The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[g5000]

If GZ was Black and TM was White, the only thing conservatives would be arguing is whether GZ should get the death penalty or not.

If Zimmerman was black, Obama would not have called him his son.

It is only because Obama stuck his nose into the case, and convicted Zimmerman in public, that we are still talking about this case today.

Now the Left must defend Obama's son. They can't have him turn out to be a common dope smoking thief and thug.

And the Right must convict Obama's son. They can't have him turn out to be anything but a common dope smoking thief and thug.

Theater for the rubes.

 

[testarosa]

Re: the shooting animals thing - did he say if he bbq'ed them up and ate them after?

It looks terrible either way.

Why? I eat animals all the time.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I think they have to give him some time simply because he killed the kid and there is some reasonable doubt. How much? Depends on how the jury is taking all the testimony.

LOL

Sarie just acknowledged reasonable doubt.

She just doesn't grasp that this means GZ should be acquitted.

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt that it wasn’t self defense. Maybe I'm not saying it right but I don't claim to be a lawyer like some people who are on her everyday.

Stringing random words together (and not all that coherently) does not help your cause, Sarie.

You seem to be attempting to retract your prior statement that there is reasonable doubt.

I can certainly understand why you'd want to retract your concession.

But you can't have it both ways.

The STATE has to prove the man's guilt BEYOND a REASONABLE DOUBT. If you admit that there is reasonable doubt of his guilt, then you admit that the STATE fails. = Acquittal.

If you are acknowledging that there is some reasonable doubt remaining that GZ acted in self defense, then the STATE necessarily failed to rebut the justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt. That's THEIR burden. = Acquittal.

Or, since you are quite incoherent, maybe you aren't saying that, either.

But that only leaves the big question open. WTF ARE you hoping to be saying?

 

[Avatar4321]

It is sort of about politics.

Conservatives feel that we should get rid of police and arm the citizens. Sorta like the wild west.

Fastest gun wins.

And Liberals? Not so much.

Straw man much?

heh, you should have asked the OP that question.

I could have, if i had no clue what a straw man is. But I do, so I didn't.

The trial is all about guns and whether we have a right to self defense.

 

[legaleagle_45]

Maybe I'm not saying it right

You did not say it right, if that is what you meant. What you said was exactly opposite of that.[/quote]

but I don't claim to be a lawyer like some people who are on her everyday.

I do not get on her every day. At most, two or three times a week., More if I drink tequilla before hand..

 

[PredFan]

Why is the Zimmerman case devided so sharply along partisan lines? With only a very few exceptions the lefties here believe GZ is guilty and the conservatives wait until the trial is over. I couldn't understand why, since GZ isn't white, the lefties were so ready to string him up.

Moments ago, it hit me.

It's only partially about race. True, if TM was white or hispanic, no one would care, but race isn't the real reason they want GZ to fry. It's guns.

GZ defended himself with a gun and a black man is dead. They cannot stand the thought that GZ might have legally used a gun to defend himself. It's about guns, and self-defense and even Stand-Your-Ground.

If GZ is convicted, they can use this case to revive their efforts to take away our rights and that is THE issue.

The left never ever cares about right and wrong, they only care about winning.

The question is, do they believe Martin deserved to die because he was black? Because they certainly are convinced he deserved to die and they believed that waaaaaaaaay before the trial started.

Thta's bull shit and you know it. Me and most of the conservatives here stated quite clearly that we don't know what happened, we weren't there. We only objected to the lefties who had him convicted without knowing the evidence, without even a trial.

You are lying out of your ass.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

an·te·ced·ent
adjective
1. preceding; prior: an antecedent event.
noun
2. a preceding circumstance, event, object, style, phenomenon, etc.
3. antecedents.
a. ancestors.
b. the history, events, characteristics, etc., of one's earlier life: Little is known about his birth and antecedents.

Love how you respond to someone about your use of the word "antecedent" but don't respond to the post showing that Zimmerman's antecedents include people of color despite your claim to the contrary.

Because I don't believe that is a picture of Zimmerman's ancestors. His life is on the line in this trial. His parents can provide a picture and say those are his ancestors, doesn't mean they are. Even if they were, he lives and thinks like a white man, like a Caucasion. He proviled Martin, no doubt about it. He thought he was killing a black teenager ganster, no doubt about that either.

