 sj |
||
|
||
BS: George Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 30 May 13 - 11:50 AM "ORLANDO, Fla. -- A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin's cellphone has been placed on administrative leave after an attorney testified that prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense, an attorney said Wednesday. Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren't turned over. Kruidbos was placed on leave shortly after White testified during a hearing in George Zimmerman's second-degree murder case on Tuesday. White said Kruidbos was interviewed by state attorney investigators twice before the action was taken. White said he wasn't surprised of possible evidence violations by Zimmerman prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda. "I was saddened by it, but I'm not surprised," he said. White first learned about the evidence through Kruidbos more than a month ago, he said. Phone and email messages left at the office of Fourth Judicial Circuit State Attorney Angela Corey were not immediately returned. Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder in 17-year-old Martin's killing and has pleaded not guilty, saying he acted in self-defense. Circuit Judge Debra Nelson has denied a defense motion to delay the trial, which scheduled to begin on June 10. White led the Nassau County state attorney's office before resigning in December, citing differences of opinion with Corey. He is now in private practice. White said the photos Kruidbos retrieved were of a hand holding a gun and one depicted drugs. The content of the text messages wasn't specified. "I'm an officer of the court and I'm obliged to inform the court of any misconduct or any potential misconduct coming before the court. Whether it's by the defense or prosecution," White said. The defense released photos of a gun, marijuana plant and Martin's text messages publicly, saying that if prosecutors planned to paint Zimmerman as the aggressor and Martin as the innocent bystander, they wanted the information to defend him. Attorneys won't be able to mention the teen's drug use, suspension from school and past fighting during opening statements at the trial, Nelson ruled Tuesday. Nelson has set a full hearing on the turning over of evidence for next week. Defense attorney Mark O'Mara has previously brought a handful of motions alleging that the state attorney's office had been slow to turn over other evidence. White said his disclosure to the defense isn't sparked by any animosity toward his former employer." Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/29/3422519/lawyer-zimmerman-prosecutor-withheld.html#storylink=cpy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Charmion Date: 31 May 13 - 07:41 AM If I understand correctly the decsion of the judge in this matter, the contents of the victim's cellphone (the photos and text messages in question) are irrelevant because the accused claims that it was the victim's behaviour *in the moments before the fatal shots were fired* that led him to fear for his life. The accused could not have known what photos and texts were on the victim's cellphone at that time, so those materials could not have influenced his interpretation of the victim's behaviour. The judge's decision to exclude the photos and texts makes the ex-employee's act worse than a breach of discipline; it amounts to contempt of court, definitely a firing offence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 May 13 - 07:54 AM More than contempt of court- The problem is that the LAW requires the prosecution to provide ALL the evidence to the Defense- IN ALL CASES. Just because "everyone" has already decided the outcome of the trial does NOT excuse this obvious violation of the defendant's rights. Regardless of whether the evidence is relevant, it MUST be made available to the defense. The relevance is for the JUDGE to decide, and the defense has the right to appeal if it thinks otherwise. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 31 May 13 - 08:13 AM Huffington Post. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 May 13 - 08:26 AM THAT was out over a year ago. By THIS illegal attempt to withhold evidence from the defense, the entire case might be thrown out, and NO trail to determine the facts would occur. Is that to be preferred???? Regardless of one's opinion of the shooting, it deserves to be tried in a fair, legal fashion, without opening up unwarranted areas for appeals or declarations of mistrial |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 31 May 13 - 08:55 AM and then hang him. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 May 13 - 09:01 AM You and the Red Queen.... Hang him FIRST, THEN have the trial. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 31 May 13 - 09:30 AM He has the right to a fair hearing. I just hope this racist, wannabe cop doesn't walk on a technicality. On that first 911 tape it's pretty obvious he was itching to mete out some justice to an "asshole" in a hoodie. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 May 13 - 09:35 AM It is actions such as this, violating his rights, that WILL lead to those "technicalities" EVERYONE should agree that the trial needs to be fair and legal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 31 May 13 - 11:10 AM Sounds like the defense wants to blame the victim. Same old story. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 May 13 - 11:14 AM So that makes it OK to violate the law? IS THAT THE LIBERAL VIEWPOINT???? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 31 May 13 - 11:54 AM It ain't this liberal's viewpoint. As you noted earlier, if there are technicalities like this one popping up then he will get off. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 May 13 - 11:56 AM Thank you, Guest. I had assumed that there were some intelligent people here that could see the obvious, but was beginning to wonder. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 May 13 - 12:35 PM Zimmerman sees Martin... Zimmerman calls police... Police tell Zimmerman to remain in his vehicle... Zimmerman disobeys police order... Zimmerman kills Martin... That's the case... Not pictures in Martin's cell phone... What Zimmerman's attorney is trying to do is equivalent to blaming a rape victim for the way she looked... This defense is shameful, immoral and should backfire on Zimmerman... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 May 13 - 12:39 PM So, Bobert, YOU think that it is ok to violate the law when YOU think someone is guilty? YOU want to have him get odd because that law was violated? THAT is what this thread is about- NOT his innocence or guilt, but the illegal actions of those, like you , that have decided it does not matter if he gets a fair or legal trial. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 May 13 - 12:53 PM You're getting overexcited again, Beardy, and somewhat incoherent as a result. Also not good for your blood pressure, you know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 31 May 13 - 12:56 PM "Nelson has set a full hearing on the turning over of evidence for next week." Seems to me we should wait for the ruling from this hearing before we decide if any laws were violated, don't you think? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 May 13 - 01:08 PM It is NOT important whether the evidence is permitted or not- THE FACT THAT IT WAS WITHHELD FROM THE DEFENSE is the legal point here. The Judge can certainly disallow this evidence- BUT IT STILL HAS TO BE AVAILABLE TO THE DEFENSE, even if it is NOT allowed at the trial. The Prosecution is NOT allowed to decide what it turns over. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 31 May 13 - 01:28 PM Nobody thinks this guy shouldn't get a fair trial. Furthermore, if he gets off on a technicality, so be it. Despite some obvious exceptions, I have a great deal of faith in the jury system. However, I don't see the purpose of the thread, unless it was to irritate those of us who see a good deal of bigotry in our law enforcement and politics in this country and are sick and tired of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 31 May 13 - 01:35 PM It is NOT important whether the evidence is permitted or not- THE FACT THAT IT WAS WITHHELD FROM THE DEFENSE is the legal point here. The Judge can certainly disallow this evidence- BUT IT STILL HAS TO BE AVAILABLE TO THE DEFENSE, even if it is NOT allowed at the trial. The Prosecution is NOT allowed to decide what it turns over. Is it not possible that the judge will determine that this particular 'evidence' was not germaine to the case and was therefore not something that needed to be turned over to the defense? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 May 13 - 01:37 PM "Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren't turned over. White said he wasn't surprised of possible evidence violations by Zimmerman prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda. "I was saddened by it, but I'm not surprised," he said. .... "I'm an officer of the court and I'm obliged to inform the court of any misconduct or any potential misconduct coming before the court. Whether it's by the defense or prosecution," White said. We have an example of an honest man ( the former prosecutor) seeing a potential miscarraige of justice ( if Zimmerman is let off because of the actions taken by the prosecution), and most in this thread turn around and jump on the defendant. If THAT is an example of the " faith in the jury system" then maybe some need to be irritated. Why not just string him up from the nearest tree, since Bobert has already declared him guilty, and sees no need for the law to be followed in this case? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 May 13 - 01:39 PM KB, That is what JUDGES do, NOT the prosecutors. If YOU were in court, would YOU want the prosecutor to be able to withhold evidence that YOU DON'T KNOW about, and NOT have a judge rule on it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 31 May 13 - 01:46 PM "Nelson has set a full hearing on the turning over of evidence for next week." I post the above again as a reference. I will wait to see what the judge has to say in the hearing before deciding what really happened here. You see, I do have some faith in the system and am willing to let it play out. Does the system always work? Of course not, I am just not ready to assume that in this case it has already failed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 May 13 - 01:50 PM My concern is that it is OK for it to fail, in the posts of so many here that I would not trust to remain out of a lynch mob. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 31 May 13 - 02:14 PM 'The Judge can certainly disallow this evidence- BUT IT STILL HAS TO BE AVAILABLE TO THE DEFENSE, even if it is NOT allowed at the trial. The Prosecution is NOT allowed to decide what it turns over.' Bingo, BB. An' that's the truth! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 31 May 13 - 02:17 PM 'The Judge can certainly disallow this evidence- BUT IT STILL HAS TO BE AVAILABLE TO THE DEFENSE, even if it is NOT allowed at the trial. The Prosecution is NOT allowed to decide what it turns over.' Bingo, BB. An' that's the truth! Again, I will let the judge be the judge of that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Futwick Date: 31 May 13 - 02:22 PM What is the point of this? It will go to trial soon enough and a judge can decide what's what. This thread seems to me to be nothing than stupid trolling. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 31 May 13 - 02:40 PM I'm with Bruce on this. Withholding evidence is unethical and unfair, whether done by the defense, the prosecution, the police or whoever. I've been on the receiving end of such unethical treament in the past, and I won't soon forget it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 31 May 13 - 02:54 PM Trolled again, damn it. Is this the same individual using different names? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Futwick Date: 31 May 13 - 03:20 PM I guess people can't read. IT IS NOT FOR US TO DECIDE THIS. THE CASE IS GOING TO TRIAL AND GODDAMN JUDGE WILL DECIDE ON THIS CASE. TAKE IT UP WITH HIM!! Are we clear now? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 May 13 - 03:21 PM However, I don't see the purpose of the thread, There is none. Beardy doesn't have to have a purpose to post nonsensical crap ad nauseum. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 31 May 13 - 03:29 PM I hear you Fut, but the real trial is the one that BB is conducting on all us liberal hypocrites. Basically it's the same show trial he conducts on most threads. He assigns us all one opinion and then tries to convict us all for it. He only has middling prosecutorial skills but can cut and paste blindfolded. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 31 May 13 - 03:31 PM ". . . GODDAMN JUDGE WILL DECIDE ON THIS CASE. TAKE IT UP WITH HIM!!" What if it ends up being a female judge? Huh? HUH? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 May 13 - 03:34 PM BLINDFOLDED? Hell, he can cut and paste mountains of bullshit IN HIS SLEEP! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 31 May 13 - 03:40 PM In this instance he's right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 May 13 - 07:19 PM Lets do a little review... Zimmerman sees Martin and calls police... Police dispatcher tells Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle and that real cops were on the way... Zimmerman disobeys police and gets out of vehicle with a gun... Zimmerman kills Martin... That's the case here, folks... What pictures are/were on Martin's phone have nothing to do with the facts... Seems that Zimmerman's lawyer is trying to use a defense that if it were a rape the victim would be blames for looking good... This is a very distasteful defense... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 31 May 13 - 08:07 PM Bobert, you've got me all confused, now! I thought it was the prosecution withholding this evidence 'cos they didn't want the defense to even know about it. Am I wrong on this? Thing is, if it's not right to withhold evidence, it's not right to withhold evidence - regardless of whether you think it will help a scumbag/hurt a victim (or vice versa). Whether that evidence is allowed in to be heard during the trial is a separate issue entirely and - as has been pointed out - up to the judge. Similarly, Nazis (in the US) have the right to freedom of speech, however distasteful I consider what they say (my background is Jewish). I'm a liberal leftie, but we can't have one set of rules for those we like/approve of and another for those we don't. I'm also one of those who think that Zimmerman sounds like a sleazebag and was clearly not justified in what he did - but that still does not justify the prosecution withholding evidence that they're afraid might help his defense. Just sayin'... :7) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 May 13 - 08:11 PM What I am getting out of this is that Zimmerman's lawyer wants to use photographs on Martin's phone as evidence from before the incident that Martin deserved to be murdered... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 31 May 13 - 09:14 PM "BY KYLE HIGHTOWER ASSOCIATED PRESS ORLANDO, Fla. -- A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin's cellphone has been placed on administrative leave after an attorney testified that prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense, an attorney said Wednesday. Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren't turned over. Kruidbos was placed on leave shortly after White testified during a hearing in George Zimmerman's second-degree murder case on Tuesday. White said Kruidbos was interviewed by state attorney investigators twice before the action was taken. White said he wasn't surprised of possible evidence violations by Zimmerman prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda." Part of the article BB was getting the info from. Read the article at http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/29/3422519/lawyer-zimmerman-prosecutor-withheld.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 31 May 13 - 09:21 PM What an incomprehensible report. What kind of people do the Miami Herald employ to make such a dog's dinner of it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 31 May 13 - 09:21 PM What an incomprehensible report. What kind of people do the Miami Herald employ to make such a dog's dinner of it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 May 13 - 09:48 PM This is a sideshow that Zimmerman's attorney is using to lay a big old smoke screen over the trial... O.J. who??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,TIA Date: 01 Jun 13 - 08:39 PM Bobert has explained it in terms that anyone can understand. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 01 Jun 13 - 08:56 PM Thank you, TIA... The last 20 years of my working life when I was in business for myself I had to represent my company in court at least a couple dozen times and had a reputation of destroying local attorneys in court... I never lost a case... No brag, just fact... The law is pretty simple... The way that attorneys practice it ain't... But when you just strip off all the shit they pile on then you win... Zimmerman's attorney is piling on truckload after truckload of shit... Prosecution should be able to shovel all the shit off the facts... All depends on the judge... If the judge is some Southern racist, he or she will allow Zimmerman's attorney to put Martin's prior pics from his cell phone into evidence... If he isn't a racist then he'll disallow... Pretty simple stuff here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 01 Jun 13 - 10:39 PM Good Christ. The prosecution is not allowed to keep any information it hopes to use from the defense. That's the law. It was instituted to prevent just such happening. You all are entitled to your respective opinions, but you are NOT entitled to interpret law in anyway that harms the accused. That's it, that's all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 02 Jun 13 - 12:22 AM "What I am getting out of this is that Zimmerman's lawyer wants to use photographs on Martin's phone as evidence from before the incident that Martin deserved to be murdered..." Bobert, I agree with you that Zimmerman's defense should not be allowed to use that information. The judge in the case should not allow it. BUT... look at it this way: who do you think should be in charge of whether evidence is allowable in court or not: people like the prosecution and defense - who have a definite interest in wanting the case to go a certain way - or the judge, who is at least supposed to be impartial? If you want the judge to have this power, then he must be aware of all the evidence, and both defense and prosecution must make whatever evidence they have available to the court. If you don't require both defense & prosecution to turn over all their evidence, then you are leaving the decision in their extremely partial hands (now there's an interesting image!) - and they are much less likely to be impartial than the judge. For example: if you, Bobert, have been charged with running over some poor kittycat, and the prosecution find photos on the kitty's cellphone showing you playing happily with said kitty, do you want them to be the ones who get to decide whether that information is/is not "relevant" enough to be included in the information presented in the trial? Or would you rather have the judge make that call? I have personal experience of police and prosecution working together to withhold evidence (even though that is illegal) which would have proved I was innocent, and I can tell you that letting one side or the other control what evidence comes to light is not the way to go. Make both sides reveal everything they know, and let a (hopefully impartial) judge decide what the jury gets to hear. (Of course, if the judge is not impartial, then there's very little hope for anything resembling a fair trial, but that's not the issue under discussion here...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 02 Jun 13 - 06:27 AM Sorry Bobert, but on this one I have to agree with Yorkshire Yankee. If the rule says all evidence known to the prosecution must also be known to the defence, then that is what should happen. I am inclined to think that the rule itself is wrong, but, umtil it is revoked it must be obeyed. The judge will have the final word and will be aware of the likely effect on a jury, so the decision will be based on his assessment of that effect. He will, if honest, rule it inadmissible, on the basis that Trayvon Martin is not on trial. If US law is anything like UK law, the prosecution will not be allowed to evince evidence of Zimmerman's previous record until and unless a guilty verdict is returned. Therefore it would be unfair to allow Martin's character to be blackened by the defence, using evidence outwith the scope of the incident being tried. Still, the bottom line is, the prosecution were out of order in failing to pass on that evidence. