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.
If all twelve jurors agree, yes, and that is a majority.
had to really reach for that--realized that a majority of jury doesn't work did ya ?
Have you ever heard of a conviction where less than the total number of jurors were in agreement? Go ahead, I'm waiting.
[
Your ignorance of all things continues to rear it's ugly head, Joey! Our court system doesn't convict on a majority decision. If one person decides that George Zimmerman is innocent then he's not "going down". I'm afraid you'll have to content yourself with trying to whip up an angry lynch mob if that happens.
Hey, if one guy decides he's innocent, they go to another trial.
And if by some chance the state jury acquits, don't worry, there will be a federal jury bringing him up on Civil Rights charges. (Again, probably after the riots.)
I won't need to whip up a lynch mob. One will form. Unfortunately, it will probably take out its wrath on some whiteboy who didn't murder a child.
had to really reach for that--realized that a majority of jury doesn't work did ya ?
Have you ever heard of a conviction where less than the total number of jurors were in agreement? Go ahead, I'm waiting.
fat chance of that happening here but good luck
had to really reach for that--realized that a majority of jury doesn't work did ya ?
Have you ever heard of a conviction where less than the total number of jurors were in agreement? Go ahead, I'm waiting.
Majority-verdict rule change leaves judges with decisions to make | NOLA.com
According to this two states, Louisiana and Oregon, allow majority jury verdicts in felony cases.
And this describes the SCOTUS allowing majority convictions at the state level (see part III) :
http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/lawreview/downloads/243/glasser.pdf
[
Your ignorance of all things continues to rear it's ugly head, Joey! Our court system doesn't convict on a majority decision. If one person decides that George Zimmerman is innocent then he's not "going down". I'm afraid you'll have to content yourself with trying to whip up an angry lynch mob if that happens.
Hey, if one guy decides he's innocent, they go to another trial.
And if by some chance the state jury acquits, don't worry, there will be a federal jury bringing him up on Civil Rights charges. (Again, probably after the riots.)
I won't need to whip up a lynch mob. One will form. Unfortunately, it will probably take out its wrath on some whiteboy who didn't murder a child.
What "civil rights" charge would George Zimmerman be guilty of? You make some of the stupidest posts I've ever seen here. Seriously dude...you embarrass yourself with this stuff. The whole notion that Zimmerman was a racist was something the liberal press pushed SO hard only to have it implode on them. Why? BECAUSE THE MAN ISN'T A RACIST!!! If he WAS he wouldn't have started the protest that he did over the beating of a homeless black man by a white police officer's kid. You try bringing Zimmerman to court on "civil rights" charges and you're going to get laughed out of court.
[
Your ignorance of all things continues to rear it's ugly head, Joey! Our court system doesn't convict on a majority decision. If one person decides that George Zimmerman is innocent then he's not "going down". I'm afraid you'll have to content yourself with trying to whip up an angry lynch mob if that happens.
Hey, if one guy decides he's innocent, they go to another trial.
And if by some chance the state jury acquits, don't worry, there will be a federal jury bringing him up on Civil Rights charges. (Again, probably after the riots.)
I won't need to whip up a lynch mob. One will form. Unfortunately, it will probably take out its wrath on some whiteboy who didn't murder a child.
What "civil rights" charge would George Zimmerman be guilty of? You make some of the stupidest posts I've ever seen here. Seriously dude...you embarrass yourself with this stuff. The whole notion that Zimmerman was a racist was something the liberal press pushed SO hard only to have it implode on them. Why? BECAUSE THE MAN ISN'T A RACIST!!! If he WAS he wouldn't have started the protest that he did over the beating of a homeless black man by a white police officer's kid. You try bringing Zimmerman to court on "civil rights" charges and you're going to get laughed out of court.
Hey, if one guy decides he's innocent, they go to another trial.
And if by some chance the state jury acquits, don't worry, there will be a federal jury bringing him up on Civil Rights charges. (Again, probably after the riots.)
I won't need to whip up a lynch mob. One will form. Unfortunately, it will probably take out its wrath on some whiteboy who didn't murder a child.
What "civil rights" charge would George Zimmerman be guilty of? You make some of the stupidest posts I've ever seen here. Seriously dude...you embarrass yourself with this stuff. The whole notion that Zimmerman was a racist was something the liberal press pushed SO hard only to have it implode on them. Why? BECAUSE THE MAN ISN'T A RACIST!!! If he WAS he wouldn't have started the protest that he did over the beating of a homeless black man by a white police officer's kid. You try bringing Zimmerman to court on "civil rights" charges and you're going to get laughed out of court.
