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.

(TMZ)   George Zimmerman is avoiding divorce by hiding from his wife. Yeah, that'll work   (tmz.com) divider line 289
    More: Florida, George Zimmerman  
•       •       •

8029 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Sep 2013 at 1:03 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-22 09:24:20 PM  

cretinbob: RoyHobbs22: He won't shoot his wife, she's white.  I certainly hope the mailman delivering the certified letter of divorce paraphernalia is not a minority.

You sure that she's white? She looks hispanic.

[a.abcnews.com image 640x360]


You sure about that?  She looks half Hutt
 
2013-09-22 09:26:05 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Benevolent Misanthrope: Nadie_AZ: Who is self destructing faster? Him or Miley?

Zimmerman.  Definitely.  His whole defense for the Martin case was that he was not the loon that people thought he was, he didn't stalk that kid, he acted only in self-defense, the whole thing was a plot to take his perfectly reasonable behaviour and make it out to be unreasonable... and ever since he was acquitted, he's had problem after problem that makes it look like maybe he is an unreasonable, gun-worshipping, violent, overreaching asshole.

It's only a matter of time before he hits bottom.  Hopefully, there won't be a mass shooting involved.

Yeah, it's almost like being tortured by the media for a year and being put on trial on trumped up charges might have a slight effect on your psyche.

I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't have PTSD with all he's been through.



Mchael Moore:  "I believe we've become so used to this image of the black man as predator that we are forever ruined by this brainwashing. In my first film, Roger & Me, a white woman on social security clubs a rabbit to death so that she can sell him as "meat" instead of as a pet. I wish I had a nickel for every time in the past 10 years that someone has come up to me and told me how "horrified" they were when they saw that "poor little cute bunny" bonked on the head. The scene, they say, made them physically sick. The Motion Picture Association of America gave Roger & Me an R <18> rating in response to that rabbit killing. Teachers write to me and say they have to edit that part out of the film, if they want to show it to their students.

But less than two minutes after the bunny lady does her deed, I included footage of a scene in which police in Flint, Michigan, shot a black man who was wearing a Superman cape and holding a plastic toy gun. Not once - not ever - has anyone said to me, "I can't believe you showed a black man being shot in your movie! How horrible! How disgusting! I couldn't sleep for weeks." After all, he was just a black man, not a cute, cuddly bunny. The ratings board saw absolutely nothing wrong with that scene. Why? Because it's normal, natural. We've become so accustomed to seeing black men killed - in the movies and on the evening news - that we now accept it as standard operating procedure. No big deal! That's what blacks do - kill and die. Ho-hum. Pass the butter."
 
2013-09-22 09:27:18 PM  

PunGent: cosmiquemuffin: freak7: jaytkay: ...because Zimmerman killed the other witness.

I guess the witness that saw Trayvon on top of George, swinging away, doesn't fit into your version of events so you choose to pretend he doesn't exist.

...except that there was no Zimmerman DNA found on Trayvon Martin's hands.  How the heck do you grab and pound the shiat out of guy's head without getting his DNA on your hands or under your fingernails?
http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2012/09/19/case_pa rt _5_Gorgone_FDLE_complete_report_7_26_12_.pdf

Have you never been in a fight?

Possibility one:  Head butt to Z's nose, the cops probably didn't swab M's forehead, and even if they did, DNA transfer isn't 100 percent automatic, every time.  Real life isn't like CSI.

Possibility two:  M grabs Z's clothes/jacket front/shoulders, and slams him into the pavement.  No likely DNA transfer.

Possibility three:  M grabs Z's ears, slams him into the pavement.  STILL no guaranteed DNA transfer.  No idea if the cops ever tried to get prints off Z, or his clothes.

The blood from Z's nose (as opposed to the back of his head) was the most likely thing to get on M, and if it didn't start flowing immediately, even a bare-handed punch wouldn't guarantee transfer.

Life doesn't always imitate Tarantino movies...


Possibility Occam: Martin didn't beat on Zimmerman.  If you are beating the crap out of a guy it is a long stretch to have zero none nada DNA on your hands as a result.
 
2013-09-22 09:44:12 PM  

s2s2s2: cosmiquemuffin: freak7: jaytkay: freak7: What he saw was Trayvon on top swinging, that's all that matters.

He said swinging or maybe holding down.

Again, sorry. I know you are very emotionally wrapped up in your feelings for George Zimmerman, but you shouldn't let that cloud your judgment.

