Zimmerman will be acquitted - Page 14 - GoFuckYourself.com

baddog · 07-07-2013, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane

Maybe he meant it in a British way so he was calling you an old cigarette

Got it; thanks.

brassmonkey · 07-07-2013, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane

Maybe he meant it in a British way so he was calling you an old cigarette

SuckOnThis · 07-07-2013, 09:48 PM

Robbie · 07-07-2013, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

wow, not sure how I read fat; guess it must be the denial of my sexuality.

tony286 · 07-08-2013, 06:01 AM

http://deadstate.org/conservative-ra...-guilty-audio/
He actually bring up a good point:
"Savage went on to say that the gun Zimmerman was carrying did not have the safety on and that there was a bullet chambered, which, according to Savage, showed intent from Zimmerman.

“Had he not chambered a round prior to meeting Trayvon, and had he not taken the safety off — even if Trayvon — during the altercation even if Trayvon had tried to grab the gun away from Zimmerman, had that gun not been chambered with a round and safety off, Trayvon would have had to use two hands. You can’t do it with one hand,” Savage said.

“Because Zimmerman carried a loaded weapon with the safety off, Trayvon Martin is dead,” Savage concluded. “Therefore, the responsibility is in the hands of Zimmerman.”

The Truth Hurts · 07-08-2013, 06:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony286

He actually bring up a good point:

no he doesn't...

"SAFETY
To achieve highest operator safety, combined with ease of handling, the pistol is
"DOUBLEACTION ONLY". It has no manual safety and the hammer is never
fully cocked."

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

He would not have known it to be "stand your ground" from the course that he took as it was not taught as being the "stand your ground" law as there is not any such law. It has been nick named by the media as the "stand your ground" law.

Crackerhead said what? Do you just make stuff up now?

The exact law is called "Justifiable Use Of Force".

Quote:

A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String&U RL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

When people live in a neighborhood that is getting their homes robbed, and someone volunteers to go on neighborhood watch...I'm pretty sure that the folks that lived there were grateful for anybody they can get with a vested interest in the community to help.

It blows my mind that anyone would want someone like Zimmerman on their Neighborhood Watch. On face of it all Zimmerman seems like a nice guy, and is concerned about his neighborhood. But the reality is Zimmerman has had a restraining order against him, was charged with assaulting a police, and ordered by the court to take anger management classes. How is someone like Zimmerman allowed on the Neighborhood Watch? How is Zimmerman allowed to legally own a gun?

Do you really want someone like Zimmerman armed patrolling your neighborhood? When you have someone who lives a life of restraining orders, assaulting police officers, and anger management problems and you arm him and send him into the night to "protect the citizens" it's only a matter of time before he shoots and kills someone.

SuckOnThis · 07-08-2013, 07:47 AM

Is this all the defense has?

Right wing gun nut buddies of Zimmerman who is profiting from this by writing books and calling him 'Georgie' on the stand swearing without a doubt it was Zimmerman crying for help? Has anyone from the Zimmerman side not profited from this?

theking · 07-08-2013, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Crackerhead said what? Do you just make stuff up now?

The exact law is called "Justifiable Use Of Force".

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String&U RL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

No I do not just make stuff up. What in my post are you accusing me of making up?

Choopa_Pardo · 07-08-2013, 07:58 AM

Really happy this board is full of amateur prosecutors to keep me up to date on all the proceedings of this case.

theking · 07-08-2013, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

It blows my mind that anyone would want someone like Zimmerman on their Neighborhood Watch. On face of it all Zimmerman seems like a nice guy, and is concerned about his neighborhood. But the reality is Zimmerman has had a restraining order against him, was charged with assaulting a police, and ordered by the court to take anger management classes. How is someone like Zimmerman allowed on the Neighborhood Watch? How is Zimmerman allowed to legally own a gun?

Do you really want someone like Zimmerman armed patrolling your neighborhood? When you have someone who lives a life of restraining orders, assaulting police officers, and anger management problems and you arm him and send him into the night to "protect the citizens" it's only a matter of time before he shoots and kills someone.

