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.
WTF? Child Abuse???

Ayup, this is the part of the movie where the guy says, yeah he may be innocent based on self defense, but Trayvon was a kid, big kid but a kid nonetheless and our job as citizens is to protect our kids not shoot them in self defense.
Ayup

I hope she lets it in. It's so stupid only a moron would applaud this . Now we know why the texts were fought so hard
 
Last edited:
WTF? Child Abuse???

Ayup, this is the part of the movie where the guy says, yeah he may be innocent based on self defense, but Trayvon was a kid, big kid but a kid nonetheless and our job as citizens is to protect our kids not shoot them in self defense.

Whatever the hell that means.

It means kids can beat the carp out of you, and if you strike them back you go to jail. Welcome to the moonbatery that is zero tolerance.
 
The judge is going overboard in trying to fix a conviction for something. She knows that the prosecution failed to prove up their case she's trying to help.
 
Asking the judge to add charges AFTER the defense rest...it's unAmerican

Not adding charges, consider a lesser charge.
And MOST times it is THE DEFENSE that does this.
Standard procedure done in most all criminal cases, especially murder cases.
Media is making this appear to be something unusual for ratings.
Imagine that, media distorting, slanting and twisting the facts.

Yup. I'd bet if I look through this thread I'd see several posters pointing out the same thing, but when people are determined to see "bias" then that's what they'll see.
 
WTF? Child Abuse???

Ayup, this is the part of the movie where the guy says, yeah he may be innocent based on self defense, but Trayvon was a kid, big kid but a kid nonetheless and our job as citizens is to protect our kids not shoot them in self defense.
Ayup

I hope she lets it in. It's so stupid only a moron would applaud this . Now we know why the texts were fought so hard

Zero tolerance.

What if, arguendo, TM was 12, 11, 10, 9? At what point does self defense fall and child abuse begin?
 
Yes, you believe the guy who shot dead a minor. You believe that Martin first runs away and then runs back. You believe that Martin who had no history of violence just attacked Zimmerman and was going to beat him to death on the street. So basically your going to believe the adult with the gun who shot dead the minor regardless of anything else. So it seems clear that people are picking sides based on political reasons only.

From the right I think many people are supporting Zimmerman because he is a concealed carry guy. If he gets in trouble it makes them all look bad. After all they talk all the time about how much safer it is when everyone carries guns. But this seems to be a good case where having a gun ends in disaster. I also think some on the right look at Martin and have just decided he wasn't good so it's ok what happened. I think it's a bit of racism.

From the left people do support Martin because he was black. There are those who try to find racism in everything to stay relevant. But others do want to prove that carrying a gun is not safe. So if Zimmerman goes to jail they can claim a win for gun control.

I think this is a tragedy. Zimmerman probably had the right intentions and things went bad. Martin wasn't doing anything wrong, but is now dead. No winners in this one.

I believe what the evidence suggests. The evidence suggests that ZImmerman's story is, generally speaking, the true account of what happened. I see little to no evidence to suggest the opposite. I dont care what color or what political persuasion anyone is. I care about facts and the law.

You have no reason to believe what you do other than "Zimmerman shot a child to death." It is clear that is not the case. Martin was hardly a child. He was over 6 feet tall. Zimmerman was reasonably in fear of his life, as evidenced by his injuries and the neighbor's testimony. It is established in court that Martin was on top of Zimmerman. That makes Zimmerman's act an act of self defense and the killing a justifiable killing.
If you have some evidence other than "Zimmerman is a cop wannabe" or "Zimmerman shot an unarmed man" then bring it. OTherwise stfu and get out of this discussion.

Yes as long as we have a statement from the killer I guess all is settled. We should probably just always take the word of the killer and not waste time with trials. You are very wise.

So again I guess you ignore that Martin had no history of violent crime and blindly believe his first violent crime was going to be beating Zimmerman to death on the street.

Martin was 17, so that makes him a minor. Zimmerman is an adult. Zimmerman did shoot Martin dead. These are facts.

From what I have read who was on top is in question. We also don't know for sure who was screaming for help.

What we know is that Martin was coming back from the store and had every right to be there. Zimmerman followed him and a confrontation took place. Martin the minor ends up shot. Now I certainly don't know what happened, but I'm not going to believe everything the killer says blindly. That would just be dumb.

So again I guess you ignore that Martin had no history of violent crime and blindly believe his first violent crime was going to be beating Zimmerman to death on the street.

Also his last violent crime.
 
He's not a man, he's a weasel. A man wouldn't try shit like this.

pathetic. surely there are strong grounds for future appeals.

the whole process is tainted.

yes, I fear the legal system.

