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.
Do not misplay what the dispatcher said.
He said "keep your ass in the car, podjo" and Z disobeyed the order.
Do not misplay what the dispatcher said.
He said "keep your ass in the car, podjo" and Z disobeyed the order.
I heard he is getting 50 years for killing that unarmed kid.
We can all hope...
Missourian, all of that matters not a bit.
The women will take upon themselves the character as present of Z, will consider the circumstance, and then ask themselves why he murdered another woman's son.
Stop the masculine-type logic. That is not going to determine this case.
Missourian, all of that matters not a bit.
The women will take upon themselves the character as present of Z, will consider the circumstance, and then ask themselves why he murdered another woman's son.
Stop the masculine-type logic. That is not going to determine this case.
Zimmerman's account of the incident is supported by both the 911 tape and injuries to him and Martin.
While there may very well be one or two women on the jury who will vote for conviction on emotion rather than the evidence, I can't see 12 of them doing so.
Worst scenario for Zimmerman will be a hung jury. Even then, I doubt that they would retry the case if they get what I would guess would be 10:2 for acquittal.
I said masculine-type logic, Esmeralda. There is no one logic, and you know as well as I do, that the women will act as they best see appropriate in the light of the evidence, of Z's character, and that another woman's son is dead. There is nothing inferior about that.
Don't ever put words of inference in my mouth that I did not make. That is inherently illogical, because that will always out.
I said masculine-type logic, Esmeralda. There is no one logic, and you know as well as I do, that the women will act as they best see appropriate in the light of the evidence, of Z's character, and that another woman's son is dead. There is nothing inferior about that.
Don't ever put words of inference in my mouth that I did not make. That is inherently illogical, because that will always out.
There is only one logic. There is not feminine logic and masculine logic.
Zimmerman's account of the incident is supported by both the 911 tape and injuries to him and Martin.
While there may very well be one or two women on the jury who will vote for conviction on emotion rather than the evidence, I can't see 12 of them doing so.
Worst scenario for Zimmerman will be a hung jury. Even then, I doubt that they would retry the case if they get what I would guess would be 10:2 for acquittal.
You are very likely in error (nothing new there) because you get so emotional.
I will remind you if you are.
I said masculine-type logic, Esmeralda. There is no one logic, and you know as well as I do, that the women will act as they best see appropriate in the light of the evidence, of Z's character, and that another woman's son is dead. There is nothing inferior about that.
Don't ever put words of inference in my mouth that I did not make. That is inherently illogical, because that will always out.
There is only one logic. There is not feminine logic and masculine logic.
Only if we are all borgs without personality and emotions, without sex and age and ethnicity and religion.
Best think this through.
he's "out" it would appearKeep proving my point. Preoccupation.Sure.
In the same post you asked for a "swallow".
Fucking faggot.
AIDS ruining you cognition?
S. J.'s preoccupation with gay sex reveals a latency in him that is becoming unmanageable.
Do not misplay what the dispatcher said.
He said "keep your ass in the car, podjo" and Z disobeyed the order.
Zimmerman's account of the incident is supported by both the 911 tape and injuries to him and Martin.
While there may very well be one or two women on the jury who will vote for conviction on emotion rather than the evidence, I can't see 12 of them doing so.
Worst scenario for Zimmerman will be a hung jury. Even then, I doubt that they would retry the case if they get what I would guess would be 10:2 for acquittal.
You are very likely in error (nothing new there) because you get so emotional.
I will remind you if you are.
As if anyone really is interested in your irrelevance.
12 women WILL NOT VOTE TO CONVICT. I guarantee it.
There is only one logic. There is not feminine logic and masculine logic.
Only if we are all borgs without personality and emotions, without sex and age and ethnicity and religion.
Best think this through.
You are refering to emotion, not logic. If reasoning is influenced by sex, age, ethnicity and religion, it is not logic. It is flawed reasoning influenced by emotions and perceptions--not logic. We cannot expect a jury to be purely logical; they will be influenced by emotion and perception, but both men and women will be, equally. What you are or were refering to is that you think women perceive things differently than men and thus will see this differently than men. This is not necessarily so; in fact, it is a sexist stereotype.
Only if we are all borgs without personality and emotions, without sex and age and ethnicity and religion.
Best think this through.
You are refering to emotion, not logic. If reasoning is influenced by sex, age, ethnicity and religion, it is not logic. It is flawed reasoning influenced by emotions and perceptions--not logic. We cannot expect a jury to be purely logical; they will be influenced by emotion and perception, but both men and women will be, equally. What you are or were refering to is that you think women perceive things differently than men and thus will see this differently than men. This is not necessarily so; in fact, it is a sexist stereotype.
You are defending the indefensible. You cannot separate reasoning from being human in all of its aspects.
It is what it is. To suggest otherwise, is to support a false world of stereotyping.
Yes, you are flatly wrong on this. Won't argue with you further, because you are invested sexually and emotionally in your view point. How immature.
Jakes is the board joke. Nobody on either side of any issue takes him seriously. He's just a troll, and a liar, and more than a little creepy.
We already covered this in The Fact Thread, but if the defense files prima facie of self defense, they have to show enough that it could be, then the burden indeed shifts to the state to prove that it was not self defense and then prove M2.
The links are all over there.
-Pete and Repeat
You are a fucking asshole. You jumped into this message board to only talk about trials and opened up a thread on this trial when there were already two going. Now you are telling people not to repeat things on their own threads which have been talked about on yours? Go fuck yourself. Go back to your own stupid thread and discuss your own stupid shit there. Do not tell other people what to do.
