Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes it is. An armed person stalking an un-armed person is definitely a crime.Which isn't a crime.
That's why the cops told him to stop!
And he fuckin' knew it to, because he tried to lie about what he was doing by saying he got out of his car to check the street name; in a complex he had lived for years; that only has 3 streets; that he patrols during his Neighborhood Watch outings.
So, it's pretty fuckin' ridiculous to think he wouldn't know what street he was on, but he needed a reason to be out of his car.
I know, but it still should have been considered - it gives a reason as to motive, for Trayvon to have attacked.
The attack on him wasn't random - it was probably provoked by Zimmerman following the boy, and that should have been considered. Otherwise the jury didn't get all the facts.
There was no prior motive established during the trial. Other than Zimmerman referring to him as suspicious, he did not act maliciously. If you haven't already seen, you can by looking at Martin's Facebook posts and text messages know that he liked getting into fights, even gave his girlfriend a blow by blow of a fight he got into. Zimmerman never "attacked" him either. There were over 250+ pieces of evidence and 60 witnesses called in that trial. The applicable law was put before the jury. They did it by the book, not by emotion.
Funny how rightwing nuts love 'by the book' when they like the outcome; when they have other motivations,
then they love the idea of jury nullification, and even states nullifying federal laws.
Carbonated has problems with 'jury of his peers. Just the same as the race-baiters saying they weren't there...There was no prior motive established during the trial. Other than Zimmerman referring to him as suspicious, he did not act maliciously. If you haven't already seen, you can by looking at Martin's Facebook posts and text messages know that he liked getting into fights, even gave his girlfriend a blow by blow of a fight he got into. Zimmerman never "attacked" him either. There were over 250+ pieces of evidence and 60 witnesses called in that trial. The applicable law was put before the jury. They did it by the book, not by emotion.
Funny how rightwing nuts love 'by the book' when they like the outcome; when they have other motivations,
then they love the idea of jury nullification, and even states nullifying federal laws.
So the jury were full of "rightwing nuts"? So they didn't render a verdict you wanted. Instead of abiding by their decision, you berate them. It's quite hypocritical actually, knowing you would not have said a word had they convicted him. There were no prior motivations. None. You should have heard what juror B-29 said in her interview. "He got away with murder, but as the law was read to me, he was not guilty. The prosecution did not make their case." That is doing it by the book.
And so abiding by the law is jury nullification in your book? You're a bigger idiot than I thought, Carbine.
I know, but it still should have been considered - it gives a reason as to motive, for Trayvon to have attacked.
The attack on him wasn't random - it was probably provoked by Zimmerman following the boy, and that should have been considered. Otherwise the jury didn't get all the facts.
There was no prior motive established during the trial. Other than Zimmerman referring to him as suspicious, he did not act maliciously. If you haven't already seen, you can by looking at Martin's Facebook posts and text messages know that he liked getting into fights, even gave his girlfriend a blow by blow of a fight he got into. Zimmerman never "attacked" him either. There were over 250+ pieces of evidence and 60 witnesses called in that trial. The applicable law was put before the jury. They did it by the book, not by emotion.
I guess you've flip flopped from your earlier concessions that they only acquitted him due to lack of evidence.
Here is my take on the whole of the situation.
Zimmerman is a keystone cop type. He is Tim James in "Mall Cop."
He sees Zimmerman, does not recognize him, and is suspicious of him as is anyone of a stranger in a hoodie, white or black. Zimmerman decides to confront Trayvon who is not as innocent as the anti-Zimmerman crowd paints him. Trayvon decides that he had enough of Zimmerman's BS and jumps him. Zimmerman, again being a Mall cop, isn't really prepared for fighting and goes down easily at which time Trayvon takes advantage. Not being the brightest bulb in the drawer Zimmerman pulls out his gun, there may have been a fight over it, or not, it goes off killing Trayvon.
There is no evidence that Zimmerman started a fight with Trayvon, but there is evidence that they fought. I seriously doubt Zimmerman is smart enough to kill Trayvon and then realize he needed a cover story and beat himself blooding his head.
I think that this is what the jury thought, it was a tragic incident which may have been brought on by Zimmerman following Trayvon but that in and of itself is not necessarily a reason for a fight to ensue. The one black jurist is saying, in my opinion, that by law Zimmerman was guilty but in the end Zimmerman will face true judgment.
I don't give much credence to Zimmerman's side of the story. Zimmerman was not in uniform, and was following Trayvon, unnecessarily. What was Trayvon supposed to do? What should he have thought? He thought he was about to be the victim of a mugging, and stood his ground. The expectation that deference from Trayvon towards Zimmerman is the right course of action is just white racism at work.
What was Trayvon supposed to do??? Hummm..
Well, he could have tried walking on the sidewalks instead of next to the houses, which is trespassing.