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 02 Jun 13 - 09:32 AM This all boils down to what is "evidence"... Let's say that Sallie got pregnant in high school by one of the football players and ended up getting an abortion... Ten years later she is raped by someone else... Should the high school incident be admissible "evidence" that she deserved to be raped??? So back to Martin... Will either of you tell me why you think that pictures on Martin's cell phone that were taken prior to his murder that had NOTHING to do with his murder is "evidence" in the case??? I mean, "evidence" is about the facts surrounding a crime... It's not a fishing expedition thru a victim's past life... I disagree with both of you... And I trust that any reasonable judge will tell Zimmerman's lawyer to stick with the case at hand... This "discovery" is way beyond the any sane interpretation of "evidence"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: dick greenhaus Date: 02 Jun 13 - 12:54 PM The sanity or lack of same of potential evidence is to be decided by the judge---not the prosecutor and certainly not by Bobert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 02 Jun 13 - 01:57 PM No, Bobert, the high school incident absolutely should NOT be considered admissible evidence. And I, too, trust that "any reasonable judge will tell Zimmerman's lawyer to stick with the case at hand". BUT, this is not about whether those photos are admissible evidence. What it is about is: WHO DECIDES whether or not they are admissible? Do you want interested parties to determine whether or not something is admissibe - or someone who is supposed to be neutral? (Defence and prosecution are not even supposed to be neutral - it's their job not to be.) The discovery IS evidence - just not admissible evidence concerning this case. But the prosecution should not be the one(s) to make that decision. I don't wish to just blithely trust they will resist the temptation to ignore evidence that undermines their argument(s). (Likewise, I don't trust the defense to do so, either.) Here's a thought experiment: lets pretend there are texts on Sallie's phone saying she is angry at the defendant and has decided to punish him by accusing him of rape. Do you want the prosecution to be legally allowed to decide this is "inadmissible evidence"? I would prefer to have the judge decide. The same law which helps someone who is innocent one day may well do the opposite on another (or even the very same) day. Our laws (are supposed to) help protect nasty, guilty scumbags as well as innocent people - because we are fallible and don't necessarily know which is which. Trying to be fair means you legally must treat people the same way, whether you think they "deserve" it or not. Does this make any sense to you yet? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 02 Jun 13 - 02:15 PM AMEN to that YY! Don T. P.S. I too hope this scumbag gets his comeupance, but honestly, not by prosecutors making decisions which are not theirs to make. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 02 Jun 13 - 03:17 PM A bullet from the back of a bush Took Medgar Evers' blood A finger fired the trigger to his name A handle hid out in the dark A hand set the spark Two eyes took the aim Behind a man's brain... But he sure as hell can be blamed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Jun 13 - 05:23 PM Of course the fact that a jurge rules stuff inadmissable doesn't stop jurors being fully aware of it. And the American system does appear to allow the lawyers an awful lot of leeway to make sure that they are so aware. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 02 Jun 13 - 07:16 PM Here's the deal... What Zimmerman's attorney is getting away with amounts to prejudicing perspective jurors and thus creating a scenario for a mistrial... The judge should put a gag order on both the defense and the prosecutor so that it will be possible to seat a jury that won't be prejudiced based on what is being released in the news... That is the way it is done... I'm sniffing O.J., Part II and frankly don't give a rip what anyone here thinks about my observations... I know the law pretty good, ya'll... Better, I'd say, than the folks here who think they know the law... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 02 Jun 13 - 07:46 PM BTW, YY... You one one hand admits that the incident with the high school woman shouldn't be considered "evidence" but on the other hand saying that you are okay with some judge down the road should choose what is evidence and what is not... The issue is that Zimmerman's attorneys are using the public media to introduce what they want, regardless of it's value, in an attempt to poison the jury pool... This ain't Perry "F'n" Mason here... Common sense tells anyone with an IQ on the plus side of an animal cracker that the pics taken days before Martin was murdered by Martin and of Martin could not have 1 chance in a trillion gazillion of having any bearing on his murder... Same exact scenario with the girl in high school... This is what racism looks like... The entire system is doing a rope-a-dope to get Zimmerman off... There will be no fair trial... That is now guaranteed... Zimmerman's hired guns have shot that possibility to hell and back... This is the worst of the American justice system... It looks rigged... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Jun 13 - 08:57 PM Some of these US lawyers seem to play it very dirty indeed, and get away with it scot free. I googled Zimmerman and up came this: George Zimmerman's attorneys apologize for mischaracterizing evidence ...Lawyer Mark O'Mara said during a hearing last Tuesday that the defense had obtained video footage of three fights, including one in which he said two of Martin's friends "were beating up a homeless guy." But Zimmerman's defense team corrected that statement on Sunday, saying O'Mara had unintentionally "misstated the nature" of the footage. In a statement posted on Zimmerman's website, the defense lawyers said the footage actually showed "two homeless guys fighting each other over a bike...." "Unintentionally misstated". "Pigs seen flying low over Florida courthouse..." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 02 Jun 13 - 09:03 PM Yes, this is the way it is played, McG... The attorney puts out the shit bomb and then says, "Gee, sorry"... This is like a boxer who hits low until the ref calls him and then says, "Gee, sorry"... This was all intentional on Zimmerman's attorney's part... ALL!!! It is intended to poison the jury pool just the way that Johnny Cockran did it in the O.J. trial... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 03 Jun 13 - 11:53 AM "BTW, YY... You one one hand admits that the incident with the high school woman shouldn't be considered "evidence" but on the other hand saying that you are okay with some judge down the road should choose what is evidence and what is not..." So, Bobert... if not the judge, then who? Let the prosecution and defense decide for themselves? Sorry, but I trust them even less than I trust "some judge down the road". Is there someone else you would suggest? Problem is, the decision will be made by someone - even if it's just by default/not specifying who. Sadly, in practice (as opposed to theory), the question is not so much "Who do you trust most to do the right thing?" but rather "Who do you mistrust least?". I agree with you and McG of H that it stinks that "The attorney puts out the shit bomb and then says, "Gee, sorry"...". That does poison the jury pool, and should not be allowed. But - when it comes down to it - that is (yet another) separate issue. As I see it, we have the following issues that we've been discussing: 1) Should it be legal to withhold evidence? 2) Who should decide what evidence is admissible? 3) How do you keep inadmissible evidence out of the media/public domain? These issues all affect each other and it can be hard to tell where one begins and the other ends. The answer to 3 does not have an easy solution (as if any of them do...). The judge putting a gag order on both defense and prosecution is an idea I like. Sadly, that hasn't happened this time. Why not, I can guess, but can't honestly say I know. Perhaps we should have a law requiring such gag orders rather than leaving it up to the judge in a case. Some countries do not allow media to report such kinds of developments in a trial until the jury has been selected or sequestered - or even until the trial is over. There's much to be said for that approach, although questions of Freedom of Speech arise, and can be very complicated to sort through. I agree with you both (and many others) that it's appalling and unfair, and that in our country (the US) the outcome of a trial is much more likely to be decided by 1) how much money you have available and 2) whether you're a member of the majority or of a minority (and in that order) than by your actual guilt or innocence, which is disgraceful. But I still do not wish to give the defense or the prosecution the legal OK to withhold any evidence they don't like. I repeat my question above: who do you think should be allowed to decide whether evidence is relevant/admissible? This is not an attack. I am genuinely interested in your answer to that question. I'm open to the possibility that you have a solution that hasn't occurred to me and is fairer than the current setup. Cheers, YY |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 03 Jun 13 - 01:11 PM So the ethical thing for the defence lawyer would have been to ensure that the relevant judge received and considered the evidence, but done so in such a way that it woulld be kept in confidence, and not revealed to the public. The question of whether the proescution ought to have passed it to the defence is another matter. But in the light of the unethcal conduct demonstrated by the defence lawyers it would make much more sense for it to be revealed to the judge to pass to the defence if it was determined as relevant. But maybe commnsense in such matters is as absent as ethics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jun 13 - 01:19 PM " A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin's cellphone has been placed on administrative leave after an attorney testified that prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense, an attorney said Wednesday. Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren't turned over. .... White led the Nassau County state attorney's office before resigning in December, citing differences of opinion with Corey. He is now in private practice. White said the photos Kruidbos retrieved were of a hand holding a gun and one depicted drugs. The content of the text messages wasn't specified. "I'm an officer of the court and I'm obliged to inform the court of any misconduct or any potential misconduct coming before the court. Whether it's by the defense or prosecution," White said." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 03 Jun 13 - 01:27 PM The answer to your question, YY can be found in my 7:16PM post last night... The judge should have put both the defense and prosecutor under a gag order... He obviously didn't and Zimmerman's attorney took advantage of it... This is where my problem is with the way this case is being conducted... That is irresponsible on the judge's part... Heck, once the trial begins I don't give a rat's ass what evidence people try to introduce as if the judge say's "Hey, this ain't evidence" then the jury may not hear any of it or very little of it before the judge tells them to "disregard"... But what is happening is that the initial phase of the trial has begun in public and in a case of this stature there is no way in hell that the jury pool isn't being poisoned... That is wrong... It is immoral... It is not fair to Trevon Martin or his family... I mean, they don't get to appeal if Zimmerman's attorney pulls a Johnny Cochran and get's this guy off by some very unethical trickery... So I hold the judge at fault right now... He needs to assert Travon's Martin's rights, too... And he isn't doing that... Like I said earlier... If you get some judge who has pretty much made up his or her mind they might let something slide... You have to remember that in the South lots of judges are elected and, where you might not like it, have partisan views of things... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Don Wise Date: 03 Jun 13 - 01:37 PM Like it or not, the sad truth is that in both the US and the UK innocent people are doing life or rotting on Death Row because the prosecution- police, DA etc.- DELIBERATELY withheld evidence which would have helped the case for the defence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 03 Jun 13 - 05:33 PM McGrath of Harlow, Bobert, and Don - I agree with all of your most recent posts. The reason I have such strong feelings about the wrongness of withholding evidence is that (as I mentioned before) I have sad experience (here in the U.K.) of being on the receiving end of withheld evidence (and of a judge who had already made up his mind). My husband and I fought a speeding ticket (my husband knows his physics and realised that the camera which "caught" us speeding was set on a curve, which made its calculations inaccurate). We didn't have a lot of money (couldn't afford a solicitor), but my husband firmly believed that the British system of justice is one of the best in the world, and was sure that we would get a fair hearing. What we experienced was a real eye-opener, and included a number of... "irregularities", including withholding of evidence (of various types) the laws say we were entitled to. We kept fighting/appealing (against the advice of both sets of parents) because we believed it would be wrong to just knuckle under - even when we began to see just how overwhelmingly the deck is stacked against anyone without the money to make the system work in their favor. We were found guilty and ordered to pay £15,000 court costs - which we did not have - so eventually filed for bankruptcy. I know what happened to us is nothing, nothing, nothing! compared to what is happening to Trayvon - and has happened to so many other people. My sense of outrage - for them as well as for myself - remains. (Note: I've tried to keep my account brief. I have written - in greater detail - on Mudcat about it once before; if you're interested, you can find it in this thread/post.) But - that is why anyone arguing in favor of withholding evidence hits a very sore spot for me. Overall, I think we all agree that the "system" is not working as it should (to put it mildly) - in the US, and in many other places as well. Even more distressing is that there are many, many more places where it's much, much worse. The BIG question is - how do we change things so they are fair? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 03 Jun 13 - 08:19 PM Well, YY... I am sorry that you got screwed by the system in the UK... And you did get screwed... Bankruptcy for speeding ticket is unreal... This is the kind of kangaroo court system that I am scared of here in the US... 90% of people here in the US think that O.J. Simpson killed his ex-wife... Okay, maybe 97%??? But he got away with it... That's what I don't want to see here with Zimmerman... Again, the case is just this simple: 1. Zimmerman sees Martin... 2. Zimmerman call police... 3. Police tell Zimmerman to stay in his vehicle... 4. Zimmerman ignores police... 5. Zimmerman murders Martin... THE END... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 03 Jun 13 - 10:13 PM Bobert, I do understand what you're saying, and very much share your concerns. My thought/hope is that the (potential) "silver lining" at this point, is that if Zimmerman is found "not guilty", there are grounds for a mistrial - on the basis that (as you put it) "the waters have been poisoned" - making a fair trial pretty near impossible. Maybe it could even end up in the Supreme Court and set a precedent... P.S. Thanks for the kind words. I'm convinced they played extra dirty in our case because if we won, it would have set a precedent (about certain kinds of speed cameras set on curves being inaccurate - all over the country), and opened them up to possible lawsuits due to many previous fines, lost licenses, etc becoming questionable - which would have cost them huge amounts of £££. (BTW, £15,000 = $25-30,000) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 04 Jun 13 - 09:02 AM The key question is how far the obligation of disclosure extends. Plainly there will have been some things on Martin's phone that would NOT have been evidence in this trial. For example if some weeks before his death he had been texting friends to arrange to go to see a film or a band - that would be completely irrelevant to the trial, and so under UK rules not obliged to be disclosed. Equally, as Bobert says, material that might or might not have shown Martin with a gun or with drugs weeks before the night in question cannot possibly be evidence of anything happening on the night in question. What they might be is evidence of bad character and I would have thought that would clearly not be admissible - and so not evidence of relevance to the case. It's interesting that (AFAIK) Zimmerman is still not relying on "Stand Your Ground" laws - is he? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:00 AM So, Bobert, Since YOU know he is guilty of murder ( from the news releases) WHY NOT JUST find a tree and lynch him? Why have any trial at all? Why look at the evidence? Why bother risking a JURY might let him go? Is that what you are saying??? The point of this thread is that the PROSECUTION is not acting in accord with the law, REGARDLESS OF THE CASE. This is a reason for mistrial, and LETTING HIM OFF. DO YOU WANT HIM TO GET OFF EVEN IF HE IS GUILTY????? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this: "I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him." Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:16 AM And as for "poisoning the jury pool", I think the existing press coverage has done so quite well. Just look at Bobert not even needing a trial or evidence to declare it a murder, I would bet that if the defendent was Black, and the victim white, most here would insist that he was "innocent until PROVEN guilty". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:16 AM Why have any trial at all? Why look at the evidence? Why bother risking a JURY might let him go? Is that what you are saying??? No, that's what YOU'RE saying, Beardy, or rather shouting/ranting. I haven't read anything by Bobert that says or remotely implies any of your screed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:28 AM Greggie, And I have not read anything you have posted that contributes to the thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:30 AM I have no problems with having a trial... I just don't want it to be "O.J.'d" where there is no, ahhhhh, justice... Isn't justice what all of us want??? Is justice too much to ask... I mean, our country isn't that far removed from the Greensboro Massacre when the Klan gunned down 5 unarmed peaceful protestors and got away with it... That was in 1979 and most of us here were around then... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:31 AM *IF* Bobert sees no reason to require the prosecution TO FOLLOW THE LAW in this case, I see no difference between him and those who lynch people they are "sure" ( from news reports) have committed some crime. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:32 AM Oh, and for the record??? Yes, based on what evidence has been made public I believe that Zimmerman is guilty of murder... He was told by the police to stay in his car... He didn't... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:35 AM Where did you come up with bit of mythology, bruce??? I want everyone to not only follow the law but ***RESPECT*** it as, as well... Zimmerman's attorney is not respecting the law here any more than Johnny Cochran did in the O.J. trial... Garbage in = garbage out... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:36 AM (crosspostd) "Isn't justice what all of us want???" If by justice you mean that people get fair trials according to the law, I agree. If by justice you mean that the people YOU have decided are guilty have their rights reduced, and are NOT given the benefit of a fair trail, but are punished based on news reports, I do not agree. He may or may not have a valid defense ( I suspect not) but he deserves a FAIR TRIAL, with the prosecution playing ACCORDING to the LAW. Otherwise, it is a lynching. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:44 AM From th OP: " prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense," |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:57 AM "Fair trial" and "according to the law" are not the same things. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 04 Jun 13 - 12:04 PM ""Fair trial" and "according to the law" are not the same things." It is possible for a trial to be according to the law, and NOT fair, but I do not see how a trial could be fair and NOT according to the law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 04 Jun 13 - 01:13 PM From th OP: " prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense," This is a quote by "Former prosecutor Wesley White" who felt the need to say that his disclosure to the defense isn't sparked by any animosity toward his former employer. If says there is no animosity then it must be true, right? It could be true, I don't know. Was this evidence that should have been turned over? I don't know, a Judge will decide that. I must say that I tend to agree with Bobert until just shy of the end. I think Zimmerman is clearly resposible for Martin's death but he may not be guilty of a crime. The Stand Your Ground law means that if Martin did turn on Zimmerman and make him feel threatened for his safety then Zimmerman could be in the right legally. I believe Martin would have to have started the actual altercation for that to be true but don't remember for sure how the law reads on that. It is a terrible law but there it is. Too bad Martin isn't here to give his version of the events. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 04 Jun 13 - 01:18 PM "I think Zimmerman is clearly resposible for Martin's death but he may not be guilty of a crime." Agreed. From OP: "Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren't turned over. Kruidbos was placed on leave shortly after White testified during a hearing in George Zimmerman's second-degree murder case on Tuesday. White said Kruidbos was interviewed by state attorney investigators twice before the action was taken. White said he wasn't surprised of possible evidence violations by Zimmerman prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda. "I was saddened by it, but I'm not surprised," he said. White first learned about the evidence through Kruidbos more than a month ago, he said. ... White led the Nassau County state attorney's office before resigning in December, citing differences of opinion with Corey. He is now in private practice." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bill D Date: 04 Jun 13 - 01:29 PM I would like to be in the courtroom when they attempt to impanel an 'impartial' jury. I halfway expect Zimmerman to get off, no matter what the 'truth' is, because he could not GET a 'fair' trial. At worst, I predict a verdict of 'involuntary manslaughter' and a year or two sentence. No one but Zimmerman knows exactly what happened that night, but *I* know that if a large guy in plain clothes and followed ME around and tried to 'confront' me...even when I tried to avoid him.. *I* would resist his advances and might even, if I could, bang HIS head on the ground if he wouldn't leave me alone! I don't think that would give him the right to shoot me 'in self-defense'.....and all this I believe no matter what is deemed as 'evidence' but some judge. There IS a difference between 'data' and 'relevant evidence', and I hope both judge & jury realize this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 04 Jun 13 - 02:10 PM bb - I am saying it is possible this has all come about because White has an axe to grind so went public with some info. Is his take on the situation accurate? I do not know, but all of this started with his revelation about a situation that may turn out to be much ado about nothing. White claims ths was not fueled by animosity, that could be true, could be false. Again, I don't know and neither do any of the rest of us here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jun 13 - 05:52 PM ""And I have not read anything you have posted that contributes to the thread."" I have long suspected that you only read the posts of people you think you might browbeat into submission. You've picked a wrong'un with Bobz. He doesn't browbeat worth a damn. I agree with you that the evidence must be passed on under current rules. Therefore the prosecutors are wrong. But, the rule should be what Bobert says, the evidence passed to the judge, who will decide, and pass it on if, and only if, admissible. That is not lynch law, but recognition that in the US an honest lawyer is likely to be an oxymoron. Not much better in the UK, among defence lawyers! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jun 13 - 05:59 PM ""Too bad Martin isn't here to give his version of the events."" It is precisely because he is not, that the trial must be conducted with the utmost rigour and strictly by the book, rather than being turned into the usual three ring circus of sleazy attempts to sway the Jury with inadmissible evidence and innuendo. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jun 13 - 06:07 PM Having said all that, I very much fear that the fix is already in! Justice for a black teenager is still far from a certainty anywhere in the US, but especially in the South. A Hispanic like Zimmerman would have received short shrift himself, had his victim not been black, rendering him a temporary white man. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 04 Jun 13 - 06:26 PM Zimerman's defense is based on self defense that is that he believed his life to be in danger and acted in self-defense. The only relevant evidence for that is proof of what Travon did THAT NIGHT that ZIMMERMAN PERSONALLY WITNESSED. As someone else said, |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 04 Jun 13 - 06:34 PM The DELETED messages on TRAVON's cell phone could not have been part of ZIMMERMAN's thought process at the time. Since ZIMMERMAN chose to stalk the boy, the claim of self-defense is dubious. If not for the "Stand your ground" law, I think Zimmerman would have a near impossible case. As it is, if issues of character are introduced, won't Zimmerman and his wife have to stand up and explain why they lied at their bail hearing? I have no problem with the prosecutors deciding that the gun and weed pictures were not evidence in Zimmerman's defense. Since the prosecutors had no intent to use the pictures they were nothing buts irrelevant personal information. Who decides which evidence is exculpatory? IMHO certainly NOT the tech who ran Norton utilities on the kid's cellphone. He certainly did deserve to be fired for that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 04 Jun 13 - 07:29 PM Hello? Is it no longer the case that Zimmrman has disavowed a "stand your ground" defence? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 04 Jun 13 - 07:30 PM If the prosecutor is wrong then it would be right to use the past sex life of a rape victim as evidence... This is all bullshit... Tell me, anyone, how a picture that trevon took of himself a month before is fucking "evidence"??????????????????????????????????????? Or shut the fuck up about withheld so-called "evidence"... Yes, beardedbruce... You brought this up... Use your wildest imagination on how these pics are relevant to the evidence in this case... You can't and this is all 100% USDA Choice bullshit that allows the murder victim to become the bad guy... This is a sick thread and a sick legal system that is tilted toward the rights of the murderer while trampling the rights of the murdered... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,TIA Date: 04 Jun 13 - 10:15 PM Amen Bobert. Someone please cite the statute that required disclosure of previous and deleted emails in discovery. I am not a lawyer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 04 Jun 13 - 10:25 PM " Is it no longer the case that Zimmrman has disavowed a "stand your ground" defense? " I haven't heard that. But how could he? He stalked the kid, the kid died, shot with his gun. None of that is in dispute Without "stand your ground" he is not allowed to put himself into a situation where he confronts people while armed when he sees a threat. Without "Stand Your Ground" all he has is jury tampering and character assassination. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 05 Jun 13 - 08:15 AM Yes, beardedbruce... Use your wildest imagination Should be no problem, his wildest imagination is the motivating factor behind most, if not all, of his threads. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:29 AM I thought I'd seen, months back, that Z was running straight self-defence without reliance on local "stand your ground" statute. I have no time to look for it now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:33 AM Bobert, "Tell me, anyone, how a picture that trevon took of himself a month before is fucking "evidence"??????????????????????????????????????? Or shut the fuck up about withheld so-called "evidence"... Yes, beardedbruce... You brought this up... Use your wildest imagination on how these pics are relevant to the evidence in this case... " My posts: *IF* Bobert sees no reason to require the prosecution TO FOLLOW THE LAW in this case, I see no difference between him and those who lynch people they are "sure" ( from news reports) have committed some crime. Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this: "I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him." Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants. Such a text message MIGHT lead a reasonable jury to believe that Zimmerman was attacked, and that makes a difference, doesn't it? "He stalked the kid, the kid died, shot with his gun." OR "He followed a suspected burglar, was attacked by the suspect, and in fear of his life while having his head pounded into the cement, shot the suspect with his gun" Whether he showed good judgement in following the suspect I will not state- but THIS is as likely as any other scenario. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:38 AM Zimmerman did waive a pre-trial hearing on Stand your ground - but has not absolutely waived it so it may come up at trial. Make your own blicky http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/30/17983728-zimmerman-waives-stand-your-ground-defense-for-now?lite |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:41 AM Bruce, without "stand your ground" He has no business following "suspected burglers." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:52 AM ####################################################################### "Whether he showed good judgement in following the suspect I will not state- but THIS is as likely as any other scenario." ####################################################################### People do dumb things- that DOES NOT make them "murderers". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:58 AM "A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin's cellphone has been placed on administrative leave after an attorney testified that prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense, an attorney said Wednesday." NO FUCKING MENTION of how old the messages and photos were. They could have been deleted the day after the killing, for all we know. But the resident lynch mob says they were too old to be evidence. Sounds like a 1940's Klan "trial" to me.... "We know he did it- so why bother with following the laws?" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 13 - 10:02 AM Jack, Ever hear the words "Neighborhood Watch"? What do you think they do? What do you think HE thought they did? WHAT HAVE THEY DONE IN THE PAST????? He obviously had bad judgement- BUT THAT DOES NOT REMOVE a fear for his life ***IF*** he was having his head pounded into the pavement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 05 Jun 13 - 10:23 AM Ever hear the words "Neighborhood Watch"? What do you think they do? What do you think HE thought they did? WHAT HAVE THEY DONE IN THE PAST????? Zimmerman was a one-man "Neighborhood Watch" who had been a bit of a pain to the local police in the past. This is what I read in the St. Pete Times in the weeks after the incident. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 05 Jun 13 - 10:38 AM 1. Neighborhood watch people are not permitted to carry firearms in most cases, and in ALL cases are subject to the oversight and direction of law enforcement personnel. Bruce, without "stand your ground" He has no business following "suspected burglers." "Stand your ground" laws do not apply to someone behaving as Zimmerman did, if you read up on their provisions. That's in all probability why it wasn't tendered he & his lawyers knew it wouldn't fly. Evem WITH "stand your ground" he had no business following "suspected burglars" especially after being told not to do so by law enforcement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 05 Jun 13 - 11:05 AM >>People do dumb things- that DOES NOT make them "murderers". << The person picking the fight cannot claim "self defense" if it turns deadly. That is just common sense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 13 - 11:44 AM "The person picking the fight cannot claim "self defense" if it turns deadly. That is just common sense." So if Zimmerman yelled "stop" and Martin swung at him??? Who picked THAT fight? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 05 Jun 13 - 11:59 AM So if Zimmerman yelled "stop" and Martin swung at him??? Who picked THAT fight? In the real world Zimmerman for stalking Martin and then confronting him for no real reason and even though he had been told by the dispatcher not to. In Florida, who knows? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:14 PM "for no real reason" There HAVE been reasons stated- but the lynch mob has ignored them. . THOUGHT he was acting as a Neighborhood watch member. He saw someone HE thought was acting in a suspicious manner- WHICH HE CALLED IN. He made ( the bad) choice to follow the suspect, thinking he was in the process of committing a crime. Perhaps he yelled for him to stop- DO YOU KNOW OTHERWISE? Z is now on the ground having his head beaten against the pavement. WHAT WOULD YOU DO AT THAT POINT?????? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:21 PM Bobert, Please go back and read YOUR first post, and my reply. It seems you have never =bothered to read my replies, nor have you addressed the point of this thread. I restate: Date: 31 May 13 - 12:39 PM So, Bobert, YOU think that it is ok to violate the law when YOU think someone is guilty? YOU want to have him get off because that law was violated? THAT is what this thread is about- NOT his innocence or guilt, but the illegal actions of those, like you , that have decided it does not matter if he gets a fair or legal trial. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:30 PM Those aren't "reasons" Beardy - they're suppositions, BS and smoke. As usual. I suppose if he thought he was the Lone Ranger or Spiderman that would be just fine with you as well? Does reality have no meaning for you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:37 PM As someone who has been horrified by lynchings and all sorts of murders perpetrated by racists and homophobes in my 72 years on earth, I deeply resent BB's continual use of the word lynching as applied to those of us who disagree with him. Christ, I don't even believe in capital punishment. I don't believe BB is using the word as a figure of speech. I believe he has some sort of fixation with lynching which needs to be addressed by mental health professionals. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:42 PM The law matters. IF you "lynch" Zimmerman, and violate the law, he can be released and get off EVEN IF HE IS FOUND GUILTY. I do not believe that this is what so many posters here WANT, but it is what they are supporting. Then they can scream about how unjust and racist the system is, while the real problem is that they were willing to go along with ANYTHING that looked like a way to convict Zimmerman, regardless of it's legality. THAT is "lynching" - violating the law in order to punish someone YOU think is guilty. I do not judge whether Z. is guilty, (probably) but regardless, he deserves the same legal protections that ANY accused person should get. Deny him those protections, and you have NO reason to complain when the next accused person is railroaded into jail, or hung. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:03 PM Lynching. There he goes again. Poor BB. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:06 PM You are the ones with the rope and the tree.... I just wonder if you will wear black sheets? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:21 PM When one (like BB) is irrational and argumentative, that's indicative of some deep-seated hostility which, if not treated will worsen. Googled black sheets. Target is having a great sale on black sheets. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:40 PM The reason for discovery is that no side knows what is relevant or not. All information must be given to the attorney that is the law and his constitutional right. I cannot stand Zimmerman from what I have read and heard, what occurred should not have occurred had he followed the police order. But .. the law is the law. He will only get grounds for either a new trial or a dismissal if the law isn't followed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 05 Jun 13 - 02:46 PM Elmore, Beardy's fixation with lynching is only one of a host of his problems which need to be addressed by mental health professionals. Don't get him started calling anyone who disagrees with him a "racist scumbag" - as if Jews were a "race". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 05 Jun 13 - 02:50 PM Greggie, "anyone who disagrees with him a "racist scumbag"" NO. Only YOU, since you have proven by your posts that you think somneone who is "Black, and a Democrat" is a "dumb Ni**er". YOUR words, NOT mine, you lying racist scumbag. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 05 Jun 13 - 02:56 PM Greg F.:BB should be ignored, but that's not easy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 05 Jun 13 - 03:03 PM There, there BB, calm down . I can recommend a good shrink, if you'll mail me a SASE with $100 in it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 05 Jun 13 - 03:06 PM Actually, Elmore, he's amusing in small doses - kind of like a toddler throwing a tantrum. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest Date: 05 Jun 13 - 04:03 PM Your penchant for foul language and personal attacks is disgusting Greg. People like you and Elmore ruin the Mudcat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 05 Jun 13 - 04:16 PM Guest, Guest. Coming from a troll like you, that's a compliment. Is that you Bruce? Or Songwronger? Or the gone but not forgotten Henry Krinkle? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: catspaw49 Date: 05 Jun 13 - 04:19 PM How? Are you here for this type of thread? If so you need to know they get raw. Don't come into these and you'll be a happy camper as there are lots of fine musical threads and some pretty fair jokes and other fun BS. If you think any thread relating to this case would be clean and pristine, you'd be wrong! So as the old saying goes, "If you can't stand the heat you can fuckin' blow me." Now go off and have a Coke and a smile and shut the fuck up. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 05 Jun 13 - 07:20 PM Wow... More shit than a manure factory... First, bb... 1. I challenged you to use your wildest imagination to explain a situation where Martin's pictures that were taken well before he was murdered amounted to evidence... You didn't answer that question at all... You just played silly... 2. Then you say that Zimmerman had a right to defend himself from getting his pounded in the ground... First, if you come at me with a gun and I can find a way to defend myself then guess what... If it means pounding your head in the ground I'm gonna do it... Duhhhhh??? 3. Bottom line, had Zimmerman ************OBEYED************* the police and stayed in his fucking car then two things would not have occurred that night... First, there would have been no self-defense my Martin and, two, Martin would not have murdered Martin... Do you get common sense, dude... Quit with the BS games... They are retarded... No, not even that intelligent... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 05 Jun 13 - 08:40 PM " The reason for discovery is that no side knows what is relevant or not. All information must be given to the attorney that is the law and his constitutional right. I cannot stand Zimmerman from what I have read and heard, what occurred should not have occurred had he followed the police order. But .. the law is the law. He will only get grounds for either a new trial or a dismissal if the law isn't followed" At last a reasonable human to debate with!! I totally see what you mean, but doesn't discovery apply to relevant information? To evidence the prosecution will use in its case or evidence that weakens the prosecutions case? If Zimmerman is defending himself saying that he had reasonable fear for his life. He can't say he had based that fear based on deleted picture in the kid's cellphone. He is not alleging that the kid threatened him with the marijuana leaves or the gun in the picture. The essentials of the crime and his claim of self defense is what happened that night and how he came to be there in that deadly dangerous situation. The kids prior, private life have NOTHING to do with the crime. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 05 Jun 13 - 08:46 PM Discovery isn't supposed to be an open ended fishing expedition... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:02 PM BTW, in my 7:20 post... Correction: "Zimmerman would not have murdered Martin"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 06 Jun 13 - 02:48 AM Bah. Why don't people look shit up. From Cornell University: - "Upon a defendant's request, the government must permit the defendant to inspect and to copy or photograph books, papers, documents, data, photographs, tangible objects, buildings or places, or copies or portions of any of these items, if the item is within the government's possession, custody, or control and: (i) the item is material to preparing the defense; (ii) the government intends to use the item in its case-in-chief at trial; or (iii) the item was obtained from or belongs to the defendant". So in the present case the key question is whether the item is material to preparing the defence. While the material MIGHT be evidential of Martin's character, it seems to me that that what may be in issue (that is not the same thing as what will necessarily be in issue) is what Zimmerman reasonably believed Martin's intentions to be that night. It is very hard indeed to see how month-old photos that Zimmerman had never seen could influence Zimmerman's belief on that night. It looks to me therefore as if the photos were not discoverable. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 06 Jun 13 - 05:25 AM ""He will only get grounds for either a new trial or a dismissal if the law isn't followed."" And that is the only consideration that should decide what is done with anything which might later be ruled admissible by a Court of Appeal. It isn't about getting him falsely convicted, it's about ensuring that he cannot overturn a conviction on a technicality. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 06 Jun 13 - 05:35 AM Hadn't seen that when I answered Dan's post Richard, but that would seem to make the whole thing a storm in a rather dirty teacup. After all, one might suppose that both sets of lawyers should know this, so Bobert may be right about the shit stirring intentions of a dodgy defence brief. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 06 Jun 13 - 08:22 AM Bobert, "1. I challenged you to use your wildest imagination to explain a situation where Martin's pictures that were taken well before he was murdered amounted to evidence... You didn't answer that question at all... You just played silly..." I GAVE you the text message that I thought would be significant evidence- which you ignored. "2. Then you say that Zimmerman had a right to defend himself from getting his pounded in the ground... First, if you come at me with a gun and I can find a way to defend myself then guess what... If it means pounding your head in the ground I'm gonna do it... Duhhhhh???" IF he had the gun out. IF he had it concealed, and called out, AND WAS ATTACKED by Martin, he WAS defending himself. "3. Bottom line, had Zimmerman ************OBEYED************* the police and stayed in his fucking car then two things would not have occurred that night... First, there would have been no self-defense my Martin and, two, Martin would not have murdered Martin... THIS I agree with. As do MOST here that you refuse to be reasonable in this discussion with. I stated it was a BAD DECISION. Now, about the thread topic. 1. DO YOU AGREE that the procecutor has now made it easier for Zimmerman to get off, 2. and that the ILLEGAL withholding of evidence from the defense was WRONG???? Two YES or NO questions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 06 Jun 13 - 08:43 AM BB: Could you please stop YELLING? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:04 AM Elmore, Could you please address the thread topic? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:08 AM He not only YELLS but his answers/responses make no sense at all..,. He avoids common sense like it was a radiation pit... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM Bobert, Try addressing the thread topic YES or NO to my two stated questions??? Or are you saying you are just here to be a shithead about the topic, preventing reasonable discussion of the legal points involved? Getting your hemp rope ready? Find a nice tall tree?? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:17 AM In case you have problems scrolling : 1. DO YOU AGREE that the procecutor has now made it easier for Zimmerman to get off, 2. and that the ILLEGAL withholding of evidence from the defense was WRONG???? Two YES or NO questions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:28 AM O.k. BB the thread topic was introduced by someone who loves to cause trouble, and is nasty and profane when someone disagrees with him. This thread topic would be a total waste were it not for intelligent, thoughtful responses by many Mudcatters. For my thoughts on this thread topic, see my May 31 entry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 06 Jun 13 - 10:04 AM BB says "Address the thread topic." Okay. Hellooooooh thread topic. This thread topic, like pornography, has no redeeming social value. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 06 Jun 13 - 10:07 AM Elmore, In your first post, you were a wit. By now, you are less than a nit-wit. But a clever one, I will allow. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 06 Jun 13 - 10:31 AM BB: This aged, clever nit-wit says good night and good luck. ( The good luck part may be overstated.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 07 Jun 13 - 09:42 AM "SANFORD, Fla. (AP) -- For a second day in a row, a Florida judge is weighing whether to allow certain voice experts to testify at the trial of a neighborhood watch volunteer charged in the fatal shooting of an unarmed teen. Circuit Judge Debra Nelson is listening Friday to testimony from voice experts about whether witnesses with expertise in speech identification should be allowed to testify when George Zimmerman's trial starts next week. Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder for killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin during a struggle in a gated community. He is pleading not guilty, claiming self-defense. Neighbors called 911 during the fight and cries for help can be heard on the recordings. Martin's family claim the cries came from the teen while Zimmerman's father has testified they were those of his son.' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 07 Jun 13 - 12:07 PM So What, Beardy? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 07 Jun 13 - 05:48 PM First of all, who cares??? What we are getting is a a lot of noise which is being used as a smokescreen from the facts of the case... The facts do not bode well for Zimmermen so that means its time to... ...change the subject... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 07 Jun 13 - 08:13 PM (posted this once already; it doesn't seem to have taken - so apologies if it eventually shows up twice...) I've already made it pretty clear where I stand on this, i.e.: I'm with BB (and a few others) in believing that you don't get to choose which bits of the law should apply to a case depending on who you think is guilty/innocent. I'm with Bobert (and many others) in thinking that: this evidence is not/should not be considered admissible evidence; that the defense should not have been allowed to release it to the media/the media should not have been allowed to use it; this may well "poison the well"; and it seems all too likely that justice will not be served. I don't see what was so terrible about the original post; it contained factual info that struck me as worth sharing. In BB's third post, he says, "Regardless of one's opinion of the shooting, it deserves to be tried in a fair, legal fashion, without opening up unwarranted areas for appeals or declarations of mistrial." To me, that is a pretty sensible assessment of the situation (one which I think even Bobert would agree with). In other words: if you feel Zimmerman should not "get off", you (logically) would not want the prosecution to be playing fast & loose with the law, because that increases the chance(s) that Zimmerman will get off due to a mistrial. Seems to me that folks on this thread actually agree when it comes down to it - they just don't seem to be understanding what each other are saying (getting personal/saying nasty things doesn't help, of course). When people keep saying the same things over and over and still not understanding each other, perhaps it's time to call it a day (or should that be "call it a thread"?). Just a thought... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 07 Jun 13 - 08:26 PM The problem here, YY, is that the judge is falling down on his job... His job is to insure that the trial will be untainted... He has allowed Zimmerman's attorney to use the media to poison the jury pool... That's exactly what Johnny Cochran did back in the early 90s when he got O.J. Simpson off when there was a mountain of evidence that O'J. did the crime... My problem is with judges who sit in Southern states... The US has a history of looking the other way... Unfortunately, when it comes down to these kinds of crimes, the South has a very bad track record... In 1979 in Greensboro, North Carolina, there was a non-violent, peaceful and legal civil rights march... The KKK set up shop on the march route and shot and killed 5 marchers... Not one ever was charged... The South has a way of looking the other way when it comes to these kinds of things... I know all too well... I was born in the South... Raised in the South... Educated in the South and still here... I've seen enough to suspect that one day we will look back on this trial as an injustice... Oh, well??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 08 Jun 13 - 08:43 AM Wouldn't disagree with any of that, Bobert. Suspect BB wouldn't, either... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 08 Jun 13 - 09:23 AM Works for me too! I hate to say it, but I suspected things would go this way. Zimmerman should have been tried somewhere far away from the town whose law enforcement tried to ignore the death of Trayvon Martin, and let his killer go without the circumstances even being investigated. It took a public outcry to make them earn their pay, and even then the investigation was heavily slanted in the killer's favour, with some rather suspect cosmetically enhanced photos of dubious origin being published. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 08 Jun 13 - 09:26 AM No, YY... I doubt if bb would agree with me... All along he has sounded as if it's Zimmerman who is getting the shaft... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 08 Jun 13 - 11:33 AM Suspect BB wouldn't [disagree], either... Oh, you kidder, you. That really IS amusing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 09 Jun 13 - 09:37 PM Seems that the people behind paying for Zimmerman's defense won't be happy until Zimmerman is elevated to sainthood... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 10 Jun 13 - 09:00 AM What **I** want to see is a fair trial, without lynching Zimmerman because of past injustices in the justice system. "There had been a rash of recent break-ins at the Retreat, and Zimmerman was wary of strangers walking through the complex. He was well-known to police dispatchers for his regular calls reporting suspicious people and events. Martin was walking back from a convenience store after buying ice tea and Skittles. It was raining, and he was wearing a hoodie. Zimmerman called 911, got out of his vehicle and followed Martin behind the townhomes despite being told not to by a police dispatcher. 'These a*******, they always get away,' Zimmerman said on the call. Zimmerman, who had a concealed weapons permit, was armed. The two then got into a struggle. Zimmerman told police he had lost sight of Martin, and that Martin circled back and attacked him as he walked back to his truck. Prosecutors say he tracked down Martin and started the fight. Zimmerman told police Martin punched him in the nose, knocking him down, and then got on top of him and began banging Zimmerman's head on the sidewalk. Photos taken after the fight show Zimmerman with a broken nose, bruises and bloody cuts on the back of his head. He said that when Martin spotted his gun holstered around his waist under his clothes, he said: 'You are going to die tonight.' Zimmerman said he grabbed the gun first and fired. Martin died at the scene." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 10 Jun 13 - 09:53 AM As a Floridian it distresses me that Zimmerman was given a CC permit and allowed to function as quasi police considering his own history. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 10 Jun 13 - 11:12 AM I think everyone on this thread wants to see a FAIR trial. Where we differ seems to be on the odds of that occurring - and the best way to achieve it. It's true that many of us (including me) think it highly unlikely that Zimmerman is "not guilty". If we were in the jury, that would be a serious problem, as everyone is entitled to a presumption of innocence... in court. gillymoor - absolutely! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 10 Jun 13 - 11:32 AM I agree with Bobert's post of Date: 07 Jun 13 - 08:26 PM . All true. However, NONE of that leads to any less need for a fair trial, with the rights of the accused being followed. He may well be guilty- but if the trial is unfair, that is a bad thing EVEN IF HE IS CONVICTED. The Prosecution needs to be aboveboard and follow the rules. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 10 Jun 13 - 02:10 PM That's right, Beardy - you want a "fair trial - just so long as Zimmerman is exonerated. Gotcha. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 10 Jun 13 - 02:12 PM BULLSHIT, Greggie boy. I want a fair trial- YOU are the one who wants to lynch him, regardless of his guilt. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 10 Jun 13 - 04:52 PM BB is right: "...if the trial is unfair, that is a bad thing EVEN IF HE (i.e. Zimmerman) IS CONVICTED." Perhaps we should all just leave it at that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 10 Jun 13 - 05:12 PM YY, I think that GF and BB just like calling each other names. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 10 Jun 13 - 08:51 PM At this point it doesn't much matter how the trial ends... Because this event is so polorized, one half of people (regardless of the evidence) will believe that Zimnmerman in guilty and the other half will believe the opposite... Too bad that the divide seems to follow the same divide as everything else in the country... Republicans = innocent... Dems = guilty... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 10 Jun 13 - 09:07 PM Forget the politics, when you carry a firearm (I do) you need to take extra care to avoid such situations. You will be held accountable in the harshest of terms. If a police officer tells you wait in your car we are on it, the only time you could ignore that is if someone's life was immediately in danger (ie) he heard a scream or a cry for help. Ya can't be a lone ranger, you can and will be charged with murder. That being said, he is entitled to full disclosure of all evidence and nothing can be withheld that is the law .. But I do not feel a bit sorry for him. One person is dead and his life is ruined no matter how it turns out. Ya just can't do what he did or what is reported he did. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 10 Jun 13 - 09:16 PM Exactly, Ol'ster... Same in martial arts... You will find that the baddest of bad asses in the dojo will do everything in their power to avoid a fight... People who have no real training with guns are very dangerous people... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 11 Jun 13 - 12:06 AM 100% with you on that Dan. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jun 13 - 07:56 AM No arguement at all, old dude, Bobert, and JtS - BUT HE STILL DESERVES A FAIR TRIAL. The prosecutor cannot withhold evidence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: catspaw49 Date: 11 Jun 13 - 08:19 AM Well Brucie I don't think anyone doesn't want him to have a fair trial but Dan's point has always been the only salient point. The stand your ground law should be disregarded when Zimmerman should never have been on THAT ground and hence had no ground to stand. The transcript of the 911 is clear. "We don't need you to do that."(follow Martin) Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jun 13 - 08:22 AM And his lawyer has stated he is NOT using the "Stand your ground" law in defense. So????? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 11 Jun 13 - 09:27 AM Juicy Brucie - did you read what I linked to about "stand your ground"? There has been no prior hearing on "stand your ground" but it COULD still be raised at trial. Secondly - if, as I argue, the matter in question is not evidence and is not discoverable, then no evidence has been withheld. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jun 13 - 10:56 AM Dickie Bridgie, IT IS STILL NOT THE PROSECUTORS CALL. That is for the JUDGE to decide. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 11 Jun 13 - 11:25 AM 1) Q: Is it evidence at all? A: If the judge so decides. 2) Prosecution is not allowed to keep anything from the defense. On occasion, prosecutors have been know to keep some stuff until a few days before the trial, but keep it too late so it doesn't allow the defense to modify or construct its argument and the judge will be seriously POed, if the judge is worth his salt. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 11 Jun 13 - 01:37 PM Brucie and Jest - FFS go and READ the stuff I got from Cornell University (no less). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 11 Jun 13 - 05:35 PM They probably have read it, Richard - they just are incapable of comprehending it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jun 13 - 07:18 PM In the course of any investigation a prosecutor will come across information not related to the case and stuff that most definitely would not be considered as evidence... Does the defense attorney have a right to that information??? That is the question here... When it comes to the pics on Martin's phone, I haven't heard any credible reason why Zimmerman's attorney believes that: a. These pics are evidence of a crime committed later and not related to those pictures and... b. Why Zimmerman's attorney thinks they are... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 11 Jun 13 - 07:46 PM And when the judge agrees, so it will be, Bobert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: catspaw49 Date: 12 Jun 13 - 10:07 AM RICHARD BRIDGE---Assume the following: Zimmerman disregards the police request and follows Martin. At one point they confront each other. Some fighting starts and Martin gets the upper hand. Zimmerman takes out his gun and kills Martin. *Would murder be an overreach? *No one has reported hearing cries to "STOP" but only to help.If this results in a he said/she said type of thing, how would this play out? *I'm just curious as I still see a problem with Z following when told not to do so. You and I often disagree but I have always respected your knowledge as a lawyer. With what "seems" to be known at this point, where do you see this trial going? Thanks Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 12 Jun 13 - 10:22 AM Well, the UK does not have quite the same categories of unlawful killing as the USA so I'd have to do quite a bit of digging to form a view on that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: catspaw49 Date: 12 Jun 13 - 10:32 AM Fair enough Richard......Thanks Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 13 Jun 13 - 09:10 AM http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/did-potential-zimmerman-juror-lie-court-034710693.html Bobert, I gave you a scenario where the TEXTS would be significant, and you keep going on about the PHOTOS. BITH were withheld- Are you trying to get around the fact that I answered your question??? Or are you just being an asshole on general principles, as your racist friend Greggie is? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 13 Jun 13 - 09:40 AM ""Well, the UK does not have quite the same categories of unlawful killing as the USA so I'd have to do quite a bit of digging to form a view on that."" Turning it on its head, would Zimmerman pass the test of "reasonable force" in an English court Richard? Not that this would have any bearing on US proceedings, but it is an indicator of the strength of any defence of using a weapon against an unarmed man. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 13 Jun 13 - 11:14 AM Calm down, Beardy - you're spraying spittle again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 13 Jun 13 - 12:12 PM In all fairness he has the right to the cell phone info ... this is a murder trial so withholding any request would open up a reversal or new trial in the appellate courts just making it drag on and on. The smart thing to do is just give them the damn phone. I can't understand this f up stand your ground law. You have a duty to avoid such situations. I have a Martial arts master rank. I can't clobber someone for insulting me..even when I would like to :-) I would go to jail right now ..as I am bound to avoid such situations as Bobart said. He was carrying a firearm even more restrictive ... he was legally bound to avoid the situation as the police ordered him to stand down .. second degree murder is the right charge I think but I am no lawyer |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 13 Jun 13 - 12:15 PM No arguement at all, old dude. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 13 Jun 13 - 07:35 PM Please explain, ol'ster, how pics from weeks or even days before Martin was murdered is evidence in this case... I mean, if there was one with Martin holding up a sign saying he was going to whup Zimmerman's ass, yeah... Haven't heard that such a pic existed or that Martin even knew that Zimmerman existed... Where, exactly, is any evidence???\ Martin smoked pot??? Last I heard that smoking pot wasn't a capital offense... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: pdq Date: 13 Jun 13 - 08:00 PM "...he was legally bound to avoid the situation as the police ordered him to stand down..." Zimmerman said he was following the suspect and the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that." First, that is a suggestion, not an order to "stand down". Second, it came from the dispatcher (not a cop) who has no authority to order a civilian to do anything. Besides, Zimmerman was the authorized neighborhood watchman at that time. "...I can't understand this f up stand your ground law. You have a duty to avoid such situations... The man who wrote the Stand Your Ground law says it does not apply in this case. The district attorney, all the lawyers involved in the case, and most of the national pundits say the Stand Your Ground has nothing to do with this case. Why do so many Mudcatters even bring it up? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 13 Jun 13 - 08:09 PM Come on, pdq... That is a ridiculous argument... Order v. suggestion, my butt... Look, dude... Zimmerman called the police... Not vice versa... The dispatcher told him to stay in his vehicle and that real police were being dispatched... Suggestion??? Get real, man... You are spinning faster than a top... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 13 Jun 13 - 09:29 PM " The district attorney, all the lawyers involved in the case, and most of the national pundits say the Stand Your Ground has nothing to do with this case. Why do so many Mudcatters even bring it up?" I don't know why they bring it up. I have guess. I'm pretty sure it was the excuse Sanford Law enforcement gave for not Prosecuting Zimmerman in the first place. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 14 Jun 13 - 12:25 AM The relevant UK law (as it seems to me) is discussed in part 4 of the Law Commission Report here - http://lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/docs/lc290_Partial_Defences_to_Murder.pdf My first thought is that it would be impossible under UK law for Zimmerman's use of a firearm to have been "reasonable force" for the purposes of the law of self defence since it would have been impossible under UK law for Zimmerman's carriage and discharge of a firearm to ahve been lawful. My second thought is that if one ignores the firearm element the defence of self defence would only have been possible if Martin attacked Zimmerman rather than the other way round. This becomes somewhat convoluted in that (assuming that Martin did not intend to kill Zimmerman - possibly a large assumption) if Martin genuinely and reasonably apprehended an assault on him by Zimmerman (a belief that I would have thought eminently reasonable) he would have been entitled to use reasonable force to defend himself from that apprehended assault, and the known damage to Zimmerman (if caused by Martin, another possible issue) would seem to be within that level of force. But (and so it goes round) it seems inescapable that if Martin attacked Zimmerman ( believing it to be in self defence) it is hard to doubt that Zimmerman would be likely to believe that he was being assaulted - in which case he would be entitled himself to use reasonable force. So there are two pathways to Zimmerman being convicted of murder. First if it be found that he attacked Martin, I think he would be guilty of murder under English law. Second if it be found that he was attacked by Martin but then used excessive force, he would be guilty. I do not see how, under English law, the use of an unlawful firearm could be anything other than excessive force. Another issue of fact would be whether Martin was merely trying to get away when Zimmerman shot him. If so the English law is beyond doubt, Zimmerman would be guilty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: catspaw49 Date: 14 Jun 13 - 07:38 AM Thank you Richard for the link and the analysis. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 14 Jun 13 - 08:23 AM TO REPEAT: Since Bobert continues... Bobert, I gave you a scenario where the TEXTS would be significant, and you keep going on about the PHOTOS. BOTH were withheld- Are you trying to get around the fact that I answered your question??? Or are you just being an asshole on general principles, as your racist friend Greggie is? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jun 13 - 08:29 AM No, bb, I am not "being an asshole" at all... That's projectionism on your part... Proclaiming that you have answered the question and actually having provided a reasonable answer are two different things... You are strong at proclamations but weak in logic or honesty... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:08 AM From the Guardian re Stand Your Ground Laws. I've read elsewhere that Zimmerman's defense may try to use SYG if the jury trial doesn't work out. Considering Martin's ethnicity it could be his ace in the hole in Florida, if they're allowed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:37 AM Bobert, YOU have never acknowledged, or discusses the strength of MY comment. Do I have to repeat it another time??? Have you forgotten it? Are you just ignoring anything you don't agree with? I gave you a sample text that WOULD HAVE BEEN EVIDENCE that could have been on the phone, and withheld by the prosecution - Yet you keep on about pictures? Why? YOUR posting as if I had not answered your request, WHICH I DID, is being an asshole. If you don't want to be considered an asshole, stop acting like one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:42 AM From: beardedbruce - PM Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this: "I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him." Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:45 AM From: beardedbruce - PM Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:33 AM Bobert, "Tell me, anyone, how a picture that trevon took of himself a month before is fucking "evidence"??????????????????????????????????????? Or shut the fuck up about withheld so-called "evidence"... Yes, beardedbruce... You brought this up... Use your wildest imagination on how these pics are relevant to the evidence in this case... " My posts: *IF* Bobert sees no reason to require the prosecution TO FOLLOW THE LAW in this case, I see no difference between him and those who lynch people they are "sure" ( from news reports) have committed some crime. Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this: "I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him." Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants. Such a text message MIGHT lead a reasonable jury to believe that Zimmerman was attacked, and that makes a difference, doesn't it? "He stalked the kid, the kid died, shot with his gun." OR "He followed a suspected burglar, was attacked by the suspect, and in fear of his life while having his head pounded into the cement, shot the suspect with his gun" Whether he showed good judgement in following the suspect I will not state- but THIS is as likely as any other scenario. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:51 AM Bobert, YOU are the one who is strong at proclamations but weak or entirely failing in logic or honesty... "That's projectionism on your part... Proclaiming that you have answered the question and actually having provided a reasonable answer are two different things..." You have NEVER addressed my response, except to say that it is not reasonable. Why, Can you even give a reason you reject it out of hand besides YOUR conviction that Zimmerman should be lynched to make up for past injustices of the system? You have never provided ANY reason that the evidence SHOULD be withheld from the Defense, yet continue to protest any statement that the prosecution needs to play by the law IN ORDER TO HAVE A FAIR TRAIL. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jun 13 - 10:06 AM Shear numbers of posts do not strengthen your arguments, bb... If you can't make a point with a single post then that points to nothing but spin and more spin... Guess better the first time, dude... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 14 Jun 13 - 10:13 AM Again, Bobert, you attack me and DO NOT DISCUSS the answer I gave to your question. As this is not the first time, I have to conclude that you agree it is reason enough to be evidence, and thus YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE for your continued discussion about "Pictures not being evidence " when the point is EVIDENCE BEING WITHHELD BY THE PROSECUTION. " Shear numbers of posts do not strengthen your arguments, bb... If you can't make a point with a single post then that points to nothing but spin and more spin... " And HOW MANY times are you going to bring up the non-relevant pictures? Sheer numbers of posts DO NOT strengthen your ( nonexistent) argument. If you can't make a point with a single post then that points to nothing but spin and more spin... As someone I used to have some respect for once said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:00 PM Tell ya' what, bruce... First of all, I don't read any posts by anyone who feels they have to SCREAM... Second of all, nor do most people... Thirdly, people who feel they have to SCREAM at people are rude, boorish and 99% wrong... When you can act like a sane person and quit with your rude SCREAMING then maybe I'll read your stuff... Until then. you are SCREAMING in the middle of the forest all by yourself... Bye until you quit with the insane SCREAMING... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:06 PM Bobert, In other words, you refuse to address the issue. As I said, you are acting like a real asshole. If you have a problem with my example of possible evidence, let me know why and what you disagree with- denying that I have given one makes you a liar. And people who have one set of rules for those they agree with, and a different set for those they disagree with are bigots, whether they like the term or not. If the rules you apply to others do not apply to yourself, you might as well tell me to go sit in the back of the bus, or use separate water fountains. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:08 PM Again, Bobert, you attack me and do not discuss the answer I gave to your question. As this is not the first time, I have to conclude that you agree it is reason enough to be evidence, and thus you are an asshole for your continued discussion about "Pictures not being evidence " when the point is *** Evidence being withheld by the Prosecution. *** " Shear numbers of posts do not strengthen your arguments, bb... If you can't make a point with a single post then that points to nothing but spin and more spin... " And how many times are you going to bring up the non-relevant pictures? Sheer numbers of posts do not strengthen your ( nonexistent) argument. If you can't make a point with a single post then that points to nothing but spin and more spin... As someone I used to have some respect for once said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:09 PM Wow... Two posts without a single episode... Good start... I'll read them later... Break time is over... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:10 PM Yassa, Bossman. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 14 Jun 13 - 01:13 PM 200 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 14 Jun 13 - 02:41 PM Not a lawyer but as a former law enforcement officer the prosecution and defense are entitled to anything that was in possession at the time of the crime or alleged crime. If you withhold anything in discovery the case can be overturned. Yes a judge makes that decision but he is open to having the case retried or thrown out. You bet the prosecution has his cell phone, give the defense the other it is just smart. I respectfully disagree with those who say don't |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 14 Jun 13 - 02:56 PM Bobert, You are the one who is strong at proclamations but weak or entirely failing in logic or honesty... "That's projectionism on your part... Proclaiming that you have answered the question and actually having provided a reasonable answer are two different things..." You have never addressed my response, except to say that it is not reasonable. Why, Can you even give a reason you reject it out of hand besides your conviction that Zimmerman should be lynched to make up for past injustices of the system? You have never provided any reason that the evidence SHOULD be withheld from the Defense, yet continue to protest any statement that the prosecution needs to play by the law in order to have a fair trial |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jun 13 - 07:25 PM Screaming again, I see, bb... Now, if you want to re-answer the original question about the so-called evidence and can do it without SCREAMING then I will respond to it... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: YorkshireYankee Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:50 PM Aww, c'mon Bobert. ONE word in caps is not exactly screaming - it's just emphasis. From my POV, both of you - and Greg, too - have gotten to the point where there's way more personal attacks and emotive language in your posts than actual discussion. One person says something nasty/baits the other person - who responds in kind - and the "debate" deteriorates from there. Makes it kinda pointless to "discuss" it, don't it? I respect all of you, think you're all intelligent guys and can see where you're coming from. I'd just like to see debate without all the personal animosity. Passion does not require antagonistic behavior... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jun 13 - 11:43 AM Bobert, "From: Bobert - PM Date: 14 Jun 13 - 07:25 PM Screaming again, I see, bb... Now, if you want to re-answer the original question about the so-called evidence and can do it without SCREAMING then I will respond to it... B~" So, *You* can scream, and that is ok, but when *I* do so, it is wrong? The previous post was emphasis- And you have still not addressed my last three posts. Send me to the back of the bus. As I stated, a person who requires one set of rules for those he agrees with, and another set for those he does not agree with is a bigot. You are busy qualifying. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 17 Jun 13 - 12:12 PM Send me to the back of the bus. I'm starting to believe that BullshitBruce thinks he's a Negro, instead of just a jackass. So, Bullshit: how old were you in 1963? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 17 Jun 13 - 12:22 PM YorkshireYankee ...Right on! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jun 13 - 01:28 PM Trying to make a point with a single post! Right, how about this. Bobert worries that the defence will try to prejudice the case. He is RIGHT! Given half a chance, they WILL! Simple. Bruce is concerned that the prosecution will try to prejudice the case to secutre a conviction. He is RIGHT! Given half a chance, they WILL! Simple. Bruce believes that the prosecution should hand over to the defence, anything which MIGHT be evidence. He is RIGHT! They SHOULD! Bobert believes that the phone cannot contain anything which would constitute evidence. He is not in a position to make that statement, since only two of many possible saved items have been mentioned. True that, on the face of it, those two would be irrelevant, except as pertaining to the victim's character, and even that is dubious given that replica and toy guns look frighteningly real these days. But nobody except the prosecution knows what else is on that phone, and that is why the defence must have sight of it, if a conviction is not to be overturned on appeal. THE JUDGE is the only person qualified to rule upon the admissibility of such evidence, since he is (supposedly) the only impartial party involved. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jun 13 - 01:38 PM Don T. I agree with your entire post- though I did give a hypothetical text that would probably be admissible as evidence. But since you "SHOUTED", Bobert will not bother to read anything you wore- Only he and those who support him are allowed to "SHOUT" . The rest of us are 2nd class people who should know their place and not bring up anything to disturb those who are (self-defined) "correct" And that is what I am the most annoyed with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jun 13 - 01:45 PM Again, for Bobert and his sensitive ego- with emphasis removed, so he can understand. Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this: "I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him." Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants. Such a text message *might* lead a reasonable jury to believe that Zimmerman was attacked, and that makes a difference, doesn't it? "He stalked the kid, the kid died, shot with his gun." or "He followed a suspected burglar, was attacked by the suspect, and in fear of his life while having his head pounded into the cement, shot the suspect with his gun" Whether he showed good judgement in following the suspect I will not state- but *this* is as likely as any other scenario. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jun 13 - 01:49 PM Greggie boy, "I'm starting to believe that BullshitBruce thinks he's a Negro, instead of just a jackass." So, *you* rate Negros as below jackasses, as well as considering "Black and a Democrat " the same as "dumb Ni**er"? And Bobert supports you, or at least keeps quiet because you help attack those he disagrees with... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jun 13 - 02:03 PM btw, Bobert, "If" is a conditional- I do not claim that the statement *is* on the phone, but *if* it was, it would have a good chance of being admissible. I will continue to point this out each time you claim there is no reason for the prosecution to obey the law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 17 Jun 13 - 02:15 PM Well well, first Greg slurs Bruce because he says he is Jewish, and now it's because , "*you* rate Negros as below jackasses, as well as considering "Black and a Democrat " the same as "dumb Nigger"? (I put back the G's, as not to be 'discriminatory')..It sounds like if he is using these words, as a debasing tool and tactic, because he's run out of 'other' derogatory names, it sounds like he's got some REAL bigotry issues....that's one reason I've called him a 'so-called liberal'!..among other hypocrites on here...hey Greg, come on, clean up your act..starting with your ugly hatreds in your head...I'm surprised Bobart hasn't jumped your shit for it, already.......unless.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jun 13 - 02:23 PM GfS Greggie boy had stated "I'm starting to believe that BullshitBruce thinks he's a Negro, instead of just a jackass." I stated that So, *you* rate Negros as below jackasses, as well as considering "Black and a Democrat " the same as "dumb Ni**er"? Since he used "just" in *his* posting. He considers that *any* second class citizen must refer to Negros, from his postings. And Bobert never says one word about how those who support him are being "rude, boorish and 99% wrong", you know- that would be from the other set of rules he has for the "master" group that agree with him. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 17 Jun 13 - 02:44 PM The wordage might have been what it was, but the intent is obviously there....however, your point is 'so noted'. Bobert is just a soled out Democrat. He doesn't get past their 'talking points', and stays confined within them..though I love the guy...the problem is, is that he is more dedicated to the Democrat Party, than they are to him, his best interests, or America's....they are just the other shills for the banksters, just like the Republicans, so that the national dialogue is also confined to what the party dictates that it 'should be'.....but what it really is, is distraction fodder, to keep the American people blinded, and occupied with bullshit issues, while steering us away from the bigger picture....and to keep the partisans, who think that they are so astute in such matters, preoccupied and busy with mental masturbation!!! Sorry guys, but that's the way it REALLY is!