It was clear Zimmerman was profiling Martin. Burglaries in that complex had been done by blacks, apparently. Zimmerman locked onto, followed, and then chased an innocent kid because he was a young black man wearing a hoodie. He even seemed to believe that Martin's phone was a gun, as was suggested by what he said in the phone call to the police. Based on the phone call alone, it appeared that Zimmerman felt all young black men in that area were logical suspects for being home invaders and burglars. Yes, there is a civil rights issue here.
[
So you basically don't HAVE an explanation as to why someone that you refer to as a "malignant racist" would lead a protest of a white man beating a black man? You do realize how stupid that makes you appear? Oh, that's right...you "sincerely do not give a fuck"!
Hate to break this to you, Joe but you're nothing more than a race baiting hate monger. Now run along...serious people are trying to have a discussion...
[
Your ignorance of all things continues to rear it's ugly head, Joey! Our court system doesn't convict on a majority decision. If one person decides that George Zimmerman is innocent then he's not "going down". I'm afraid you'll have to content yourself with trying to whip up an angry lynch mob if that happens.
Hey, if one guy decides he's innocent, they go to another trial.
And if by some chance the state jury acquits, don't worry, there will be a federal jury bringing him up on Civil Rights charges. (Again, probably after the riots.)
I won't need to whip up a lynch mob. One will form. Unfortunately, it will probably take out its wrath on some whiteboy who didn't murder a child.
What "civil rights" charge would George Zimmerman be guilty of? You make some of the stupidest posts I've ever seen here. Seriously dude...you embarrass yourself with this stuff. The whole notion that Zimmerman was a racist was something the liberal press pushed SO hard only to have it implode on them. Why? BECAUSE THE MAN ISN'T A RACIST!!! If he WAS he wouldn't have started the protest that he did over the beating of a homeless black man by a white police officer's kid. You try bringing Zimmerman to court on "civil rights" charges and you're going to get laughed out of court.
Hey, if one guy decides he's innocent, they go to another trial.
And if by some chance the state jury acquits, don't worry, there will be a federal jury bringing him up on Civil Rights charges. (Again, probably after the riots.)
I won't need to whip up a lynch mob. One will form. Unfortunately, it will probably take out its wrath on some whiteboy who didn't murder a child.
What "civil rights" charge would George Zimmerman be guilty of? You make some of the stupidest posts I've ever seen here. Seriously dude...you embarrass yourself with this stuff. The whole notion that Zimmerman was a racist was something the liberal press pushed SO hard only to have it implode on them. Why? BECAUSE THE MAN ISN'T A RACIST!!! If he WAS he wouldn't have started the protest that he did over the beating of a homeless black man by a white police officer's kid. You try bringing Zimmerman to court on "civil rights" charges and you're going to get laughed out of court.
It was clear Zimmerman was profiling Martin. Burglaries in that complex had been done by blacks, apparently. Zimmerman locked onto, followed, and then chased an innocent kid because he was a young black man wearing a hoodie. He even seemed to believe that Martin's phone was a gun, as was suggested by what he said in the phone call to the police. Based on the phone call alone, it appeared that Zimmerman felt all young black men in that area were logical suspects for being home invaders and burglars. Yes, there is a civil rights issue here.
What "civil rights" charge would George Zimmerman be guilty of? You make some of the stupidest posts I've ever seen here. Seriously dude...you embarrass yourself with this stuff. The whole notion that Zimmerman was a racist was something the liberal press pushed SO hard only to have it implode on them. Why? BECAUSE THE MAN ISN'T A RACIST!!! If he WAS he wouldn't have started the protest that he did over the beating of a homeless black man by a white police officer's kid. You try bringing Zimmerman to court on "civil rights" charges and you're going to get laughed out of court.
It was clear Zimmerman was profiling Martin. Burglaries in that complex had been done by blacks, apparently. Zimmerman locked onto, followed, and then chased an innocent kid because he was a young black man wearing a hoodie. He even seemed to believe that Martin's phone was a gun, as was suggested by what he said in the phone call to the police. Based on the phone call alone, it appeared that Zimmerman felt all young black men in that area were logical suspects for being home invaders and burglars. Yes, there is a civil rights issue here.