He could have continued to walk home instead of turning around and walking/running to where Zimmerman was.
He could have not attacked Zimmerman, breaking his nose and bashing his skull against the concrete.
He could have stopped hitting Zimmerman, got up off of him, and ran home when someone yelled that they were calling the police.
Yeah.. There were a lot of things Trayvon could have done that would have, in the end, allowed him to remain alive. But instead his choices led him to being shot and he died while committing a crime.
Who said he was on private property?It is a crime to walk on private property, next to houses where you don't live.
It's called "Trespassing".
What Zimmerman was doing was absolutely assault.BTW, here is the legal definition of "Assault"
Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim
What Zimmerman was doing was not assault. Trayvon, when he raised his fist to Zimmerman committed assault.
I don't give much credence to Zimmerman's side of the story. Zimmerman was not in uniform, and was following Trayvon, unnecessarily. What was Trayvon supposed to do? What should he have thought? He thought he was about to be the victim of a mugging, and stood his ground. The expectation that deference from Trayvon towards Zimmerman is the right course of action is just white racism at work.
What was Trayvon supposed to do??? Hummm..
Well, he could have tried walking on the sidewalks instead of next to the houses, which is trespassing.
He could have continued to walk home instead of turning around and walking/running to where Zimmerman was.
He could have not attacked Zimmerman, breaking his nose and bashing his skull against the concrete.
He could have stopped hitting Zimmerman, got up off of him, and ran home when someone yelled that they were calling the police.
Yeah.. There were a lot of things Trayvon could have done that would have, in the end, allowed him to remain alive. But instead his choices led him to being shot and he died while committing a crime.
Wow. What a fantasy. All of the poor decision making was on Zimmerman's part. He called the cops needlessly. He didn't wait for the cops, which he called, to get there and do their jobs. He wasn't properly dressed in a way that would ID him as a neighborhood watchman.
You poor conservatives, and your over active fantasy life. You believed in Iraqis cheering our troops, WMD in Iraq, Iranians that can't wait for a nuclear exchange with Israel, massive nationwide voter fraud, Clinton tax hikes will cause a recession, Bush won the 2000 Florida vote count, gay marriage will ruin straight marriages, Romney will win, and dumbest of all, blacks walking down the street are suspicious and calling the cops on them is not racist. Would you knock it off with being wrong all the time?
Here is my take on the whole of the situation.
Zimmerman is a keystone cop type. He is Tim James in "Mall Cop."
He sees Zimmerman, does not recognize him, and is suspicious of him as is anyone of a stranger in a hoodie, white or black. Zimmerman decides to confront Trayvon who is not as innocent as the anti-Zimmerman crowd paints him. Trayvon decides that he had enough of Zimmerman's BS and jumps him. Zimmerman, again being a Mall cop, isn't really prepared for fighting and goes down easily at which time Trayvon takes advantage. Not being the brightest bulb in the drawer Zimmerman pulls out his gun, there may have been a fight over it, or not, it goes off killing Trayvon.
There is no evidence that Zimmerman started a fight with Trayvon, but there is evidence that they fought. I seriously doubt Zimmerman is smart enough to kill Trayvon and then realize he needed a cover story and beat himself blooding his head.
I think that this is what the jury thought, it was a tragic incident which may have been brought on by Zimmerman following Trayvon but that in and of itself is not necessarily a reason for a fight to ensue. The one black jurist is saying, in my opinion, that by law Zimmerman was guilty but in the end Zimmerman will face true judgment.
I don't give much credence to Zimmerman's side of the story. Zimmerman was not in uniform, and was following Trayvon, unnecessarily. What was Trayvon supposed to do? What should he have thought? He thought he was about to be the victim of a mugging, and stood his ground. The expectation that deference from Trayvon towards Zimmerman is the right course of action is just white racism at work.
What was Trayvon supposed to do??? Hummm..
Well, he could have tried walking on the sidewalks instead of next to the houses, which is trespassing.
He could have continued to walk home instead of turning around and walking/running to where Zimmerman was.
He could have not attacked Zimmerman, breaking his nose and bashing his skull against the concrete.
He could have stopped hitting Zimmerman, got up off of him, and ran home when someone yelled that they were calling the police.
Yeah.. There were a lot of things Trayvon could have done that would have, in the end, allowed him to remain alive. But instead his choices led him to being shot and he died while committing a crime.
WHAT do you expect Zimmerman to say? He knew there were no eye witnesses and the only person who could dispute his story is the boy he executed.
You idiot.
There were plenty of witnesses. John Good was the primary witness, he had the best view of the fight.
Really? No eyewitnesses? Are you stupid? Executed? Man you swallowed all of it didn't you?
I am at a literal loss for words as to how blatantly stupid this post is.
Did John Good testify WHO started the fight???
