rushmc 23 #2676 December 12, 2012 Quote>Zimmeraman did not pursue Hmm, even Zimmerman disagrees with that. Fortunately, a court will now decide. He followed him, yes,, until he lost sight of him THAT is what Zimmernam agrees to Not the pursue story line many like to use As for the court deciding? I still think it will not go that far"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #2677 December 12, 2012 >The only reason I brought is up is because the trend of the supporters seem to be that >of Martin being a saint and is dead purely because of the act of another Yes. Your argument (and the media's argument) from the beginning has seemed to center around a few areas: -Martin was a drug using bad kid -All the bad things about Zimmerman aren't really true -It's all about how people hate guns Or reverse them depending on your political view None of which, fortunately, matter. What matters is whether or not Martin had cause to shoot and kill an unarmed kid - and that will be decided in a court of law, as it should be. All the character assassinations on both sides won't matter much at all at that point. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 362 #2678 December 12, 2012 QuoteAccording to reports, Zimmerman NEVER talked to Martin while he was watching him He lost site of him so he returned to his vehicle Marting then approached him and attacked him Entirely, 100% Zimmerman's story. No physical or eyewitness evidence whatsoever to support or refute it. But of course Zimmerman isn't going to say anything different, is he? QuoteThe eveidence we have seen fully supports Zimmermans account of the story The "evidence" we have seen could support many different scenarios. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #2679 December 12, 2012 Quote>The only reason I brought is up is because the trend of the supporters seem to be that >of Martin being a saint and is dead purely because of the act of another Yes. Your argument (and the media's argument) from the beginning has seemed to center around a few areas: -Martin was a drug using bad kid -All the bad things about Zimmerman aren't really true -It's all about how people hate guns Or reverse them depending on your political view None of which, fortunately, matter. What matters is whether or not Martin had cause to shoot and kill an unarmed kid - and that will be decided in a court of law, as it should be. All the character assassinations on both sides won't matter much at all at that point. Again A case should not go to court if there is no evidense to support a trial What we know now seems to indicate that this case should not go to trial as Zimmerman appears to have been defending himself from attack"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 362 #2680 December 12, 2012 QuoteHe followed him, yes... Not the pursue story line many like to use It all depends on what the meaning of "is" is? Semantic quibbling. "I wasn't pursuing, I was following". Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #2681 December 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteHe followed him, yes... Not the pursue story line many like to use It all depends on what the meaning of "is" is? Semantic quibbling. "I wasn't pursuing, I was following". Don Yes it does From Merriam- Webster Pursue Quoteto follow in order to overtake, capture, kill, or defeat Follow Quote to go, proceed, or come after Both are the first lines from the on line dictionary I think there is a big differnce that lacks smeantics You?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #2682 December 12, 2012 QuoteA case should not go to court if there is no evidense to support a trial Isn't that what a grand jury is for? QuoteWhat we know now seems to indicate that this case should not go to trial as Zimmerman appears to have been defending himself from attack When you have to use words like "seems to" you are probably in a situation where you would want a (grand) jury to decide. That is in the end what the justice system is for. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #2683 December 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteA case should not go to court if there is no evidense to support a trial Isn't that what a grand jury is for? Yes, and many legal experts sais this ruling was joke QuoteWhat we know now seems to indicate that this case should not go to trial as Zimmerman appears to have been defending himself from attack When you have to use words like "seems to" you are probably in a situation where you would want a (grand) jury to decide. That is in the end what the justice system is for. Refer above"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #2684 December 12, 2012 The justice system simply isn't perfect. (Remember this ruling when you argue in favour of the death penalty) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #2685 December 12, 2012 QuoteThe justice system simply isn't perfect. (Remember this ruling when you argue in favour of the death penalty) where do I stand on the death penalty?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 220 #2686 December 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteThe justice system simply isn't perfect. (Remember this ruling when you argue in favour of the death penalty) where do I stand on the death penalty? Wow you can stand on an abstract thought?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #2687 December 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteThe justice system simply isn't perfect. (Remember this ruling when you argue in favour of the death penalty) where do I stand on the death penalty? In the viewing room with a camera and big foam hand. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 362 #2688 December 12, 2012 Quotewhere do I stand on the death penalty? Not on the trap door, hopefully. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 362 #2689 December 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteThe justice system simply isn't perfect. (Remember this ruling when you argue in favour of the death penalty) where do I stand on the death penalty? In the viewing room with a camera and big foam hand.And a foam cheese on his head?_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #2690 December 12, 2012 Quote where do I stand on the death penalty? Well, if you are not going to argue in favour of the death penalty, you also won't have to remember this ruling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #2691 December 12, 2012 Quote Quote...and then have the nerve to later say that people are being one sided with presumed facts. I think I have been clear that I do not know know the exact sequence of events that transpired to bring Martin and Zimmerman into physical contact. Others here assert that they do know this. This incident does bother me on a number of levels. It bothers me to think that I could be minding my own business, doing something I have every right to do in a public area (like walking home), be challenged by some wannabee-cop, and if I don't respond to their liking end up dead. How do you not see the contradiction in these words? You say you don't know the events, yet you're certainly convinced that this is a case of a poor young boy who got harassed and then shot, merely for buying skittles and walking home. Selective acceptance of facts does not lead to an intelligent discussion of this death. when the