And how is it "clear" that Zimmerman was profiling anyone? He "locked onto" Martin because he was acting suspiciously looking at houses. He said nothing about Martin having a gun. The only comment he made was that Martin was reaching into his waistband as Martin approached the SUV that Zimmerman was sitting in. As a matter of fact the comment Zimmerman made in regard to race was when the Police dispatcher asked him if the man was black, white or Hispanic and Zimmerman replied that he thought the man was black and then verified that Martin was indeed black when Martin approached him.
Good luck selling this notion that George Zimmerman is a racist vigilante, Esmeralda! It doesn't fit the facts of that night nor does it fit George Zimmerman as he lived his life. You've made this GIANT leap of logic that because Zimmerman has a gun he was intent on using it that night. So if that IS the case? Why wouldn't he have had the gun out as he's confronted by Martin? You honestly believe that he allowed Martin to punch him in the face...knock him down on the ground and pound his head against the pavement...all so he has an "excuse" to FINALLY take out his gun and shoot his assailant? That really makes sense to you?
And then there's the "inconvenient" problem with Zimmerman starting that protest of the black homeless man's beating by a white man. How is it that you're going to reconcile THAT with your contention that Zimmerman somehow transformed into a "racist" when he was dealing with Trayvon Martin? Does THAT make sense to you either?
Your case against George Zimmerman has so many holes in it that it resembles Swiss cheese. The defense is going to have a field day with this...
Hey, if one guy decides he's innocent, they go to another trial.
And if by some chance the state jury acquits, don't worry, there will be a federal jury bringing him up on Civil Rights charges. (Again, probably after the riots.)
I won't need to whip up a lynch mob. One will form. Unfortunately, it will probably take out its wrath on some whiteboy who didn't murder a child.
What "civil rights" charge would George Zimmerman be guilty of? You make some of the stupidest posts I've ever seen here. Seriously dude...you embarrass yourself with this stuff. The whole notion that Zimmerman was a racist was something the liberal press pushed SO hard only to have it implode on them. Why? BECAUSE THE MAN ISN'T A RACIST!!! If he WAS he wouldn't have started the protest that he did over the beating of a homeless black man by a white police officer's kid. You try bringing Zimmerman to court on "civil rights" charges and you're going to get laughed out of court.
It was clear Zimmerman was profiling Martin. Burglaries in that complex had been done by blacks, apparently. Zimmerman locked onto, followed, and then chased an innocent kid because he was a young black man wearing a hoodie. He even seemed to believe that Martin's phone was a gun, as was suggested by what he said in the phone call to the police. Based on the phone call alone, it appeared that Zimmerman felt all young black men in that area were logical suspects for being home invaders and burglars. Yes, there is a civil rights issue here.
[
So you basically don't HAVE an explanation as to why someone that you refer to as a "malignant racist" would lead a protest of a white man beating a black man? You do realize how stupid that makes you appear? Oh, that's right...you "sincerely do not give a fuck"!
Hate to break this to you, Joe but you're nothing more than a race baiting hate monger. Now run along...serious people are trying to have a discussion...
Frankly, I haven't heard that anywhere but here. So I kind of discount it. Not to mention the fact this isn't the first time he's stalked black folks in his housing complex.
Zimmerman's an asshole. And he needs to be made an example of so the next asshole thinks twice before pulling shit like this.
It was clear Zimmerman was profiling Martin. Burglaries in that complex had been done by blacks, apparently. Zimmerman locked onto, followed, and then chased an innocent kid because he was a young black man wearing a hoodie. He even seemed to believe that Martin's phone was a gun, as was suggested by what he said in the phone call to the police. Based on the phone call alone, it appeared that Zimmerman felt all young black men in that area were logical suspects for being home invaders and burglars. Yes, there is a civil rights issue here.
And how is it "clear" that Zimmerman was profiling anyone? He "locked onto" Martin because he was acting suspiciously looking at houses. He said nothing about Martin having a gun. The only comment he made was that Martin was reaching into his waistband as Martin approached the SUV that Zimmerman was sitting in. As a matter of fact the comment Zimmerman made in regard to race was when the Police dispatcher asked him if the man was black, white or Hispanic and Zimmerman replied that he thought the man was black and then verified that Martin was indeed black when Martin approached him.
