martin, no body knew who George Zimmerman was. MSNBC (and others) turned this into racial crime, which it was not. They even called Zimmerman "white" and showed pictures of a 12 year old "victim". MSNBC went as far as edit the 911 tape to make it look like Zimmerman was using racial slurs that are not fit for television. That is messed up, Zimmerman and his lawyers should teach MSNBC and the media a lesson, a billion dollars would be about what a case like this should be worth. The guy will never be able to live life without the fear of someone hunting him down and for what? Defending himself against a thug who was going to kill him. He can thank MSNBC for that and they should pay dearly.
 
2013-09-10 12:20:32 PM  

MFAWG: frepnog: MFAWG: And we get back to the heart of the matter: under Florida law Messr. Martin has no duty to retreat and call anyone.

but he did in fact "retreat" to his current home and then return to beat Zimmerman up.

reality is what it is, dude.

Do you have a credible source that says he went home?


a witness stated it on the stand.  what more do you want? it happened. also, the time frame of the incident absolutely support that Martin disappeared for around 4 minutes - plenty of time to cover the ground.  believe what you want, I suppose, he stays dead and the man that killed him was acquitted.
 
2013-09-10 12:25:57 PM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.


yep, I am just making it all up.  That is why TO THIS DAY Zimmerman sits on death row, awaiting his judgement.

Oh wait.  I am not the one in this case that tried to create racial controversy, lied about what actually happened to the public, doctored tapes and telephone GPS data, pushed a case with no evidence.....
 
2013-09-10 12:27:24 PM  

frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.

yep, I am just making it all up.  That is why TO THIS DAY Zimmerman sits on death row, awaiting his judgement.

Oh wait.  I am not the one in this case that tried to create racial controversy, lied about what actually happened to the public, doctored tapes and telephone GPS data, pushed a case with no evidence.....


Don't forget about bypassing a grand jury and willfully withholding evidence from the defense. Who needs professional ethics when we've got a lynch mob to placate?
 
2013-09-10 12:27:37 PM  

someonelse: Phinn: What are some of the corresponding, reciprocal obligations of marriage, in your view?

What a sweet talker you are. I'll bet the ladies are lined up around the block.


they're called golddiggers....they're everywhere......
 
2013-09-10 12:29:13 PM  

Nabb1: frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.

yep, I am just making it all up.  That is why TO THIS DAY Zimmerman sits on death row, awaiting his judgement.

Oh wait.  I am not the one in this case that tried to create racial controversy, lied about what actually happened to the public, doctored tapes and telephone GPS data, pushed a case with no evidence.....

Don't forget about bypassing a grand jury and willfully withholding evidence from the defense. Who needs professional ethics when we've got a lynch mob to placate?


Then had the feds re-open the case flagrantly trying to find a way around the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment.
 
2013-09-10 12:29:22 PM  

Magorn: Phinn: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: LasersHurt: The more you eat the more you fart: Link to report that cites the most recent cdc report for the three of you too lazy/stupid to do it yourselves:


http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-vic t ims-of-partner-abuse/

I accept this. It's a better source than your previous ones.

Now you just need to stop saying "women lie" so people don't dismiss you right off the bat (your Weeners to me was namecalling me, in fact). Not being a dick goes a long way towards credibility.

Facts are facts...and i was stating fact. The cdc report even goes into detail abput why the doj study and the navaw and nvis studies most people here are referring to are flawed and not accurate.

The cdc is THE source on violence statistics.

I did some deeper reading - the CDC report actually disagrees with nearly everything you said earlier.

Facts are facts, sure - but that doesn't mean everything YOU say is fact. Clearly you were straight up wrong, at least if you're willing to say the CDC report is accurate.

You did read the link i sent right?

Then clearly..it says exactly what my initial statement was: women initiate far more domestic violence than men.

Yeah, but in post-Clinton America, men deserve it. They can be attacked with impunity and then jailed (or at best detained) for making a woman hit him. For exame, if he fails to meet her needs, such as making enough money for her use, or not finding her sufficiently attractive to remain sexually loyal to her. For that, men get what they deserve, until they learn their place.

And when a woman decides she wants to convert her indoor husband to an outdoor husband, she only needs to file a No Questions Asked divorce, and she'll automatically be entitled to retain her right to be economically supported without all those pesky reciprocal obligations.

As an added bonus, all female accusations against men are now presumed tru ...