He shoved an undercover alcohol-control agent who was arresting an under-age friend of his at a bar so the undercover agent...over charged him...with everything he could...as law enforcement always does. To avoid a trial he was allowed to enter an anger management program...pretty much SOP. No convictions.

He broke off an engagement to a girl and she and he filed for and both were granted restraining order.

Most people that knew/know him describe him as a mild mannered person...as a nice guy.

It is apparent that your mind is easily blown.

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

No I do not just make stuff up. What in my post are you accusing me of making up?

You said there is no such law when obviously there is.

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

He shoved an undercover alcohol-control agent who was arresting an under-age friend of his at a bar so the undercover agent...over charged him...with everything he could...as law enforcement always does. To avoid a trial he was allowed to enter an anger management program...pretty much SOP. No convictions.

He broke off an engagement to a girl and she and he filed for and both were granted restraining order.

Most people that knew/know him describe him as a mild mannered person...as a nice guy.

It is apparent that your mind is easily blown.

I consider myself a "mild mannered person". I've never been arrested, never had a restraining order against me, and never had to attend "court ordered anger management classes".

Zimmerman is a wannabe police officer rejected by the police. He's trolling, looking to start shit, and armed. He was on the neighborhood watch and claims he knows everyone, yet no one knew him at all him and he doesn't seem to know the name of the tree streets in his complex.

He got punched in the face and shot and killed someone.

theking · 07-08-2013, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

You said there is no such law when obviously there is.

Pigshit...the law is the Justifiable Use Of Force law...not "Stand your ground" law as the media has nick named the law.

Trend · 07-08-2013, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

It blows my mind that anyone would want someone like Zimmerman on their Neighborhood Watch. On face of it all Zimmerman seems like a nice guy, and is concerned about his neighborhood. But the reality is Zimmerman has had a restraining order against him, was charged with assaulting a police, and ordered by the court to take anger management classes. How is someone like Zimmerman allowed on the Neighborhood Watch? How is Zimmerman allowed to legally own a gun?

Do you really want someone like Zimmerman armed patrolling your neighborhood? When you have someone who lives a life of restraining orders, assaulting police officers, and anger management problems and you arm him and send him into the night to "protect the citizens" it's only a matter of time before he shoots and kills someone.

Oh richard.....

Your bias .. or ignorance is showing again

You keep saying that you can't believe we would want "someone like Zimmerman on a neighborhood watch" ...

His restraining order was due to a domestic dispute in which BOTH he and his fiancee had restraining orders against each other. You are going to pre judge him based on this? Really?

Consider the following:

1. Domestic violence is 2 to 4 times more common in police families than in the general population. In two separate studies, 40% of police officers self-report that they have used violence against their domestic partners within the last year.

Source 1 Source 2

2. Many of the qualities valued in on-duty police officers can make them dangerous domestic violence offenders. All abusers employ similar methods to control and abuse their intimate partners. Officers however, have skills and tactics not commonly possessed by civilians. Professional training in force, weapons, intimidation, interrogation and surveillance ? along with the cultural climate ? become a dangerous and potentially lethal combination in a domestic situation. Victims face the bias of law enforcement agencies and the legal system, psychological intimidation, and a high lethality risk.

~ Diane Wetendorf All Rights Reserved. (in Domestic Violence by Police Officers. Donald C. Sheehan (ed.) pp 375-382. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice

So I guess we shouldn't want police officers on the neighborhood watches either....

3. The Defense Department doesn?t break down pre- and post-deployment figures, but the fact is that rates of domestic violence in the military have been high for years?two to five times higher than among civilians, depending on which DoD study is consulted.

So I guess we shouldn't want retired military on the neighborhood watches either....

You seem to want to be the judge and jury over everyone .. even without having all the facts. That's an odd stance to take for someone in an industry as marginalized as ours.

theking · 07-08-2013, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

I consider myself a "mild mannered person". I've never been arrested, never had a restraining order against me, and never had to attend "court ordered anger management classes".

Zimmerman is a wannabe police officer rejected by the police. He's trolling, looking to start shit, and armed. He was on the neighborhood watch and claims he knows everyone, yet no one knew him at all him and he doesn't seem to know the name of the tree streets in his complex.

