George Zimmerman's bloody head

[Liability]

Yes. I mean the beating.

If he was getting a beating and feared for his life, the shooting is justifiable.

Sure, if he was walking along sniffing the flowers and all of a sudden out of the blue a guy descends on him and proceeds to whip his ass. But if he knowingly puts him self in danger against the advice the authorities as well as the training of who ever signed his CCW ticket and outside the rules of his neighborhood watch hand book then he must answer for the killing.

Nonsense. First off -- again -- nothing he did was against any "advice" of any authorities.

Secondly, walking around is perfectly legal and proper behavior.

Following a person who you deem suspicious is also legal and proper behavior.

If Trayvon took exception to it, his legal options did not include physically assaulting George. (And again, I don't know that this is what happened, but you don't know that it isn't. And there is some reason to believe it might have happened.)

And if it is what happened, and George was put in reasonable fear for his life or in fear of receiving great bodily harm, then your "analysis" is complete bullshit. At that point, George, having done nothing wrong, would be legally entitled to use even deadly physical force to protect himself.

 

[earlycuyler]

If he was getting a beating and feared for his life, the shooting is justifiable.

Sure, if he was walking along sniffing the flowers and all of a sudden out of the blue a guy descends on him and proceeds to whip his ass. But if he knowingly puts him self in danger against the advice the authorities as well as the training of who ever signed his CCW ticket and outside the rules of his neighborhood watch hand book then he must answer for the killing.

Nonsense. First off -- again -- nothing he did was against any "advice" of any authorities.

Secondly, walking around is perfectly legal and proper behavior.

Following a person who you deem suspicious is also legal and proper behavior.

If Trayvon took exception to it, his legal options did not include physically assaulting George. (And again, I don't know that this is what happened, but you don't know that it isn't. And there is some reason to believe it might have happened.)

And if it is what happened, and George was put in reasonable fear for his life or in fear of receiving great bodily harm, then your "analysis" is complete bullshit. At that point, George, having done nothing wrong, would be legally entitled to use even deadly physical force to protect himself.

That just is not so. Read back a few post where the rules for his neighborhood watch were posted. Zimmerman was acting outside of those. He was advised by the 911 operator to not follow Trayvon. He did not. Zimmerman was not just walking around, he was persuading a suspect. Again, that is forbidden in the rules of his neighborhood watch, and diametrically opposed to any training he would have received in a CCW class. George put himself in a situation where he found him self in grave danger against the advice of all his training the the rules of the organization he was serving . Stand your ground does not protect a shooter from that. George did everything wrong. And because of that, he picked up a charge.

 

[Liability]

Sure, if he was walking along sniffing the flowers and all of a sudden out of the blue a guy descends on him and proceeds to whip his ass. But if he knowingly puts him self in danger against the advice the authorities as well as the training of who ever signed his CCW ticket and outside the rules of his neighborhood watch hand book then he must answer for the killing.

Nonsense. First off -- again -- nothing he did was against any "advice" of any authorities.

Secondly, walking around is perfectly legal and proper behavior.

Following a person who you deem suspicious is also legal and proper behavior.

If Trayvon took exception to it, his legal options did not include physically assaulting George. (And again, I don't know that this is what happened, but you don't know that it isn't. And there is some reason to believe it might have happened.)

And if it is what happened, and George was put in reasonable fear for his life or in fear of receiving great bodily harm, then your "analysis" is complete bullshit. At that point, George, having done nothing wrong, would be legally entitled to use even deadly physical force to protect himself.

That just is not so. Read back a few post where the rules for his neighborhood watch were posted. Zimmerman was acting outside of those. He was advised by the 911 operator to not follow Trayvon. He did not. Zimmerman was not just walking around, he was persuading a suspect. Again, that is forbidden in the rules of his neighborhood watch, and diametrically opposed to any training he would have received in a CCW class. George put himself in a situation where he found him self in grave danger against the advice of all his training the the rules of the organization he was serving . Stand your ground does not protect a shooter from that. George did everything wrong. And because of that, he picked up a charge.

What you claim is simply false.

Zimmerman was perfectly entitled to follow. What he was not properly entitled to do was to try to become an arresting "officer." There is no evidence that he did any such thing.

He was NOT advised by the 9-1-1 operator not to follow Trayvon. That too is just you being sloppy, careless or dishonest. He WAS told that he didn't HAVE to do so. But that's a different proposition.

He did not put himself in ANY danger that anybody walking around there that night might not have been exposed to. He was ALLOWED to be there and that did not entitle anybody to attack him. IF that is what happened after Trayvon objected to being followed, then the confrontation would be at the initiation of Trayvon. HIS misbehavior does not deprive Zimmerman of his right to self defense.