All those posters who claim Jury B29 said that Zimmerman got away with murder are completely disingenuous. They are attempting to say she believes Zimmerman should have been convicted, but the lady says the very opposite. They ignore most of what Juror B29 actually said and twist her other words beyond recognition. Those who bother to read the entire interview sill quickly learn that she actually supports the Zimmerman verdict and thinks it was wrong to even arrest him!! Now, after all the lies, here is the truth:
Jury B29 specifically stated that the case should have never gone to trail, and the whole thing was just a political stunt; however, but that won't mean anything to the Zimmerman haters. Here is what she said:
When asked by Roberts whether the case should have gone to trial, Maddy said, 'I don't think so.""
'I felt like this was a publicity stunt. This whole court service thing to me was publicity,' she said.
"It's hard for me to sleep, it's hard for me to eat because I feel I was forcefully included in Trayvon Martin's death.
George Zimmerman Juror Says 'In Our Hearts, We Felt He Was Guilty' - ABC News
Juror B29 also said that Martin's death had nothing to do with race, but that won't matter to those who are filled with hate against Zimmerman and want to falsely portray him as a homicidal racist:
Juror B29 also told ABC that she didn't believe race was an issue at the trial. Though the judge so far has refused to release the names or biographical information about the jurors, B29 said she was 36 years old and Puerto Rican.
Zimmerman Trial Juror B29, formerly of Chicago, says she owes Trayvon Martin's parents apology | abc7chicago.com
If you listen to her tape you will realize that she thought Zimmerman got away with murder solely because she believes (erroneously) that if you kill someone for any reason you should be charged. She said the law was contrary to her beliefs, but she had to obey the law. She never said anything to indicate that Zimmerman broke any laws, and in fact she admitted that he did not! Here are her exact words:
'That's where I felt confused, where if a person kills someone, then you get charged for it,' Maddy said. 'But as the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you can't say he's guilty'" (see above link).
She admitted that there was no proof that Zimmerman killed Martin intentionally, and that is what the case was all about. If there was no proof that Zimmerman killed Martin intentionally, he did not get away with murder. End of story.
But Zimmerman haters will ignore everything Juror B29 said and cling only to these words based not on law, but on her own personal feelings (which are obviously contrary to the law): Zimmerman got away with murder.
The Reader's Digest version of her comments would be: Juror B29 wishes she could have found Zimmerman guilty, but she couldn't because he did not break any law. Says case should never have gone to trial and she is upset she was put in the middle of the whole thing.
I applaud the integrity of all the jurors. They were all deeply concerned with the violent death of a young man and wanted to punish the man who took his life. However, they realized that they had to go by the law and the evidence which demanded a verdict of not guilty. I especially acknowledge the integrity of Juror B29. She strongly believes that anyone who takes the life of another for any reason should be charged. However, she set aside her passionate beliefs and acknowledged that under the law the case never should have gone to trial. Ya gotta love the lady.
ZIMMERMAN HATERS: YOU WERE CONTENT TO MISREPRESENT WHAT JUROR B28 REALLY SAID. NOW THAT EVERYONE ELSE KNOWS THE TRUTH. ACCEPT WHAT SHE TOLD YOU AND GET ON WITH YOUR LIVES. THE ZIMMERMAN CASE SHOULD NEVER HAVE GONE TO TRIAL. I KNOW THAT'S A BIG PILL TO SWALLOW BUT YOU HAVE NO CHOICE.
Funny, I didn't know that trial juries had the authority to make that determination.
"George Zimmerman got away with murder, but you can't get away from God," she said.
Zimmerman Trial Juror B29, formerly of Chicago, says she owes Trayvon Martin's parents apology | abc7chicago.com
The absents of evidence is not the evidence of absents.
I have been to jury selection and it isn't the cream of the crop that gets picked. So I am thinking this woman just ain't that bright. That said, if after listening to the trial and the evidence she still voted for acquittal but believes him to be innocent what does that make her? She should STFU before Zimmerman rightfully sues her for smearing him. She had her chance to vote him guilty, now she is just engaging in slander or proving she is a liar.
It's slander to hold the opinion that Zimmerman got away with murder? lol, where did you go to school?
I don't give much credence to Zimmerman's side of the story. Zimmerman was not in uniform, and was following Trayvon, unnecessarily. What was Trayvon supposed to do? What should he have thought? He thought he was about to be the victim of a mugging, and stood his ground. The expectation that deference from Trayvon towards Zimmerman is the right course of action is just white racism at work.
What was Trayvon supposed to do??? Hummm..
Well, he could have tried walking on the sidewalks instead of next to the houses, which is trespassing.
He could have continued to walk home instead of turning around and walking/running to where Zimmerman was.
He could have not attacked Zimmerman, breaking his nose and bashing his skull against the concrete.
He could have stopped hitting Zimmerman, got up off of him, and ran home when someone yelled that they were calling the police.