He got punched in the face and shot and killed someone.

Yes...at one time...in years past...Zimmerman applied to become a police officer and apparently changed his mind or he probably would have jumped on this...testified by...
state witness Wendy Dorival.

Wendy Dorival, who coordinated the local Neighborhood Watch Program for the Sanford Police Department, thought so highly of Zimmerman that she tried to recruit him to be a “Citizen on Patrol,” in which he would be supplied with a police department issued patrol car and a uniform of sorts. In sharp contrast to the State’s repeated characterization of Zimmerman as a “wannabe” cop who went over the edge in his pursuit, confrontation, and shooting of Martin, Ms. Dorival regretfully stated that Zimmerman had declined the offer.

In addition Professor Scott Pleasant testified that Zimmerman had told him his career goals were to become an attorney and then a State prosecutor.

Notice "attorney then a prosecutor"...so apparently he no longer wanted to be a police officer.

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trend

Oh richard.....

Your bias .. or ignorance is showing again

You keep saying that you can't believe we would want "someone like Zimmerman on a neighborhood watch" ...

His restraining order was due to a domestic dispute in which BOTH he and his fiancee had restraining orders against each other. You are going to pre judge him based on this? Really?

Consider the following:

1. Domestic violence is 2 to 4 times more common in police families than in the general population. In two separate studies, 40% of police officers self-report that they have used violence against their domestic partners within the last year.

Source 1 Source 2

2. Many of the qualities valued in on-duty police officers can make them dangerous domestic violence offenders. All abusers employ similar methods to control and abuse their intimate partners. Officers however, have skills and tactics not commonly possessed by civilians. Professional training in force, weapons, intimidation, interrogation and surveillance ? along with the cultural climate ? become a dangerous and potentially lethal combination in a domestic situation. Victims face the bias of law enforcement agencies and the legal system, psychological intimidation, and a high lethality risk.

~ Diane Wetendorf All Rights Reserved. (in Domestic Violence by Police Officers. Donald C. Sheehan (ed.) pp 375-382. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice

So I guess we shouldn't want police officers on the neighborhood watches either....

3. The Defense Department doesn?t break down pre- and post-deployment figures, but the fact is that rates of domestic violence in the military have been high for years?two to five times higher than among civilians, depending on which DoD study is consulted.

So I guess we shouldn't want retired military on the neighborhood watches either....

You seem to want to be the judge and jury over everyone .. even without having all the facts. That's an odd stance to take for someone in an industry as marginalized as ours.

But Zimmerman wasn't in law enforcement. He couldn't even get that far.

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

Yes...at one time...in years past...Zimmerman applied to become a police officer and apparently changed his mind or he probably would have jumped on this...testified by...
state witness Wendy Dorival.

Wendy Dorival, who coordinated the local Neighborhood Watch Program for the Sanford Police Department, thought so highly of Zimmerman that she tried to recruit him to be a ?Citizen on Patrol,? in which he would be supplied with a police department issued patrol car and a uniform of sorts. In sharp contrast to the State?s repeated characterization of Zimmerman as a ?wannabe? cop who went over the edge in his pursuit, confrontation, and shooting of Martin, Ms. Dorival regretfully stated that Zimmerman had declined the offer.

State witness Wendy Dorival

But did she investigate his background?

Maybe he declined the offer because he knew his past would come up and he would be rejected.

theking · 07-08-2013, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

But did she investigate his background?

Maybe he declined the offer because he knew his past would come up and he would be rejected.

I added this to my previous post.

In addition Professor Scott Pleasant testified that Zimmerman had told him his career goals were to become an attorney and then a State prosecutor.

Notice "attorney then a prosecutor"...so apparently he no longer wanted to be a police officer.

BTW his one and only application to be a police officer...years ago...was denied only because he had a bad credit rating.

Trend · 07-08-2013, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

But Zimmerman wasn't in law enforcement. He couldn't even get that far.

Wow.. after all that, this is your response?

This clarifies it for me... you must be trolling.

