RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN

RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:03:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Zimmerman isn't credible, so once you discount his claims, there is no EVIDENCE that Travyon Martin is responsible for his injuries, nor that Trayvon Martin or him had any fight. Go reread all the witness testimony. Not a single one of them identified either party positively. So PERHAPS there was a third party who beat Zimmerman up. There's no evidence to give reasonable doubt to that is there? No evidence that aliens didn't abduct everyone kill Martin beat up Zimmerman and plant false memories in everyone.

tazzygirl -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:04:53 PM)
quote: No evidence that aliens didn't abduct everyone kill Martin beat up Zimmerman and plant false memories in everyone. Who killed T isnt in question. [;)]

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:07:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: No evidence that aliens didn't abduct everyone kill Martin beat up Zimmerman and plant false memories in everyone. Who killed T isnt in question. [;)] Don't start I was showing how ridiculous Fargle was being and if you are half as smart as I think you are you would be able to figure that out,

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:13:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: No evidence that aliens didn't abduct everyone kill Martin beat up Zimmerman and plant false memories in everyone. Who killed T isnt in question. [;)] Neither is who beat up Zimmerman.

tazzygirl -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:15:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: No evidence that aliens didn't abduct everyone kill Martin beat up Zimmerman and plant false memories in everyone. Who killed T isnt in question. [;)] Don't start I was showing how ridiculous Fargle was being and if you are half as smart as I think you are you would be able to figure that out, You fella's seem to be confused in believing any of you have the right to tell me what to do or not do [;)] As far as Z, whoever beat him up didnt do a good enough job.

kdsub -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:17:13 PM)
Most likely discussed in other threads but I am too lazy to look…so… If I was innocent in my mind….and I told the truth as I could remember it…and my lawyers told me that my recollection of events broke no law… Then: I would not only want but I would demand that I be allowed to provide testimony to the jury…How could they make me look bad if I was telling the truth? I would first apologize and beg for forgiveness from Trayvon Martin’s parents…and mean it. I would tell them what an idiot I was and how I was afraid and not thinking straight and if I only had it to do over things would be different. Then I would tell my story and answer every question asked of me to the best of my ability and recollection. If I were on the jury this would make a huge difference in my decision. His not testifying would influence me if I were borderline in my thinking. I believe he made a mistake in not testifying. Butch

Powergamz1 -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:18:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama The Court has released the final Jury Instructions that will be read to the jury this afternoon. "He's guilty as hell: there's a correct verdict and a stupid verdict in this case. make sure you find in a suitably smart manner..."? Or: http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/12/justice/zimmerman-trial/index.html quote: She told the jury that Zimmerman exercised his legal right not to testify, and they cannot "view this as an admission of guilt." "It is not necessary for George Zimmerman to prove anything," Nelson said. Or: quote: is based upon Zimmerman's known history. A history that, had it been investigated, should have had him arrested Or : quote: Zimmerman isn't credible, so once you discount his claims, there is no EVIDENCE that Travyon Martin is responsible for his injuries, nor that Trayvon Martin or him had any fight. Go reread all the witness testimony. Not a single one of them identified either party positively. So PERHAPS there was a third party who beat Zimmerman up. There's no evidence to give reasonable doubt to that is there? Or: quote: Civics in some fairytale world, not law whatsoever. Well, I wonder if they have instructions finalized, cuz I guess I would were I the prosecutor, have the instruction that not testifying on his own behalf (the 5th amendment) should be an indication that he is guilty according to recent SCOTUS case law. Speaking of experts.... who to believe, who to believe??

tazzygirl -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:18:18 PM)
Z already testified... from the videos. Funny how that was allowed to happen.

Edwynn -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:19:50 PM)
I'm not getting the issue on that one. If the "right to remain silent" were not intended to be implemented with out automatically 'assigned guilt' in the process, then it would be useless and not enacted in the first place. I don't care at all how this turns out in a court, I already know what happened. That is, the end result that would have been avoided, were a sane person to be involved. I don't need a court to 'verify' things one way or another, anymore than I need the SEC to dock Goldman Sachs two weeks' allowance of $500 mil for causing trillions of damages to society. Why people have their knickers in a twist over this one is beyond me.

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:23:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: No evidence that aliens didn't abduct everyone kill Martin beat up Zimmerman and plant false memories in everyone. Who killed T isnt in question. [;)] Don't start I was showing how ridiculous Fargle was being and if you are half as smart as I think you are you would be able to figure that out, You fella's seem to be confused in believing any of you have the right to tell me what to do or not do [;)] As far as Z, whoever beat him up didnt do a good enough job. I didn't tell you what to do or not to do I just pointed out what any reasonable person would be able to see. 'Whoever" does this mean you actually believe in a phantom beater? Your smarter than that.

kdsub -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:23:26 PM)
No where near the same as face to face with the prosecution...I am saying this not just for this trial but any trial... If innocent then defendants should testify and if they don't they should understand it could influence the jury...and should in my opinion. Butch

mnottertail -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:25:15 PM)
quote: If the "right to remain silent" were not intended to be implemented with out automatically 'assigned guilt' in the process, then it would be useless and not enacted in the first place. You would think so, but not so, according to SCOTUS. The miasma is in this thread: http://www.collarchat.com/m_4483319/mpage_1/tm.htm

