Zimmerman

[jtpr312]

Training was required for everyone in the unit.

Of course, let's not forget, during Katrina, blacks were "looting" while white folks were "Finding supplies".

Lol. Guess you missed ALL the pictures coming out of the area huh? Supplies=food, water other things needed to survive. Looting=jewelry, electronics, furs, leather coats, etc. Pics of whites carrying water, pics of negroes carrying big screen TV's and looting jewelry stores. Face the reality boy.

I saw those pictures, most of them were people taking things they needed to survive.

Not much point taking a big screen during a flood. they aren't water-proof.

Sure you need a new gold and diamond necklace to "survive".



With much of the city flooded by Hurricane Katrina, looters floated garbage cans filled with clothing and jewelry down the street in a dash to grab what they could.

In some cases, looting on Tuesday took place in full view of police and National Guard troops.

Around the corner on Canal Street, the main thoroughfare in the central business district, people sloshed headlong through hip-deep water as looters ripped open the steel gates on the front of several clothing and jewelry stores.

.One man, who had about 10 pairs of jeans draped over his left arm, was asked if he was salvaging things from his store.

“No,” the man shouted, “that’s everybody’s store.”

Looters filled industrial-sized garbage cans with clothing and jewelry and floated them down the street on bits of plywood and insulation as National Guard lumbered by.

Some in the crowd splashed into the waist-deep water like giddy children at the beach.

..Mike Franklin stood on the trolley tracks and watched the spectacle unfold.

“To be honest with you, people who are oppressed all their lives, man, it’s an opportunity to get back at society,” he said.

http://http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9131493/ns/us_news-katrina_the_long_road_back/t/looters-take-advantage-new-orleans-mess/

 

[JoeB131]

Resorting to racism and homophobia... Nice job libtards

Wasn't that your plan in the last election?

 

[jtpr312]

^ angry racist is angry....and has no clue what a fact is.

No doubt that he is a homosexual as well.

Have you met Warrior yet?

You making a pass at me boy? Don't bother, I don't swing your way son. Guess you chose not to try and dispute my facts huh boy?

You wouldn't know a fact if it you stalked it then shot and killed it when it confronted you for being a creeper.

You should look up Warrior, you two would definitely hit it off.

Like I said, your refusal to confront and dispute the facts that I posted prove you have no argument and instead resort to name calling and attempted insults to my masculinity, lol. Typical 7th grade behavior. Don't feel bad though, having a 7th grade mentality makes you somwhere in the top 5% of your race, so good job boy.

 

[WorldWatcher]

And THC was found in Martins blood, urine and organs. A regular twisty freak.

Read the report and compare the measured amount with the half-life of THC in the system. You'll find that it was equivalant to having a beer with breakfast 12-hours before.

I've never known someone that smoked pot and had a munchie attack 12-hours later.

The fact that a teenager smoked pot at some point in the past is irrelevant to the events of that night.


Now I'm sure the prosecution would love to bring up past events before the Jury. If the defense opened that door then the prosecution could bring up things like Zimmerman's assaulting a police officer in the performance of his duties and testimony from a previous employer who fired Zimmerman for unjustified violence against party guests when working as a bouncer.

>>>>

so it's fine to vilify one of the participants but not the other?

do I have that correct?

Nope, neither should be "vilified".

What should be brought before the jury are only things relevant to the night in question.

I don't see how Martin being suspended for an empty baggie which chemically tested positive or a trace amount of THC in the autopsy report (indicative of use at a minimum 10-12 or even days prior) has on the night in question.

I also don't see Zimmerman having a violent nature (assault of a police officer, fired for assaulting a client, restraining order) years before has any real bearing on the night in question.


But if the defense were to try to "vilify" Martin (who since he's the one who is dead, could really backfire on them), then I have no problem with the prosecution being able to bring up Zimmerman's violent past.

Personally, I think the Judge should exclude both and stick to things that are relevant to that night. Because if Zimmerman's violent past comes in it is much more damaging to his case then a 17 year old that occasionally smoked a little weed.