I have to give credit where it's due though .. you are doing it well

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trend

This clarifies it for me... you must be trolling.

I'm not trolling at all. This is just such an open and shut case that it stuns me that people can believe otherwise.

Zimmerman is an overbearing rejected police officer wannabe who mishandled this situation from the very beginning, failed to follow the instructions of the 9/11 operator, then forced a confrontation in which seventeen year old kid punched in the face, he over reacted, and then shot and killed a kid.

TheSquealer · 07-08-2013, 09:40 AM

The only purpose of certainty is to reinforce ones own ores pre-existing beliefs. New evidence is produced daily.

baddog · 07-08-2013, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

You said there is no such law when obviously there is.

That is not what he said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

I'm not trolling at all. This is just such an open and shut case that it stuns me that people can believe otherwise.

troll on, Richard, troll on

theking · 07-08-2013, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

I'm not trolling at all. This is just such an open and shut case that it stuns me that people can believe otherwise.

Zimmerman is an overbearing rejected police officer wannabe who mishandled this situation from the very beginning, failed to follow the instructions of the 9/11 operator, then forced a confrontation in which seventeen year old kid punched in the face, he over reacted, and then shot and killed a kid.

You are trolling or just dense.

As presented in court he was not a "police officer wannabe"...but instead wanted to be an attorney/prosecutor...and in fact turned down the offer of being a member of the Police Citizen on Patrol program. Zimmerman clearly is not overbearing according to all testimony presented at trial...just the opposite has been testified to...he has been described as a mild mannered...nice guy is the testimony. As presented in court...by multiple police reports... he did not fail to follow the advice/instructions by the 911 operator. As stated in court by the girl that was on the phone with Martin...it was Martin that confronted Zimmerman not the other way around.

Trend · 07-08-2013, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

I'm not trolling at all. This is just such an open and shut case that it stuns me that people can believe otherwise.

Zimmerman is an overbearing rejected police officer wannabe who mishandled this situation from the very beginning, failed to follow the instructions of the 9/11 operator, then forced a confrontation in which seventeen year old kid punched in the face, he over reacted, and then shot and killed a kid.

Since your bias is well documented, I just have one last question for you. If he is found not guilty by a jury, will you accept that decision or continue to crucify him?

theking · 07-08-2013, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trend

Since your bias is well documented, I just have one last question for you. If he is found not guilty by a jury, will you accept that decision or continue to crucify him?

By not guilty...do you mean of 2nd degree murder and manslaughter also. I personally suspect the jury may nail him on manslaughter...and it is my understanding that he can be sentenced to as long as 25 or 30 years...and it would not surprise me if this judge gave him the max or close to it.

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trend

Since your bias is well documented, I just have one last question for you. If he is found not guilty by a jury, will you accept that decision or continue to crucify him?

I believe that if he is found innocent it will set a very dangerous precedent - If someone punches you in the face you will now legally be able to shoot and kill them.

This was a fist fight, not even close to life threatening.

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

You are trolling or just dense.

As presented in court he was not a "police officer wannabe"...but instead wanted to be an attorney/prosecutor...and in fact turned down the offer of being a member of the Police Citizen on Patrol program. Zimmerman clearly is not overbearing according to all testimony presented at trial...just the opposite has been testified to...he has been described as a mild mannered...nice guy is the testimony. As presented in court...by multiple police reports... he did not fail to follow the advice/instructions by the 911 operator. As stated in court by the girl that was on the phone with Martin...it was Martin that confronted Zimmerman not the other way around.

As presented in court, he applied to be a police officer and was turned down.

Zimmerman is clearly overbearing - instead of reporting a suspicious person to the police, instead of following the directions of the 911 operator, he got out of the car and followed him which resulted in Martin feeling threatened.

He is not "mild mannered" - He had a restraining order against him, he assaulted a police officer, and attended court ordered anger management. That is not mild mannered at all.

Martin may have confronted Zimmerman - But Zimmerman forced the confrontation by following the kid and then getting out of his car to follow him more.