Marini -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:25:43 PM)
Zim trial unleashed? This thread will certainly be on fire, after the verdict...... and of course before the verdict. I have a question, When did it become okay to be on "neighborhood watch" and carry a gun? I remember years ago, when the Guardian Angels were front and center news. I don't recall Curtis Sliwa carrying a piece, when did this become legal and acceptable behavior? Trayvon Martin would be alive, if neighborhood watch rules were followed Peace

BamaD -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:30:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini Zim trial unleashed? This thread will certainly be on fire, after the verdict...... and of course before the verdict. I have a question, When did it become okay to be on "neighborhood watch" and carry a gun? I remember years ago, when the Guardian Angels were front and center news. I don't recall Curtis Silwa carry a piece, when did this become legal and acceptable behavior? Trayvon Martin would be alive, if neighborhood watch rules were followed Peace Zimmerman wasn't "on duty" and he had a concealed carry permit. He started carrying because of vicious dogs in the area and the police told him a taser wouldn't stop a big dog. All a matter of record.

cloudboy -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:31:45 PM)
I was about to post on Zimmerman III when I found out that it had been locked. I think that you have hit upon the solution here, and I hope the trial experiment goes well. (pardon the pun....) ------------ "That conversation (issues emanating from the Zimmerman trial) is about the particulars and vagaries of laws. It is about a law that allows an “aggressor” to legally use deadly force against a defender if the two become engaged in an altercation where the aggressor begins to “believe” he or she is in imminent danger of being seriously hurt or killed. Do we want our laws to be written in such a way? Should the “aggressor” pay no legal penalty for setting deadly events in motion? Should the idea of self-defense bounce back and forth between two people like a Ping-Pong ball?" Do we really want handguns operating as the final arbiter of what might otherwise be: 1st, 2nd or 3rd Degree Assaults or Stalkings / bar-room - neighborhood squabbles? Does the "fear of imminent harm - use of deadly force doctrine" open up ispo-facto defenses for every homicide committed in the course of a struggle or disagreement? What factors would you require to justify the use of deadly force in a self defense claim?

mnottertail -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:34:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD Zimmerman wasn't "on duty" and he had a concealed carry permit. He started carrying because of vicious dogs in the area and the police told him a taser wouldn't stop a big dog. All a matter of record. Yes, wasn't he going to the store for milk in one incarnation, so he grabs a couple bucks out of the old lady's purse, a gun and a flashlight, for a run to the corner store, right?

tazzygirl -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:35:46 PM)
quote: I didn't tell you what to do or not to do I just pointed out what any reasonable person would be able to see. 'Whoever" does this mean you actually believe in a phantom beater? Your smarter than that. "Dont start" sure sounds like telling someone what to do or not do to me. As far as a phantom beater.... you dont know how to take a joke, do you... which is really a shame. You fellas have spent months over all this bullshit with Z and T and the rest that you lost all your senses of humor. Im glad this thread is unmoderated. You, Bama, need to chill out and relax, quit taking stuff so personal or serious.

Powergamz1 -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:35:55 PM)
Better hurry up and catch Judge Nelson so she'll have time to re-instruct the jury properly... quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: If the "right to remain silent" were not intended to be implemented with out automatically 'assigned guilt' in the process, then it would be useless and not enacted in the first place. You would think so, but not so, according to SCOTUS. The miasma is in this thread: http://www.collarchat.com/m_4483319/mpage_1/tm.htm

Edwynn -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:43:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: If the "right to remain silent" were not intended to be implemented with out automatically 'assigned guilt' in the process, then it would be useless and not enacted in the first place. You would think so, but not so, according to SCOTUS. The miasma is in this thread: http://www.collarchat.com/m_4483319/mpage_1/tm.htm I won't disagree as to the assertion, and likely, the fact of such adjudication, being as that I have to avoid such 'information' as might make me to "go postal," as they used to say. I haven't had a TV for over 20 years, for good reason, as that is to benefit to society and myself both. When the 'output' of the scotus has become even more absurd than any congress or president could conjure, I tend to delve into more meaningful things, wherever to be found. I don't dispute your word, nor even sentiment in the matter, one way or the other. But I must reiterate that I don't care if "Dr. Z" walks free, does 20 years, or whatever. I know enough of what happened. Unless we're in an alternate universe as presented by, e.g., Heinlein, or the 'defenders of the shooter.' I don't care if the defenders of the shooter defend the shooter, I'm just tired of all this complete social norm inversion on their part that being followed by a nut case is all of a sudden a 'normal' thing, as opposed to centuries and recent decades and recent years of reality in contravention thereby.

Marini -> RE: UNMODERATED ZIMMERMAN (7/12/2013 2:43:51 PM)
quote: Zimmerman wasn't "on duty" and he had a concealed carry permit. He started carrying because of vicious dogs in the area and the police told him a taser wouldn't stop a big dog. All a matter of record. He decided to carry a gun on "neighborhood watch" because of vicious dogs? Are you telling me the police gave him permission to chase and to run after people "he thought looked suspicious", playing a broke down rambo with a gun? If it was too dangerous for him to do his "neighborhood watch" without a gun, he had no business being out there anyway. He is not a policeman, he is not even a security guard.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.0546875