>>>>

 

[Article 15]

Never left boy. You can either dispute the facts I stated, or piss off.

^ angry racist is angry....and has no clue what a fact is.

No doubt that he is a homosexual as well.

Have you met Warrior yet?

Ya have to resort to racism & homophobia..... You lose!

He is making up his own "facts" and his racist agenda is his obvious motivator.

I'm treating him exactly exactly how he deserves to be treated.

Morons like this need to mocked and ridiculed...not taken seriously.

 

[Article 15]

You making a pass at me boy? Don't bother, I don't swing your way son. Guess you chose not to try and dispute my facts huh boy?

You wouldn't know a fact if it you stalked it then shot and killed it when it confronted you for being a creeper.

You should look up Warrior, you two would definitely hit it off.

Like I said, your refusal to confront and dispute the facts that I posted prove you have no argument and instead resort to name calling and attempted insults to my masculinity, lol. Typical 7th grade behavior. Don't feel bad though, having a 7th grade mentality makes you somwhere in the top 5% of your race, so good job boy.

Don't mistake no argument with not engaging the obvious racist in any kind of serious discussion.

BTW what race am I, Clevon?

 

[JoeB131]

BTW what race am I, Clevon?

Shhhh... he really thinks you're teenage Eric Holder.

 

[Gadawg73]

Read the report and compare the measured amount with the half-life of THC in the system. You'll find that it was equivalant to having a beer with breakfast 12-hours before.

I've never known someone that smoked pot and had a munchie attack 12-hours later.

The fact that a teenager smoked pot at some point in the past is irrelevant to the events of that night.


Now I'm sure the prosecution would love to bring up past events before the Jury. If the defense opened that door then the prosecution could bring up things like Zimmerman's assaulting a police officer in the performance of his duties and testimony from a previous employer who fired Zimmerman for unjustified violence against party guests when working as a bouncer.

>>>>

so it's fine to vilify one of the participants but not the other?

do I have that correct?

Nope, neither should be "vilified".

What should be brought before the jury are only things relevant to the night in question.

I don't see how Martin being suspended for an empty baggie which chemically tested positive or a trace amount of THC in the autopsy report (indicative of use at a minimum 10-12 or even days prior) has on the night in question.

I also don't see Zimmerman having a violent nature (assault of a police officer, fired for assaulting a client, restraining order) years before has any real bearing on the night in question.


But if the defense were to try to "vilify" Martin (who since he's the one who is dead, could really backfire on them), then I have no problem with the prosecution being able to bring up Zimmerman's violent past.

Personally, I think the Judge should exclude both and stick to things that are relevant to that night. Because if Zimmerman's violent past comes in it is much more damaging to his case then a 17 year old that occasionally smoked a little weed.


>>>>

Both sides will file motions in limine which are motions to exclude those line of questions before trial.
Add in the witness lists both sides pretty much know what they can and can not do long before the trial. Only witnesses that can be called other than those witnesses on each list are witnesses to that are rebuttal witnesess.
And I believe you are right on it as the Judge has plenty of case law to exclude irrelevant facts that had no bearing on any motive or actions that day.

 

[Gadawg73]

The prosecution has to turn over their entire case file to the defense long before trial.
The defense has to clarify to the prosecution exactly what their defense is and specifically if it is self defense in the stand your ground defense.
Along with the witness lists there will be nothing new to either side from the start.
Not like the CSI shows you folks are used to watching where a murder case is solved in one hour, tried in court and a verdict is reached. Loved Perry Mason years ago but that show was the furthest from fact any legal show ever could be.

 

[Gadawg73]

And THC was found in Martins blood, urine and organs. A regular twisty freak.
He had just returned from getting his munchies as he was stoned when he went to the store.
Slam dunk civil case and I hope the family takes policy limits.
And I would most likely convict on what the crime was, involuntary manslaughter which is 20 feet over the heads of most here. They could care less about the law, they want mob rule.
This is not a murder case as there was no intent to murder.
WELL DUH.