Zimmerman followed the kid, there was a confrontation, Martin acted in self defense, Zimmerman shot him even though his life was not in danger.

theking · 07-08-2013, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

I believe that if he is found innocent it will set a very dangerous precedent - If someone punches you in the face you will now legally be able to shoot and kill them.

This was a fist fight, not even close to life threatening.

That is not his defense and no there will not be a precedent set that one can kill someone that punches them.

His defense has nothing to do with being punched or beaten or his injuries. His defense is that Martin saw and then went for his gun and he beat Martin to it.

Joshua G · 07-08-2013, 11:16 AM

if GZ refuses to take the stand, just IMO...he is guilty of manslaughter. There is no excuse for him not to testify if he was the good guy & was just defending himself. His defense would be strongest if he testifies. & the state is accusing him of murder! how would he not want to testify? His life is on the line.

credibility is most important as to guilt or innocence when facts are murky & the dead guy cant tell his story. Zims facts are already bad (nonexistent bushes, no recollection of street names in a subdivision he patrols), & it is worse if he refuses to tell the jury directly that he was defending himself.

no excuse not to testify...the truth shall set you free! (or send you to jail

)

Trend · 07-08-2013, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

I believe that if he is found innocent it will set a very dangerous precedent - If someone punches you in the face you will now legally be able to shoot and kill them.

This was a fist fight, not even close to life threatening.

Thanks for NOT answering lol.

And once again, you have assigned yourself the supreme know all. Pretty arrogant to presume to know for everyone what is and what is not a life threatening experience.

Regarding: "If someone punches you in the face you will now legally be able to shoot and kill them."

How about here?

http://youtu.be/glrh2JrtFOU

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

That is not his defense and no there will not be a precedent set that one can kill someone that punches them.

His defense has nothing to do with being punched or beaten or his injuries. His defense is that Martin saw and then went for his gun and he beat Martin to it.

His defense is self defense. His injuries were not consistent with what he claims happened, and there is no proof Martin went for his gun.

Trend · 07-08-2013, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoshGirls Josh

if GZ refuses to take the stand, just IMO...he is guilty of manslaughter. There is no excuse for him not to testify if he was the good guy & was just defending himself. His defense would be strongest if he testifies. & the state is accusing him of murder! how would you not want to testify?

credibility is most important as to guilt or innocence when facts are murky & the dead guy cant tell his story. Zims facts are already bad (nonexistent bushes, no recollection of street names in a subdivision he patrols), & it is worse if he refuses to tell the jury directly that he was defending himself.

no excuse not to testify...the truth shall set you free! (or send you to jail

)

Legally, this is so "out there" that it shouldn't get a response.

GZ's LAWYERS will determine whether or not he takes the stand. To go against advice of counsel in a legal proceeding is moronic.

Robbie · 07-08-2013, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoshGirls Josh

There is no excuse for him not to testify if he was the good guy & was just defending himself. His defense would be strongest if he testifies. & the state is accusing him of murder! how would he not want to testify? His life is on the line.
no excuse not to testify...the truth shall set you free! (or send you to jail

)

That would seem to make common sense. But every defense attorney tells their client NOT to take the witness stand.

It's not as simple as just taking the stand and giving a speech.

You're going to be cross examined by LAWYERS. And those guys are the trickiest SOB's in the world when it comes to twisting words and making you look bad.

I bet GZ himself would love to take the stand. But I'd bet the farm that his lawyers are saying "no".

Remember, they don't give you a chance to put things in context or extrapolate your answer in cross examination. The cross examination is purposefully intended to make you look like a liar. And if you have the defendant on the stand...that's red meat for those prosecuting attorneys.

In any trial, the prosecutors are just praying that the defendant will make the mistake of taking the stand.

Joshua G · 07-08-2013, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trend

Legally, this is so "out there" that it shouldn't get a response.

GZ's LAWYERS will determine whether or not he takes the stand. To go against advice of counsel in a legal proceeding is moronic.

i wasnt talking legally. please refer to the IMO in my comment.

also zimmerman is the ultimate decider of his defense. he can get advice from his counsel. but the decision is his whether to testify. & my point was quite simple...sorry you didnt understand it.

