Zimmerman_Martin Trial

[CMJ]

You're being unfair. Maybe he just watched Spiderman.

I already made a Spider-man joke!

[Quoner]

I already made a Spider-man joke!

I scrolled right by it and ruined your birthday. This case is tearing the country apart and needs to end.

[CMJ]

I scrolled right by it and ruined your birthday. This case is tearing the country apart and needs to end.

I feel like I'm sitting on an atomic bomb waiting for it to go off!

[Quoner]

I feel like I'm sitting on an atomic bomb waiting for it to go off!

This is worse than the time I forgot me underwears.

[emmitt01]

I really hope you stay away from anything law involved. That is the same conjecture the state has used the entire time. They claim George is a vigilante want to be cop etc etc... None of which is any more proven then what I have said above.It is all assumptions or what ifs. If they cannot prove it is any different which they have not then there is no case so George goes free...

I mean sure, if you ignore the fact that Zimmerman applied to a police department and was rejected, then I guess the "wanna be" cop thing is just as much conjecture as your ridiculous theory that a kid leaving a convenience store is logically a burglar. Those two things seem logically comparable...oh, wait...

I have no opinion on Zimmerman's guilt or innocence (though I'm sure UNTLifer will be along shortly to claim I'm hawking bean pies). I just think your logic leap is stupendous.

[FirefightnRick]

seriously??? our president did this??? why???

i'm really hating this racial shiat...can't we all just get along! why does everything have to boil down to race...

It's right there in print of a favorite of Obama's mentor Frank Marshall Davis...Saul Alynski's book "Rules For Radicals"

The despair is there; now its up to us to go in and rub raw the sores of discontent, galvanize them for radical social change. - Saul Alinsky

Then, there's the notorious similar statement made by ex Obama Chief Of Staff, Rahm Emanuel.

You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.

Rick

[CMJ]

This is worse than the time I forgot me underwears.

Anyway, how is your sex life?

[UNT90]

What you just can't get past are the injuries to the back of Zimmerman's head and his nose, which are consistent with Zimmerman's account of events.

All this B.S. of "he followed him, he was looking for it, he is guilty" is just pure crap. Its not against the law to follow someone in a public place. Period.

Did Zimmerman make terrible decisions? Absolutely. Did he violate any law? No.

It's really not that hard.

Unless you allow yourself to be emotionally motivated by a media that wanted this story oh so bad.

We shouldn't convict people in this country because of bad decisions. If we did, many on this board would be in jail for what they did around 2:00AM while in college.

Edited July 13, 2013 by UNT90

[emmitt01]

"We shouldn't convict people in this country because of bad decisions. If we did, many on this board would be in jail for what they did around 2:00AM while in college."

She looked hot at the time!

[TheTastyGreek]

"We shouldn't convict people in this country because of bad decisions. If we did, many on this board would be in jail for what they did around 2:00AM while in college."

She looked hot at the time!

You still shouldn't have followed her, no matter what you think she looked like. She'd still be alive, and she would have been able to finish that Long Island iced tea.

I'm not saying you did anything WRONG, Emmitt. As far as I'm concerned, you're an American hero. And if she didn't want to get shot, she shouldn't have been there, dressed like that.

Frankly, she was asking for it.

[UNTcrazy727]

You still shouldn't have followed her, no matter what you think she looked like. She'd still be alive, and she would have been able to finish that Long Island iced tea.

I'm not saying you did anything WRONG, Emmitt. As far as I'm concerned, you're an American hero. And if she didn't want to get shot, she shouldn't have been there, dressed like that.

Frankly, she was asking for it.

Bravo, sir

[UNT90]

You still shouldn't have followed her, no matter what you think she looked like. She'd still be alive, and she would have been able to finish that Long Island iced tea.

I'm not saying you did anything WRONG, Emmitt. As far as I'm concerned, you're an American hero. And if she didn't want to get shot, she shouldn't have been there, dressed like that.

Frankly, she was asking for it.

Actually, if she turned around and attacked Emmitt sexually while Emmitt was following her, she kinda was not only asking for it, but making it happen.

Especially if she was bigger than Emmitt. And lets face it, at 2AM in college, is there really any doubt she was twice Emmitt's size?