 

[PredFan]

It is sort of about politics.

Conservatives feel that we should get rid of police and arm the citizens. Sorta like the wild west.

Fastest gun wins.

And Liberals? Not so much.

 

[PredFan]

It is sort of about politics.

Conservatives feel that we should get rid of police and arm the citizens. Sorta like the wild west.

Fastest gun wins.

And Liberals? Not so much.

Straw man much?

Very much.

 

[testarosa]

Why are we on tree beating up Z still?

Does this make sense to any one other than the Bernster?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Unlike our good pal, Sarie, the jurors are all but certain to realize that the EVIDENCE shows that TM was ON TOP of GZ (as the balance of the evidence demonstrates).

They don't even have to be sold on that. If they aren't sure that TM was on top, then that creates reasonable doubt.

 

[Borillar]

Why is the Zimmerman case devided so sharply along partisan lines? With only a very few exceptions the lefties here believe GZ is guilty and the conservatives wait until the trial is over. I couldn't understand why, since GZ isn't white, the lefties were so ready to string him up.

Moments ago, it hit me.

It's only partially about race. True, if TM was white or hispanic, no one would care, but race isn't the real reason they want GZ to fry. It's guns.

GZ defended himself with a gun and a black man is dead. They cannot stand the thought that GZ might have legally used a gun to defend himself. It's about guns, and self-defense and even Stand-Your-Ground.

If GZ is convicted, they can use this case to revive their efforts to take away our rights and that is THE issue.

The left never ever cares about right and wrong, they only care about winning.

Gee, I just had an epiphany too. Most Conservatives had already decided before the trial began that GZ was innocent. Why? First, because concealed carry folks are never ever wrong even when they stalk kids buying skittles. Second, because the dead kid is black, therefore a thug who had it coming.

They can't stand the thought that GZ might have overstepped his bounds and needlessly killed another person. If anybody had a right to stand his ground, it was TM to defend himself against a stalker. Too bad he didn't have a gun, but I doubt you will hear the NRA types saying "if only he had a gun, he could have protected himself".

Maybe the right doesn't care so much about right and wrong either. It's all about winning, no matter the cost.

Let the trial play out.

 

[Ravi]

Straw man much?

heh, you should have asked the OP that question.

I could have, if i had no clue what a straw man is. But I do, so I didn't.

The trial is all about guns and whether we have a right to self defense.

There's the strawman. The trial is about does someone have the right to get out of his car, follow a teen, and kill him with impunity? It is also about the stand your ground law, which should have applied to Martin since he was the one being followed and reported on when he had done nothing wrong.

 

[The Rabbi]

We will have to agree to disagree on GZ. However, I have a great deal of contempt for a prosecutor who charges you with a crime for 5-10 times what he offers you in a plea. Any public defender in the world will tell his client to take that deal, and fear will make the accused take it.

You hit the nail on the head. When they over-charge, they have no respect for what a suspect is going through.

At the same time, I also believe Zimmerman was overcharged since I believe he's only guilty of manslaughter. It'd be nearly impossible to prove murder.

Agree on the over charge. However, I don't think the state has disproven self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. All the same, if they would have offered a plea for reckless discharge of a firearm, you know he would have snatched it up, for the very reasons we have stated.

If I hear one person say the state over charged I'm gonna barf. Self defense is an absolute defense. It wouldn't matter what they charged him with. If he claims he acted in self defense and can show that, he must be acquitted. There is no different burden of proof. He killed Martin. That's admitted. There is no issue there as to whether it was premeditated or whatever. His reason for doing so is SD. In order to counter that the state must show a reasonable person would not be in fear.

 

[Brain357]

Yes it's definitely guns. To me this is an example how things can go really wrong if your carrying a gun. Clearly Martin wasn't doing anything wrong until he was confronted. After that I guess we don't know what happened. If they were fighting after Zimmerman confronted him it seems really wrong that Martin ends up dead. Seems like he was minding his own business and Zimmerman brought about the confrontation. If Martin did attack him I don't think he was going to kill him, should have just been a fight. But instead it's a death thanks to the gun. All that said Zimmerman probably had good intentions that went really bad. Again probably thanks to the gun. So yes the politics is because of the gun.

You're assuming Zimmerman initiated the confrontation. The Evidence doesn't support that.