Wow. You are seriously about two steps away from being found dancing around wearing the flayed skin of the random women who are your victims.  Get help, and do it now.


As someone who enjoys a colorful retort, I appreciate the vivid imagery, I really do.

But to the extent that you're serious shows just how perverse contemporary American culture has become on the subject of gender and the law -- anyone who has a negative opinion about the relatively recent changes in family and criminal law is one step away from being a serial killer.

That's the famous Progressive sense of rationality and open-mindedness on display.
 
2013-09-10 12:30:19 PM  

frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.

yep, I am just making it all up.  That is why TO THIS DAY Zimmerman sits on death row, awaiting his judgement.

Oh wait.  I am not the one in this case that tried to create racial controversy, lied about what actually happened to the public, doctored tapes and telephone GPS data, pushed a case with no evidence.....


Goalposts moved successfully.

We asked you to prove your statements about Martin, not discuss the verdict. Two different things.
 
2013-09-10 12:33:40 PM  

LasersHurt: MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.

I asked for a citation, he provided one and called me a name. The fact that you need to pile on is sad and childish.

I've seen you in many threads. His citation was in yesterdays thread which you participated in. You conveniently forgot it. You ask for citations without ever providing your own. My observation is based on your participation in threads. Not really childish.

His citation was incorrect, refuted by the very study he claimed supported it. In THIS thread.

And I have no idea what you're referring to about Yesterday, I didn't talk to him about this at all.


No it didn't, his cite said exactly what he said it did.  It's right there, I just read it.  What are you trying to turn his simple statement into?  What is it you're trying to imply he said that's somehow refuted?


someonelse: The more you eat the more you fart: The cdc is THE source on violence statistics.

Indeed. http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/2010_report.html


Okay, I've read your source, and it's counting something other than the one he's citing.  The source he cites counts ALL acts of violence and the source you cite specifically counts SERIOUS acts of violence.

Both things can be true, and I've not once seen him assert anything saying differently.
 
2013-09-10 12:34:08 PM  
MFAWG: And we get back to the heart of the matter: under Florida law Messr. Martin has no duty to retreat and call anyone.

Up until this point, Zimmerman had done nothing that would justify Martin striking first.

However, let's assume that he did, for the sake of argument. This would have given Martin a valid self-defense claim. But self-defense still has its limits: even under SYG, you have to stop when the threat is neutralized, and Martin failed to do that. He completely dominated the fight, to the point that Zimmerman was crying for help, but he pressed his attack. If he ever had a self-defense claim, it ended at that moment.
 
2013-09-10 12:34:51 PM  

MycroftHolmes: I thi....I mean you...ho.....

Wow, just wow. You have built an entire fantasy scenario based on the idea that if the facts do not expressly disprove your fantasy, it must be true.

Why was Zimmerman armed? Why was he out of his car? Why did Martin, who had a very valid reason to be in the neighborhood, choose to confront Zimmerman?

Zimmerman did not just call the police. He also followed him around, then got out his car, while armed, after the sequence of events had started.


That's nothing, wait to you hear my theory of what went down that night:
As we now know, Zimmerman's wife left him that night after they had a big fight.  He didn't know if she'd ever be back.  He was angry and highly sexually frustrated.

So he went driving around.  Angry, raging erection, and he had a gun.   He saw a young, nubile black man walking alone.  So he followed him.   He knew what wanted to do, how long it would take him (he typically couldn't maintain an erection longer then 20 seconds after intercourse started).  He called the police to setup an alibi.

After trying to trick Martin into his car failed, due to Martin already having candy, he took after the young man on foot.  He managed to catch him but the attempted rape turned into a fight, as the kid was able to put up a fight.  Fearing for his life, Zimmerman then shot his planned rape victim.

The facts don't fully disprove my theory, so that must mean it's true.
 
2013-09-10 12:37:45 PM  
frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Much as I hate to step in the middle of your and someonelses' love fest, this statement is demonstrably false.  The autopsy report clearly states that the liver microscopy had no diagnostic abnormalities.  Grossly, it states that there is some fatty change (the use the term 'fatty metamorphisis', which isn't really the term used these days, but whatever...it gets the meaning across if you know what you are looking at), but this is a non-specific finding.

Link to primary source:
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/17/trayvon.martin.autops y. pdf?hpt=hp_t2

\liver?
\\Chianti and fava beans
 
2013-09-10 12:39:34 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: MycroftHolmes: I thi....I mean you...ho.....