Offer some proof to back your opinions. Can you do that? Speculation not allowed.

How about the fact that Martin had no Zimmerman DNA on his hands, if he was supposedly beating the crap out of him?
http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2012/09/19/case_pa rt _5_Gorgone_FDLE_complete_report_7_26_12_.pdf

He had George's blood on his shirt.


Which would show up if Zimmerman had a cut on his hand and grabbed Martin's shirt.
 
2013-09-22 09:44:34 PM  
s2s2s2: The guy who saw what freak7 says he saw, was Mark Goode. He testified that George looked him in the eye and asked for help, from underneath Trayvon.

Your comprehension of reality is very limited. My sympathies. That must be difficult for you.

1) His first name is not Mark.

2) His last name is not Goode.

3) He did not testify that "George looked him in the eye and asked for help, from underneath Trayvon".

Good luck in life.

You need it.
 
2013-09-22 09:47:58 PM  

freak7: NightOwl2255: So, Frep, which witness testified that Martin sucker punched Zimmerman? You state it as a fact so I assume you have proof.

Zim said it in his statements to police. Can you prove it's not true?


Can you prove it is?

/no dog in this fight
//just a fan of intellectual honesty
 
2013-09-22 10:16:50 PM  

freak7: grumpfuff: Can you prove it is?

Is that important?


Well, yes. Someone else said "X!" You said "X is wrong! It's Y!" That's fine, you can say that. But if you want people to accept what you say, you should provide proof that it is Y, not X. Otherwise, to the neutral outsider, it looks like a case of "He said, she said."
 
2013-09-22 10:25:35 PM  
cdn3.sbnation.com

Hide yo kids, Hide (from) yo wife...

/we gone find you
 
2013-09-22 10:45:51 PM  

freak7: grumpfuff: Well, yes. Someone else said "X!" You said "X is wrong! It's Y!" That's fine, you can say that. But if you want people to accept what you say, you should provide proof that it is Y, not X. Otherwise, to the neutral outsider, it looks like a case of "He said, she said."

It is a case of he said she said. I have a court verdict backing up my opinion, what does the other side have?


You don't understand how court verdicts work.
 
2013-09-22 10:54:38 PM  

freak7: udhq: You don't understand how court verdicts work.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's you and the rest of Team Trayvon.


No. The jury didn't decide Zimmerman was innocent, or his story checked out or he really was defending himself.

All they decided was that there wasn't enough evidence to convict, and that was because the spd didn't collect the the forensic evidence they should have, because before the media got involved, the were hoping they could sweep this all under the rug.
 
2013-09-22 10:58:11 PM  

freak7: grumpfuff: Well, yes. Someone else said "X!" You said "X is wrong! It's Y!" That's fine, you can say that. But if you want people to accept what you say, you should provide proof that it is Y, not X. Otherwise, to the neutral outsider, it looks like a case of "He said, she said."

It is a case of he said she said. I have a court verdict backing up my opinion, what does the other side have?


I point you to the courts finding OJ not guilty, and yet most people thinking he's guilty. Even if he published a book called "If I Did It", what right do we have to assume he did actually do it, if a court found him not guilty?

I see it as a case that got so farked by pre-trail bullshiat (from both pro-Martin and pro-Zimmerman sides), that the court findings are pretty much not to be taken seriously(and yes, I would say the same if Zimmerman was found guilty).

The pro-Zimmerman side sits there and says "Well according to Zimmerman, it went down (like this)." Well sure, of course Zimmerman paints it in a light that shows him as the good guy. Did you think he'd sit there and be like "Oh sure, I shot him for no good reason"?

Meanwhile, the pro-Martin side usually goes with something along the lines of "He was just a kid in a hoodie getting skittles!" Of course, no kid in a hoodie getting skittles could ever be up to no good. That's simply unthinkable.

So yea. I'm sorry if you don't like it, but in my eyes, most of the people who argue for or against either side in this case end up looking like people who are more interested in what their gut tells them happened, not what actually happened.
 
2013-09-22 11:21:05 PM  
Fair enough, everybody knows you're just making shiat up anyways.
 
2013-09-22 11:28:19 PM  

udhq: Fair enough, everybody knows you're just making shiat up anyways.


