The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[Luissa]

But last time I checked manslaughter is illegal. I think following someone twice and not retreating back to his truck to prevent anything more from happening, then shooting him will probably get him a manslaughter conviction.

Florida law doesn't require retreat.

Which is why Martin didnt have to. Zimmerman followed him.

 

[dilloduck]

But last time I checked manslaughter is illegal. I think following someone twice and not retreating back to his truck to prevent anything more from happening, then shooting him will probably get him a manslaughter conviction.

Florida law doesn't require retreat.

Which is why Martin didnt have to. Zimmerman followed him.

seriously--you need to talk to the lawyers who wrote the law

 

[Trajan]

No we don't dillo, the evidence leans toward Zimmerman being told he didn't need to follow and following anyway.

I have to laugh at the threads whining about kids bringing play guns to school getting in trouble (right wing whines) and this thread that appears to be saying Martin deserved to die because he had a text of a gun on his phone.

Ravi--no it doesn't--The evidence does not show Zimmerman being a vigilante nor hunting martin down like a dog. Vigilantes don't call the cops and you can't link to anyone who said " martin deserved to die because he had a text of a gun on his phone". Your just flat making shit up again

Yes it does, he followed him twice. He was armed and followed him. He was trying to okay vigilante and catch that horrible hooded criminal. And in the end an innocent person was shot.

we don't know that.....

 

[Luissa]

Florida law doesn't require retreat.

Which is why Martin didnt have to. Zimmerman followed him.

seriously--you need to talk to the lawyers who wrote the law

Have you looked up cases dropped by the law? Probably not.

And I am guessing if someone followed you twice, one could feel they might suffer bodily harm and wouldn't be required to retreat. I suggest you read the law and then look up dropped cases..... Like I have asked about 20 times.
Who is untruthful now? Maybe you?

 

[Luissa]

Ravi--no it doesn't--The evidence does not show Zimmerman being a vigilante nor hunting martin down like a dog. Vigilantes don't call the cops and you can't link to anyone who said " martin deserved to die because he had a text of a gun on his phone". Your just flat making shit up again

Yes it does, he followed him twice. He was armed and followed him. He was trying to okay vigilante and catch that horrible hooded criminal. And in the end an innocent person was shot.

we don't know that.....

We don't? It doesn't take a genius to figure out he followed him twice.
That he lied about where the fight started and that he lied to either Sean Hannity or the 911 operator.
What he did is called manslaughter. His actions caused the death of a innocent minor. Pretty simple to me.

 

[dilloduck]

Which is why Martin didnt have to. Zimmerman followed him.

seriously--you need to talk to the lawyers who wrote the law

Have you looked up cases dropped by the law? Probably not.

And I am guessing if someone followed you twice, one could feel they might suffer bodily harm and wouldn't be required to retreat. I suggest you read the law and then look up dropped cases..... Like I have asked about 20 times.
Who is untruthful now? Maybe you?

if you know the law why in the hell are you still asking questions ? It's legal to be armed and it's legal to "follow". Z is charged with 2nd class murder--why not just go straight there ?

 

[Luissa]

seriously--you need to talk to the lawyers who wrote the law

Have you looked up cases dropped by the law? Probably not.

And I am guessing if someone followed you twice, one could feel they might suffer bodily harm and wouldn't be required to retreat. I suggest you read the law and then look up dropped cases..... Like I have asked about 20 times.
Who is untruthful now? Maybe you?

if you know the law why in the hell are you still asking questions ? It's legal to be armed and it's legal to "follow". Z is charged with 2nd class murder--why not just go straight there ?

I don't think he showed malice.
But I think he showed criminal negligence.


Web definitions
(law) recklessly acting without reasonable caution and putting another person at risk of injury or death (or failing to do something...
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


I think following him the first time, then not returning to his truck the second time was a reckless move and was acting without reasonable caution.


As Martin, all he would have had to do was prove he felt reasonable fear for his life or bodily farm. Which would have been very easy, even more so now.... Since he is dead. He had good reason to be fearful.
In other words he didnt have to retreat.
And Zimmerman's reckless actions caused his death. I hope his patents also sue him.

 

[dilloduck]

Have you looked up cases dropped by the law? Probably not.

And I am guessing if someone followed you twice, one could feel they might suffer bodily harm and wouldn't be required to retreat. I suggest you read the law and then look up dropped cases..... Like I have asked about 20 times.
Who is untruthful now? Maybe you?

if you know the law why in the hell are you still asking questions ? It's legal to be armed and it's legal to "follow". Z is charged with 2nd class murder--why not just go straight there ?

I don't think he showed malice.
But I think he showed criminal negligence.


Web definitions
(law) recklessly acting without reasonable caution and putting another person at risk of injury or death (or failing to do something...
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


I think following him the first time, then not returning to his truck the second time was a reckless move and was acting without reasonable caution.


As Martin, all he would have had to do was prove he felt reasonable fear for his life or bodily farm. Which would have been very easy, even more so now.... Since he is dead. He had good reason to be fearful.
In other words he didnt have to retreat.
And Zimmerman's reckless actions caused his death. I hope his patents also sue him.

they already have and won

and you're as irrational as ever

 

[Luissa]

if you know the law why in the hell are you still asking questions ? It's legal to be armed and it's legal to "follow". Z is charged with 2nd class murder--why not just go straight there ?