Wow, just wow. You have built an entire fantasy scenario based on the idea that if the facts do not expressly disprove your fantasy, it must be true.

Why was Zimmerman armed? Why was he out of his car? Why did Martin, who had a very valid reason to be in the neighborhood, choose to confront Zimmerman?

Zimmerman did not just call the police. He also followed him around, then got out his car, while armed, after the sequence of events had started.

That's nothing, wait to you hear my theory of what went down that night:
As we now know, Zimmerman's wife left him that night after they had a big fight.  He didn't know if she'd ever be back.  He was angry and highly sexually frustrated.

So he went driving around.  Angry, raging erection, and he had a gun.   He saw a young, nubile black man walking alone.  So he followed him.   He knew what wanted to do, how long it would take him (he typically couldn't maintain an erection longer then 20 seconds after intercourse started).  He called the police to setup an alibi.

After trying to trick Martin into his car failed, due to Martin already having candy, he took after the young man on foot.  He managed to catch him but the attempted rape turned into a fight, as the kid was able to put up a fight.  Fearing for his life, Zimmerman then shot his planned rape victim.

The facts don't fully disprove my theory, so that must mean it's true.


If he couldn't maintain an erection for longer than 20 seconds AND Martin was still moving after the gun shot, he clearly missed his opportunity.
 
2013-09-10 12:39:58 PM  

neomunk: No it didn't, his cite said exactly what he said it did.  It's right there, I just read it.


Read the CDC report in this thread. It directly contradicts most of his points. It's the source material his claims are based on, yet it disagrees with him. Do not rely on third-party "analysis."
 
2013-09-10 12:40:38 PM  

frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: someonelse: frepnog: a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

google "trayvon + live damage" and you will find all you need, my friend.  ignoring reality doesn't make reality go away.

Again. Show in the autopsy where it says he had liver damage from drug use. Or any credible medical source backing up such a claim.

Show proof that he was "casing houses."

Show proof that he "liked to steal" and "liked to fight."

All things that you have claimed as fact.

do your own research.  My screen name is not google.


So. You are claiming that proof exists that Martin a) was casing houses, b) had liver damage due to drug abuse, c) liked to fight, and d) liked to steal. But you refuse to share any of it. Sounds legit.
 
2013-09-10 12:40:51 PM  

LasersHurt: frepnog: DROxINxTHExWIND: Researchers who are trying to get to the truth normally share information. Just give your source and allow us to read it. Seems pretty simple in the internet age. Unless...there is no source and you're making shiat up.

yep, I am just making it all up.  That is why TO THIS DAY Zimmerman sits on death row, awaiting his judgement.

Oh wait.  I am not the one in this case that tried to create racial controversy, lied about what actually happened to the public, doctored tapes and telephone GPS data, pushed a case with no evidence.....

Goalposts moved successfully.

We asked you to prove your statements about Martin, not discuss the verdict. Two different things.


Point is that you can call me a liar but reality is what it is and the facts are out there. But you and a select group don' t care about the facts. You just want zim's head on a pike regardless of fact. So do your own research because anything i post won't be good enough- if you can't face reality by now nothing i say will matter.
 
2013-09-10 12:43:39 PM  

frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.


The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.
 
2013-09-10 12:44:46 PM  

brokenslide: (the use the term 'fatty metamorphisis', which isn't really the term used these days,


The correct term is "person of size metamorphosis."

fatvanish.com
 
2013-09-10 12:46:21 PM  

LasersHurt: MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.

I asked for a citation, he provided one and called me a name. The fact that you need to pile on is sad and childish.

I've seen you in many threads. His citation was in yesterdays thread which you participated in. You conveniently forgot it. You ask for citations without ever providing your own. My observation is based on your participation in threads. Not really childish.

His citation was incorrect, refuted by the very study he claimed supported it. In THIS thread.

And I have no idea what you're referring to about Yesterday, I didn't talk to him about this at all.


You were in the zimmerman thread yesterday. The same statistic was there. The same citation was there. His claims have not been refuted. You have yet to cite in the cdc study where it disputes his claim. You claim to read the source yet can't post the cite. Odd, no. You are a liar on two counts.
 
2013-09-10 12:46:54 PM  

LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.


Fine. I'm wrong. Show me zim's murder conviction.
 
2013-09-10 12:46:55 PM  

someonelse: frepnog: trayvon was not on trial. however, many things about trayvon are known. he liked to steal. he liked to fight. he liked to vandalize, and he very much liked a concoction made with codeine, skittles and soda - so much so that his liver showed damage from it.