Good luck selling this notion that George Zimmerman is a racist vigilante, Esmeralda! It doesn't fit the facts of that night nor does it fit George Zimmerman as he lived his life. You've made this GIANT leap of logic that because Zimmerman has a gun he was intent on using it that night. So if that IS the case? Why wouldn't he have had the gun out as he's confronted by Martin? You honestly believe that he allowed Martin to punch him in the face...knock him down on the ground and pound his head against the pavement...all so he has an "excuse" to FINALLY take out his gun and shoot his assailant? That really makes sense to you?
And then there's the "inconvenient" problem with Zimmerman starting that protest of the black homeless man's beating by a white man. How is it that you're going to reconcile THAT with your contention that Zimmerman somehow transformed into a "racist" when he was dealing with Trayvon Martin? Does THAT make sense to you either?
Your case against George Zimmerman has so many holes in it that it resembles Swiss cheese. The defense is going to have a field day with this...
LOL When this trial is over, looks like you all are going to be as disappointed as you were when Obama was elected.
[
You didn't hear about it, JoeB because it didn't fit the narrative that the main stream media was pushing just like you didn't see recent pictures of Trayvon Martin or hear about his drug use and suspension from school for theft. The media's performance during the early parts of this is nothing short of deplorable. You discount it now because you don't have any rational way of explaining it. Zimmerman wasn't a racist and the proof of that is his organizing that protest against someone who WAS!
[
You want to make an "example" of Zimmerman? So someone else will think twice before defending themselves against an attack? Trust me people who carry ALREADY think twice about how they will probably be crucified if they DO use a gun in self defense ESPECIALLY if it's against a minority.
But that's what this case is all about anyways! It isn't about George Zimmerman defending himself as he's getting beaten...it's about gun control advocates wanting to make an example of him because he used a gun while doing so.
And how is it "clear" that Zimmerman was profiling anyone? He "locked onto" Martin because he was acting suspiciously looking at houses. He said nothing about Martin having a gun. The only comment he made was that Martin was reaching into his waistband as Martin approached the SUV that Zimmerman was sitting in. As a matter of fact the comment Zimmerman made in regard to race was when the Police dispatcher asked him if the man was black, white or Hispanic and Zimmerman replied that he thought the man was black and then verified that Martin was indeed black when Martin approached him.
Good luck selling this notion that George Zimmerman is a racist vigilante, Esmeralda! It doesn't fit the facts of that night nor does it fit George Zimmerman as he lived his life. You've made this GIANT leap of logic that because Zimmerman has a gun he was intent on using it that night. So if that IS the case? Why wouldn't he have had the gun out as he's confronted by Martin? You honestly believe that he allowed Martin to punch him in the face...knock him down on the ground and pound his head against the pavement...all so he has an "excuse" to FINALLY take out his gun and shoot his assailant? That really makes sense to you?
And then there's the "inconvenient" problem with Zimmerman starting that protest of the black homeless man's beating by a white man. How is it that you're going to reconcile THAT with your contention that Zimmerman somehow transformed into a "racist" when he was dealing with Trayvon Martin? Does THAT make sense to you either?
Your case against George Zimmerman has so many holes in it that it resembles Swiss cheese. The defense is going to have a field day with this...
LOL When this trial is over, looks like you all are going to be as disappointed as you were when Obama was elected.
Is that your only response to my queries, Esmeralda? If so it's rather obvious that your "case" against George Zimmerman is based on a political agenda and not the facts.
LOL When this trial is over, looks like you all are going to be as disappointed as you were when Obama was elected.
Is that your only response to my queries, Esmeralda? If so it's rather obvious that your "case" against George Zimmerman is based on a political agenda and not the facts.
My point is that YOUR case is based on a poltical agenda and not the facts. You all want so much for Zimmerman to be right, to be excused for setting up the whole thing and murdering an unarmed kid , you over look reality. Unless the jury are a bunch of gun toting racists, they will convict Zimmerman. Anyone who is going to sit there and make up a fantasy police record for this poor dead kid has major issues.
Is that your only response to my queries, Esmeralda? If so it's rather obvious that your "case" against George Zimmerman is based on a political agenda and not the facts.
My point is that YOUR case is based on a poltical agenda and not the facts. You all want so much for Zimmerman to be right, to be excused for setting up the whole thing and murdering an unarmed kid , you over look reality. Unless the jury are a bunch of gun toting racists, they will convict Zimmerman. Anyone who is going to sit there and make up a fantasy police record for this poor dead kid has major issues.
All I want is for George Zimmerman to get a fair trial. I don't want to see him get crucified because people like you and JoeB decided he was a "gun toting racist" long before the trial even began.