It's not an assumption. Didn't Zimmerman call the police on Martin who was doing nothing wrong? And didn't he continue to follow him after he was told not to? This confrontation was his fault. Had he minded his own business this wouldn't have happened.

 

[Ravi]

The question is, do they believe Martin deserved to die because he was black? Because they certainly are convinced he deserved to die and they believed that waaaaaaaaay before the trial started.

Thta's bull shit and you know it. Me and most of the conservatives here stated quite clearly that we don't know what happened, we weren't there. We only objected to the lefties who had him convicted without knowing the evidence, without even a trial.

You are lying out of your ass.

lol, your confirmation bias is interesting.

 

[Edgetho]

Could the jury convict? Sure. Do I believe if they do that the conviction is overturned on appeal? Absolutely.

I don't.

I don't think it gets overturned on appeal. No way.

Appeals on evidence don't work, the lower Court must make a mistake for the higher Court to overturn.

Either way, the left is in a no-win situation.

Z gets convicted and they like the racist pigs they are. He gets acquitted and they look like they forced trumped-up charges to be brought and any riots afterwards will be SERIOUSLY frowned on by the American People.

They done painted themselves into a corner. They can't win no matter which way they go

I see multiple reversible errors by the judge and the prosecution in this case. I think they are grounds for reversal upon appeal. I could see an acquittal on appeal regarding the judgment of acquittal request that should have been given, and the manner in which the judge considered it. Put that with refusal for the state to cooperate with discovery. Both of these are reversible decisions based on Florida case law. Take into account that every judge ruling that the defense has appealed to the higher court in this case has been overturned. Plus every appeal that a defense has made based on this judge's decision has been granted.

Sounds to me like you're more than a typical layman.

I defer to your judgement

 

[Esmeralda]

George's FATHER is the one who first identified George as "white Hispanic." It wasn't the media, it was his father. A half black man or woman in the USA is always identified by the media as black. Also by just about everyone in the country. If you are half black in America, you are identified as black.

 

[westwall]

Sheesh..at least KoshrSlut is a girl..and it would be sorta appropriate for her to ask a straight guy for a swallow of his jiz. I've read articles where man juice makes girls happy when ingested.

Are you a girl? ProfessorDickSuck? Or are you a faggot?

Not sure.

I don't care for faggots. So no. You can't swallow my man juice. If you are.

What a stupid post. The problem you have Sallow is you don't know shit about guns and their use. I suggest you do some serious reading about the subject because the only shoe that has dropped is your profound ignorance of the subject.

Quit with the stupid posts and do some basic reading dude.

Read?

I've been around guns since the age of seven.

I know all I need to know.

Point. Shoot. Done.

That's what Zimmerman did and a kid is dead.

As I said, you don't KNOW shit about guns. You have certainly seen a lot of guns used in movies but I doubt you could field strip a bolt action .22 which I learned to do when I was 7.

 

[Ravi]

Why is the Zimmerman case devided so sharply along partisan lines? With only a very few exceptions the lefties here believe GZ is guilty and the conservatives wait until the trial is over. I couldn't understand why, since GZ isn't white, the lefties were so ready to string him up.

Moments ago, it hit me.

It's only partially about race. True, if TM was white or hispanic, no one would care, but race isn't the real reason they want GZ to fry. It's guns.

GZ defended himself with a gun and a black man is dead. They cannot stand the thought that GZ might have legally used a gun to defend himself. It's about guns, and self-defense and even Stand-Your-Ground.

If GZ is convicted, they can use this case to revive their efforts to take away our rights and that is THE issue.

The left never ever cares about right and wrong, they only care about winning.

Gee, I just had an epiphany too. Most Conservatives had already decided before the trial began that GZ was innocent. Why? First, because concealed carry folks are never ever wrong even when they stalk kids buying skittles. Second, because the dead kid is black, therefore a thug who had it coming.

They can't stand the thought that GZ might have overstepped his bounds and needlessly killed another person. If anybody had a right to stand his ground, it was TM to defend himself against a stalker. Too bad he didn't have a gun, but I doubt you will hear the NRA types saying "if only he had a gun, he could have protected himself".

Maybe the right doesn't care so much about right and wrong either. It's all about winning, no matter the cost.

Let the trial play out.

Well stated.