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trend

Thanks for NOT answering lol.

I stated what I thought would happen if Zimmerman was found innocent.

It's possible they will drop the charges down to manslaughter, but he'll get a stiff sentence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trend

And once again, you have assigned yourself the supreme know all. Pretty arrogant to presume to know for everyone what is and what is not a life threatening experience.

I don't think I am the supreme anything. It just seems very obvious to me this was a fist fight that ended up with someone getting shot and killed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trend

Regarding: "If someone punches you in the face you will now legally be able to shoot and kill them."

How about here?

http://youtu.be/glrh2JrtFOU

Don't really have enough information on if it was life threatening or not, although it sure does look bad. I also don't know what injuries she got in the process. Looks horrible, but three people tried to break it up and we also don't know when police were called.

The eighteen year old got five years in prison for this. The other attacker is a minor.

Stunning that shit like this goes on.

Joshua G · 07-08-2013, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

That would seem to make common sense. But every defense attorney tells their client NOT to take the witness stand.

It's not as simple as just taking the stand and giving a speech.

You're going to be cross examined by LAWYERS. And those guys are the trickiest SOB's in the world when it comes to twisting words and making you look bad.

I bet GZ himself would love to take the stand. But I'd bet the farm that his lawyers are saying "no".

Remember, they don't give you a chance to put things in context or extrapolate your answer in cross examination. The cross examination is purposefully intended to make you look like a liar. And if you have the defendant on the stand...that's red meat for those prosecuting attorneys.

In any trial, the prosecutors are just praying that the defendant will make the mistake of taking the stand.

with all that you said to be true, if the state is accusing YOU of murder, would you refuse the stand out of fear of the prosecutors? your a credible guy. I think any truly innocent & credible man fights for his life on that witness stand.

plus, the defense has the opportunity to retort any cross examination that may harm you on the stand. its not like whatever is damaging in cross exam cannot be clarified by the defense.

Robbie · 07-08-2013, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoshGirls Josh

with all that you said to be true, if the state is accusing YOU of murder, would you refuse the stand out of fear of the prosecutors? your a credible guy. I think any truly innocent & credible man fights for his life on that witness stand.

plus, the defense has the opportunity to retort any cross examination that may harm you on the stand. its not like whatever is damaging in cross exam cannot be clarified by the defense.

Yes, after watching many lawyer shows on television I have learned that it's best to listen to the professionals. lol

But seriously...yes, I would probably argue with my lawyers about it. And then, because I like to think I'm reasonably intelligent, I'd hear what they think would happen if I did take the stand.

And then, because I don't want to go to jail...I'd listen and heed their advice.

I know that here on GFY we are all experts, but in the real world I'd listen to the real experts (and then later come on GFY and tell you that I disagreed with them lol)

theking · 07-08-2013, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

His defense is self defense. His injuries were not consistent with what he claims happened, and there is no proof Martin went for his gun.

There is testimony..by Zimmerman..in the police reports that Martin went for his gun and that put him in "fear for his life or great bodily harm" which by law gave him the right to use deadly force. That is defense in total.

The burden of proof lies with the prosecutor not Zimmerman...thus the prosecutor...has to prove that Martin did not go for Zimmerman's gun and Zimmerman does not have to prove that Martin did.

Trend · 07-08-2013, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

I stated what I thought would happen if Zimmerman was found innocent.

No you sidestepped by giving the following non-committal answer: " I believe that if he is found innocent it will set a very dangerous precedent - If someone punches you in the face you will now legally be able to shoot and kill them. "

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

I don't think I am the supreme anything.

You are talking out of both ends .. you said:

"This was a fist fight, not even close to life threatening."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Don't really have enough information on if it was life threatening or not, although it sure does look bad.

Oh.. I see... In this case you don't have enough info but in the GZ case you do. Didn't realize you were privy to the court records.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

I also don't know what injuries she got in the process. Looks horrible, but three people tried to break it up and we also don't know when police were called.