Just remember, to Frep A.K.A. Freak, Martin who had never had any contact with the police, never been arrested, never been accused of a crime has a long history of violent criminal behavior. But St. Zimmerman, who has a long history of contact with the police, has been arrested, has been accused by several people of assault is not a criminal. That's how the mind of a Zimmer Rimmer works. He's a clown.
 
2013-09-22 11:35:19 PM  

cosmiquemuffin: Which would show up if Zimmerman had a cut on his hand and grabbed Martin's shirt.


Zimmerman had no wounds on his hands.

Want to try any other fantasy scenarios out?
 
2013-09-22 11:45:03 PM  

jaytkay: Your comprehension of reality is very limited. My sympathies. That must be difficult for you.


Doesn't make much difference that it's John Good, does it?

rewind2846: s2s2s2: rewind2846: I'm betting on the mass shooting or suicide by cop.
On that day, even though I don't drink and haven't had a drop since 1986, I will have a beer.
And laugh.

/hope his wife gets all the money he fraudulently scammed raised

Stay classy.

Oh I will.
Haven't shot and killed any kids yet, so that's a win for me. I'm just waiting for this asshole to self-destruct... he was already proven to be a model of instability even before the incident that made him so infamous. If he decides to rearrange his dental work with a .45, I will not weep.



"Classy"
 
2013-09-22 11:53:05 PM  
s2s2s2:
"Classy"

Hey, I'm not the one on his knees defending a killer.
Whatever floats your dinghy, though...
 
2013-09-23 12:12:34 AM  

rewind2846: s2s2s2:
"Classy"

Hey, I'm not the one on his knees defending a killer.
Whatever floats your dinghy, though...


Having an opinion = sucking the D(NTTATWWT)?
 
2013-09-23 12:28:37 AM  

PsiChick: MadAzza: PsiChick:

A child died.

Oh, for fark's sake, here we go again. DRINK!

No. Facts are not disputable. A minor, a person under eighteen, is a child. A child is afforded extra protections by society. A child is dead. The gun came from Zimmerman's bullet. Whether or not you like it, whether or not you feel it was  legally justified,  people will have a problem with this.

You do not get to ignore the real world because it's annoying you.


The child was physically bigger and stronger, and attacked Zimmerman, slamming his head against the sidewalk. If Zimmerman hadn't acted to stop this "child" he himself would be dead.
 
2013-09-23 12:31:46 AM  

s2s2s2: rewind2846: s2s2s2:
"Classy"

Hey, I'm not the one on his knees defending a killer.
Whatever floats your dinghy, though...

Having an opinion = sucking the D(NTTATWWT)?


You can believe that the evidence wasn't there to convict (which I happen to agree with) and still think that there was a terrible miscarriage of justice, that Zimmerman is clearly a violent thug, and that the campaign to smear the victim was abhorrent.
 
2013-09-23 12:37:32 AM  

Penman: PsiChick: MadAzza: PsiChick:

A child died.

Oh, for fark's sake, here we go again. DRINK!

No. Facts are not disputable. A minor, a person under eighteen, is a child. A child is afforded extra protections by society. A child is dead. The gun came from Zimmerman's bullet. Whether or not you like it, whether or not you feel it was  legally justified,  people will have a problem with this.

You do not get to ignore the real world because it's annoying you.

The child was physically bigger and stronger, and attacked Zimmerman, slamming his head against the sidewalk. If Zimmerman hadn't acted to stop this "child" he himself would be dead.


That's just not true. Zimmerman had a significant weight advantage over Trayvon, was trained in MMA, and had the element of surprise.

If you seriously believe that a seventeen year old kid who was allegedly intoxicated was able to overpower hits much bigger assailant, then I've got a bridge to sell you.
 
2013-09-23 12:47:10 AM  

Penman: PsiChick: MadAzza: PsiChick:

A child died.

Oh, for fark's sake, here we go again. DRINK!

No. Facts are not disputable. A minor, a person under eighteen, is a child. A child is afforded extra protections by society. A child is dead. The gun came from Zimmerman's bullet. Whether or not you like it, whether or not you feel it was  legally justified,  people will have a problem with this.

You do not get to ignore the real world because it's annoying you.

The child was physically bigger and stronger, and attacked Zimmerman, slamming his head against the sidewalk. If Zimmerman hadn't acted to stop this "child" he himself would be dead.


Even if you were right, guess what?

Kid's still dead. People are still going to be upset. Same as if a police officer shot a child who was in full-blown meltdown and mentally ill. No matter how justified, society mourns dead children. Your point is totally irrelevant.
 