media showed pictures of this sweet young 14 year old boy, who couldn't possibly stand to a full sized adult, despite being out outright lie, this was done to convince all that this was a vigilante shooting. When the police/prosecutor hid the higher resolution images and video of GZ, and instead showed a B&W low res image that obscured his injuries, that was done to convince all that his claim of self defense and fear of death was horseshit. But fortunately they could not indefinitely maintain these falsehoods. Unlike your presumption of simple shopping, these are known facts. Yes, it is problematic that only the survivor can tell the story. But you can't convict a person for second degree murder based on the notion that the victim *might* tell a different story. It's also difficult to support a charge of 2nd degree on any basis other than political reasons. Personally I see little reason to rehash the same shit all over again. But you tried to establish opinion as obvious fact, and that's bullshit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #2692 December 12, 2012 QuoteWhat matters is whether or not Martin had cause to shoot and kill an unarmed kid . . . Wait, now Martin shot and killed an unarmed kid too? While he himself was unarmed? This is getting so confusing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rick 67 #2693 December 12, 2012 Quote Quote What matters is whether or not Martin had cause to shoot and kill an unarmed kid . . . Wait, now Martin shot and killed an unarmed kid too? While he himself was unarmed? This is getting so confusing. yes it's all in his school records You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #2694 December 12, 2012 this thread is so hard to stay on this page feels just like page 20 and 50 and page 60 and page 70 (you get the idea) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 801 #2695 December 12, 2012 Don, There IS physical evidence as well as a witness that are supporting Zimmerman's telling of events. I'm still trying to figure out how the hell you get suspended for an EMPTY bag of weed....isn't that just lunch??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 362 #2696 December 12, 2012 QuoteThere IS physical evidence as well as a witness that are supporting Zimmerman's telling of events. I guess I missed that. I've heard of a witness who heard the altercation, looked out the window, and saw a fight in progress. Zimmerman's injuries clearly also indicate a fight, so there's no disputing that. What I haven't heard about is any witness who saw the start of the fight, i.e. who threw the first punch/made physical contact. Is there physical evidence that speaks to that, or that implicates Martin as the aggressor? QuoteI'm still trying to figure out how the hell you get suspended for an EMPTY bag of weed....isn't that just lunch??? One would think. Or, if the bag was quite recently emptied, maybe a reason for lunch? I suspect the problem is zero tolerance policies or similar silliness. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #2697 December 12, 2012 Quote Quote where do I stand on the death penalty? Well, if you are not going to argue in favour of the death penalty, you also won't have to remember this ruling. Well, a comment was made regarding my position on the death penalty I have not spoken of it or about it much (if any ) at all on this site So, he seemed to think he knows what my position is on it so I thought I would ask him"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #2698 December 12, 2012 I personal believe that as a society we don’t actually believe in the right to use deadly force without a trial – almost. There seems to be enough questions (legitimate) that perhaps a trial is in order. But if you are a T.M. supporter you should at least be able to acknowledge that some of the press seems to be desperate to change the view of the event. T.M. was at the start presented as a “perfect kid” and Z was treated as a white person who shot a helpless child. What worries me is that the press in order to gin up business and the race baiters totally distorted this event, is that going to be the new norm?Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skypuppy 1 #2699 December 12, 2012 I think I have been clear that I do not know know the exact sequence of events that transpired to bring Martin and Zimmerman into physical contact. ________________________________________ actually in post 2661 you say clearly that zimmerman admits approaching and challenging Martin. I have never heard Zimmerman admit any such thing. I think he said he was headed back to his truck and Martin came up behind him and challenged him. __________________________________________________ Then you say It bothers me that the opportunity for any "justice" in this case has been squandered, likely in the first hours after the killing when the opportunity to look for evidence to verify (or otherwise) Zimmerman's story was passed by. Every single thing about this case pisses me off. ________________________________________ But the fact that such opportunity was squandered doesn't mean that it was Zimmerman's fault. Even if things happened exactly as he said, (and in which case, under the law as I understand it he is innocent), are you wanting to hold him guilty even if he is innocent just because the police didn't investigate it enuf for you? As far as I'm concerned the police acted exactly as they should - they did investigate, and found that the facts supported zimmerman's self-defence claim, and didn't charge him.If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #2700 December 13, 2012 Quote>Zimmeraman did not pursue Hmm, even Zimmerman disagrees with that. Fortunately, a court will now decide. funny I went back a looked for the grand jury ruling As far as I can tell there is none (so my comment on the ruling was wrong. I must have been remembering comments about the prosecutor actions) The special prosector brought the charges by herself This then raises many questons QuoteNo sooner did the special prosecutor at Florida file her charges accusing George Zimmerman of murdering Trayvon Martin than the controversy erupted over whether the bringing of charges is the result of a rush to judgment. Some will say that the idea of a rush to judgment is ridiculous. It was weeks after the killing before the charges were finally laid, and then only after a national outcry that went all the way to the White House. But the concerns rocketing around the internet are not only from racists indifferent to the fate of the slain youth. The concerns are also being voiced by some of the most distinguished legal minds in the country, including Harvard Law School’s Alan Dershowitz, who is a master of due process. The question that has been nagging at these columns has to do with the decision of the prosecutor to bypass the grand jury. The so-called grand jury right, after all, is American bedrock, vouchsafed in the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. It is stated in some of the plainest language in the whole Bill of Rights: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger.” So if a prosecutor wants to charge Mr. Zimmerman, why doesn’t the prosecutor have to go through a grand jury? bolding and underlining added by me http://www.nysun.com/editorials/zimmermans-bill-of-rights/87790/"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