Yeah.. There were a lot of things Trayvon could have done that would have, in the end, allowed him to remain alive. But instead his choices led him to being shot and he died while committing a crime.
Or he could have just hung up with his girlfriend, and used his cell phone to call 911 and report that he was being followed by a stranger.
Who said he was on private property?It is a crime to walk on private property, next to houses where you don't live.
It's called "Trespassing".
What Zimmerman was doing was absolutely assault.BTW, here is the legal definition of "Assault"
Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim
What Zimmerman was doing was not assault. Trayvon, when he raised his fist to Zimmerman committed assault.
"an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim."That outta do it!
Act: Man with a gun, following what he considers to be a "fuckin' coon", starts stalking the person walking through a neighborhood.
"...reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim...
Act: Stalker shoots coon to death.
Unless you want to argue whether death constitutes "reasonable harm"?
What was Trayvon supposed to do??? Hummm..
Well, he could have tried walking on the sidewalks instead of next to the houses, which is trespassing.
He could have continued to walk home instead of turning around and walking/running to where Zimmerman was.
He could have not attacked Zimmerman, breaking his nose and bashing his skull against the concrete.
He could have stopped hitting Zimmerman, got up off of him, and ran home when someone yelled that they were calling the police.
Yeah.. There were a lot of things Trayvon could have done that would have, in the end, allowed him to remain alive. But instead his choices led him to being shot and he died while committing a crime.
Wow. What a fantasy. All of the poor decision making was on Zimmerman's part. He called the cops needlessly. He didn't wait for the cops, which he called, to get there and do their jobs. He wasn't properly dressed in a way that would ID him as a neighborhood watchman.
You poor conservatives, and your over active fantasy life. You believed in Iraqis cheering our troops, WMD in Iraq, Iranians that can't wait for a nuclear exchange with Israel, massive nationwide voter fraud, Clinton tax hikes will cause a recession, Bush won the 2000 Florida vote count, gay marriage will ruin straight marriages, Romney will win, and dumbest of all, blacks walking down the street are suspicious and calling the cops on them is not racist. Would you knock it off with being wrong all the time?
ROFLMAO.
You can't refute a single point I made, so you run off on a tangent on something that absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter. That is a tactic of a person who realizes too late they have painted themselves into a corner. Either admit that they have been wrong, or "Look, squirrel".
Looks like you chose the "Look, Squirrel" route.
The FBI and trial Jury disagrees. The FBI did an extensive investigation to see if Zimmerman racially profiled Martin and stalked him. In essence, they concluded he did neither and that the incident WAS NOT racially motivated and therefore, there was no reason to charge George with a federal hate crime.Who said he was on private property?It is a crime to walk on private property, next to houses where you don't live.
It's called "Trespassing".
What Zimmerman was doing was absolutely assault.BTW, here is the legal definition of "Assault"
Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.
The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim
What Zimmerman was doing was not assault. Trayvon, when he raised his fist to Zimmerman committed assault.
"an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim."That outta do it!
Act: Man with a gun, following what he considers to be a "fuckin' coon", starts stalking the person walking through a neighborhood.
"...reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim...
Act: Stalker shoots coon to death.
Unless you want to argue whether death constitutes "reasonable harm"?
"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus
Proof there is no thinking going on with the right. It is PURE emotions...HATE and FEAR.
Wow. What a fantasy. All of the poor decision making was on Zimmerman's part. He called the cops needlessly. He didn't wait for the cops, which he called, to get there and do their jobs. He wasn't properly dressed in a way that would ID him as a neighborhood watchman.
You poor conservatives, and your over active fantasy life. You believed in Iraqis cheering our troops, WMD in Iraq, Iranians that can't wait for a nuclear exchange with Israel, massive nationwide voter fraud, Clinton tax hikes will cause a recession, Bush won the 2000 Florida vote count, gay marriage will ruin straight marriages, Romney will win, and dumbest of all, blacks walking down the street are suspicious and calling the cops on them is not racist. Would you knock it off with being wrong all the time?
ROFLMAO.
You can't refute a single point I made, so you run off on a tangent on something that absolutely nothing to do with the subject matter. That is a tactic of a person who realizes too late they have painted themselves into a corner. Either admit that they have been wrong, or "Look, squirrel".
Looks like you chose the "Look, Squirrel" route.
Your points are pure fantasy. The mistakes that were made were Zimmerman's. All of them. The death was made possible by George's racist decision making.
Trayvon clearly thought he was about to be mugged, and stood his ground. Too bad George Zimmerman made the mistake of not being more deferential and apologetic once confronted by Trayvon. It was yet another Zimmerman mistake. Now he's a roly-poly 30 year old loser spending all say in his hidey-hole, a subject of scorn and contempt. What a horrible life. He deserves worse.