He "liked to steal"? Because of all the theft convictions on his record? How many were there again? And again, specifically, what evidence do you have that he was "casing houses"? And why, exactly, does his history mean he "liked to fight," but Zimmerman's history does not?


That's what I mean when I talk about the double standard of proof/conviction vs perception as it relates to bias.  Trayvon's IMAGE and lifestyle are all the evidence needed for some, but GZ must be convicted of specific crimes to be subject to the same scrutiny, even with multiple and similar incidents to consider.
 
2013-09-10 12:56:41 PM  

MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.

I asked for a citation, he provided one and called me a name. The fact that you need to pile on is sad and childish.

I've seen you in many threads. His citation was in yesterdays thread which you participated in. You conveniently forgot it. You ask for citations without ever providing your own. My observation is based on your participation in threads. Not really childish.

His citation was incorrect, refuted by the very study he claimed supported it. In THIS thread.

And I have no idea what you're referring to about Yesterday, I didn't talk to him about this at all.

You were in the zimmerman thread yesterday. The same statistic was there. The same citation was there. His claims have not been refuted. You have yet to cite in the cdc study where it disputes his claim. You claim to read the source yet can't post the cite. Odd, no. You are a liar on two counts.


Seriously? All this shows is that you didn't read the CDC report. From the "summary":

"Women experience more intimate partner
violence than do men: 22.1 percent of surveyed women, compared with 7.4 percent
of surveyed men, reported they were physically assaulted by a current or former
spouse, cohabiting partner, boyfriend or
girlfriend, or date in their lifetime; 1.3 percent of surveyed women and 0.9 percent of
surveyed men reported experiencing such
violence in the previous 12 months. "


http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/2010_report.html

I'm not a liar, I just took the time to read the source instead of some person's "analysis" of it.

frepnog: LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.

Fine. I'm wrong. Show me zim's murder conviction.


There you go again, intentionally conflating Zim's charges/acquittal with your claims about Martin. But you're right, you ARE wrong, and have no evidence to support your claims.
 
2013-09-10 12:57:46 PM  

whatsupchuck: steamingpile: whatsupchuck: For the police to have found a gun, they'd have to search for one first.

/fine police work there Lou, etc.

They did, read the report again, searched him, his bodyguard, and their car. No gun.

What report?  Certainly not in TFA.

If true, then they did an extraordinarily shiatty job of searching since even his attorney says he had his gun with him.


No he doesn't, he says he thinks it may have been holstered in the car but the police didn't find one while searching, she also backed off her claim her father was punched. In the end its all horseshiat by her to get what money and attention.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/09/george-zimmerman - gun-incident-florida-trayvon-martin/2788443/
 
2013-09-10 01:04:03 PM  
What the fark is it about Trayvon Martin/George Zimmermann that makes people completely unable to see logic.The evidence backed Zimmermanns story. This doesn't mean the Zimmermann isn't a piece of crap. It just means that he was innocent of that crime.
 
2013-09-10 01:04:17 PM  

LasersHurt: MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: LasersHurt: MyRandomName: You can't teach him anything. Many have tried. He doubles down on his own ignorance every time.

I asked for a citation, he provided one and called me a name. The fact that you need to pile on is sad and childish.

I've seen you in many threads. His citation was in yesterdays thread which you participated in. You conveniently forgot it. You ask for citations without ever providing your own. My observation is based on your participation in threads. Not really childish.

His citation was incorrect, refuted by the very study he claimed supported it. In THIS thread.

And I have no idea what you're referring to about Yesterday, I didn't talk to him about this at all.

You were in the zimmerman thread yesterday. The same statistic was there. The same citation was there. His claims have not been refuted. You have yet to cite in the cdc study where it disputes his claim. You claim to read the source yet can't post the cite. Odd, no. You are a liar on two counts.

Seriously? All this shows is that you didn't read the CDC report. From the "summary":

"Women experience more intimate partner
violence than do men: 22.1 percent of surveyed women, compared with 7.4 percent
of surveyed men, reported they were physically assaulted by a current or former
spouse, cohabiting partner, boyfriend or
girlfriend, or date in their lifetime; 1.3 percent of surveyed women and 0.9 percent of
surveyed men reported experiencing such
violence in the previous 12 months. "

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/2010_report.html

I'm not a liar, I just took the time to read the source instead of some person's "analysis" of it.

frepnog: LasersHurt: frepnog: But you and a select group don' t care about the facts.

