Zimmerman Trial

#3,627
#3,627
Carl Pickens said:
I don't see how anyone that actually watched the trial could have come up with a guilty vote without applying some serious bias.....especially after the directions were read to the jurors.
Click to expand...

I don't either, but from what I read, some people just take an armed man shooting an unarmed teenager and think that there must be some guilt by the shooter. Then there are those who rationalize that getting out of a car to watch somebody somehow justifies the watched person brutally attacking him.
 
#3,632
#3,632
govols/cc said:
Yea who invented peanut butter. I wanna shake that man's hand.
Click to expand...

skippy-peanut-butter-recall-salmonella-march-2011.jpg
 
#3,633
#3,633
Weezer said:
According to the witness that was on the phone with TM at the time, TM knew he was being followed. If Z couldn't see him, then he had obviously failed in following him. If that's the case, why not simply identify who you are out loud in case he is hiding?



Trut, there is a difference between being followed and walking in the same area as someone else. TM acted reckless as well, I won't argue that, but I firmly believe so did Z. But let me ask you this, as I stated above, TM knew he was being followed, so if that created a fear for his life in him, were his actions not justified as well? I did not follow this trial everyday, nor have I studied the actual FL stand your ground law, but most SYG laws are dependent on a fear for your life. If TM had beaten Z to death, would he have been justified? A strange man was following him. He didn't know the man's intentions. A fear for his life may have set in, which in hindsight is justified. Yes, he should have just run away, but he didn't, he stood his ground. Z should never have left his vehicle, but he did. He was NHW, not the police. Both took actions that were reckless IMO. One paid for his recklessness with his life. The other is now a free man. Perhaps the case itself has punished him enough for his recklessness as his life will never be the same. But I don't feel Z was guilt free. Everyone's entitled to their opinion. That's mine.
Click to expand...

Semantics. Both following someone and walking behind someone in public look the same. The danger, however, comes from the reaction not of the supposed follower but by the reaction of the supposed followed. Thus, if it is not reckless to walk as I described in a public park, it is no more reckless to follow in a public neighborhood.

As far as Martin fearing for his life, such a fear is irrelevant unless it is attached to the reasonable belief that the only way to preserve his life was to beat the **** out of Zimmermann. That is a tough story to sell.

Fact is you have someone following an individual in public and that is perfectly legal. You have the followed who made the conscious decision to commit assault and that is perfectly illegal. Legality aside, the mere act of following someone is harmless; the mere act of assaulting someone is harmful. If an act, in and of itself, is harmless how can it be reckless? Had Zimmermann continued to act in the manner he did (i.e., following someone) no harm would be caused by Zimmermann based on that act alone. So, again, how is it reckless?

And, finally, to touch on your position that fear, in and of itself, justifies assault, then are our soldiers justified in assaulting damn near everyone they come across in theater? Further, if fear justifies, as you seem to hold, then isn't Zimmermann justified in at least following Martin, since following is less severe, thus more moderate, than assault, so long as Zimmermann is able to say that Martin appeared to be suspicious (suspect of doing harm, which carries with it at last a modicum amount of fear for oneself or one's community)?

Did Martin deserve to die? No. Does that factor make his killing unjustified? No. Did Martin's decisions and actions put Zimmermann in a situation in which it was reasonable to believe he either had to kill or be killed? Yes. Did Martin have the power to make other decisions and avoid assaulting Zimmermann? Yes. Had Martin avoided assaulting Zimmermann would Martin have been killed by Zimmermann? No reason to believe he would have. And, did Zimmermann's decisions and actions necessarily lead to his being assaulted? No, as has been shown by this line of questioning.

You can't just say that someone was killed, therefore someone else ought to be punished. There are steps prior to such a conclusion. And, you must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that an individual did something wrong. By consistently defaulting to, "well, it's just my opinion", you are demonstrating that you cannot produce said proof. And, I don't know about you, but I would rather we did not punish individuals in America based merely on opinion.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,634
#3,634
After talking to my Latino coworkers this morning, if the obama administration goes after Zim it may just sever the ties between Latinos and the democrat party.

They are pissed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,635
#3,635
PimpVol said:
They created "African-Americans". So, it stands to reason that they created racism at some point after creating a race of people.
Click to expand...

Don't forget that whites coined the term Africa in ancient times (Afri). Latin for Cave dwellers (in reference to Carthaginians at the time).
 
#3,636
#3,636
Weezer said:
According to the witness that was on the phone with TM at the time, TM knew he was being followed. If Z couldn't see him, then he had obviously failed in following him. If that's the case, why not simply identify who you are out loud in case he is hiding?



