The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

What are your Initial Thoughts on the Guilt or Innocence of George Zimmerman?


  • Total voters
    84
Status
Not open for further replies.

The dog fighting is what he was doing for a while, all along knowing it was against the law. He deserved what he got....It wasn't a one time thing....

There's a lot more to the story of the woman, Marissa Alexander....this is NOT a SYG issue as she wanted it to be.

Alexander also was charged with domestic battery four months after the shooting in another assault on Gray, this time leaving him with an injury to his eye. As a result, her bond was revoked in the aggravated assault case. She eventually pleaded no contest to that charge and was sentenced to time served.

Jacksonville woman sentenced to 20 years in prison in 'Stand Your Ground' controversy | jacksonville.com

Neither of these stories are anything like the Zimmerman/Martin trial.
 
Is Zimmerman back "on patrol" tonight? His neighbors must be so grateful to have him back while their kids are out of school during those hot summer nights, going to and fro in the neighborhood. I've just got ONE piece of advice for those kids. Make sure that George never feels threatened. Maybe if everyone ties a little bell to their shoe laces.

Well you go right ahead and let a person you beat you to death... We wont stop you.
 
No kidding! This is total gov bs.

Since we have the thread all to ourselves, you feeling better?

Maybe we can change this to the Catching Up thread.

:)
 
How do you know who started the altercation between the two men?

What evidence do you have?

I didn't know that that aspect had been proven.

Do you actually have any real answers, or are you just one of those people on here who shoots their mouth off without being able to back any of it up? Cause there's a lot of that around here.
Common sense tells me who started it. The thug.

The best witness in the trial testified to evidence that it was solely Zimmerman that started the fight. When she states GZ was behind Martin right before, it shows Martin was fleeing and other things she said Martin said are consistent with GZ following and tracking down Martin from the get go.

Friend of Trayvon Martin testifies in George Zimmerman murder trial | World news | guardian.co.uk

A friend who was on the phone with 17-year-old Trayvon Martin moments before he was fatally shot by George Zimmerman testified on Wednesday that she heard the Miami teen shout, "Get off! Get off!" before his telephone went dead.

Rachel Jeantel recounted to jurors in Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial how Martin told her he was being followed by a man as he walked through the Retreat at Twin Lakes townhome complex, on his way back from a convenience store to the home of his father's fiancée. Jeantel is considered one of the prosecution's most important witnesses, because she was the last person to talk to Martin before his encounter with Zimmerman on 26 February 2012.

She testified that Martin described the man following him as "a creepy-ass cracker" and he thought he had evaded him. But she said a short time later Martin let out a profanity. Martin said Zimmerman was behind him and she heard Martin ask: "What are you following me for?" She then heard what sounded like Martin's phone earpiece drop into the grass and she heard him say, "Get off! Get off!" The phone then went dead, she said.

No one saw how the fight started you lying piece of shit.
 
They may train 'em that way in Fla., but Fla. is messed up in a lot of ways - almost as badly as TX. Tell you what, sport - tomorrow, I'll make a call and let you know how they are trained here. I will be surprised if they are told to shut up when someone is threatening to go get a gun.

Oh, and by the way, I only handle cases from arraignment through either dispo or preliminary hearing. In this particular case, the dispatcher's silence had no bearing on the preliminary hearing, so no investigation was required. The case is now in superior court, where the trial attorney may well want to pursue that aspect of the case.

I am pretty sure that they train them that way most places thanks to lawyers that sue cities for bad advice.

You have mentioned more than once that you are a public defender, and I just assumed you handled the whole shebang. My bad.

I see the logic of your thinking - you may be right. The other side of that coin is that FAILURE to discourage someone from using a gun can also result in potential liability for a police department. I doubt that anyone in any police department is going to fork over anything about how dispatchers are trained, but I'll give it a go.

I used to handle the whole shebang, well, the trial end of it that is. Did that for many years until they gave me this cushy assignment I have had for the past several years. Much prefer the present assignment. I don't miss the pressure of trial work in the least.

It would probably be easier if you had more money/resources and fewer clients. I still think that the government should be required to give the defense as much money as they spend themselves whenever they arrest someone, it would probably cut down on the bullshit charges meant only to harass people who are annoying the police.
 
The paper says there were know African Americans on the jury. All wihte. Shouldn't there have been some African Amercans on the jury to be even? This is straight out of the 30's. Gosh!
 
Is there something we can do to start an investigation into the bs that started this?

I'm ok, as long as I remember not to put any weight on the front of my foot and don't bang it on something (which I did last Fri at work before leaving).
 
If they ever give you advice that puts you in harm's way, the government body they work for can be sued for libel. Therefore, it is standard policy to advise you of the safest thing possible in all scenarios.

Thank you. You listening to this, QW?

I am not going to be able to get anything out of our local police department. They aren't going to tell me bo-diddily, afraid that whatever they say (to a lawyer) will probably be used against them.

But think about it, QW - and Boss, I realize what I am about to say is not the Zimmerman case, but bear with me for a second anyway - if a dispatcher is being told by someone in a car that he is being chased by another car and that he is going to go home and get his shotgun, which scenario is probably going to result in the safest result: (1) advising the gun-threatening driver not to go home and get his gun but, instead, simply to drive to the police station or (2) saying nothing, followed by the gun-threatening driver doing exactly what he threatened he was going to do? Hint: No. 1.

It defies common sense to think that liability-fearing police departments have policies which would require a dispatcher to say nothing when confronted with the type of situation outlined, above.

I advise women who think they are being followed to head for the nearest firestation, they are more likely to get someone's attention there than at a police station, especially at night.

I think dispatchers should be able to tell people to avoid dangerous situations, but there is no way you can say that it is always safer to go to the police station than home. Let us go out of our way to create a ridiculous situation, the type that get lawyers thinking about losing money.

Someone calls in to report being followed, and the dispatcher advises him to drive to the nearest police station. He does so, and the guy following him happens to be a whacko crazed survivalist who is armed to the teeth. When they get to the police station the guy that called is killed in the ensuing gun battle, and it turns out that he was shot by one of the police officers that was aiming at the other guy.

Would you want to defend the police from the ensuing law suit under those circumstances?
 
What's most fucked about it is our government and a entire race of bigots don't care about the evidence. They will just scream that the thug that was beating on this man was BLACK! Like it somehow gives that young man a right to beat on a man without Zimmerman doing anything.

This is sad.

I never cared whether Trayvon was black or not. For the most part, it was about my freedom to be in public without being spied on or followed.

This is what We in the real world call a post made entirely from bullshit.

Good material for your posts, eh?
 
Is Zimmerman back "on patrol" tonight? His neighbors must be so grateful to have him back while their kids are out of school during those hot summer nights, going to and fro in the neighborhood. I've just got ONE piece of advice for those kids. Make sure that George never feels threatened. Maybe if everyone ties a little bell to their shoe laces.

Well you go right ahead and let a person you beat you to death... We wont stop you.

Zimmerman wasn't injured badly at all. His head injury was superficial. I've HAD a head injury, and you don't just bounce up like he apparently did.
 
The paper says there were know African Americans on the jury. All wihte. Shouldn't there have been some African Amercans on the jury to be even? This is straight out of the 30's. Gosh!

One black woman


Now how the paper get that wrong? I swear the news so messed up.

It's called a agenda.
1. To make a double standard that we can't go after black criminals.
2. To go after the gun laws

Why can't we just judge everyone equally. Isn't justice blind?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top