Edited July 13, 2013 by UNT90

[FirefightnRick]

Duke Lacrosse team anyone?

Rick

[TheTastyGreek]

Look, this was probably a bad idea. I probably shouldn't have posted anything here, I probably should have just minded my own business and gone on about my day. I even talked to Harry first, and he told me not to do it.

But I did. Because, frankly, there has been a lot of inappropriate behavior in this "Pie For Everyone" neighborhood recently. And won't let this neighborhood go to crap, thank you very much. I'm not putting up with this deviant behavior and delinquency. And, (even though I know people are going to call me intolerant and bigoted...) frankly, it's all been coming from white guys over 40.

Whoa. WHOA. First, calm down. I'm not profiling. And I DEFINITELY don't have a problem with white guys over 40. I have at least seven friends who are white guys over 40. I LOVE white guys over 40. At least, the good ones. The ones who aren't walking around in their saggy butt Dockers, drinking Bartles & Jaymes, blasting their godawful Steely Dan noise when they drive through my neighborhood (side note: that crap ISN'T MUSIC. Period!) in their Camrys and Silverados.

And maybe I misread the situation. Maybe nobody was acting the fool or planning any trouble... At least, not in this specific instance. And, sure, I was in no danger... Armed with the power to moderate threads and posts, safely off by myself, I didn't need to inject myself into what's going on here just because so many OTHER white guys over 40 have been stirring up trouble in this neighborhood recently.

But... You never know. And I'm not putting up with this sort of crap in the neighborhood anymore.

Technically, I haven't done anything wrong. I'm well within my rights to assume the worst, and take it upon myself to track and follow the activity in this thread. And even though I may be the one responsible for creating this tense standoff... I still have the right to defend myself now, thank you very much.

So, I'm warning you... Stop attacking my joke from earlier. Don't threaten my humor. I WILL stand my ground. I don't want to have to do it (or... do I?), but I will.

Take your Skittles and just move on. Because I don't have to take any crap from the likes of you people. Come at me, and suffer the consequences.

[KRAM1]

Look, this was probably a bad idea. I probably shouldn't have posted anything here, I probably should have just minded my own business and gone on about my day. I even talked to Harry first, and he told me not to do it.

But I did. Because, frankly, there has been a lot of inappropriate behavior in this "Pie For Everyone" neighborhood recently. And won't let this neighborhood go to crap, thank you very much. I'm not putting up with this deviant behavior and delinquency. And, (even though I know people are going to call me intolerant and bigoted...) frankly, it's all been coming from white guys over 40.

Whoa. WHOA. First, calm down. I'm not profiling. And I DEFINITELY don't have a problem with white guys over 40. I have at least seven friends who are white guys over 40. I LOVE white guys over 40. At least, the good ones. The ones who aren't walking around in their saggy butt Dockers, drinking Bartles & Jaymes, blasting their godawful Steely Dan noise when they drive through my neighborhood (side note: that crap ISN'T MUSIC. Period!) in their Camrys and Silverados.

And maybe I misread the situation. Maybe nobody was acting the fool or planning any trouble... At least, not in this specific instance. And, sure, I was in no danger... Armed with the power to moderate threads and posts, safely off by myself, I didn't need to inject myself into what's going on here just because so many OTHER white guys over 40 have been stirring up trouble in this neighborhood recently.

But... You never know. And I'm not putting up with this sort of crap in the neighborhood anymore.

Technically, I haven't done anything wrong. I'm well within my rights to assume the worst, and take it upon myself to track and follow the activity in this thread. And even though I may be the one responsible for creating this tense standoff... I still have the right to defend myself now, thank you very much.

So, I'm warning you... Stop attacking my joke from earlier. Don't threaten my humor. I WILL stand my ground. I don't want to have to do it (or... do I?), but I will.

Take your Skittles and just move on. Because I don't have to take any crap from the likes of you people. Come at me, and suffer the consequences.

I am thinking that you have way too much free time on your hands! :-). But, this is pretty funny.

[FirefightnRick]

Not Guilty!

Rick

[UNT90]

Lets hope people keep their emotions in Check.

[Andrew]

The jury just followed what the law stated. The right decision was made.