This tells me 100% of what I need to know about your world view. It "looks" horrible? Seriously? She could have retaliated with an Uzi and I would support her.

sandman! · 07-08-2013, 12:30 PM

i would have no problem with Zimmerman patrolling my Neighborhood

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

It blows my mind that anyone would want someone like Zimmerman on their Neighborhood Watch. On face of it all Zimmerman seems like a nice guy, and is concerned about his neighborhood. But the reality is Zimmerman has had a restraining order against him, was charged with assaulting a police, and ordered by the court to take anger management classes. How is someone like Zimmerman allowed on the Neighborhood Watch? How is Zimmerman allowed to legally own a gun?

Do you really want someone like Zimmerman armed patrolling your neighborhood? When you have someone who lives a life of restraining orders, assaulting police officers, and anger management problems and you arm him and send him into the night to "protect the citizens" it's only a matter of time before he shoots and kills someone.

sandman! · 07-08-2013, 12:35 PM

anyone punching a armed person in the face takes the risk of getting shot.

think of it this way if people know they might get shot and killed for punching someone in the face they might think twice about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

I believe that if he is found innocent it will set a very dangerous precedent - If someone punches you in the face you will now legally be able to shoot and kill them.

This was a fist fight, not even close to life threatening.

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

There is testimony..by Zimmerman..in the police reports that Martin went for his gun and that put him in "fear for his life or great bodily harm" which by law gave him the right to use deadly force. That is defense in total.

So now we accept everything Zimmerman says as being true?

You know, it's not like he doesn't have a long history of spinning bullshit here.

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trend

No you sidestepped by giving the following non-committal answer: " I believe that if he is found innocent it will set a very dangerous precedent - If someone punches you in the face you will now legally be able to shoot and kill them. "

Now who's trolling. You asked what I thought would happen if he was found innocent, and I told you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trend

Oh.. I see... In this case you don't have enough info but in the GZ case you do. Didn't realize you were privy to the court records.

Correct. With the assault in Baltimore I know... Nothing. I don't know know if the victim was seen by a doctor or spent three days in a hospital recovering from wounds. I don't know anything about the victim's injuries.

With Zimmerman, well, we know everything. We have pictures of him front and back, he didn't go to the hospital, he didn't need stiches, he didn't see a doctor. The police detailed his injuries, and multiple people have testified about the extent or lack of injuries Zimmerman had.

Rochard · 07-08-2013, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandman!

i would have no problem with Zimmerman patrolling my Neighborhood

That's great. I am not comfortable with having untrained armed civilians running around trying to be police officers. Again, the end result is some innocent kid gets shot and killed.

theking · 07-08-2013, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

So now we accept everything Zimmerman says as being true?

You know, it's not like he doesn't have a long history of spinning bullshit here.

I certainly do not accept everything Zimmerman says...I stated that the prosecutor has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Martin did not go for Zimmerman's gun...and Zimmerman does not have to prove that he did.

Of course you know that...you just like to troll...for whatever purpose you have for doing so. I intend to end it.

Trend · 07-08-2013, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Now who's trolling. You asked what I thought would happen if he was found innocent, and I told you.

No. I NEVER asked you what you think would happen.

I asked .. and I quote:

"If he is found not guilty by a jury, will you accept that decision or continue to crucify him?"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Correct. With the assault in Baltimore I know... Nothing. I don't know know if the victim was seen by a doctor or spent three days in a hospital recovering from wounds. I don't know anything about the victim's injuries.

With Zimmerman, well, we know everything. We have pictures of him front and back, he didn't go to the hospital, he didn't need stiches, he didn't see a doctor. The police detailed his injuries, and multiple people have testified about the extent or lack of injuries Zimmerman had.

This highlights a significant & fundamental difference between you and I. You need to see the extent of someone's injuries to determine if lethal force is warranted.

I see this requirement as quite literally insane. In most states:

"the statutes say you can use deadly force to protect yourself or someone else if you feel your life is in danger or someone else's life is in danger,"

It does not say that you can use deadly force if the injuries from an attack on you or someone else are serious enough to warrant deadly force.

Can you not see how waiting until after an attack to make that determination is insane?