"Stand your ground" is entirely irrelevant to the whole discussion. Simple "justification" also known as "self defense" are the actual principles of law involved.

There is not a scintilla of evidence that George did ANYTHING wrong, much less that he did everything wrong.

YOU are completely wrong.

 

[earlycuyler]

Nonsense. First off -- again -- nothing he did was against any "advice" of any authorities.

Secondly, walking around is perfectly legal and proper behavior.

Following a person who you deem suspicious is also legal and proper behavior.

If Trayvon took exception to it, his legal options did not include physically assaulting George. (And again, I don't know that this is what happened, but you don't know that it isn't. And there is some reason to believe it might have happened.)

And if it is what happened, and George was put in reasonable fear for his life or in fear of receiving great bodily harm, then your "analysis" is complete bullshit. At that point, George, having done nothing wrong, would be legally entitled to use even deadly physical force to protect himself.

That just is not so. Read back a few post where the rules for his neighborhood watch were posted. Zimmerman was acting outside of those. He was advised by the 911 operator to not follow Trayvon. He did not. Zimmerman was not just walking around, he was persuading a suspect. Again, that is forbidden in the rules of his neighborhood watch, and diametrically opposed to any training he would have received in a CCW class. George put himself in a situation where he found him self in grave danger against the advice of all his training the the rules of the organization he was serving . Stand your ground does not protect a shooter from that. George did everything wrong. And because of that, he picked up a charge.

What you claim is simply false.

Zimmerman was perfectly entitled to follow. What he was not properly entitled to do was to try to become an arresting "officer." There is no evidence that he did any such thing.

He was NOT advised by the 9-1-1 operator not to follow Trayvon. That too is just you being sloppy, careless or dishonest. He WAS told that he didn't HAVE to do so. But that's a different proposition.

He did not put himself in ANY danger that anybody walking around there that night might not have been exposed to. He was ALLOWED to be there and that did not entitle anybody to attack him. IF that is what happened after Trayvon objected to being followed, then the confrontation would be at the initiation of Trayvon. HIS misbehavior does not deprive Zimmerman of his right to self defense.

"Stand your ground" is entirely irrelevant to the whole discussion. Simple "justification" also known as "self defense" are the actual principles of law involved.

There is not a scintilla of evidence that George did ANYTHING wrong, much less that he did everything wrong.

YOU are completely wrong.

Ok bubba. what ever you say, but you know not of what you speak. Ill take the advice of my guys when they say he was wrong.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes. I mean the beating.

If he was getting a beating and feared for his life, the shooting is justifiable.

Sure, if he was walking along sniffing the flowers and all of a sudden out of the blue a guy descends on him and proceeds to whip his ass. But if he knowingly puts him self in danger against the advice the authorities as well as the training of who ever signed his CCW ticket and outside the rules of his neighborhood watch hand book then he must answer for the killing.

But if he knowingly puts him self in danger

LOL! If I knowingly walk thru a bad neighborhood and put myself in danger, I don't get to defend myself? I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.

 

[saveliberty]

Not disclosing to the judge he had access to a large sum of money before the bail hearing may cost him a year he could have spent out of jail. This is getting closer and closer to a plea every day.

 

[Liability]

That just is not so. Read back a few post where the rules for his neighborhood watch were posted. Zimmerman was acting outside of those. He was advised by the 911 operator to not follow Trayvon. He did not. Zimmerman was not just walking around, he was persuading a suspect. Again, that is forbidden in the rules of his neighborhood watch, and diametrically opposed to any training he would have received in a CCW class. George put himself in a situation where he found him self in grave danger against the advice of all his training the the rules of the organization he was serving . Stand your ground does not protect a shooter from that. George did everything wrong. And because of that, he picked up a charge.

What you claim is simply false.

Zimmerman was perfectly entitled to follow. What he was not properly entitled to do was to try to become an arresting "officer." There is no evidence that he did any such thing.

He was NOT advised by the 9-1-1 operator not to follow Trayvon. That too is just you being sloppy, careless or dishonest. He WAS told that he didn't HAVE to do so. But that's a different proposition.

He did not put himself in ANY danger that anybody walking around there that night might not have been exposed to. He was ALLOWED to be there and that did not entitle anybody to attack him. IF that is what happened after Trayvon objected to being followed, then the confrontation would be at the initiation of Trayvon. HIS misbehavior does not deprive Zimmerman of his right to self defense.

"Stand your ground" is entirely irrelevant to the whole discussion. Simple "justification" also known as "self defense" are the actual principles of law involved.