The amount found was low, very low, and could have been from getting stoned weeks before he was murdered.

You are constantly spewing lies, and you have been since this happened. You pass yourself off as an expert but in reality you are a hysterical idiot that identifies with someone that killed an unarmed kid and justify it by claiming the kid was stoned.

Like I said before, ANYONE that hires you as an expert is an idiot and should be warned.

Who determined it was "low".
Are you a forensic pathologist?
What is low and what is high THC content in a 17 year old's body?
He had it in his damn urine.
Anyone with any knowledge of forensic toxicology knows that is CURRENT USE.

 

[Gadawg73]

you either

My mind is not made up. I would consider all options.
But look at his face. Take a good look. Trayvon Martin attacked him.
What does that mean to you?

How are you deciding this? He could have tripped and went face first into the cement, for all you know. He could have attacked Martin, who took him down face first into the cement, for all you know.

NEVER said Martin attacked him FIRST.
Zimmerman could have attacked him first.
But sports fans, Zimmerman had the gun NOT IN HIS HANDS, he pulled it out from somewhere when he was on the ground.
Again, DO NOT KNOW WHO hit who first.

 

[Gadawg73]

Everyone here that believes Z is innocent until proven guilty is a racist.
Anyone that offers their 30+ years expertise working criminal defense cases hates children.
Anyone that wants a fair trial for Z and if he is found guilty is nuts because they want the Feds to then come in and try him again. Double jeopardy?, to hell with the Constitution.
Mob rule is gaining support in America. Let the media decide what is evidence and what is not and get the rope because "a child" was killed and someone must pay.

 

[squeeze berry]

Resorting to racism and homophobia... Nice job libtards

Wasn't that your plan in the last election?

I think it was yours as well as anti-mormon bigotry

 

[WorldWatcher]

And THC was found in Martins blood, urine and organs. A regular twisty freak.
He had just returned from getting his munchies as he was stoned when he went to the store.
Slam dunk civil case and I hope the family takes policy limits.
And I would most likely convict on what the crime was, involuntary manslaughter which is 20 feet over the heads of most here. They could care less about the law, they want mob rule.
This is not a murder case as there was no intent to murder.
WELL DUH.

The amount found was low, very low, and could have been from getting stoned weeks before he was murdered.

You are constantly spewing lies, and you have been since this happened. You pass yourself off as an expert but in reality you are a hysterical idiot that identifies with someone that killed an unarmed kid and justify it by claiming the kid was stoned.

Like I said before, ANYONE that hires you as an expert is an idiot and should be warned.

Who determined it was "low".
Are you a forensic pathologist?
What is low and what is high THC content in a 17 year old's body?
He had it in his damn urine.
Anyone with any knowledge of forensic toxicology knows that is CURRENT USE.

1. The Medical Examiner report shows 1.5 nanograms/millileter of THC, that is a trace amount.

2. Based on the half-life of THC, that indicates an equivalent to 1 joint 10-12 hours prior.

3. Sorry, when I active duty we did random drug testing and routinely kicked people out for smoking pot based on urine sample when the intake had been weeks before. The mere presence of THC in the sample does not mean that Martin was high at the time of incident.


>>>>

 

[Ravi]

And THC was found in Martins blood, urine and organs. A regular twisty freak.
He had just returned from getting his munchies as he was stoned when he went to the store.
Slam dunk civil case and I hope the family takes policy limits.
And I would most likely convict on what the crime was, involuntary manslaughter which is 20 feet over the heads of most here. They could care less about the law, they want mob rule.
This is not a murder case as there was no intent to murder.
WELL DUH.

The amount found was low, very low, and could have been from getting stoned weeks before he was murdered.

You are constantly spewing lies, and you have been since this happened. You pass yourself off as an expert but in reality you are a hysterical idiot that identifies with someone that killed an unarmed kid and justify it by claiming the kid was stoned.

Like I said before, ANYONE that hires you as an expert is an idiot and should be warned.

