Florida Teen Shot

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Do you take on faith the claims of a guy who has a self-interest of clearing himself from charges?

I take nothing on faith. But I require legitimate evidence to convict. In its absence, whether or not I have misgivings about the guy, he must be released.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

You taking lessons from kallend now?

Why, is kallend a law teacher now?

He thinks he is

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,991]

>I take nothing on faith. But I require legitimate evidence to convict. In its
>absence, whether or not I have misgivings about the guy, he must be
>released.

Agreed.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>She stated in her press conference that she wanted justice for Martin
>That seems to show a clear bias

You're right. Wanting justice for someone demonstrates a clear anti-conservative bias.

Ahhh

but what if Zimmerman was the victim and he was defending his own life?

But of course the only one needing justice is Martin

Fuck Zimmerman, correct?

Martin doesn't get a lawyer, and to go before a judge and jury to decide if he should live or die - he's dead already.

GZ has access to justice that was denied to TM.

The ignorance of this post is very blinding

So you don't believe in jury trials before a judge to sort fact from fiction?

Maybe you should emigrate to, say, Iran.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>She stated in her press conference that she wanted justice for Martin
>That seems to show a clear bias

You're right. Wanting justice for someone demonstrates a clear anti-conservative bias.

Ahhh

but what if Zimmerman was the victim and he was defending his own life?

But of course the only one needing justice is Martin

Fuck Zimmerman, correct?

Martin doesn't get a lawyer, and to go before a judge and jury to decide if he should live or die - he's dead already.

GZ has access to justice that was denied to TM.

The ignorance of this post is very blinding

So you don't believe in jury trials before a judge to sort fact from fiction?

Maybe you should emigrate to, say, Iran.

Very blinding

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

>but what if Zimmerman was the victim and he was defending his own life?

Then justice will be served by finding him not guilty. His indictment will let a jury decide if that is the case.

except that he will have been jailed for weeks up to a year for the trial, have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars he doesn't have, and in any case still be marked as a killer with possible physical retribution. If he is the victim, he has still lost. If he wasn't the victim, then he's getting 25% of the punishment owed to him.

How is that different from any other criminal defendant who is subsequently found "not guilty"? It's a feature of our system. Undesirable maybe, but true.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>She stated in her press conference that she wanted justice for Martin
>That seems to show a clear bias

You're right. Wanting justice for someone demonstrates a clear anti-conservative bias.

Ahhh

but what if Zimmerman was the victim and he was defending his own life?

But of course the only one needing justice is Martin

Fuck Zimmerman, correct?

Martin doesn't get a lawyer, and to go before a judge and jury to decide if he should live or die - he's dead already.

GZ has access to justice that was denied to TM.

The ignorance of this post is very blinding

So you don't believe in jury trials before a judge to sort fact from fiction?

Maybe you should emigrate to, say, Iran.

Very blinding

So you don't have an actual rebuttal, just a silly remark.

That figures.

We have a dispute over the "facts" of the case. Zimmerman gets a trial before a jury of his peers, Martin gets a coffin. I know whose shoes I'd rather be in.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

Quote

Do you take on faith the claims of a guy who has a self-interest of clearing himself from charges?

I take nothing on faith. But I require legitimate evidence to convict. In its absence, whether or not I have misgivings about the guy, he must be released.

I agree 100%. Given my understanding of the standards required to assert a self-defense argument in FL I doubt there will be enough evidence to convict. However I am quite sure that none of us know all of the evidence so I could be mistaken.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>but what if Zimmerman was the victim and he was defending his own life?

Then justice will be served by finding him not guilty. His indictment will let a jury decide if that is the case.

except that he will have been jailed for weeks up to a year for the trial, have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars he doesn't have, and in any case still be marked as a killer with possible physical retribution. If he is the victim, he has still lost. If he wasn't the victim, then he's getting 25% of the punishment owed to him.

How is that different from any other criminal defendant who is subsequently found "not guilty"? It's a feature of our system. Undesirable maybe, but true.

As I wrote, that's isn't the question being answered.

But IF he is the victim, then this result isn't justice being served. A worse result may be avoided, but he was harmed in the incident, and further by the system.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>but what if Zimmerman was the victim and he was defending his own life?

Then justice will be served by finding him not guilty. His indictment will let a jury decide if that is the case.

except that he will have been jailed for weeks up to a year for the trial, have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars he doesn't have, and in any case still be marked as a killer with possible physical retribution. If he is the victim, he has still lost. If he wasn't the victim, then he's getting 25% of the punishment owed to him.

How is that different from any other criminal defendant who is subsequently found "not guilty"? It's a feature of our system. Undesirable maybe, but true.

As I wrote, that's isn't the question being answered.

But IF he is the victim, then this result isn't justice being served. A worse result may be avoided, but he was harmed in the incident, and further by the system.

As is every other defendant who is subsequently found "not guilty". Z is not being singled out for special mistreatment.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[headoverheels 333]

Quote

Quote

Zimmerman made his choice.

that's an entirely different question than "will justice be served." Being jailed a year and losing money (though the comment that he can probably get even via Fox money sounds valid) may be preferable to death, but it's hardly an outcome you desire.

When Zimmerman decided to act as he did, and carry, he set up the situation. Whether he started the physical part of the altercation is unknown to me, but he certainly set it up and provoked it.

[headoverheels 333]

Quote

Quote

Quote

You taking lessons from kallend now?

Why, is kallend a law teacher now?