Who's REALLY at fault here? Who REALLY escalated the situation to one of violence? Your whole notion of guilt for Zimmerman is solely based on the fact that he followed Trayvon Martin which he did in fact do. What you can't seem to grasp is that following someone is not illegal nor does it constitute assault. George Zimmerman didn't follow after Trayvon Martin screaming racial invectives. George Zimmerman didn't initiate a physical confrontation. George Zimmerman didn't punch Trayvon Martin in the face. George Zimmerman didn't slam Trayvon Martin's head against the ground.
What George Zimmerman DID do was pull out a concealed weapon and shoot someone that was attacking him. Not BEFORE the attack took place but after Trayvon Martin had proceeded to give him a good old fashioned ass kicking. Those cries for help that witnesses heard? Trayvon Martin's father stated that night that he didn't think that was his son's voice screaming for help which makes the man crying out for help, George Zimmerman. He's crying out for help and none is coming. He's on the ground, Trayvon Martin is on top of him and Martin is going to town. THAT is the point that Zimmerman finally is able to draw his gun and shoot one time. That is the point where Zimmerman defended himself.
And I didn't make up a fantasy police report about Trayvon Martin. I simply stated that he was suspended from school for possession of pot and for being in possession of stolen property and burglary tools. That isn't a "fantasy" I've cooked up. That's reality. I don't KNOW what Trayvon Martin's status with the Police is at that point because he was a juvenile and those records are sealed. What you have to ask yourself is which is more likely...that Trayvon HAS a police record or that he does not? I would assume that he has some sort of record simply for doing what got him suspended from school. Quite frankly I would be shocked if he didn't.
My point is that YOUR case is based on a poltical agenda and not the facts. You all want so much for Zimmerman to be right, to be excused for setting up the whole thing and murdering an unarmed kid , you over look reality. Unless the jury are a bunch of gun toting racists, they will convict Zimmerman. Anyone who is going to sit there and make up a fantasy police record for this poor dead kid has major issues.
All I want is for George Zimmerman to get a fair trial. I don't want to see him get crucified because people like you and JoeB decided he was a "gun toting racist" long before the trial even began.
Who's REALLY at fault here? Who REALLY escalated the situation to one of violence? Your whole notion of guilt for Zimmerman is solely based on the fact that he followed Trayvon Martin which he did in fact do. What you can't seem to grasp is that following someone is not illegal nor does it constitute assault. George Zimmerman didn't follow after Trayvon Martin screaming racial invectives. George Zimmerman didn't initiate a physical confrontation. George Zimmerman didn't punch Trayvon Martin in the face. George Zimmerman didn't slam Trayvon Martin's head against the ground.
What George Zimmerman DID do was pull out a concealed weapon and shoot someone that was attacking him. Not BEFORE the attack took place but after Trayvon Martin had proceeded to give him a good old fashioned ass kicking. Those cries for help that witnesses heard? Trayvon Martin's father stated that night that he didn't think that was his son's voice screaming for help which makes the man crying out for help, George Zimmerman. He's crying out for help and none is coming. He's on the ground, Trayvon Martin is on top of him and Martin is going to town. THAT is the point that Zimmerman finally is able to draw his gun and shoot one time. That is the point where Zimmerman defended himself.
And I didn't make up a fantasy police report about Trayvon Martin. I simply stated that he was suspended from school for possession of pot and for being in possession of stolen property and burglary tools. That isn't a "fantasy" I've cooked up. That's reality. I don't KNOW what Trayvon Martin's status with the Police is at that point because he was a juvenile and those records are sealed. What you have to ask yourself is which is more likely...that Trayvon HAS a police record or that he does not? I would assume that he has some sort of record simply for doing what got him suspended from school. Quite frankly I would be shocked if he didn't.
How do you know all these things? Zimmerman could have initiated a physical confrontation. He could have punched Martin in the face. The biggest problem I have with all of the speculation is that it IS speculation, but is treated so often as fact.
The evidence I have seen does not seem like enough to convict Zimmerman of murder. It does not exonerate him, either. Whether he was at fault or not may well end up unanswered whatever the outcome of the trial.
[
All I want is for George Zimmerman to get a fair trial. I don't want to see him get crucified because people like you and JoeB decided he was a "gun toting racist" long before the trial even began.
Who's REALLY at fault here? Who REALLY escalated ....