The irony here is delicious. You've been caught unable to defend your assertions, but WE'RE the ones who don't care about facts.

Fine. I'm wrong. Show me zim's murder conviction.

There you go again, intentionally conflating Zim's charges/acquittal with your claims about Martin. But you're right, you ARE wrong, and have no evidence to support your claims.


Ok. You have shown me the light. Tray was an innocent gunned down by a cop wannabe. Happy?
 
2013-09-10 01:24:31 PM  

p the boiler: I should feel bad about myself that I find Shellie cute - I know this, but I think she is cute


encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com
 
2013-09-10 01:37:46 PM  

someonelse: brokenslide: (the use the term 'fatty metamorphisis', which isn't really the term used these days,

The correct term is "person of size metamorphosis."

[fatvanish.com image 560x400]


He looked happier when he was fat.
 
2013-09-10 01:41:42 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.


That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...
 
2013-09-10 01:44:00 PM  

dittybopper: RoyBatty: Additionally, the police said they found no gun at the scene of the altercation between George Zimmerman and the two family members.

False accusations of threats of domestic violence in divorce cases.

Women, don't do that.

Especially when you consider that if he gets put under a restraining order, he's not allowed to possess a firearm under federal law.  And that puts him in much more danger than the typical person, because there is a significant (though small) fraction of the population that wants him dead, because "Justice for Trayvon".

If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


You mean, god forbid, someone might profile Zimmerman due to his proclivity to get himself in dangerous situations and thereby provoke someone to defend themselves out of a reasonable fear of serious bodily injury or death?

Also, Zimmerman has already been "put under a restraining order" by his previous girlfriend and it doesn't seem to have kept him from legally carrying a gun. That's because the typical restraining order granted in a divorce proceeding is completely different than the one proscribed by federal law upon conviction of an act of domestic violence. Anyone can file a request for a protection order by alleging certain facts, mostly that they are afraid of someone, and an emergency ex parte order enjoining the respondent from all contact with the victim will be rubber-stamped by a judge. This doesn't overcome a constitutional right.

As for Shellie being charged with manslaughter...this has to be the stupidest shiat I've ever read on Fark, but it sure does show what a bunch of pussies the Zimmerman fanbois are.
 
2013-09-10 01:47:10 PM  

Magorn: This text is now purple: Magorn: Mandatory arrest policies are gender neutral which has been a major academic criticism of them. They have lead to soaring arrest rates of women in DV situations. One of the reasons for this it that police are required to make an arrest if they see signs of domestic violence. A slap or a punch, may not leave visible injuries until hours after the incident when the bruise develops, but a woman with long nails is likely to break the skin if she struggles with her partner (be it on offense or defense) leaving a very visible result. SInce cops have to arrest one of them, this can often lead to the arest of the women even when she was only defending herself.

Poor you, begin required to do your job and arrest the person who left evidence of battery. Your burden is Sissyphian.

Did you get the impression I'm a cop?   Reading IS Fundamental,  I've bolded the significant part of my post above.  But the fact reamins that if a man initiates a violent encounter by, say grabbing his wife and throwing her on a bed (as , say a prelude to rape) and she fights him off with clawed hands, she is going to show no visible signs of his attack but his face will be badly scratched and bleeding.  In this scenario, the attacker will be labelled the victim and the victim arrested and charged, which, I think we can all agree, is an injustice neh?


I would need to know what your alternative is before deciding. What do you propose is the correct course of action? But without a priori knowledge of the objective course of events -- based only on what a responding officer would know.
 
2013-09-10 01:48:08 PM  

Nabb1: diddletwat: Nabb1: Because People in power are Stupid: dittybopper: If she knowingly lied about him using a gun and used that to get a restraining order against him, and he was subsequently killed because he wasn't allowed to carry a firearm anymore (at least until the RO was lifted), I think there would be a damned good case for manslaughter against her.  Certainly better than the murder case against Zimmerman.


Do you think he feels threatened by her? If he does, he can morally and legally shoot her.

Interesting interpretation of the law you've got there.

No worse than a judge and jury in Florida.

I'm sorry you feel that way, but they got it right. The only people who are still lost on that are either ignorant of the facts, ignorant of the law, or just plain ignorant. Or they are using other people's ignorance to push something that doesn't really factor into this case. I'm not trying to be to harsh, but the facts have been out there long enough that anyone who still clings to the Trayvon Martin fan-fiction version of events or keeps parroting misstatements of the law has to be willfully ignorant at this point.