There is not a scintilla of evidence that George did ANYTHING wrong, much less that he did everything wrong.

YOU are completely wrong.

Ok bubba. what ever you say, but you know not of what you speak. Ill take the advice of my guys when they say he was wrong.

Between the two of us, I am the only one who knows whereof he speaks. You, being a bit of an idiot, cannot even grasp the undeniable FACT that the 9-1-1 operator told Zimmerman that he didn't have to follow -- and that saying that is NOT a direction NOT to follow.

I don't care what advise you take or who "your guys" are. You are the one spouting off and you were dead wrong in EVERY single respect.

 

[Againsheila]

Not disclosing to the judge he had access to a large sum of money before the bail hearing may cost him a year he could have spent out of jail. This is getting closer and closer to a plea every day.

Considering that goes to Zimmerman's character, it could be a nail in his coffin. It was a BIG mistake on his part.

 

[earlycuyler]

What you claim is simply false.

Zimmerman was perfectly entitled to follow. What he was not properly entitled to do was to try to become an arresting "officer." There is no evidence that he did any such thing.

He was NOT advised by the 9-1-1 operator not to follow Trayvon. That too is just you being sloppy, careless or dishonest. He WAS told that he didn't HAVE to do so. But that's a different proposition.

He did not put himself in ANY danger that anybody walking around there that night might not have been exposed to. He was ALLOWED to be there and that did not entitle anybody to attack him. IF that is what happened after Trayvon objected to being followed, then the confrontation would be at the initiation of Trayvon. HIS misbehavior does not deprive Zimmerman of his right to self defense.

"Stand your ground" is entirely irrelevant to the whole discussion. Simple "justification" also known as "self defense" are the actual principles of law involved.

There is not a scintilla of evidence that George did ANYTHING wrong, much less that he did everything wrong.

YOU are completely wrong.

Ok bubba. what ever you say, but you know not of what you speak. Ill take the advice of my guys when they say he was wrong.

Between the two of us, I am the only one who knows whereof he speaks. You, being a bit of an idiot, cannot even grasp the undeniable FACT that the 9-1-1 operator told Zimmerman that he didn't have to follow -- and that saying that is NOT a direction NOT to follow.

I don't care what advise you take or who "your guys" are. You are the one spouting off and you were dead wrong in EVERY single respect.

If I am an idiot, then you are not much more then a pompous wind bag, and an ignorant one at that. Ill take my guys word for it. They have years of experience in dealing with, and advising in such matters. You ? just a rep whore who only matters here. Now fuck off and run along. Fox is on.

 

[Liability]

Ok bubba. what ever you say, but you know not of what you speak. Ill take the advice of my guys when they say he was wrong.

Between the two of us, I am the only one who knows whereof he speaks. You, being a bit of an idiot, cannot even grasp the undeniable FACT that the 9-1-1 operator told Zimmerman that he didn't have to follow -- and that saying that is NOT a direction NOT to follow.

I don't care what advise you take or who "your guys" are. You are the one spouting off and you were dead wrong in EVERY single respect.

If I am an idiot, then you are not much more then a pompous wind bag, and an ignorant one at that. Ill take my guys word for it. They have years of experience in dealing with, and advising in such matters. You ? just a rep whore who only matters here. Now fuck off and run along. Fox is on.

Wrong agin, latecuyler. I am no more pompous or arrogant than you or almost anyone who states their opinions. But at least -- unlike you -- I use actual facts in my arguments. I still don't give a shit whose word you'll take or who your guys are.

They appear to be dumb asses like you.

And I have qualifications to discuss these things which you and your moron buddies could never grasp. So fuck yourself, eat more shit, choke on it and get to a hospital where ObamaCare is all that can save you.

Poor you.

Go watch CNN, read the NY Slimes and talk with your ignorant asshole pals some more.

But you're still entirely wrong.

 

[earlycuyler]

If he was getting a beating and feared for his life, the shooting is justifiable.

Sure, if he was walking along sniffing the flowers and all of a sudden out of the blue a guy descends on him and proceeds to whip his ass. But if he knowingly puts him self in danger against the advice the authorities as well as the training of who ever signed his CCW ticket and outside the rules of his neighborhood watch hand book then he must answer for the killing.

But if he knowingly puts him self in danger

LOL! If I knowingly walk thru a bad neighborhood and put myself in danger, I don't get to defend myself? I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.

That depends. Are you buying crack ? or headed to the store to get something ? Your question is stupid and has nothing to do with Zimmerman case. He was not just walking along minding his business, he was actively pursuing Trayvon. He admitted that he was. He was moving into the situation. That was a stupid question.

