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.
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.

then lynch the bastard with vigilante fervor. Don't delay. Get there early for a good parking spot.
 
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 fact that the back of his head was scarred and he had a broken nose proves he was being beat. Agree?
 
Last edited:
They changed when he went from being referred to as Hispanic to "White-Hispanic".

Back up even there.:eusa_shhh:

They thought they had a white jew killing young black kid. The press never knew his mother was from Peru.

You have to go back to the original reports.

Confirmed Tiny..mm..can I call you Tiny?

In the words of the greatest spokeswoman the R's have ever had :eusa_angel:

"you bettcha"
 
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.

You are absolutely correct.
 

It says she didn't know who said get off until the prosecutor prompted her. You're lazy as hell if you can't click and read. You really are worthless.

No, forum rules and etiquette are that you don't post a link and nothing else. Besides, I could read it and still not know what the hell you were trying to get at. :badgrin:

No, they didn't hear her correctly at first. The analysis of the testimony I just posted clearly shows what she testified without any contradictions. Her final and definitive testimony ON the stand is what counts, not all the second guessing.
 
No not unless someone files a complaint or several with the bar, stamina does something, a civil case is filed where it all comes out, that's on the state level. The Feds make up their own rules.

You need to stop that til it gets better!! Xo
 
I'm not going to bother reading that right now unless you comment on it or give a quote from it. What's your point?

It says she didn't know who said get off until the prosecutor prompted her. You're lazy as hell if you can't click and read. You really are worthless.

No, forum rules and etiquette are that you don't post a link and nothing else. Besides, I could read it and still not know what the hell you were trying to get at. :badgrin:

No, they didn't hear her correctly at first. The analysis of the testimony I just posted clearly shows what she testified without any contradictions. Her final and definitive testimony ON the stand is what counts, not all the second guessing.

You are exactly right, and the juror on CNN right now just said she wasn't credible specifically for what I just put to your attention. BOOOOM! STFU
 
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.

:badgrin:
 
It says she didn't know who said get off until the prosecutor prompted her. You're lazy as hell if you can't click and read. You really are worthless.

No, forum rules and etiquette are that you don't post a link and nothing else. Besides, I could read it and still not know what the hell you were trying to get at. :badgrin:

No, they didn't hear her correctly at first. The analysis of the testimony I just posted clearly shows what she testified without any contradictions. Her final and definitive testimony ON the stand is what counts, not all the second guessing.

You are exactly right, and the juror on CNN right now just said she wasn't credible specifically for what I just put to your attention. BOOOOM! STFU

What one juror says after the trial doesn't explain what happened in deliberation. Jurors change their minds, about how they feel about how they voted, like the seasons.
 
Jurors only concentrated on last moments in making their decision. They didn't think about the wanna-be cop crap.
 
Juror B-37 said the subject of race never came up in the jury room.

And everyone in this forum who insists on calling Trayvon Martin a 'child' needs to reconcile their perception of his being a 'child' and also being allowed by the responsible adults in his life to be out alone in the dark in a crime ridden neighborhood. Those two things do not gee and haw.
 
No, forum rules and etiquette are that you don't post a link and nothing else. Besides, I could read it and still not know what the hell you were trying to get at. :badgrin:

No, they didn't hear her correctly at first. The analysis of the testimony I just posted clearly shows what she testified without any contradictions. Her final and definitive testimony ON the stand is what counts, not all the second guessing.

You are exactly right, and the juror on CNN right now just said she wasn't credible specifically for what I just put to your attention. BOOOOM! STFU

What one juror says after the trial doesn't explain what happened in deliberation. Jurors change their minds, about how they feel about how they voted, like the seasons.

She is speaking about that process right now. Get Obama to get you some cable brother. After evidence review it was 5 to 1 acquittal.
 
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.

She didn't state it outright, but she gives the play-by-play and like listening to sports on the radio, it isn't hard to figure out from there.
 
Book juror with the attorney husband said it was most important to follow letter of the law and instructions.

She was the reasonable justice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top