GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post

TheSquealer · 07-13-2013, 09:39 AM

It really doesn't matter what Martin was doing - or Zimmerman for that matter except for what happened at the very moment the gun came out and the trigger was pulled. The prosecution has to prove what was happening inside Zimmermans mind in that very moment and whether or not a reasonable fear or grave bodily harm existed on Zimmermans part. Everything else is is just theater and emotion.. There is no evidence that discredits Zimmermans account. There is no proof of an alternative sequence of events. The prosecution has not proven or even put forward and alternative theory. The prosecution even changed their story as to what "might have happened" which is retarded and should tell anyone that's the slightest bit reasonable that you can't have two possibilities and not have reasonable doubt as to either happening.

Did the prosecution prove Zimmerman was acting out of malice, ill will, spite etc AND of a depraved mind with no regard for human life when the physical altercation started? No. He proved that a dopey, aloof guy that basically sounded like Forest Gump was doing his job, calling police and guiding police to his location because he felt this guy was out of place and was darting in and out of peoples private property.

As I mentioned... I once was attacked by a guy that broke into my house to confront his ex who lived with me. I pistol whipped him to the point that the walls we basically painted the walls in blood in 2 rooms. Police arrived and he immediately started trying to argue that he was assulted. The police looked at him and asked "was this gentleman ever between you and the door? No? Ok, then you are under arrest". This apllies directly to Martin. He was not stopped from going home. No one got between him and where he was going. In fact, he was completely free to keep walking OR to call the police instead of continuing to talk to his female friend. Any argument to the contrary is speculative, not fact. Any argument Martin was somehow defending himself is again speculative and not fact. Being followed by someone does not give you the legal right to attack them. the presumption is that Martim dod attack him as no evidence contradicts that. You don't get a conviction based on speculation and hypotheticals.

07-13-2013, 09:39 AM
TheSquealer BANNED Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: In Your Head Posts: 25,187	It really doesn't matter what Martin was doing - or Zimmerman for that matter except for what happened at the very moment the gun came out and the trigger was pulled. The prosecution has to prove what was happening inside Zimmermans mind in that very moment and whether or not a reasonable fear or grave bodily harm existed on Zimmermans part. Everything else is is just theater and emotion.. There is no evidence that discredits Zimmermans account. There is no proof of an alternative sequence of events. The prosecution has not proven or even put forward and alternative theory. The prosecution even changed their story as to what "might have happened" which is retarded and should tell anyone that's the slightest bit reasonable that you can't have two possibilities and not have reasonable doubt as to either happening. Did the prosecution prove Zimmerman was acting out of malice, ill will, spite etc AND of a depraved mind with no regard for human life when the physical altercation started? No. He proved that a dopey, aloof guy that basically sounded like Forest Gump was doing his job, calling police and guiding police to his location because he felt this guy was out of place and was darting in and out of peoples private property. As I mentioned... I once was attacked by a guy that broke into my house to confront his ex who lived with me. I pistol whipped him to the point that the walls we basically painted the walls in blood in 2 rooms. Police arrived and he immediately started trying to argue that he was assulted. The police looked at him and asked "was this gentleman ever between you and the door? No? Ok, then you are under arrest". This apllies directly to Martin. He was not stopped from going home. No one got between him and where he was going. In fact, he was completely free to keep walking OR to call the police instead of continuing to talk to his female friend. Any argument to the contrary is speculative, not fact. Any argument Martin was somehow defending himself is again speculative and not fact. Being followed by someone does not give you the legal right to attack them. the presumption is that Martim dod attack him as no evidence contradicts that. You don't get a conviction based on speculation and hypotheticals. Last edited by TheSquealer; 07-13-2013 at 09:43 AM..