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.
Yeah, if you have a very vivid imagination.
Two men are grappling, blood is being spilled, you'd expect to see tissue under fingernails and blood on clothing. And that stuff doesn't come out.
no, I simply know what I am talking about, contrary to you. Forensics and stuff like that
The Forenics folks all testified for the prosecution...
But I'm sure you've seen a bunch of episodes of CSI, so that makes you an expert.
no, I simply know what I am talking about, contrary to you. Forensics and stuff like that
The Forenics folks all testified for the prosecution...
But I'm sure you've seen a bunch of episodes of CSI, so that makes you an expert.
considering your awe towards the circumstantial evidence in this case and the general ignorance on a biology part you clearly watch too much tv and CSI in particular
The Forenics folks all testified for the prosecution...
But I'm sure you've seen a bunch of episodes of CSI, so that makes you an expert.
considering your awe towards the circumstantial evidence in this case and the general ignorance on a biology part you clearly watch too much tv and CSI in particular
There are only two relevent facts in this case.
Trayvon is dead.
Zimmerman killed him.
Telling me to "learn basic biology first" instead of deconstructing the post is basically just as good as waving a white flag.
Had the evidence been specious it would not have been allowed to be entered.
That's not the case.
People with the proper accreditation were allowed to testify. And the defense was allowed to cross examine.
The prosecution made the same exact points that I posted in this thread.
there is nothing to deconstruct. Numerous people here already told you that DNA evidence is irrelevant in this case. It is not a raping case or paternity determination, or identifying the unknown remains.
Learn the basic biology first and you will understand when and where DNA evidence IS relevant.
Doesn't matter what numerous people on a message board have said.
It's been entered into evidence.
The jury now has to consider it.
You may want to learn about how our legal system works.
The Forenics folks all testified for the prosecution...
But I'm sure you've seen a bunch of episodes of CSI, so that makes you an expert.
considering your awe towards the circumstantial evidence in this case and the general ignorance on a biology part you clearly watch too much tv and CSI in particular
There are only two relevent facts in this case.
Trayvon is dead.
Zimmerman killed him.
In short, serious injury refers to the woman, not the fetus.
The reality is, babies under one month old were not counted in censuses of the people. Even that was considered too iffy a proposition when you had an infant mortality rate of upward of 50%.
[
those are the reasons the relevance of the facts are discussed
and there are many more relevant facts - the eye witness confirming Z's claim of self-defense is the most important here.
In short, serious injury refers to the woman, not the fetus.
The reality is, babies under one month old were not counted in censuses of the people. Even that was considered too iffy a proposition when you had an infant mortality rate of upward of 50%.
So you libs can snuff their asses up until they're a month old I guess?
considering your awe towards the circumstantial evidence in this case and the general ignorance on a biology part you clearly watch too much tv and CSI in particular
There are only two relevent facts in this case.
Trayvon is dead.
Zimmerman killed him.
Indeed- Society is safer when criminals don't know who's armed
-Geaux
there is nothing to deconstruct. Numerous people here already told you that DNA evidence is irrelevant in this case. It is not a raping case or paternity determination, or identifying the unknown remains.
Learn the basic biology first and you will understand when and where DNA evidence IS relevant.
Doesn't matter what numerous people on a message board have said.
It's been entered into evidence.
The jury now has to consider it.
You may want to learn about how our legal system works.
Oh, you will learn, and in pretty quick order after the Acquittal.
-Geaux
There are only two relevent facts in this case.
Trayvon is dead.
Zimmerman killed him.
Indeed- Society is safer when criminals don't know who's armed
-Geaux
Society would be safer if civilians weren't armed in general, as you are more likely to be killed by a family member than a "criminal".
Doesn't matter what numerous people on a message board have said.
It's been entered into evidence.
The jury now has to consider it.
You may want to learn about how our legal system works.
Oh, you will learn, and in pretty quick order after the Acquittal.
-Geaux
I bet you were thinking Romney would win too.
Oh, you will learn, and in pretty quick order after the Acquittal.
-Geaux
I bet you were thinking Romney would win too.
Assume much?
-Geaux
Indeed- Society is safer when criminals don't know who's armed
-Geaux
Society would be safer if civilians weren't armed in general, as you are more likely to be killed by a family member than a "criminal".
Regardless, its an acceptable risk for those of us who purchase and own firearms
-Geaux
So what we really have to back up Zimmerman's word of self defense is Zimmerman's account, and Zimmerman has already been caught lying.
and to think Casey Anthony walked away with a more horrific crime.
Indeed- Society is safer when criminals don't know who's armed
-Geaux
Society would be safer if civilians weren't armed in general, as you are more likely to be killed by a family member than a "criminal".
Regardless, its an acceptable risk for those of us who purchase and own firearms
-Geaux
In short, serious injury refers to the woman, not the fetus.
The reality is, babies under one month old were not counted in censuses of the people. Even that was considered too iffy a proposition when you had an infant mortality rate of upward of 50%.
Society would be safer if civilians weren't armed in general, as you are more likely to be killed by a family member than a "criminal".
Regardless, its an acceptable risk for those of us who purchase and own firearms
-Geaux
It's not acceptable to the rest of us.
But here's an idea. Hold gunowners criminally responsible. If your five year old shoots his little playmate with your gun, you go to jail.
If you do an off the books gun transfer to your buddy and he knocks over a liqour store, you go to jail.