 

[Liability]

Sure, if he was walking along sniffing the flowers and all of a sudden out of the blue a guy descends on him and proceeds to whip his ass. But if he knowingly puts him self in danger against the advice the authorities as well as the training of who ever signed his CCW ticket and outside the rules of his neighborhood watch hand book then he must answer for the killing.

But if he knowingly puts him self in danger

LOL! If I knowingly walk thru a bad neighborhood and put myself in danger, I don't get to defend myself? I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.

That depends. Are you buying crack ? or headed to the store to get something ? Your question is stupid and has nothing to do with Zimmerman case. He was not just walking along minding his business, he was actively pursuing Trayvon. He admitted that he was. He was moving into the situation. That was a stupid question.

He was following a person he suspected and whom he had reported.

He was allowed to.

So, you and your ignorant pals are only highlighting your general stupidity some more.

 

[earlycuyler]

Between the two of us, I am the only one who knows whereof he speaks. You, being a bit of an idiot, cannot even grasp the undeniable FACT that the 9-1-1 operator told Zimmerman that he didn't have to follow -- and that saying that is NOT a direction NOT to follow.

I don't care what advise you take or who "your guys" are. You are the one spouting off and you were dead wrong in EVERY single respect.

If I am an idiot, then you are not much more then a pompous wind bag, and an ignorant one at that. Ill take my guys word for it. They have years of experience in dealing with, and advising in such matters. You ? just a rep whore who only matters here. Now fuck off and run along. Fox is on.

Wrong agin, latecuyler. I am no more pompous or arrogant than you or almost anyone who states their opinions. But at least -- unlike you -- I use actual facts in my arguments. I still don't give a shit whose word you'll take or who your guys are.

They appear to be dumb asses like you.

And I have qualifications to discuss these things which you and your moron buddies could never grasp. So fuck yourself, eat more shit, choke on it and get to a hospital where ObamaCare is all that can save you.

Poor you.

Go watch CNN, read the NY Slimes and talk with your ignorant asshole pals some more.

But you're still entirely wrong.

Yeah whatever, its always the same. You are a lawyer, black belt in tai quan juitsu, have a 24 inch cock and know it all. You are just a pompous twerp. And you just cant stand it when its pointed out. Say what you will. It only matters to you, and maybe just a little bit here. Poor little fella.

 

[Liability]

If I am an idiot, then you are not much more then a pompous wind bag, and an ignorant one at that. Ill take my guys word for it. They have years of experience in dealing with, and advising in such matters. You ? just a rep whore who only matters here. Now fuck off and run along. Fox is on.

Wrong agin, latecuyler. I am no more pompous or arrogant than you or almost anyone who states their opinions. But at least -- unlike you -- I use actual facts in my arguments. I still don't give a shit whose word you'll take or who your guys are.

They appear to be dumb asses like you.

And I have qualifications to discuss these things which you and your moron buddies could never grasp. So fuck yourself, eat more shit, choke on it and get to a hospital where ObamaCare is all that can save you.

Poor you.

Go watch CNN, read the NY Slimes and talk with your ignorant asshole pals some more.

But you're still entirely wrong.

Yeah whatever, its always the same. You are a lawyer, black belt in tai quan juitsu, have a 24 inch cock and know it all. You are just a pompous twerp. And you just cant stand it when its pointed out. Say what you will. It only matters to you, and maybe just a little bit here. Poor little fella.

Poor poor butthurt you.

Yeah, I am a lawyer. Idiots like you can never believe it because "anybody can say anything on the internet." (And your pitiable form of "logic" then leads you to the conclusion that anybody who claims it must be lying. )

Nevertheless, neither you nor your moron "guys" have the first fucking clue about the legal issues involved -- and YOU don't even grasp the basic facts.

Morons like you always substitute their preconceived (idiot) notions for "facts.

However, despite your blissful ignorance and prejudgment, the reality is: you weren't there. Thus, you can't tell anybody what actually went down.

Meanwhile I can tell you that Zimmerman's behavior of following young Trayvon was lawful. I can tell you that if Zimmerman didn't try to physically detain Trayvon or otherwise start the physical altercation, then Trayvon had no right to engage in any act of physical violence against Zimmerman.

I can also tell you -- beyond a doubt -- that if Trayvon did initiate the physical altercation, and Zimmerman ended up on the ground, on his back, getting his head slammed into the concrete, then he could very reasonably fear for his life (or at least fear great bodily harm). If that's what happened, Zimmerman could resort to self defense. If that's what happened, Zimmerman committed no crime.