He thinks he is

I hear that the defense is expected to say that Zimmerman was using the 45 degree rule of separation.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Zimmerman made his choice.

that's an entirely different question than "will justice be served." Being jailed a year and losing money (though the comment that he can probably get even via Fox money sounds valid) may be preferable to death, but it's hardly an outcome you desire.

When Zimmerman decided to act as he did, and carry, he set up the situation. Whether he started the physical part of the altercation is unknown to me, but he certainly set it up and provoked it.

The same could be said for Martin, since he had successfully eluded Zimmerman and then returned to confront him.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 2,991]

>The same could be said for Martin, since he had successfully eluded
>Zimmerman and then returned to confront him.

I am sure Zimmerman's lawyers will try to play that angle. However, a jury, rather than a guy on the Internet with no knowledge of the case, will decide that.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>The same could be said for Martin, since he had successfully eluded
>Zimmerman and then returned to confront him.

I am sure Zimmerman's lawyers will try to play that angle. However, a jury, rather than a guy on the Internet with no knowledge of the case, will decide that.

Aww, don't be so hard on yourself.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

The same could be said for Martin, since he had successfully eluded Zimmerman and then returned to confront him.

From the affidavit that was filed, the prosecutor does not seem to believe this was the case. The affidavit states that Zimmerman pursued Martin, confronted him, and then a struggle ensued. But I don't know what evidence they intend to use to try to prove this.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

The same could be said for Martin, since he had successfully eluded Zimmerman and then returned to confront him.

From the affidavit that was filed, the prosecutor does not seem to believe this was the case. The affidavit states that Zimmerman pursued Martin, confronted him, and then a struggle ensued. But I don't know what evidence they intend to use to try to prove this.

Given the direct conflict with Zimmerman's 911 call transcript, I don't know either.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

When Zimmerman decided to act as he did, and carry, he set up the situation. Whether he started the physical part of the altercation is unknown to me, but he certainly set it up and provoked it.

I know happy hour is long past...people seem to be having considerable difficulty remembering the key IF premise in this sub thread.

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The same could be said for Martin, since he had successfully eluded Zimmerman and then returned to confront him.

From the affidavit that was filed, the prosecutor does not seem to believe this was the case. The affidavit states that Zimmerman pursued Martin, confronted him, and then a struggle ensued. But I don't know what evidence they intend to use to try to prove this.

Given the direct conflict with Zimmerman's 911 call transcript, I don't know either.

The first admission that there's something you don't know about this case. All your other posts suggest that you have first hand knowledge of everything that happened.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The same could be said for Martin, since he had successfully eluded Zimmerman and then returned to confront him.

From the affidavit that was filed, the prosecutor does not seem to believe this was the case. The affidavit states that Zimmerman pursued Martin, confronted him, and then a struggle ensued. But I don't know what evidence they intend to use to try to prove this.

Given the direct conflict with Zimmerman's 911 call transcript, I don't know either.

What part of the call transcript conflicts with this? The call ends before any confrontation, so it seems to only confirm that Zimmerman pursued Martin, but it doesn't indicate what happened after that either way.

I know Zimmerman's own story conflicts with this affidavit, but again, I don't know what evidence either side has to back up their case. (And of course, the prosecutor is the one who has the burden of proof.)

[kallend 2,027]

Quote

Quote

When Zimmerman decided to act as he did, and carry, he set up the situation. Whether he started the physical part of the altercation is unknown to me, but he certainly set it up and provoked it.

I know happy hour is long past...people seem to be having considerable difficulty remembering the key IF premise in this sub thread.

This one?

Quote

If he is the victim, he has still lost. If he wasn't the victim, then he's getting 25% of the punishment owed to him.

At this point those seem the only outcomes. And the best way our civilization has yet come up with to decide such things is trial by a jury in a court of law.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The same could be said for Martin, since he had successfully eluded Zimmerman and then returned to confront him.

From the affidavit that was filed, the prosecutor does not seem to believe this was the case. The affidavit states that Zimmerman pursued Martin, confronted him, and then a struggle ensued. But I don't know what evidence they intend to use to try to prove this.

Given the direct conflict with Zimmerman's 911 call transcript, I don't know either.

What part of the call transcript conflicts with this? The call ends before any confrontation, so it seems to only confirm that Zimmerman pursued Martin, but it doesn't indicate what happened after that either way.

I know Zimmerman's own story conflicts with this affidavit, but again, I don't know what evidence either side has to back up their case. (And of course, the prosecutor is the one who has the burden of proof.)

The call indicates that Martin had broken contact and Zimmerman didn't have him in sight: "I don't know where this kid is"

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rushmc 23]

When Zimmerman decided to act as he did, and carry, he set up the situation. Whether he started the physical part of the altercation is unknown to me, but he certainly set it up and provoked it.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The same could be said for Martin, since he had successfully eluded Zimmerman and then returned to confront him.

From the affidavit that was filed, the prosecutor does not seem to believe this was the case. The affidavit states that Zimmerman pursued Martin, confronted him, and then a struggle ensued. But I don't know what evidence they intend to use to try to prove this.

Given the direct conflict with Zimmerman's 911 call transcript, I don't know either.

The first admission that there's something you don't know about this case. All your other posts suggest that you have first hand knowledge of everything that happened.

AND YOURS DONT???

10 outa 10 then a boom as the meter is destroyed

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Carrying is not more setting things up than Martin walking through the neighborhood

I think the comment was more meant to indicate that choosing to carry brings with it extra risks and responsibilities.