I don't think he showed malice.
But I think he showed criminal negligence.


Web definitions
(law) recklessly acting without reasonable caution and putting another person at risk of injury or death (or failing to do something...
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


I think following him the first time, then not returning to his truck the second time was a reckless move and was acting without reasonable caution.


As Martin, all he would have had to do was prove he felt reasonable fear for his life or bodily farm. Which would have been very easy, even more so now.... Since he is dead. He had good reason to be fearful.
In other words he didnt have to retreat.
And Zimmerman's reckless actions caused his death. I hope his patents also sue him.

they already have and won

and you're as irrational as ever

What are you talking about?
Irrational? You mean doing actual research instead of just throwing insults? I guess I am irrational then.

 

[dilloduck]

I don't think he showed malice.
But I think he showed criminal negligence.


Web definitions
(law) recklessly acting without reasonable caution and putting another person at risk of injury or death (or failing to do something...
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


I think following him the first time, then not returning to his truck the second time was a reckless move and was acting without reasonable caution.


As Martin, all he would have had to do was prove he felt reasonable fear for his life or bodily farm. Which would have been very easy, even more so now.... Since he is dead. He had good reason to be fearful.
In other words he didnt have to retreat.
And Zimmerman's reckless actions caused his death. I hope his patents also sue him.

they already have and won

and you're as irrational as ever

What are you talking about?
Irrational? You mean doing actual research instead of just throwing insults? I guess I am irrational then.

you use what you feel as a defense as opposed to reason

 

[Luissa]

they already have and won

and you're as irrational as ever

What are you talking about?
Irrational? You mean doing actual research instead of just throwing insults? I guess I am irrational then.

you use what you feel as a defense as opposed to reason

Sure.
Ignorance is when you make up your mind about something without knowing any facts. Being untruthful is when you claim to know something when you have done nothing to educate yourself.
So by this thread I can assume your are ignorant and untruthful.

 

[dilloduck]

What are you talking about?
Irrational? You mean doing actual research instead of just throwing insults? I guess I am irrational then.

you use what you feel as a defense as opposed to reason

Sure.
Ignorance is when you make up your mind about something without knowing any facts. Being untruthful is when you claim to know something when you have done nothing to educate yourself.
So by this thread I can assume your are ignorant and untruthful.

stop hurting my feelings

 

[Luissa]

Just paying ya back

 

[dilloduck]

Just paying ya back

there's blood and guts and stuff--all over my feelings. OMG

 

[Luissa]

Just paying ya back

there's blood and guts and stuff--all over my feelings. OMG

You must retreat now, or it will be your fault.

 

[KissMy]

Zimmerman told police on video that night right after the shooting that he never hit Martin. Zimmerman was yelling for help, trying to get away from martin & held his hands in front of his face to block Martins punches. The coroner report proves that Zimmerman never struck Martin. Martin was irrationally beating someone who was not a threat & begging for his life. That is a indefensible crime that justifies deadly force with a gun. Shooting Martin was highly justified.

 

[Luissa]

Zimmerman told police on video that night right after the shooting that he never hit Martin. Zimmerman was yelling for help, trying to get away from martin & held his hands in front of his face to block Martins punches. The coroner report proves that Zimmerman never struck Martin. Martin was irrationally beating someone who was not a threat & begging for his life. That is a indefensible crime that justifies deadly force with a gun. Shooting Martin was highly justified.

You wouldn't see someone following you as a threat?

 

[KissMy]

Zimmerman told police on video that night right after the shooting that he never hit Martin. Zimmerman was yelling for help, trying to get away from martin & held his hands in front of his face to block Martins punches. The coroner report proves that Zimmerman never struck Martin. Martin was irrationally beating someone who was not a threat & begging for his life. That is a indefensible crime that justifies deadly force with a gun. Shooting Martin was highly justified.

You wouldn't see someone following you as a threat?

NO! - Show me a law that says following someone is illegal & justifies beating someone.

 

[Luissa]

Zimmerman told police on video that night right after the shooting that he never hit Martin. Zimmerman was yelling for help, trying to get away from martin & held his hands in front of his face to block Martins punches. The coroner report proves that Zimmerman never struck Martin. Martin was irrationally beating someone who was not a threat & begging for his life. That is a indefensible crime that justifies deadly force with a gun. Shooting Martin was highly justified.

You wouldn't see someone following you as a threat?

NO! - Show me a law that says I can't follow someone.

I don't care about the law.
You wouldn't think someone following you at night was a threat? Or make you fearful?

 

[dilloduck]

Zimmerman told police on video that night right after the shooting that he never hit Martin. Zimmerman was yelling for help, trying to get away from martin & held his hands in front of his face to block Martins punches. The coroner report proves that Zimmerman never struck Martin. Martin was irrationally beating someone who was not a threat & begging for his life. That is a indefensible crime that justifies deadly force with a gun. Shooting Martin was highly justified.

You wouldn't see someone following you as a threat?

NO! - Show me a law that says I can't follow someone.

Luissa has put herself in Trayvon's shoes and thinks Trayvon thinks like her. Scarey.