If Mope allows this, defense should demand a mistrial since they never had a chance to defend against child abuse charges.

are these the worst prosecutors ever?

I think so.

I avoided news of this trial until it started--not easy--I knew it would be a time bomb. At any rate--I didn't know the background--Special Prosecutor pushed for it. Someone said the prosecutors are probably just throwing everything at the wall.
Not just. imo.
 
Re DD:

Are you freaking kidding me? She lies and it's everyone else's fault. Oh looky! Al's back!

MSNBC's Al Sharpton spoke today with Rod Vereen, the attorney representing Rachel Jeantel, a key witness for the state in the murder trial of George Zimmerman. Sharpton noted how the defense attorneys went out of their way to discredit her testimony, and brought up some of the vicious attacks on Jeantel during and following her two days in the courtroom. Immediately following the interview, Sharpton condemned the attacks on her that "have been nothing short of offensive to any American.Vereen explained that because Jeantel is still under subpoena, she cannot talk to anyone about her testimony, but said that "her body language tells me that she's happy that it's over with." Sharpton brought up how the defense "tried to discredit Rachel" by grilling her about initially lying over why she didn't attend Trayvon Martin's funeral. Sharpton found her explanation, that she felt guilty about being the last person who spoke to him before he died, "pretty reasonable to me.Vereen explained his client never wanted to be dragged into the spotlight over this, but now the credibility of a teenage girl has become the topic of national discussion. Sharpton asked Vereen if Jeantel is aware of the attacks on her in the media and online. Vereen said he recommended she avoid social media, because if she's called back to testify, the negative criticism could influence her. He also slammed the media for nitpicking her "stumbling," saying that witnesses will always have "inconsistencies in statements," but that does not always mean they're lying.Sharpton concluded the segment with a swift condemnation of the attacks on Jeantel's character.The attacks that I've heard on Rachel Jeantel have been nothing short of offensive to any American that wants to see young people... to do the right thing and come forward. No matter what happens in this trial, if people come forward, they ought not be ridiculed. They ought not be in any way given the kind of treatment that this young lady was given... To castigate her, to characterize her, to stereotype her, and use all kind of attacks, I think, is something that does an injustice to the criminal justice system."

Al Sharpton Talks With Rachel Jeantel's Lawyer,Condemns 'Offensive' Stereotyping Of Her In The Media - YouTube


The funeral thing was a bit of a stretch, after all if Florida had Early Funeraling or Absentee Funeraling, DD probably been able to participate.

I think I made up a new word.
 
Re DD:

Are you freaking kidding me? She lies and it's everyone else's fault. Oh looky! Al's back!

MSNBC's Al Sharpton spoke today with Rod Vereen, the attorney representing Rachel Jeantel, a key witness for the state in the murder trial of George Zimmerman. Sharpton noted how the defense attorneys went out of their way to discredit her testimony, and brought up some of the vicious attacks on Jeantel during and following her two days in the courtroom. Immediately following the interview, Sharpton condemned the attacks on her that "have been nothing short of offensive to any American.Vereen explained that because Jeantel is still under subpoena, she cannot talk to anyone about her testimony, but said that "her body language tells me that she's happy that it's over with." Sharpton brought up how the defense "tried to discredit Rachel" by grilling her about initially lying over why she didn't attend Trayvon Martin's funeral. Sharpton found her explanation, that she felt guilty about being the last person who spoke to him before he died, "pretty reasonable to me.Vereen explained his client never wanted to be dragged into the spotlight over this, but now the credibility of a teenage girl has become the topic of national discussion. Sharpton asked Vereen if Jeantel is aware of the attacks on her in the media and online. Vereen said he recommended she avoid social media, because if she's called back to testify, the negative criticism could influence her. He also slammed the media for nitpicking her "stumbling," saying that witnesses will always have "inconsistencies in statements," but that does not always mean they're lying.Sharpton concluded the segment with a swift condemnation of the attacks on Jeantel's character.The attacks that I've heard on Rachel Jeantel have been nothing short of offensive to any American that wants to see young people... to do the right thing and come forward. No matter what happens in this trial, if people come forward, they ought not be ridiculed. They ought not be in any way given the kind of treatment that this young lady was given... To castigate her, to characterize her, to stereotype her, and use all kind of attacks, I think, is something that does an injustice to the criminal justice system."

Al Sharpton Talks With Rachel Jeantel's Lawyer,Condemns 'Offensive' Stereotyping Of Her In The Media - YouTube


The funeral thing was a bit of a stretch, after all if Florida had Early Funeraling or Absentee Funeraling, DD probably been able to participate.

I think I made up a new word.

quick! Trademark it!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top