Go have yourself another good cry, latecuyler.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Sure, if he was walking along sniffing the flowers and all of a sudden out of the blue a guy descends on him and proceeds to whip his ass. But if he knowingly puts him self in danger against the advice the authorities as well as the training of who ever signed his CCW ticket and outside the rules of his neighborhood watch hand book then he must answer for the killing.

But if he knowingly puts him self in danger

LOL! If I knowingly walk thru a bad neighborhood and put myself in danger, I don't get to defend myself? I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.

That depends. Are you buying crack ? or headed to the store to get something ? Your question is stupid and has nothing to do with Zimmerman case. He was not just walking along minding his business, he was actively pursuing Trayvon. He admitted that he was. He was moving into the situation. That was a stupid question.

Actively pursuing Trayvon doesn't mean he can't defend himself. You're silly.

 

[MaryL]

What skin color is INNOCENCE again? I forget.

 

[earlycuyler]

But if he knowingly puts him self in danger

LOL! If I knowingly walk thru a bad neighborhood and put myself in danger, I don't get to defend myself? I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.

That depends. Are you buying crack ? or headed to the store to get something ? Your question is stupid and has nothing to do with Zimmerman case. He was not just walking along minding his business, he was actively pursuing Trayvon. He admitted that he was. He was moving into the situation. That was a stupid question.

Actively pursuing Trayvon doesn't mean he can't defend himself. You're silly.

Meh. Your ignorant. Not a bad thing unless you do it deliberately.

 

[earlycuyler]

Wrong agin, latecuyler. I am no more pompous or arrogant than you or almost anyone who states their opinions. But at least -- unlike you -- I use actual facts in my arguments. I still don't give a shit whose word you'll take or who your guys are.

They appear to be dumb asses like you.

And I have qualifications to discuss these things which you and your moron buddies could never grasp. So fuck yourself, eat more shit, choke on it and get to a hospital where ObamaCare is all that can save you.

Poor you.

Go watch CNN, read the NY Slimes and talk with your ignorant asshole pals some more.

But you're still entirely wrong.

Yeah whatever, its always the same. You are a lawyer, black belt in tai quan juitsu, have a 24 inch cock and know it all. You are just a pompous twerp. And you just cant stand it when its pointed out. Say what you will. It only matters to you, and maybe just a little bit here. Poor little fella.

Poor poor butthurt you.

Yeah, I am a lawyer. Idiots like you can never believe it because "anybody can say anything on the internet." (And your pitiable form of "logic" then leads you to the conclusion that anybody who claims it must be lying. )

Nevertheless, neither you nor your moron "guys" have the first fucking clue about the legal issues involved -- and YOU don't even grasp the basic facts.

Morons like you always substitute their preconceived (idiot) notions for "facts.

However, despite your blissful ignorance and prejudgment, the reality is: you weren't there. Thus, you can't tell anybody what actually went down.

Meanwhile I can tell you that Zimmerman's behavior of following young Trayvon was lawful. I can tell you that if Zimmerman didn't try to physically detain Trayvon or otherwise start the physical altercation, then Trayvon had no right to engage in any act of physical violence against Zimmerman.

I can also tell you -- beyond a doubt -- that if Trayvon did initiate the physical altercation, and Zimmerman ended up on the ground, on his back, getting his head slammed into the concrete, then he could very reasonably fear for his life (or at least fear great bodily harm). If that's what happened, Zimmerman could resort to self defense. If that's what happened, Zimmerman committed no crime.

Go have yourself another good cry, latecuyler.

You are still posting ? Thought you were above it all. Hm.

 

[earlycuyler]

But if he knowingly puts him self in danger

LOL! If I knowingly walk thru a bad neighborhood and put myself in danger, I don't get to defend myself? I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.

That depends. Are you buying crack ? or headed to the store to get something ? Your question is stupid and has nothing to do with Zimmerman case. He was not just walking along minding his business, he was actively pursuing Trayvon. He admitted that he was. He was moving into the situation. That was a stupid question.

He was following a person he suspected and whom he had reported.

He was allowed to.

So, you and your ignorant pals are only highlighting your general stupidity some more.

Yep. So ignorant that they built a business teaching folks how not to get in the same bind as Mr. Zimmerman. Actual professionals in there fields. Something you wish you could be, but are not. All you have is what O'Rilley hands you on twitter. Poor little fella.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Not disclosing to the judge he had access to a large sum of money before the bail hearing may cost him a year he could have spent out of jail. This is getting closer and closer to a plea every day.

There are a lot of fucking idiots around here, aren't there? Can anyone show me any requirement for a defendant to disclose his finances? If not, stop pretending one exists.