2013-09-23 12:51:12 AM  

udhq: Penman: PsiChick: MadAzza: PsiChick:

A child died.

Oh, for fark's sake, here we go again. DRINK!

No. Facts are not disputable. A minor, a person under eighteen, is a child. A child is afforded extra protections by society. A child is dead. The gun came from Zimmerman's bullet. Whether or not you like it, whether or not you feel it was  legally justified,  people will have a problem with this.

You do not get to ignore the real world because it's annoying you.

The child was physically bigger and stronger, and attacked Zimmerman, slamming his head against the sidewalk. If Zimmerman hadn't acted to stop this "child" he himself would be dead.

That's just not true. Zimmerman had a significant weight advantage over Trayvon, was trained in MMA, and had the element of surprise.

If you seriously believe that a seventeen year old kid who was allegedly intoxicated was able to overpower hits much bigger assailant, then I've got a bridge to sell you.


Let's be honest: Zimmerman was a fatty. Trayvon outclassed him. Fortunately Zimmerman was able to use his training to outsmart his attacker.
 
2013-09-23 12:54:32 AM  

PsiChick: Even if you were right, guess what?

Kid's still dead. People are still going to be upset. Same as if a police officer shot a child who was in full-blown meltdown and mentally ill. No matter how justified, society mourns dead children. Your point is totally irrelevant.


Well yeah if you think it's sad when anybody at all dies, then I guess that's true.
 
2013-09-23 12:58:54 AM  

Penman: udhq: Penman: PsiChick: MadAzza: PsiChick:

A child died.

Oh, for fark's sake, here we go again. DRINK!

No. Facts are not disputable. A minor, a person under eighteen, is a child. A child is afforded extra protections by society. A child is dead. The gun came from Zimmerman's bullet. Whether or not you like it, whether or not you feel it was  legally justified,  people will have a problem with this.

You do not get to ignore the real world because it's annoying you.

The child was physically bigger and stronger, and attacked Zimmerman, slamming his head against the sidewalk. If Zimmerman hadn't acted to stop this "child" he himself would be dead.

That's just not true. Zimmerman had a significant weight advantage over Trayvon, was trained in MMA, and had the element of surprise.

If you seriously believe that a seventeen year old kid who was allegedly intoxicated was able to overpower hits much bigger assailant, then I've got a bridge to sell you.

Let's be honest: Zimmerman was a fatty. Trayvon outclassed him. Fortunately Zimmerman was able to use his training to outsmart his attacker.


Sure, if by "outsmart" you mean "shoot in cold blood" and by "attacker" you mean "the child that he was stalking after dark."
 
2013-09-23 01:11:58 AM  

Penman: PsiChick: Even if you were right, guess what?

Kid's still dead. People are still going to be upset. Same as if a police officer shot a child who was in full-blown meltdown and mentally ill. No matter how justified, society mourns dead children. Your point is totally irrelevant.

Well yeah if you think it's sad when anybody at all dies, then I guess that's true.


Most people do think it's a bit sad, yes, but society reserves special emotions for children. Because, you know, if we were hardwired not to care about children,  humans wouldn't exist as a species.
 
2013-09-23 03:13:04 AM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Yeah, it's almost like being tortured by the media for a year and being put on trial on trumped up charges might have a slight effect on your psyche.


While there's some of this going on, it can't help at all that what got him into the predicament in the first place was having the conflict resolution skills of a mollusk and the general intelligence of a fungus.

He was already kind of at the bottom of the barrel as far as solving his problems went, as humans go.  Getting random hate mail and having a prosecutor try to railroad him (which, in all fairness, was the case, when you're clearly guilty of manslaughter and the DA goes for murder 2 you're getting shafted by the system) can't have helped, but all it did was make what was already a problem into a self-reinforcing problem.
 
2013-09-23 04:11:42 AM  

Penman: Let's be honest: Zimmerman was a fatty. Trayvon outclassed him. Fortunately Zimmerman was able to use his training to outsmart his attacker.


Heh.

I know you're a troll account and all, but what training would that be, exactly?
 
2013-09-23 04:20:22 AM  

Jim_Callahan: While there's some of this going on


Some?

More than I've ever seen in my life is not "some"
 
2013-09-23 06:25:23 AM  

cosmiquemuffin: PunGent: cosmiquemuffin: freak7: jaytkay: ...because Zimmerman killed the other witness.