Statements such as this only proves that ignorance is pervasive in our society and especially in the state of Florida.
 
2013-09-10 01:49:21 PM  

steamingpile: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/09/george-zimmerman - gun-incident-florida-trayvon-martin/2788443/


"Deputy Police Chief Colin Morgan said officers did not recover a gun..."

This is not evidence of a search.  You have asserted that they searched Zimmerman, his car and his bodyguard, facts not in evidence and not in any news article I've read.  I would be happy to believe it if somebody, anybody could provide a reliable source for this information.  Until then I will stand by my original comment and suffer through everyone else attempting to retry the Travon Martin case and/or biatching about their horrible ex.
 
2013-09-10 01:49:49 PM  

PsiChick: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...


You're also neglecting to mention the part where her father was there as well and didn't want to press charges after allegedly having his nose broken and having been "threatened with a gun." I'm having trouble that the battered spouse behavior would have taken hold of him too. The police had the opportunity to look at the security camera footage as well, and nothing came of that.

I haven't gone through a divorce but I know people who have. Without commenting on her post encounter behavior, it doesn't seem unusual that an encounter between people who can't stand to be around each other, especially when one shows up unannounced (her), that an emotionally charged event like an argument might take place.
 
2013-09-10 01:50:55 PM  
img0012.popscreencdn.com
 
2013-09-10 01:53:52 PM  

PsiChick: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...


Oh look. It's She-Bevets.
 
2013-09-10 01:54:38 PM  

AxemRed: It sounds like Zimmerman is just the kind of guy who doesn't know how to avoid trouble. I'm not saying that he starts the trouble or breaks any laws. He's just dumb and doesn't know when to walk away. He's going to continue to have a pretty crappy life if he doesn't learn how to choose his battles


Pretty much that. Used to have a friend like that, it was a wonder he made it to his mid 20s without getting himself or anyone killed. It is the main reason people stopped hanging out with him. Does Zimmerman even have a job right now, because if I was his employer I would probably be looking for a way to get him out the door. I soehow imagine him being a rent-a-cop somewhere.
 
2013-09-10 01:58:07 PM  

PsiChick: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.


I suppose I can only speak for myself, but this makes the second time I've presumed the man guilty only for the facts to prove me wrong when the truth came out. In this case, for example, I said that she should have pressed charges over the gun threat and the broken nose, only to find out later that there was no gun and there was no broken nose. What conclusion am I supposed to be drawing now?

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...

I don't know about you, but I've been noticing that the old heuristic of "trust the most likely victim" has had a really bad track record as of late. Perhaps we shouldn't be taking such shortcuts after all, and evaluating the case on its merits, rather than on the people.
 
2013-09-10 01:58:47 PM  

redmid17: PsiChick: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...

You're also neglecting to mention the part where her father was there as well and didn't want to press charges after allegedly having his nose broken and having been "threatened with a gun." I'm having trouble that the battered spouse behavior would have taken hold of him too. The police had the opportunity to look at the security camera footage as well, and nothing came of that.

I haven't gone through a divorce but I know people who have. Without commenting on her post encounter behavior, it doesn't seem unusual that an encounter between people who can't stand to be around each other, especially when one shows up unannounced (her), that an emotionally charged event like an argument might take place.


...TFA isn't loading well for me, so if that's true, yes, that would change the story.

This text is now purple: Oh look. It's She-Bevets.


Oh look. A waste of a comment.
 
2013-09-10 01:59:01 PM  

whatsupchuck: steamingpile: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/09/george-zimmerman - gun-incident-florida-trayvon-martin/2788443/

"Deputy Police Chief Colin Morgan said officers did not recover a gun..."

This is not evidence of a search.  You have asserted that they searched Zimmerman, his car and his bodyguard, facts not in evidence and not in any news article I've read.  I would be happy to believe it if somebody, anybody could provide a reliable source for this information.  Until then I will stand by my original comment and suffer through everyone else attempting to retry the Travon Martin case and/or biatching about their horrible ex.


So you maintain that police responding to a domestic violence situation, where gun violence was reported and alleged to have been committed by someone who just got through with a murder trial, would not search for a gun?
 
2013-09-10 02:10:45 PM  

Millennium: PsiChick: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: So, she recanted in order to save him and his needs.  Not abused spouse behavior at all.