[CMJ]

I just know that I have read a story or two in my time where people driving, have accidentally run over kids who darted out in the street while chasing a ball or something....and they got manslaughter convictions. Those drivers were not really at fault of anything other than having really shitty luck.

I guess i just don't see how this doesn't meet that standard.

[Andrew]

I just know that I have read a story or two in my time where people driving, have accidentally run over kids who darted out in the street while chasing a ball or something....and they got manslaughter convictions. Those drivers were not really at fault of anything other than having really shitty luck.

I guess i just don't see how this doesn't meet that standard.

You take full responsibility once you get behind the wheel of a car. If you are not speeding and attentive at the time then you would not be charged. I think a lot of those cases the driver was messing with the radio or going 5 miles an hour over. Edited July 14, 2013 by Andrew

[CMJ]

This sounds like manslaughter to me.

In most jurisdictions, voluntary manslaughter consists of an intentional killing that is accompanied by additional circumstances that mitigate, but do not excuse, the killing. The most common type of voluntary manslaughter occurs when a defendant is provoked to commit the Homicide. It is sometimes described as a heat of passion killing. In most cases, the provocation must induce rage or anger in the defendant, although some cases have held that fright, terror, or desperation will suffice.

If adequate provocation is established, a murder charge may be reduced to manslaughter. Generally there are four conditions that must be fulfilled to warrant the reduction: (1) the provocation must cause rage or fear in a reasonable person; (2) the defendant must have actually been provoked; (3) there should not be a time period between the provocation and the killing within which a reasonable person would cool off; and (4) the defendant should not have cooled off during that period.

Provocation is justifiable if a reasonable person under similar circumstances would be induced to act in the same manner as the defendant. It must be found that the degree of provocation was such that a reasonable person would lose self-control. In actual practice, there is no precise formula for determining reasonableness. It is a matter that is determined by the trier of fact, either the jury or the judge in a nonjury trial, after a full consideration of the evidence.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/manslaughter

[Andrew]

The definition of manslaughter does very little if you do not know how the state defines "stand your ground" or selfdefense. You have have to also have that definition not just manslaughter.... That is like finding the area of a multiple sided shape by using only one formula. A lot of questions would be left unanswered.

[LakeTravis]

Duke Lacrosse team anyone?

Rick

A bunch of college guys hire a stripper who she performs then goes to a completely different party, gets too drunk & passes out.

Doesnt remember what happens, changes her story 15 times but figures she can make money by blaming it on a bunch of white college kids at a expensive private university.

Duke LAX gets banned for season before hearing due to media.

Proved innocent.

Lost season for nothing.

Media creating firestorm because of race.

[MeanGreenTexan]

This is sad. A young man died, and he didn't have to. The person who killed him not only is free, but is richer because of it. Horrible.

No satire. Not driven by media. Semantics and details got in the way of justice. AT LEAST a manslaughter conviction should have come down.

For those of you saying he was standing his ground and shot the kid in self defense... Why did he need to "stand his ground"?? He was the pursuer. He was the aggressor. He got himself in a situation he could not handle, and killed someone to get out of it. This did not need to happen. Period.

This is so simple.

[Andrew]

This is sad. A young man died, and he didn't have to. The person who killed him not only is free, but is richer because of it. Horrible.

No satire. Not driven by media. Semantics and details got in the way of justice. AT LEAST a manslaughter conviction should have come down.

For those of you saying he was standing his ground and shot the kid in self defense... Why did he need to "stand his ground"?? He was the pursuer. He was the aggressor. He got himself in a situation he could not handle, and killed someone to get out of it. This did not need to happen. Period.

This is so simple.

When it comes down to it non of this matters. What matters is the law. The stand your ground holds this case. It does not say "this does not apply to men who follow someone in the dark of night".... It just simply gives anyone the right to defend themselves with force if they believe their life is in danger. That is the law. Disagree with it? Join the liberals in their crusade to re-write laws. All of which is based on emotion. People are getting far to emotional and nothing good comes from acting on emotion. (as we can see in this case). Yes Zimmerman acted on emotion and had other options he should have taken, but the fact is that he was still in the right with the action he chose. It is sad that a young man is dead, but you have to take emotion out of it and look at this case based on what the law says. It may be tough for a lot of people to swallow but that is the reality.