I guess the witness that saw Trayvon on top of George, swinging away, doesn't fit into your version of events so you choose to pretend he doesn't exist.

...except that there was no Zimmerman DNA found on Trayvon Martin's hands.  How the heck do you grab and pound the shiat out of guy's head without getting his DNA on your hands or under your fingernails?
http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2012/09/19/case_pa rt _5_Gorgone_FDLE_complete_report_7_26_12_.pdf

Have you never been in a fight?

Possibility one:  Head butt to Z's nose, the cops probably didn't swab M's forehead, and even if they did, DNA transfer isn't 100 percent automatic, every time.  Real life isn't like CSI.

Possibility two:  M grabs Z's clothes/jacket front/shoulders, and slams him into the pavement.  No likely DNA transfer.

Possibility three:  M grabs Z's ears, slams him into the pavement.  STILL no guaranteed DNA transfer.  No idea if the cops ever tried to get prints off Z, or his clothes.

The blood from Z's nose (as opposed to the back of his head) was the most likely thing to get on M, and if it didn't start flowing immediately, even a bare-handed punch wouldn't guarantee transfer.

Life doesn't always imitate Tarantino movies...

Possibility Occam: Martin didn't beat on Zimmerman.  If you are beating the crap out of a guy it is a long stretch to have zero none nada DNA on your hands as a result.


Yeah...problem is, there's SOME evidence M was on top of Z...and no evidence to the contrary.
And Occam's Razor means the injuries to the front AND back of Z's head were inflicted by someone, at the least, knocking him over.   Unless you think M got behind him and punched him in the head?

Law school 101:  crappy evidence trumps NO evidence.

/even racist losers have the right to self-defense.
 
2013-09-23 06:36:24 AM  

cosmiquemuffin: freak7: jaytkay: freak7: What he saw was Trayvon on top swinging, that's all that matters.

He said swinging or maybe holding down.

Again, sorry. I know you are very emotionally wrapped up in your feelings for George Zimmerman, but you shouldn't let that cloud your judgment.

Offer some proof to back your opinions. Can you do that? Speculation not allowed.

How about the fact that Martin had no Zimmerman DNA on his hands, if he was supposedly beating the crap out of him?
http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2012/09/19/case_pa rt _5_Gorgone_FDLE_complete_report_7_26_12_.pdf


Sigh.

Your link says "fingernail scrapings" were taken from M.

Now, make a fist.  Look at it.

See how your fingernails are ON THE INSIDE?

Tough to get DNA transfer there.
 
2013-09-23 09:07:40 AM  

PunGent: there's SOME evidence M was on top of Z


Right. Zimmerman's word, which I'm sure we can safely say means that at no time was he on top. amirite?

PunGent: Your link says "fingernail scrapings" were taken from M.

Now, make a fist.  Look at it.

See how your fingernails are ON THE INSIDE?

Tough to get DNA transfer there.


Most interesting revelation from the trial: "Martin's own DNA was not found in the scrapings from under his nails."

Fact: Martin was never there.
 
2013-09-23 09:12:17 AM  

PsiChick: Penman: PsiChick: Even if you were right, guess what?

Kid's still dead. People are still going to be upset. Same as if a police officer shot a child who was in full-blown meltdown and mentally ill. No matter how justified, society mourns dead children. Your point is totally irrelevant.

Well yeah if you think it's sad when anybody at all dies, then I guess that's true.

Most people do think it's a bit sad, yes, but society reserves special emotions for children. Because, you know, if we were hardwired not to care about children,  humans wouldn't exist as a species.


This is what the Zimmerman defenders will never get. Most of us have within ourselves certain biases and, dare I say it, "moral" precepts not taught by any church, religion or parent. One of those is that we tend to find the killing of children abhorrent, and those who kill children even more so. This is one of the things that has made our species grow to the 7 billion it is now.

Unfortunately in some people their fear that black males are so dangerous as to no longer be children (much less human) has screwed their psyches up badly enough that even that hardwiring shorts out, and they are actually able to excuse and even venerate the death of said child at the hands of an adult who took it upon himself to initiate the contact that led to that child's death.

Child killers will never get my sympathy, empathy or support. Even prison inmates don't like child killers. I do hope Zimmerman lives a long life (if he decides not to have a lead eggroll), and I hope during that life he sees the image of Trayvon Martin's face as the bullet ripped through his body, his face as the last breath left his lungs, his face as he stiffened and died on the lawn near his father's house. Every motherf*cking time he closes his eyes, even when he blinks.
 