That was my first thought, yeah. And then I walked in the thread, and apparently Fark has decided it was her fault.

I suppose I can only speak for myself, but this makes the second time I've presumed the man guilty only for the facts to prove me wrong when the truth came out. In this case, for example, I said that she should have pressed charges over the gun threat and the broken nose, only to find out later that there was no gun and there was no broken nose. What conclusion am I supposed to be drawing now?

I'm noticing a disturbing pattern lately of cases where the facts are a bit difficult to interpret, and the first thought is to blame whoever is most likely the victim for creating\aggravating the situation...

I don't know about you, but I've been noticing that the old heuristic of "trust the most likely victim" has had a really bad track record as of late. Perhaps we shouldn't be taking such shortcuts after all, and evaluating the case on its merits, rather than on the people.


I did not see that there was no broken nose (though the lack of a gun's presence, as has been pointed out, does not negate the crime of threatening with a gun). That does change the situation somewhat, but it  still does not justify saying one party or the other is automatically a liar. I'm not saying  trust the woman. I'm saying don't decide what happened now, before the facts are in. Notice how I'm not saying Zimmerman actually did anything, either? I find it  likely that he did, but I  don't know. Important distinctions here.
 
2013-09-10 02:19:03 PM  

MFAWG: frepnog: MFAWG: frepnog: lordjupiter: Yeah no reason to believe the poster boy for shooting people and getting away with it would have a gun somewhere.

he didn't get away with anything.  he was acquitted of a baseless charge for which there was no evidence.

Well, other than the gun and dead kid. But other than that...

and the ample evidence of self-defense.  a dead body does not equal a crime.  trayvon attacked him, it was clear at the scene, and it was why he was acquitted.  shame that trayvon can not in good conscious be used as a martyr, but facts are funny that way.

What happened before Trayvon Martin attacked out of the clear blue sky? Care to summarize that sequence of events in your own words?

I will: George Zimmerman chased him, first in a car, and then on foot. BTW, that's what George Zimmerman says happened, too.


being followed is not justification for assaulting someone.    Hopping on top of someone and beating them is justicfation for them shooting you though.    If Trayvon watched more Rocky movies, he would have known to "stick and move... stick....and move"
 
2013-09-10 02:20:39 PM  

redmid17: whatsupchuck: steamingpile: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/09/george-zimmerman - gun-incident-florida-trayvon-martin/2788443/

"Deputy Police Chief Colin Morgan said officers did not recover a gun..."

This is not evidence of a search.  You have asserted that they searched Zimmerman, his car and his bodyguard, facts not in evidence and not in any news article I've read.  I would be happy to believe it if somebody, anybody could provide a reliable source for this information.  Until then I will stand by my original comment and suffer through everyone else attempting to retry the Travon Martin case and/or biatching about their horrible ex.

So you maintain that police responding to a domestic violence situation, where gun violence was reported and alleged to have been committed by someone who just got through with a murder trial, would not search for a gun?


Some people are this stupid, if she reported a gun being brandished against her, hell its on the 911 call, then they will search for it. The police chief already doesn't like him and wouldn't need much of a reason to help him move on, if there was a gun they would have found it.
 
2013-09-10 02:27:15 PM  
Why is Zimmerman even in FL still? He should be in Montana or some shiat
 
2013-09-10 02:28:15 PM  

redmid17: whatsupchuck: steamingpile: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/09/george-zimmerman - gun-incident-florida-trayvon-martin/2788443/

"Deputy Police Chief Colin Morgan said officers did not recover a gun..."

This is not evidence of a search.  You have asserted that they searched Zimmerman, his car and his bodyguard, facts not in evidence and not in any news article I've read.  I would be happy to believe it if somebody, anybody could provide a reliable source for this information.  Until then I will stand by my original comment and suffer through everyone else attempting to retry the Travon Martin case and/or biatching about their horrible ex.

So you maintain that police responding to a domestic violence situation, where gun violence was reported and alleged to have been committed by someone who just got through with a murder trial, would not search for a gun?


Funny, I've been on this planet long enough to realize that there is often a difference between a) what I imagine should have happened in a given situation and b) what actually happened.  This is why people like police, and scientists, and newspaper reporters go to so much trouble to dig up these things called "facts" which more objectively describe actual events then the imaginings in your head.

Good lord...
 
Displayed 50 of 474 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


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

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

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

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report