Trut, there is a difference between being followed and walking in the same area as someone else. TM acted reckless as well, I won't argue that, but I firmly believe so did Z. But let me ask you this, as I stated above, TM knew he was being followed, so if that created a fear for his life in him, were his actions not justified as well? I did not follow this trial everyday, nor have I studied the actual FL stand your ground law, but most SYG laws are dependent on a fear for your life. If TM had beaten Z to death, would he have been justified? A strange man was following him. He didn't know the man's intentions. A fear for his life may have set in, which in hindsight is justified. Yes, he should have just run away, but he didn't, he stood his ground. Z should never have left his vehicle, but he did. He was NHW, not the police. Both took actions that were reckless IMO. One paid for his recklessness with his life. The other is now a free man. Perhaps the case itself has punished him enough for his recklessness as his life will never be the same. But I don't feel Z was guilt free. Everyone's entitled to their opinion. That's mine.
Click to expand...

You do know that the "Zimmerman following Trayvon" was actually Zimmerman walking to a street sign to tell the cops where he was because he wanted to talk to them. At this point the kid is gone according to GZ and he even tells the cops that but wants the police to come still..

Did most people listen to the one sided heavily edited NBC versions of the 911 call? wtf.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,637
#3,637
Obsessed said:
After talking to my Latino coworkers this morning, if the obama administration goes after Zim it may just sever the ties between Latinos and the democrat party.

They are pissed.
Click to expand...

Makes total sense ....latinos will overtake the black population if they haven't already .Barry had better tread lightly .
 
#3,639
#3,639
Great analysis TRUT.

I would add that, even if Martin, in fear for his own personal safety, was justified in striking Zimmerman, then his self-defense stopped when he'd knocked Zimmerman to the ground. It is not self-defense to get on top of a grounded man and start wailing on him. Even if Zimmerman had thrown the first punch, and no evidence suggests he did, Martin moved from self-defense to assault and battery the moment he straddled Zimmerman's chest and continued the beating.
 
#3,640
#3,640
FLVOL69 said:
Makes total sense ....latinos will overtake the black population if they haven't already .Barry had better tread lightly .
Click to expand...

It is not just Blacks who are having strong emotional reactions to the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. A lot of liberals are fit to be tied. I've encountered many on another site who are more emotionally irrational than any of the Black folks on this board. Are they creating a separation between Latinos and the Democratic Party? I think they are. Liberals are handing Latino votes to Republicans in a gift wrapped package, if Republicans do not stop the amnesty immigration bill.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,641
#3,641
Vol Main said:
It is not just Blacks who are having strong emotional reactions to the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. A lot of liberals are fit to be tied. I've encountered many on another site who are more emotionally irrational than any of the Black folks on this board. Are they creating a separation between Latinos and the Democratic Party? I think they are. Liberals are handing Latino votes to Republicans in a gift wrapped package, if Republicans do not stop the amnesty immigration bill.
Click to expand...

I think the Latino outrage will be short-lived. Many are coming to this country for the entitlements that the Democrats love to hand out. There's a reason why the Democrats want to make them legal; they know which way they'll vote.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,645
#3,645
PimpVol said:
Yes, blacks sold other blacks into slavery. But what you did with them once you got them is another story. Totally. One to be fogotten, I suppose. Because hey, you got them from other black people. So what you do with them is your prerogative, right?
Click to expand...

Really? I (nor my family) did anything with them. You must be drunk as a skunk cause you are getting into territory where you are going to be blasted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,646
#3,646
82_VOL_83 said:
Really? I (nor my family) did anything with them. You must be drunk as a skunk cause you are getting into territory where you are going to be blasted.
Click to expand...

Drunk as a skunk..funny because booze was the main trading currency for slaves by the Dutch/Portuguese/Spanish slavers.
 
#3,647
#3,647
82_VOL_83 said:
Really? I (nor my family) did anything with them. You must be drunk as a skunk cause you are getting into territory where you are going to be blasted.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. While some white people's ancestors were trading in slavery, mine were searching for potatoes and having sex with sheep. Neither me, nor "my people" had anything to do with slavery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,648
#3,648
McDad said:
Excellent point. While some white people's ancestors were trading in slavery, mine were searching for potatoes and having sex with sheep. Neither me, nor "my people" had anything to do with slavery.
Click to expand...

Mine were digging for potatoes and starting WW1.

Over 60% of white American's descendents didnt even come to this country until after 1900. But I am sure blacks probably assume every white person must have owned slaves once before just like I assume every Chinese person knows Karate and every Candian person is a lumberjack.

Forget that some of us honkies actually have a slavic ancestry which..wait for it...means slave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,649
#3,649
McDad said:
Excellent point. While some white people's ancestors were trading in slavery, mine were searching for potatoes and having sex with sheep. Neither me, nor "my people" had anything to do with slavery.
Click to expand...

Chalk me up as another descendant of people that also did not own slaves.
 
#3,650
#3,650
It is so wrong for people to look at this case and this trial in terms of race, but that is what a lot of people are doing...Blacks and Whites. They ought to stop it and look at the case for what it is, a shooting with a not guilty verdict based on self defense.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top