2013-09-23 09:17:46 AM  

s2s2s2: PunGent: there's SOME evidence M was on top of Z

Right. Zimmerman's word, which I'm sure we can safely say means that at no time was he on top. amirite?


Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but Z didn't take the stand, did he?.  I'm talking about the physical evidence of the injuries to the front and back of his head.

PunGent: Your link says "fingernail scrapings" were taken from M.

Now, make a fist.  Look at it.

See how your fingernails are ON THE INSIDE?

Tough to get DNA transfer there.

Most interesting revelation from the trial: "Martin's own DNA was not found in the scrapings from under his nails."

Fact: Martin was never there.


Yeah...not so much a "fact" as more proof that real life doesn't equal CSI.

It's an entertaining show, not reality.
 
2013-09-23 09:35:03 AM  

PunGent: Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but Z didn't take the stand, did he?.  I'm talking about the physical evidence of the injuries to the front and back of his head.


A small confession, first. 1) I read you wrong. I had it Z on top of M when I posted. 2) It was a joke, anyway, so no real point in my arguing a point I wasn't making. 3) Apologies.

PunGent: Yeah...not so much a "fact" as more proof that real life doesn't equal CSI.


I know, it was a meme from the trial threads. "Wacky facts"

PunGent: It's an entertaining show.


Debatable
 
2013-09-23 10:24:23 AM  
If only he'd stayed in the car like he was ordered to...
 
2013-09-23 11:06:50 AM  

s2s2s2: PunGent: Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but Z didn't take the stand, did he?.  I'm talking about the physical evidence of the injuries to the front and back of his head.

A small confession, first. 1) I read you wrong. I had it Z on top of M when I posted. 2) It was a joke, anyway, so no real point in my arguing a point I wasn't making. 3) Apologies.

PunGent: Yeah...not so much a "fact" as more proof that real life doesn't equal CSI.

I know, it was a meme from the trial threads. "Wacky facts"

PunGent: It's an entertaining show.

Debatable


No worries.  And, yeah, I liked CSI Vegas for awhile, but that was about it.
 
2013-09-23 01:12:59 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Benevolent Misanthrope: Nadie_AZ: Who is self destructing faster? Him or Miley?

Zimmerman.  Definitely.  His whole defense for the Martin case was that he was not the loon that people thought he was, he didn't stalk that kid, he acted only in self-defense, the whole thing was a plot to take his perfectly reasonable behaviour and make it out to be unreasonable... and ever since he was acquitted, he's had problem after problem that makes it look like maybe he is an unreasonable, gun-worshipping, violent, overreaching asshole.

It's only a matter of time before he hits bottom.  Hopefully, there won't be a mass shooting involved.

Yeah, it's almost like being tortured by the media for a year and being put on trial on trumped up charges might have a slight effect on your psyche.

I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't have PTSD with all he's been through.


Don't forget the thousands of death threats.
 
2013-09-23 11:26:38 PM  

freak7: The First Four Black Sabbath Albums: If only he'd stayed in the car like he was ordered to...

Trololololo


Your humor detector needs to be re-calibrated.
 
2013-09-24 01:10:11 AM  

PunGent: MadAzza: Mercutio74: phenn: Well, I'm not going to get into an argument on anymore Zim threads. I will only say that I disagree. I think the laws are correct and they were followed in this case. No, I do not like the idea that a mother lost her son. Never will. It's sad all around.

Personally I think the threshold for lethal self defence should be your life WAS in danger, not you FELT your life was in danger.

OK. Supposing I point a gun at you. You, too, have a gun. You freak out, and shoot and kill me. However, my gun was unloaded.

Haha, joke's on you! You go to prison for 20 years, because your life was not in danger.

And what you "felt" doesn't matter, just like you wanted.

Err, I'm not sure that's correct.   I believe most U.S. jurisdictions use a "reasonable man" standard of self-defense, and it's reasonable to assume the gun pointed at you is loaded, and act according.

/am a lawyer
//not a criminal lawyer
///don't try this at home


Of course it's not correct. My hypothetical situation was based on Mercutio74's hypothetical law, which states that what you feel doesn't matter, only the fact that you were not actually in danger.

Did you read the post??
 
Displayed 39 of 289 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report