TheSquealer · 07-08-2013, 03:05 PM

Driving about 800 miles today - again listened to almost the whole day and still listening to the hearings about admitting additional evidence and testimony.. The defense pretty much crushed the prosecution today on every level. Toxicology report will be admitted. 5 or more witnesses identified Zimmerman as the guy crying for help just today alone. Prosecutor strangely can't muster up any family or friends that can do the same - of the 3 so far, being the mother, brother and father, 2 initially said it wasn't Martin.

Horrible that someone died. But it's not appearing to be anywhere close to 2nd degree murder

TheSquealer · 07-08-2013, 03:21 PM

Beyond

A

Reasonable

Doubt

That is all that matters.

07-08-2013, 07:58 AM	#661
Choopa_Pardo Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: NJ Posts: 1,629	Really happy this board is full of amateur prosecutors to keep me up to date on all the proceedings of this case. __________________ AIM - thePardovich Email - [email protected] A World Wide Leader In Hosting! * CHOOPA.COM * Order Now!

07-08-2013, 09:40 AM	#673
TheSquealer BANNED Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: In Your Head Posts: 25,187	The only purpose of certainty is to reinforce ones own ores pre-existing beliefs. New evidence is produced daily. __________________ . Yes, fewer illegal immigrants working equates to more job opportunities for American citizens. Rochard

07-08-2013, 11:16 AM	#681
Joshua G dumb libs love censorship Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 8,198	if GZ refuses to take the stand, just IMO...he is guilty of manslaughter. There is no excuse for him not to testify if he was the good guy & was just defending himself. His defense would be strongest if he testifies. & the state is accusing him of murder! how would he not want to testify? His life is on the line. credibility is most important as to guilt or innocence when facts are murky & the dead guy cant tell his story. Zims facts are already bad (nonexistent bushes, no recollection of street names in a subdivision he patrols), & it is worse if he refuses to tell the jury directly that he was defending himself. no excuse not to testify...the truth shall set you free! (or send you to jail ) Last edited by Joshua G; 07-08-2013 at 11:23 AM..

07-08-2013, 03:05 PM	#699
TheSquealer BANNED Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: In Your Head Posts: 25,187	Driving about 800 miles today - again listened to almost the whole day and still listening to the hearings about admitting additional evidence and testimony.. The defense pretty much crushed the prosecution today on every level. Toxicology report will be admitted. 5 or more witnesses identified Zimmerman as the guy crying for help just today alone. Prosecutor strangely can't muster up any family or friends that can do the same - of the 3 so far, being the mother, brother and father, 2 initially said it wasn't Martin. Horrible that someone died. But it's not appearing to be anywhere close to 2nd degree murder Last edited by TheSquealer; 07-08-2013 at 03:07 PM..

07-08-2013, 03:21 PM	#700
TheSquealer BANNED Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: In Your Head Posts: 25,187	Beyond A Reasonable Doubt That is all that matters. __________________ . Yes, fewer illegal immigrants working equates to more job opportunities for American citizens. Rochard

07-07-2013, 09:48 PM	#653
SuckOnThis So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In my head Posts: 6,844

07-08-2013, 06:01 AM	#655
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	http://deadstate.org/conservative-ra...-guilty-audio/ He actually bring up a good point: "Savage went on to say that the gun Zimmerman was carrying did not have the safety on and that there was a bullet chambered, which, according to Savage, showed intent from Zimmerman. “Had he not chambered a round prior to meeting Trayvon, and had he not taken the safety off — even if Trayvon — during the altercation even if Trayvon had tried to grab the gun away from Zimmerman, had that gun not been chambered with a round and safety off, Trayvon would have had to use two hands. You can’t do it with one hand,” Savage said. “Because Zimmerman carried a loaded weapon with the safety off, Trayvon Martin is dead,” Savage concluded. “Therefore, the responsibility is in the hands of Zimmerman.”

07-08-2013, 07:47 AM	#659
SuckOnThis So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In my head Posts: 6,844	Is this all the defense has? Right wing gun nut buddies of Zimmerman who is profiting from this by writing books and calling him 'Georgie' on the stand swearing without a doubt it was Zimmerman crying for help? Has anyone from the Zimmerman side not profited from this?