Who determined it was "low".
Are you a forensic pathologist?
What is low and what is high THC content in a 17 year old's body?
He had it in his damn urine.
Anyone with any knowledge of forensic toxicology knows that is CURRENT USE.

You haven't read any of the documents released have you? You just keep believing what you want to believe and making things up to fit your viewpoint because you're an idiot.

Read the fucking documents, moron.

 

[Article 15]

And THC was found in Martins blood, urine and organs. A regular twisty freak.
He had just returned from getting his munchies as he was stoned when he went to the store.
Slam dunk civil case and I hope the family takes policy limits.
And I would most likely convict on what the crime was, involuntary manslaughter which is 20 feet over the heads of most here. They could care less about the law, they want mob rule.
This is not a murder case as there was no intent to murder.
WELL DUH.

The amount found was low, very low, and could have been from getting stoned weeks before he was murdered.

You are constantly spewing lies, and you have been since this happened. You pass yourself off as an expert but in reality you are a hysterical idiot that identifies with someone that killed an unarmed kid and justify it by claiming the kid was stoned.

Like I said before, ANYONE that hires you as an expert is an idiot and should be warned.

Who determined it was "low".
Are you a forensic pathologist?
What is low and what is high THC content in a 17 year old's body?
He had it in his damn urine.
Anyone with any knowledge of forensic toxicology knows that is CURRENT USE.

You don't know what the hell you are talking about.

THC can be found in your urine 2-4 weeks after smoking.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The amount found was low, very low, and could have been from getting stoned weeks before he was murdered.

You are constantly spewing lies, and you have been since this happened. You pass yourself off as an expert but in reality you are a hysterical idiot that identifies with someone that killed an unarmed kid and justify it by claiming the kid was stoned.

Like I said before, ANYONE that hires you as an expert is an idiot and should be warned.

Who determined it was "low".
Are you a forensic pathologist?
What is low and what is high THC content in a 17 year old's body?
He had it in his damn urine.
Anyone with any knowledge of forensic toxicology knows that is CURRENT USE.

You don't know what the hell you are talking about.

THC can be found in your urine 2-4 weeks after smoking.

Actually the Medical Examiners toxicology levels was based on a blood sample. As THC is absorbed into the system it is converted to THC-COOC which is retained in fatty cells and slowly released back into the blood resulting in its presence in a persons urine weeks ofter the last intake.

Now we commonly refer to someone testing positive for THC in a urine sample, but actually they are testing positive for the presence of TCH-COOC.



OK, there is your little factoid for the day.


>>>>

 

[Dick Tuck]

View attachment 22890

New ball game.

No it's not unless you are part of the crowd who thinks that the person who started it and got their ass kicked is the "victim".

So ignorant, even when the facts are out your choose to ignore them! Typical liberal!

Why are you looking for more ways to murder inocent people, who happen to be black?

 

[Meathead]

No it's not unless you are part of the crowd who thinks that the person who started it and got their ass kicked is the "victim".

So ignorant, even when the facts are out your choose to ignore them! Typical liberal!

Why are you looking for more ways to murder inocent people, who happen to be black?

I don't know why anyone would. Blacks seem more than capable of murdering each other.

 

[Article 15]

Who determined it was "low".
Are you a forensic pathologist?
What is low and what is high THC content in a 17 year old's body?
He had it in his damn urine.
Anyone with any knowledge of forensic toxicology knows that is CURRENT USE.

You don't know what the hell you are talking about.

THC can be found in your urine 2-4 weeks after smoking.

Actually the Medical Examiners toxicology levels was based on a blood sample. As THC is absorbed into the system it is converted to THC-COOC which is retained in fatty cells and slowly released back into the blood resulting in its presence in a persons urine weeks ofter the last intake.

Now we commonly refer to someone testing positive for THC in a urine sample, but actually they are testing positive for the presence of TCH-COOC.



OK, there is your little factoid for the day.


>>>>

I did not know that. TY, Chief!