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 17 Jun 13 - 03:01 PM Don, every day, in thousands of cases, the lawyers for the parties decide what they are obliged to disclose. It's part of the disclosure process. You need to read up on your legal practice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 17 Jun 13 - 04:07 PM Okay, Bruce... Let's say that Martin had said that he was going to check out a house to burglarize and beat the crap out of the owner of the house... Let's also say that he had said this just the night before... Unless Zimmerman knew that this prior to following and murdering Martin why is it relevant... We do character witnesses for defend0ants, not murder victims... The bottom line here is simple... In the South we have way too many judges who are either elected or appointed by the local powers at be... That is my beef here... It's not that I don't believe that it's up to the judge to put a gag order in place on the prosecutor and defense attorney... It's that the South, especially, has a very bad record with "wink, wink" justice... Any "fair minded" judge would/should have issued a gag order... It's not that Zimmerman won't get a fair trial... It's that Martin won't and he doesn't have any right to appeal... And for the record, it is very unusual for me to SCREAM... When I was using "caps" to write "scream" it wasn't a form of screaming... It was a way of getting you to associate the word with the intent... If you don't get that copy my post and take it to an English professor and have him or her explain it to you... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 17 Jun 13 - 04:33 PM So, *you* rate Negros as below jackasses, as well as considering "Black and a Democrat " the same as "dumb Ni**er"? Since he used "just" in *his* posting. He considers that *any* second class citizen must refer to Negros, from his postings. All YOUR words, BeardedBullshit, not mine. In addition to other problems, you apparently have difficulty in reading and/or comprehending the English Language. Get help. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jun 13 - 05:01 AM ""But since you "SHOUTED", Bobert will not bother to read anything you wore- Only he and those who support him are allowed to "SHOUT" ."" The difference BB is that I wasn't shouting AT Bobert! Emphasis on certain words will clarify the meaning and intent of a passage. "Answer my question!" when capitalised is shouting at the recipient, and I have to say I would share Bobert's anger at that. None of which, of course alters my viewpoint on the topic. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jun 13 - 05:11 AM ""Don, every day, in thousands of cases, the lawyers for the parties decide what they are obliged to disclose. It's part of the disclosure process. You need to read up on your legal practice."" UK law Richard! US law, as practised, seems (and I'm open to correction on this) to take a rather different view. They seem to be saying that if the prosecution has it, the defence must be fully aware of it too. Maybe they don't place as much trust in their lawyers as seems to be the case here. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jun 13 - 05:15 AM ""Bobert is just a soled out Democrat. He doesn't get past their 'talking points',"" Goofus, FFS get off your political hobbyhorse. This thread is about a specific court case, so keep the political claptrap for the political threads you so love to destroy. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 18 Jun 13 - 07:22 AM Well, Don that is not what the words I provided from a respected US university say is the US law. Not that anyone here seemed to notice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jun 13 - 08:15 AM Bobert, You state: "Okay, Bruce... Let's say that Martin had said that he was going to check out a house to burglarize and beat the crap out of the owner of the house... Let's also say that he had said this just the night before... Unless Zimmerman knew that this prior to following and murdering Martin why is it relevant... " It would be relevant, because the defense has stated that it is using self-defense as it's plea. The "fact" that Martin had stated he would attack "anyone who tried to stop him" would strengthen the defense claim that Trevor *did* attack Zimmerman, and support the plea of self defense. Otherwise, it is entirely Zimmerman's word. The present defense story is that Zimmerman followed Martin ( a mistake in my opinion, but he had his reasons) and confronted him. Zimmerman then claims he was attacked by Martin, and was having his head beaten against the ground. In self-defense, Zimmerman shot Martin. I *do* *not* *know* the truth of this story- and neither do you. But to deny Zimmerman his rights to a fair trial because of past injustices in the legal system is wrong, as wrong as lynching someone because of his skin color. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 18 Jun 13 - 08:18 AM Zimmerman is going to jail. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 18 Jun 13 - 09:07 AM So, bb, stand your ground is fine for Zimmerman but not Martin even thou Martin wasn't armed... Is he not allowed to defend himself??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jun 13 - 10:39 AM No, Bobert, *Please* learn to read what is written. " So, bb, stand your ground is fine for Zimmerman but not Martin even thou Martin wasn't armed... C 1. Zimmerman is ++not++ using "Stand Your Ground" He is using self defense, claiming that after confronting Martin ("Hey! What are you doing here?") he (Zimmerman) was attacked ++by++ Martin and was having his (Zimmerman's) head pounded into a bloody pulp. 2. ++If++ you attack me with your fists, and are inflicting bodily harm on me, and I am in fear of my life, I ++will++ shoot you if I have a gun. "Is he not allowed to defend himself???" ++That++ is what the trial is supposed to determine - ++Who++ was attacking and who was defending themselves. Are you stating that Zimmerman was ++not++ allowed to defend himself if he was attacked?? ++If++ Zimmerman physically attacked Martin, Zimmerman is in the wrong. ++If++ Martin physically attacked Zimmerman after a verbal confrontation, ++Martin++ was in the wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:05 AM Who instigated the conflict, bb??? Martin, who was walking home from a convenience store or... ...Zimmerman who was told by the police to stay in his car??? No spin, dude... Just answer the question... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:07 AM In any case, it was a tragedy- but lynching a person who might have been defending himself from an attack ++regardless++ of the color of his skin is ++wrong++. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:14 AM Cross-posted. Bobert, "Who instigated the conflict, bb??? Martin, who was walking home from a convenience store or... ...Zimmerman who was told by the police to stay in his car??? No spin, dude... Just answer the question..." ++You++ have already spun it like a top. How about Who instigated the conflict, Bobert?? Martin, who was walking around possibly looking to break in, steal stuff, and beat up some white boy, (As ++you++ said, Zimmerman could not know why Martin was there- but could ask) or... ...Zimmerman who was the neighborhood watch in an area with previous breakins, who asked someone he saw why he was there and was physically attacked and having his head beaten into mush????? No spin, dude... Just answer the question... Suppose it had been an older Black preacher and a white skinhead, and the skinhead was killed. ++If++ that makes a difference, ++you++ are the one in the wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:29 AM 1. As a neighborhood watch person Zimmerman was not supposed to be armed... That has been reported by a member of a nation citizen's watch association... 2. Zimmerman had a criminal history involving violence and perhaps shouldn't have been allowed to be a neighborhood watch person to begin with... 3. You are wrong as wrong can be, bb about the instigation... Zimmerman has never denied that he got out of of his vehicle... Nor has he denied that he approached Martin... Nor has he denied that he had a gun... This is just simple "common sense" to anyone who has any common sense... Perhaps you don't get it but it is common sense... Had Zimmerman not gotten out of his vehicle (the police told him to stay in his vehicle) then there wouldn't have been a murder... That is plain as day and night... That makes Zimmerman the instigator... 4. Again, Martin had a right to defend himself against someone who had instigated the conflict... You would, I would and Martin tried... These are the facts of the case... This isn't about what Martin said that isn't related to the case... The only exception would be if Martin knew Zimmerman and made statements that he was going to try to harm Zimmerman... That would be the only exception... That is not that case... No, I'm not spinning at all here, bb... As you will see as this case goes along what I am saying is what the case is about and what you are saying is just... ...noise... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:35 AM I disagree with you, Bobert, and think that a trial judge should determine guilt, not a public opinion poll , and even someone I think is guilty deserves to have a fair trial. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jun 13 - 11:43 AM Bobert, "1. As a neighborhood watch person Zimmerman was not supposed to be armed... That has been reported by a member of a nation citizen's watch association..." Standards differ in various areas. I do not know the Florida standards- Do you? "2. Zimmerman had a criminal history involving violence and perhaps shouldn't have been allowed to be a neighborhood watch person to begin with..." I ++agree++. That does not make him guilty of murder. "3. You are wrong as wrong can be, bb about the instigation... Zimmerman has never denied that he got out of of his vehicle... Nor has he denied that he approached Martin... Nor has he denied that he had a gun... This is just simple "common sense" to anyone who has any common sense... Perhaps you don't get it but it is common sense... Had Zimmerman not gotten out of his vehicle (the police told him to stay in his vehicle) then there wouldn't have been a murder... That is plain as day and night... That makes Zimmerman the instigator.. So, If I am in a bad area, and the operator tells me to stay in my car, and I get out because I see suspicious people, ++I++ am the instigator if one of them kills me? "4. Again, Martin had a right to defend himself against someone who had instigated the conflict... You would, I would and Martin tried..." And you claim Zimmerman did not have that right, ++even++ if he was attacked physically after asking a verbal question??? ++As++ ++I++ ++posted++, the trial is to determine who was at fault- ++Your++ statement as to Zimmerman's guilt is just "noise" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 18 Jun 13 - 12:52 PM 1. There are national standards for neighborhood watches, bruce... The operative word in neighborhood watch is, ahhhhh, watch... That is the backbone of the program everywhere... The difference between a neighborhood watch program and armed security is night and day... Armed security are people who have specific training in weapons... If you can find one neighborhood watch group that arms untrained watchers please feel free to offer up your source... If not, then this argument of yours is null and void... 2. We agree but if Martin (the victim) gets a fair trial, Zimmerman has to be convicted of, at the very least, wrongful death... 3. There is a name for someone, other than a law enforcement officer, who gets out of his car with a gun because he is suspicious... It's called vigilante... 4. You miss the point yet again... If the conflict was initiated by Zimmerman then nothing that followed absolves Zimmerman from liability... Once Zimmerman made the initial contact, which BTW is not in dispute, then Martin had every right to defend himslef... Bottom line, Part 649: The only way that anything that was on Martin's cell phone that could be relevant to this case would have to involved this case... Since Martin and Zimmerman didn't know one another at the time of the "encounter" there can be nothing on that phone that can be used as "evidence"... Zimmerman's attorney knows this yet he has used the media to try to poison the jury pool... The judge is negligent and derelict here in not imposing a gag order... And, yes, I do know quite a bit of law... When I was in business I had the opportunity to represent my company in court well over 20 times against "real lawyers" and in all but one of those cases won the rest of them... Got to where the "real lawyers", most of whom I knew personally, would try to settle rather than litigate... No brag, just fact... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jun 13 - 01:24 PM "If the conflict was initiated by Zimmerman then nothing that followed absolves Zimmerman from liability... Once Zimmerman made the initial contact, which BTW is not in dispute, then Martin had every right to defend himslef..." OK, I meet you on the street, and ++You++ say "What are you doing here?" I take this as an attack, and start beating your head against the ground. You shoot me- ++You++ as the instigator are guilty of murder? That is what you are saying |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 18 Jun 13 - 01:31 PM In the UK one is allowed to use reasonable force in self defence. Shooting an unarmed man might well not count. I have explained this above. The US belief that resort to a firearm is socially normative is out of whack by many other countries' standards. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:11 PM This case isn't an "Okay, I meet you on the street" case, bruce... This is a case where the victim was stalked and confronted... That is a major difference... The facts of the case as we know them are that Zimmerman got out of his vehicle with a gun and confronted the victim... That isn't at all the scenario that you have just presented... Your scenario has nothing to do with the realities of this case... I mean, your posts are like spin on crack cocaine... If you were my lawyer I'd fire you... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:18 PM If I were your lawyer I would quit, since you don't listen to what I said. The scenario I presented is what the defense in this case is presenting, and thus is significant in terms of the allowable evidence- ++If++ there were texts that indicated that Martin would attack someone who tried to stop him, hat would support the Defense claim that Zimmerman was attacked. OK, have it your way- violate Zimmerman's rights, convict him in a mock trial, and have him get off for the mistrial. Then ++You++ can take credit for the (many) deaths and destruction from the riots after the "miscarriage" of justice. Since that is what ++you++ want. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:31 PM The US belief that resort to a firearm is socially normative is out of whack by many other countries' standards. Its also out of whack with the standards of many - if not most - thinking people here in the US too, Richard. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:35 PM I once had a friend—a guitar student of mine—who was also a gun enthusiast. I joined him a number of times at the firing range, bought myself a target pistol, and thorough enjoyed popping holes in paper at 25 yards. But my friend carried a Colt .45 automatic with him at all times. He had a concealed weapons permit, and he was never without the pistol. His wife told me that he even slept with it on the bedside table. There were a number of incidents. One night he very nearly shot a mutual friend approaching him whom he did not immediately recognize. Out with the .45 and drew a bead on Buzz's chest and was about to pull the trigger when he suddenly realized who it was. Another time, he whipped out the .45 and took aim at someone trying to flee from a hit-and-run accident and got himself arrested by the police, who already had the situation in hand. My friend (ex-friend—I came to the conclusion that he was just too damned dangerous to be around—and his wife divorced him after a couple of years of marriage) was arrested by the police and his gun was confiscated. And his concealed weapons permit was rescinded for a three month period. He was told by the judge, in no uncertain terms, that the hit-and-run accident did not justify the use of lethal force. So I know this kind of person. They have a gun, they fancy themselves Defenders of Law and Order—and they are itching to shoot someone!!. A black teen-ager, walking in the evening, wearing a "hoody," and carrying "something" in his hand (a box of candy he had just purchase at a convenience store), and Zimmerman assumed was casing the neighborhood, was just too big a temptation! The police told him to cool it, but he went ahead anyway. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 18 Jun 13 - 04:47 PM Yup, Don... That's the case at hand... BB wants to make it about Zimmerman being lynched or not getting a fair trial... What a bunch of baloney... Zimmerman's attorney is already getting away with stuff that most reasonable and non-partisan judges would have stopped immediately which does not bode well for justice being served here... Shaping up like O.J., Part II... The point that Martin doesn't get an appeal seems to have shot right over bb's head... It's Martin who isn't going to get a fair trial... As for the lynching... Black kid with hoodie??? He got a 9mm lynching... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jun 13 - 08:08 AM I repeat, Bobert: OK, I meet you on the street, and ++You++ say "What are you doing here?" I take this as an attack, and start beating your head against the ground. You shoot me (after getting your head pounded) ++You++ as the instigator are guilty of murder? You have stated that you, as the instigator, are guilty of at least 2nd degree murder. You have never answered any of my questions, nor acknowledged that I did provide an example of possible evidence that could be on the phone. You have made a presumption of guilt on this, denying the basic tenant of American Justice that innocence is presumed, and the prosecution has to prove otherwise. What can I say but that you are advocating a lynching to enforce your view of what happened? Where do you come off any different from the KKK, or other racist groups? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 19 Jun 13 - 08:34 AM Your logic escapes reason, bb... Guess better... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jun 13 - 08:43 AM Bobert, I have tried to explain, but you refuse to address the issues. Your failure to comprehend simple conditionals is not my problem. Your failure to understand that a trial is to determine guilt, not rubber-stamp public opinion ++is++ of concern to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 19 Jun 13 - 09:04 AM Yes, you have tried to explain... The problem is that your logic is badly flawed as you are having to invent scenarios that do not relate to the case... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM Wrong, Bobert. Try to learn what a conditional is, someday. I gave a set of scenarios that the Defense has stated it will be using, thus justifying the phone information as evidence. Any further "judgement" should be done by the ++Judge++ and not the prosecution, as ++You++ have stated. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 19 Jun 13 - 09:30 AM Sorry, bruce, but I'm right and you are wrong... A thousand more of your posts won't change that... Like a learned clinical psychologist once told me when I was a socail worker, "You can't argue with irrational people"... He was right... You can spin out a thousand more irrational/illogical posts but... ...I'm done with you... Bye... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jun 13 - 09:44 AM And you, being "Right," would string Zimmerman up . So what is the difference between you and the Klan? The color of your sheet? The fact "You" know you are right and they are "Wrong"? You are correct in that one cannot argue with an irrational person. Maybe you should look i the mirror sometime. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jun 13 - 10:52 AM So what is the difference between you and the Klan The KLAN? "LYNCHING"?? "The color of your sheet"?? This poses another question: What is the difference between yourself and an obnoxious, irrational, ignorant, foul-mouther asshole? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jun 13 - 11:00 AM "What is the difference between yourself and an obnoxious, irrational, ignorant, foul-mouther asshole?" That's easy- I am "beardedbruce", not "GregF". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jun 13 - 12:03 PM Pretty limp-dick response, Beardy. Where's your usual verbosity & rapier-like wit? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 19 Jun 13 - 12:56 PM The claim that Martin attacked Zimmerman is Zimmerman's story. I saw rwo mug shots of Zimmerman, the first of which was a straight mug shot, the second of which was the same mug shot, but it had been photoshopped to make it look like he was covered with blood. Did Martin attack Zimmerman? I don't think so! That was Zimmerman's excuse for killing Martin. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 19 Jun 13 - 01:10 PM Yeah, like I have pointed out, Don... It was Zimmerman who ignored the police's instruction to remain in his vehicle... Had he done that then Martin would be alive today... All this talk of lynching of Zimmerman is the sickest of sick thinking... The only lynching that has occurred was done by Zimmerman with a handgun... Lets also look at the builds of these two people... Zimmerman is a pretty beefy dude... Martin was a skinny kid... Skinny kids generally don't go attacking guys who out weigh them by 50 or so pounds... I mean, I understand exactly what Zimmerman's attorney is up to... It's trickery and it's part of his job but it's also the job of the judge to try to have a fair trial and unless the judge is willing to put a gag order out there then this is going to be O.J., Part 2... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jun 13 - 03:14 PM Subject: RE: BS: NON-Partisan political comments From: beardedbruce - PM Date: 02 Oct 04 - 11:41 PM and from Bobert: "Unless you are capable and willing to look beyond *your* side then you are allready in the loser category in my book. I mean no disrespect here but life isn't about winning law suits but being able to find common ground or selling visions." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 22 Jun 13 - 03:32 PM "The judge in the George Zimmerman trial has ruled that two voice identification experts who suggested that unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin screamed for help before he was shot and killed by Zimmerman will not be allowed to testify at the trial." Judge blocks audio expert testimony in Trayvon Martin case |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 22 Jun 13 - 03:42 PM Like I have pointed out: So much for ***Martin*** getting a fair trial... Welcome to the South, folks... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 22 Jun 13 - 03:45 PM Also from the same link: "On Friday, the judge also dismissed a defense motion to bar certain words and phrases from the prosecution's opening statement. She ruled prosecutors could allege that Zimmerman, who is Hispanic, "profiled" Martin but ordered them not to use the term "racial profiling." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 23 Jun 13 - 08:53 AM Didn't one of the first people to reach the scene say that Zimmerman was astride Martin's chest with Martin on his back? If you were underneath someone, having your head bashed in, and you shot him, you would push him off and get up. Why would you turn him over and kneel astride the body? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 23 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM Necrophilia? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jun 13 - 08:28 AM "Meanwhile, defense attorney Mark O'Mara cross-examined Wendy Dorival, who served as volunteer program coordinator for the Sanford Police Department. Dorival stated that neighborhood watch volunteers were not supposed to follow suspects, but added that she thought Zimmerman was a professional person, and had tried to recruit him to a citizens patrol program. She said that it was suspicious that a person – Trayvon Martin – was walking in the rain between houses without a particular purpose.' And these are the Prosecution's witnesses. Already proven that one of Bobert's standard lies is just that- the "Police told him not to follow" line. It was the 911 operator: "According to another witness, a 911 operator, it is not within the purview of 911 operators to give orders to callers." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jun 13 - 08:47 AM Wendy Dorival, who trained Zimmerman in his duties as the watch representative for his gated community, described him as "a little meek" and someone who wanted to "make changes in his community to make it better." Although a PowerPoint slide as part of Dorival's orientation presentation declared citizens are "NOT the vigilante police," she told defense attorney Don West that seeing an unknown or suspicious person walking around in the rain or on a pathway not meant for walking would be grounds for calling the police department's nonemergency number. That testimony could assist the defense in painting Zimmerman as someone who was simply carrying out his neighborhood watch duties rather than hunting down an unarmed teenager. The defense's case was further strengthened by testimony that there had been burglaries in Zimmerman's community, including one in which a home was entered while a mother of a small child was upstairs. "She was alone," Dorival said. "It was terrifying for her. She was still shaken up by it. It seemed very fresh to her." Dorival testified that residents who had an issue "were directed to call Mr. Zimmerman." Perhaps just as significantly, Dorival came to Zimmerman with the idea of assuming greater duty in community policing. Asked why, Dorival said it was because of Zimmerman's "demeanor" and "his high interest in being part of a Sanford community." http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/haunting-photos-unexpected-witness-defense-day-2-zimmerman-214809362.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Jun 13 - 08:59 AM Well, well, well... Seems as if the judge has yet another opportunity to stick it to Martin and the prosecution today as police tapes of Zimmerman made prior to the murder indicating Zimmerman's focus on black males being in the neighborhood may not be admissible??? Huh??? Yup, Zimmerman had a history of calling the police when he saw black males in the neighborhood... Not evidence??? I would think the jury has a right to know of those calls... We'll see... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jun 13 - 09:18 AM Bobert, From your comments, you are still only interested in finding Zimmerman guilty and punishing him for all the past injustices of the system- regardless of his guilt or innocence. I am interested in finding out the truth. Sort of like having justice, instead of a lynching. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 26 Jun 13 - 09:31 AM I am interested in finding out the truth Yeah, right. By the way, Beardy, what's this lynching fixation of yours? Someone already asked you that a while back, & you failed to answer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jun 13 - 10:13 AM Bobert: "Also Wednesday, Judge Debra Nelson ruled that she would allow at trial five police dispatch calls Zimmerman made in the months prior to his encounter with Martin. Prosecutors want to use the calls to bolster their argument that Zimmerman was increasingly frustrated with repeated burglaries and had reached a breaking point the night he shot the unarmed teenager. Prosecutors played the calls for the judge Tuesday with the jurors out of the courtroom. The recordings show Zimmerman's "ill will," prosecutor Richard Mantei said. "It shows the context in which the defendant sought out his encounter with Trayvon Martin," he said. O'Mara argued that the calls were irrelevant and that nothing matters but the seven or eight minutes before Zimmerman fired the deadly shot into Martin's chest. In the calls, Zimmerman identifies himself as a neighborhood watch volunteer and recounts that his neighborhood has had a rash of recent break-ins. In one call, he asks that officers respond quickly since the suspects "typically get away quickly." In another, he describes suspicious black men hanging around a garage and mentions his neighborhood had a recent garage break-in. " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jun 13 - 10:15 AM "Seems as if the judge has yet another opportunity to stick it to Martin and the prosecution today as police tapes of Zimmerman made prior to the murder indicating Zimmerman's focus on black males being in the neighborhood may not be admissible??? Huh??? Yup, Zimmerman had a history of calling the police when he saw black males in the neighborhood... Not evidence??? I would think the jury has a right to know of those calls..." So did the judge. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Jun 13 - 10:31 AM Greg, Remind bb that I don't read his posts anymore... His irrational thinking isn't worth my time... Thanks, B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Jun 13 - 12:45 PM "She said it was suspicious that a person was walking in the rain..." That is completely insane. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Jun 13 - 12:50 PM When it comes to sanity there ain't gonna be too much of that with this trial... The judge is already screwing around with the prosecution's case... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jun 13 - 02:16 PM Bobert: "The judge is already screwing around with the prosecution's case..." "Seems as if the judge has yet another opportunity to stick it to Martin and the prosecution today as police tapes of Zimmerman made prior to the murder indicating Zimmerman's focus on black males being in the neighborhood may not be admissible??? Real world: "Also Wednesday, Judge Debra Nelson ruled that she would allow at trial five police dispatch calls Zimmerman made in the months prior to his encounter with Martin. Prosecutors want to use the calls to bolster their argument that Zimmerman was increasingly frustrated with repeated burglaries and had reached a breaking point the night he shot the unarmed teenager. Prosecutors played the calls for the judge Tuesday with the jurors out of the courtroom. The recordings show Zimmerman's "ill will," prosecutor Richard Mantei said. "It shows the context in which the defendant sought out his encounter with Trayvon Martin," he said." Of course, Real World facts have no bearing on this case- after all, in the Real World, with a fair trial Zimmerman might not be convicted. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jun 13 - 03:01 PM A former neighbor of George Zimmerman testified Wednesday that she heard a boy's cry for help shortly before hearing the firing of a gun. But Jayne Surdyka also testified on the third day of testimony in Zimmerman's murder trial that she heard multiple gunshots: "pop, pop, pop." Only one shot was fired in the fatal encounter between Zimmerman and 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. "I truly believe the second yell for help was a yelp," said Surdyka, who later dabbed away tears as prosecutors played her 911 call. "It was excruciating. I really felt it was a boy's voice." Surdyka told the court that before the shooting, she heard an aggressive voice and a softer voice exchanging words for several minutes. "It was someone being very aggressive and angry at someone," she said. During the struggle, she said, she saw a person in dark clothes on top of the other person. Martin was wearing a dark sweatshirt and Zimmerman wore red clothing. Surdyka said she saw the person who was on top get off the body after the shot was fired. During cross-examination, defense attorney Don West tried to show there was a lapse in what Surdyka saw. Defense attorneys contend Martin was on top of Zimmerman during the struggle, but after the neighborhood watch volunteer fired a shot, Zimmerman got on top of Martin. West also challenged Surdyka about her belief that the cry for help was a boy's voice, saying she was making an assumption about whose voice it was. Another neighbor, Jeannee Manalo, testified after Surdyka that she believed Zimmerman was on top of Martin. Manalo also described hearing howling, but she couldn't tell who it was coming from. Under cross-examination, defense attorney Mark O'Mara asked why she had never mentioned her belief that Zimmerman was on top in previous police interviews. He made her read back a transcript of an interview in which she described only seeing shadows." Note: "During the struggle, she said, she saw a person in dark clothes on top of the other person. Martin was wearing a dark sweatshirt and Zimmerman wore red clothing. Surdyka said she saw the person who was on top get off the body after the shot was fired." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jun 13 - 03:06 PM McGrath, "She said that it was suspicious that a person – Trayvon Martin – was walking in the rain between houses without a particular purpose." Along a street- not suspicious. Between houses- suspicious. Normally one does not go off the public right of way without a reason. Especially in a gated community |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jun 13 - 03:44 PM "Testifying in the Geoge Zimmerman trial, prosecution witness Rachel Jeantel, 19, who says she was on the phone with Trayvon Martin before he was shot, explained that Martin told her that a "creepy ass cracker" was following him. According to Jeantel, Martin was worried that Zimmerman was a rapist, and said to "stop playing with him like that." He also told Jeantel, she said, that the "n----- is now following him." Jeantel is mumbling her testimony, leading to delays in the courtroom. She has already allegedly perjured herself months ago by stating that she missed Martin's funeral because she was in the hospital." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 26 Jun 13 - 03:51 PM There is one lesson in all of this. If you can carry a firearm legally. Avoid at all costs getting yourself into bad situations. Use the firearm only in the most deadly situations that you are put in and never go looking for trouble. Hell there is enough trouble out there in the world without looking for it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 26 Jun 13 - 05:33 PM There is another lesson in this. In fact there are several. I can start the list with "Do not let people carry guns. Guns kill people". I can add "Walking while black is a capital crime". We all know of DWB but this takes it one stage further. Who wants to carry the list on? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Jun 13 - 06:10 PM Ambiguity there. Streets are lined with houses. Walking along a street therefore involves walking between houses. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Jun 13 - 07:27 PM Thank you, ol'ster... The one lesson that I came away with from martial arts is this: When is right to fight... Answer: never... You understand the responsibility that goes with gun ownership... Unfortunately, you are in a small minority of gun owners... I've been hunting with people who say they understand gun safety but take unsafe shots... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 26 Jun 13 - 09:45 PM I've kind of kept arms length away from this shooting, trying not to get overly dogmatic about it. But I have a few questions that I have not heard addressed. #1 According to yesterday's testimony, Martin was shot in "the chest area" and was still (barely) alive when the first responder tried to revive him. He testified that he rolled Martin's body over and gave him mouth to mouth. #2 If Zimmerman is correct in saying that Martin was pounding his head on the concrete, then Martin was on top, i.e. you can't pound someone's head when it is at a distance. (Incidentally, were the two men curbside? Pictures show two small 'lumps' on Zimmerman's head that would seem to indicate an edge to the concrete.) #3 Since Martin was shot in the chest, should not Zimmerman have been covered with blood? According to the first responder's testimony, Martin's heart was still beating, and therefore pumping blood. Zimmerman "was wearing red clothing"- does that explain why the blood was not the most visible thing present? The early accounts that I read never mentioned blood on Zimmerman, nor did I see any pictures of it. #4 Zimmerman was taken down to the precinct station to make a statement and then let go. Presumably this was before he went home and changed clothes. Will there be testimony by the police department describing Zimmerman's clothing? #4 After Martin was shot and Zimmerman was lying beneath him, presumably Martin's body was limp. What is the most common scenario in sliding out from under a limp body? Would one thrust it to the side and slide out? Or would one 'buck' it off? #5 Did Zimmerman examine Martin's body after the shooting? In that case, it would be logical to say that he turned it face up. Yet, the first responder found it face down. All that said, I can imagine that one's thinking processes would be so chaotic, so fragmented, that any logical sequence of events would be impossible. As I said, I am come late to this subject- after all it is now in the trial phase - but please bear with me. I'm sure there is information out there that I don't know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Jun 13 - 09:53 PM Thanks, Eb... Well thought out... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 27 Jun 13 - 12:26 PM You are very right EB, also there would be what is called tattooing on the victim (power burns on the skin from a firearm discharge closer than three to five feet. Likewise the shooters upper torso would be covered in gun shot residue, the spent cartridge would also indicate the distance. I see nothing to describe this stuff. Only questions that don't quite add up to me |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Jun 13 - 09:56 AM Well, seems like Zimmerman's attorneys are trying to make the murder victim the bad guy here... I'm sniffing O.J. Part 2 here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 28 Jun 13 - 10:14 AM Bobster, its Florida he will walk free just watch. If it were Texas they would buy him a new gun |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Jun 13 - 12:31 PM Not only would Texas buy him a new gun, they'd elect him to the US Senate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Jun 13 - 12:45 PM "Good took the stand today and said he first thought he was looking at a dog attack until he noticed two men. He says he yelled "stop" as he watched the fight. "I said cut it out. I'm calling 911 because it was getting serious," said Good. Good says he watched as what looked like punches being thrown. "Could you describe who was on top and who was at bottom," asked prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda. "The color on top was dark and the color at bottom was…red," responded Good referring to the men's clothing. At another point he told the court that the person on the bottom had "lighter skin color." Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who was wearing a red and black jacket that night. Martin, who was black, was wearing a dark sweatshirt. He also said, "The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help.'" Under cross examination by Zimmerman's lawyer, Good said he believes he saw Martin on top punching Zimmerman "MMA style," a reference to mixed martial arts. "The person on top was ground and pounding the person on the bottom?"asked Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara "Correct," said Good But he said he did not see Martin banging Zimmerman's head on the concrete, which is what Zimmerman has claimed. His testimony is in sharp contrast to Selma Mora, another witness to the fatal encounter between Zimmerman and Martin who testified late Thursday that Zimmerman was on top of Martin in the moments before a gunshot ended the fight. "How were the two people positioned that you saw?" asked prosecutor John Guy. Mora told the court Thursday that at some point she saw a man in "patterns between black and red" on top, indicating Zimmerman. "One of them was on the ground, and the other one was on top in position like a rider," Mora, who speaks Spanish, testified through a translator." http://gma.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-witnesses-conflicting-versions-fatal-fight-145530258--abc-news-topstories.html A responder at the scene said Martin's knuckles were bloodied, suggesting he had injured Zimmerman with a punch; - The lead investigator on the scene, Officer Christopher Serino, wrote that Zimmerman could be heard "yelling for help as he was being battered by Trayvon Martin." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Jun 13 - 01:07 PM "CBS) A former neighbor of George Zimmerman testified he saw two men in a "tussle" outside his home the night of Feb. 26, 2012, and said he now believes the person on top in the altercation - which would moments later turn fatal - was Trayvon Martin. In key testimony, he also said he believes George Zimmerman was the person yelling for help. PICTURES: George Zimmerman on trial in death of Fla. teen VIDEO: Zimmerman trial: Prosecutor opens with profanity John Good took the stand Friday in the fifth day of testimony in the Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial. The former neighborhood watch captain is charged with shooting the unarmed teen as he was walking back to his father's fiancee's home through a Sanford, Fla. gated community. John Good testified he saw a man in dark clothing on top of a man who was wearing red or light-colored clothing with lighter skin. Zimmerman, 29, was wearing a red jacket the night of the altercation, and Martin was wearing a dark hoodie. However, Good testified that he didn't see the person on top smashing the other person's head into the sidewalk, as Zimmerman claims Martin did before he fatally shot the teen. READ: Trayvon Martin Shooting: A timeline of events Taking the stand Thursday, John Good said he was at home watching television with his wife when he heard a "faint noise" that seemed to be getting closer. Outside, he said he saw the person on top of another man. The man on the bottom, who he said he now believes is George Zimmerman, yelled for help. "At first it was "What's going on," and no one answered,' " Good said, describing calling out for the men. "And then at that point the person on the bottom, I could finally see, I heard a 'help.' Then at some point I said 'Cut it out.' And then, 'I'm calling 911.' That's when I thought it was getting really serious." The altercation seemed to escalate, according to Good. The struggle moved to the cement pathway, and he said the person in dark clothing straddled the other man in "mixed martial arts position" he later described to police as a "ground and pound." He said he saw "arm movements going downward," though he couldn't be certain the person on top was striking the person on the bottom. "The person you now know to be Trayvon Martin was on top, correct?" asked defense attorney Mark O'Mara. "He was the one raining blows down on George Zimmerman, correct?" "That's what it looked like," Good answered. Good said he then went back inside to call 911. As he was dialing the phone, he heard a gunshot. His 911 call was played in court as the jury listened." http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57591520-504083/george-zimmerman-trial-neighbor-testifies-trayvon-martin-was-straddling-z |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Jun 13 - 01:25 PM "Political Strategist Charles D. Ellison also warns that, "There is the risk of a flashpoint as intense as the aftermath of that fateful Los Angeles police brutality verdict in 1992," if Zimmerman walks free. "At that time, many underestimated the potential for social unrest. And a bit over 20 years to the date, many could be making the same miscalculation at this very moment. The ingredients are there in Sanford and they loom large nationally, from an economy barely managing its own recovery to an unemployment rate that's much higher than it should be, particularly for African-Americans," adds Ellison. Some are even asking whether the law should be ignored and Zimmerman convicted simply to avoid race riots. "Regardless of whether or not Zimmerman acted in self defense, a large segment of the population, particularly the black population, are demanding Zimmerman be punished. And if they don't have their demands satisfied, it is possible they might riot," writes a poster at the Aesops Retreat forum. "So would it be appropriate to consider potential riots when deciding on whether or not to prosecute Zimmerman? Or should justice be blind and follow the rule of law?" Critics of the attempt to convict Zimmerman have cited numerous points of evidence which clearly suggest Zimmerman acted in self-defense and that the case against him was built largely on the back of contrived racial politics." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Jun 13 - 02:59 PM Oh, dear - another bout of bloody postarrhoea. Condition may be approaching critical. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Arkie Date: 28 Jun 13 - 03:52 PM Seems to me the major flaw in the claim that Zimmerman acted in self defense is that he forced the contact with Martin by stalking him and while he may have been comforted in knowing that the had a hand on his pistol he could have kept his distance. He had contacted police and done his duty as neighborhood watch. I think most of us would have developed some concern if we were walking along a residential street and become aware that someone was following us. If there were an armband, cap, or insignia on a car to indicate neighbor watch, we might take note. I doubt that I would confront the stalker, but there is possibly here some who would. Even if Martin confronted Zimmerman and even if he made the first physical contact, Zimmerman is still, at least, partially at fault. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Jun 13 - 12:15 AM Let the verdict come in according to the EVIDENCE, not political posturing. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 29 Jun 13 - 10:07 AM What evidence??? The prosecutors have already had some of their case disallowed by the judge??? This trial is bogus as a $3 bill... We have been told over and over by the media that the prosecution will have an uphill battle... Who writes that and gives it to the reporters to read??? There's more politics in this case than Carter has liver pills... Welcome to the South... Home of Jim Crow, the KKK, the Minutemen and over 1000 organized hate groups and where judges have to be partisan to get their jobs... How do you spell Kangaroo Court??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Jun 13 - 10:26 AM Bobert: "What evidence???" "There's more politics in this case than Carter has liver pills..." Quit being silly...they only disallowed the unintelligible phone call recording, and both sides had their 'expert' witness, to refute each other. It sounds to me, that the real evidence that the DO have, is just not the stuff fits your politics. You've already decided, without hearing all the evidence, or even before the trial's over, how you want it to go, so ANY evidence that doesn't go 'your way', is considered, "What evidence???" Watch a good football game, if you want to root for a team, one way or the other. Trials are different...they just want to get to the facts...no biases, one way or the other. I haven't been on this thread, merely because I figured, it would be a battle of wits, for witless bigots....trying to ensure that their personal discriminations, one way or the other, would rule the day! ....nor have I 'promoted' one side or the other. All I've said was, "Let the verdict come in according to the EVIDENCE, not political posturing." Something wrong with that..................too? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 29 Jun 13 - 12:47 PM I can tell that you have never lived in the South nor paid much attention to what happens down here, GfinS... Google up Greensboro massacre for a quick primer... BTW, the lynching has already occurred here... 9mm style... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 30 Jun 13 - 08:28 AM Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:35 PM Excellent post. Pretty much says it all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 30 Jun 13 - 01:22 PM Thanks, SJL. Here is a link to my post. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 30 Jun 13 - 01:34 PM Bobert, I don't know if you have heard...but in America, or what used to be known as America, you are innocent, unless PROVEN guilty. All the prosecution has to do, is prove its case, and he's convicted. All the prejudice in the world, one way or the other, shouldn't win or lose the case. Why do you bring up and condemn 'lynching', and the 'Greensboro massacre'...and then go on a tirade and play the part, as if you were some frothing idiot in a lynch mob??? Just calm down..let the trial run its course....if the results aren't to your liking, THEN you can join a frothing mob, and riot, like in your southern lynch mob mentality...and while you're rioting, you can keep telling yourself, that it's not about justice, it's about race! Now, does that make you feel better?? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 30 Jun 13 - 05:38 PM Goofball, when the judge and some of the attorneys are displaying a considerable measure of prejudice by disallowing certain testimony and evidence to be presented, it doesn't take an intelligent person long to figure out that the court is biased, and what that bias is. Let me repeat: It doesn't take an intelligent person long to figure out the bias of the court. I personally think they should take that trial out of that jurisdiction and conduct it where there is far less historical prejudice and both George Zimmerman AND Trayvon Martin get a fair verdict. 'Course don't listen to me. I'm only one of those "loony Liberals" who tend to value things like honesty and fairness. . . . Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 30 Jun 13 - 06:00 PM Don: "'Course don't listen to me. I'm only one of those "loony Liberals" who tend to value things like honesty and fairness. . . ." You had me going there..but you lost me about halfway through your last sentence! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 30 Jun 13 - 06:15 PM FFS. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 01 Jul 13 - 11:35 AM "The prosecutors have already had some of their case disallowed by the judge???" I note that you did not complain when the defense had some of it's case disallowed by the judge..... "By most accounts, last week was not what the state in the George Zimmerman case would have hoped for. In one way or another, more than half of the prosecution witnesses supported Zimmerman's account of what happened the night Trayvon Martin was killed. Prosecutors started strong with a powerful, concise opening statement from Assistant State Attorney John Guy, in contrast to the silly knock-knock joke and seemingly disorganized and meandering defense argument. Photos of the final candy and drink that Martin, 17, purchased minutes before his death riveted the jury, followed by haunting images of his dead body, the end result of a quick visit to a 7-11. But then something happened that many would have thought improbable as this case received wall to wall coverage leading up to Zimmerman's arrest. What the state hoped would be proof that Zimmerman initiated the altercation and that he, not Martin, was on top as they grappled on the ground, did not appear to proceed as planned. A variety of eye and ear witnesses of varying credibility, did offer testimony to support the prosecution theory that Zimmerman was the aggressor before the shot was fired. They either heard what they thought was Zimmerman instigating the encounter or in one case heard a chase (which Zimmerman insists never happened). But with each witness there were either facts that we now know are not true (like hearing three shots, when there was only one) or indications that their memories have somehow become clearer since the incident itself. While those sorts of attacks on witnesses, in particular eyewitnesses, are standard fare for cross examination, the state's troubles seemed to extend further than minor inconsistencies. Even the prosecution's effort to show that Zimmerman was an over-eager, wannabe cop backfired when a witness from the Sanford Police Department, testifying as part of the prosecution's case, admitted that she tried to recruit Zimmerman for a citizen's patrol and that "George was very professional, a little meek, really wanted to make community better." Then came the state's star witness, Rachel Jeantel, who recounted those final moments on the phone with Martin. "He told me the man kept following him," Jeantel testified. "I say, 'Trayvon,' and then he said, 'Why are you following me for?' And then I heard a hard-breathing man come say, 'What you doing around here?' ... And then I was calling, 'Trayvon, Trayvon.' And then I started to hear a little bit of Trayvon saying, 'Get off, get off.'" If jurors believe her, that Martin said "get off," then there seems to be little question that Zimmerman at least initiated the incident. The problem? She admitted to lying on certain matters, and most importantly she was confronted with an earlier account, where she had recalled Zimmerman uttering the far more innocuous response, "What are you talking about," rather the more menacing "What are you doing around here" The difference between bewilderment by Zimmerman as opposed to a veiled accusation is a significant one. But the ambiguity surrounding her testimony was nothing compared to the clarity of neighbor and witness John Good. His vantage point and detailed account may be more definitive than that of any other witness to date, and rather than supporting the prosecution's case, he seemed to bolster Zimmerman's claim that Martin was beating him. Good testified that the lighter skinned man was on the bottom. He also described to the jury the clothing that he saw. "The color on top was dark and the color at bottom was ... red," Martin said. Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who was wearing a red jacket while Martin, who was black, was wearing a dark sweatshirt. "The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help,'" Good said." http://gma.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-prosecutions-woes-analysis-140121038--abc-news-topstories.html "How do you spell Kangaroo Court???" 'B o b e r t' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 01 Jul 13 - 11:44 AM Southern courts have a long tradition of fucking over black people... The Southern Poverty Law Center has a team of lawyers that try to level the field but it's like going up against an intransigent army of Southern white racists, bigots and, frankly, rednecks who will fight against equal justice tooth and nail... Anyone interested in a glimpse into just how intransigent these folks can be should read Morris Dees' book "A Lawyer's Journey"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 01 Jul 13 - 11:48 AM So the solution, your "Affirmative Action" plan, is to lynch enough non-blacks to make up for past injustices??? If the race of the defendant and victim were reversed, I would be posting the same comments- Would you? And who would that indicate was being bigoted based on race? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 01 Jul 13 - 11:53 AM "If these six women jurors believe the fight would not have occurred but for Zimmerman "following" Martin -- which remains a matter of dispute -- and even if they are convinced that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation, that alone is not enough to convict under Florida law. When this case entered the public consciousness, Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law became a national focus. Under that controversial law, determining who was the aggressor is crucial to assessing whether a defendant can succeed in having a case dismissed. The defense here chose not to rely on that law, probably because they would have lost at a hearing. Instead, they are arguing classic self defense and so Zimmerman's actions and mindset when he fired the shot are at issue. Was he reasonably in fear for his life or great bodily harm at the moment he pulled the trigger? This jury could believe Zimmerman was wrong, even be convinced that he stalked Martin and still find that the prosecution had not survived its legal burden beyond a reasonable doubt. These legal distinctions are important and as part of the live coverage on many cable and local news networks they are discussing these issues thereby allowing people to better understand the process. This is not to suggest in any way that the prosecution should be throwing in the towel. This week they will present evidence of inconsistencies in Zimmerman's own account of what happened and if they find his story implausible that could spell trouble for the defense. Furthermore, jurors can give some witnesses far more weight than others. But no matter what happens, I know I'll be glad that the world watched and judged it, and the verdict, for themselves." http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-prosecutions-woes/story?id=19541263&page=2#.UdGlixZ1CS0 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 01 Jul 13 - 12:07 PM ""If the race of the defendant and victim were reversed, I would be posting the same comments- Would you? And who would that indicate was being bigoted based on race?"" If that reversal had been the case, then the black guy would have been tried, convicted and condemned by now, that is, if he hadn't been shot dead while "resisting arrest". Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 01 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM ""This jury could believe Zimmerman was wrong, even be convinced that he stalked Martin and still find that the prosecution had not survived its legal burden beyond a reasonable doubt. These legal distinctions are important and as part of the live coverage on many cable and local news networks they are discussing these issues thereby allowing people to better understand the process."" These legal distinctions are important in the framework of allowing the gung ho killer to evade the consequences of his crime when the killee is a black child armed with candy, dangerous only to his teeth. If Zimmerman walks this opens the hunting season on black kids in Florida. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 01 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM Hey! Ol' Lynchin' Bigot Bruce is back! With the same lynchin', bigot horseshit! Tiresome. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Jul 13 - 01:03 PM Beardedbruce, what you are accusing others of tends to indicate the direction of your own prejudices. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 01 Jul 13 - 01:18 PM Yeah, seems that the "lynching" has already occurred... It was of the 9 mm variety and now that the lyncher has been caught seems that all the pro-gun,k right-winged racists want nothing but exoneration for their poster boy lyncher... Who is not getting justice out of this Southern kangaroo court is Trevon Martin... Nor does he get an appeal... Welcome to the South, ya'll... Come back, ya' hear??? Bob |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 01 Jul 13 - 01:23 PM Don, " Beardedbruce, what you are accusing others of tends to indicate the direction of your own prejudices. " So, you are stating that Bobert has indicated the direction of his thoughts, too, or is it only those your disagree with that you apply this standard to? I have stated that the laws should be followed, and Bobert has stated that he will only be satisfied with a guilty verdict, regardless of what is brought out at the trial.Who is it that is in favor of lynching????????????????? What a bunch of racist bigots. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 01 Jul 13 - 01:43 PM I ++have++ stated that if the races were reversed I would still be saying the same things. The defendant in any trial is entitled to a legal trail , or the verdict can be thrown out. I apply this to any race. Some here have stated that they only apply it when certain races are the victims or defendants, and not if a different race is. If that is not racism, perhaps someone can politely state why not. I have seen no criticism of Greggie boy's comments, so I continue to presume that they represent the "Liberal" majority here. If I judge you too harshly, too bad. You bring it on yourselves by your own defense of his personnel attacks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 01 Jul 13 - 02:26 PM ""I apply this to any race."" You may certainly be honest enough to do so. I'd really like to be able to say that I could believe that the Sanford authorities and the Florida judiciary were half as honest. They, absent the public outcry, were not even going to arrest the killer, let alone try him. Can you, hand on on heart, say that you believe that would have been their reaction had the races been reversed as per your earlier comment? If you answer yes to that, I would like a couple of ounces of what you are smoking. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 01 Jul 13 - 02:39 PM Don, This entire thread is about the ILLEGAL withholding BY the Prosecution of evidence, contrary to US law. Bobert thinks that is just fine as long as they string Zimmerman up. Do you agree with him, or with the goal of a fair trail, under the law, that will not be thrown out for procedural errors, regardless of the final verdict? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:14 PM "Withholding of evidence" are the key words here, Beardedbruce! THAT is not "justice" for anyone!! It has one helluva lot to do with racism, but Bobert and I are NOT the racists here! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:19 PM Don F If the defendant was black and the victim white, would Bobert be willing to accept the Prosecution violating the law and withholding evidence? I would not. Yet he does accept it, because the victim was black and the defendent is white/hispanic. That IS racism, regardless of what you might choose to believe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:32 PM This entire thread is about the ILLEGAL withholding BY the Prosecution of evidence, contrary to US law. I have still only ever seen the comments of one former prosecutor indicating that this actually happened. Do you have more evidence that I have missed? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:36 PM Yet he does accept it, because the victim was black and the defendent is white/hispanic. More bullshit from Bullshit Bruce, who chooses to conveniently ignore 300 years of southern history and precedents. For an obnoxious asshole that keeps going on about "lynching" one might expect some actual knowledge of the history of lynching- suggest that he read Philip Dray's At The Hands Of Persons Unknown for a start, or any of DuBois' works on the subject, or the sources cited in Dray's bibliography. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:43 PM Do you have more evidence that I have missed? BullshitBruce does not, and never has, let actual evidence get in the way of his Niagara of horseshit, KB. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 01 Jul 13 - 05:40 PM There are people working behind the scenes to keep George Zimmerman out of jail. He's got some good buddies in his neighborhood I've noticed. Send him up here. We'll try and convict him. In my town, we don't allow vigilantes. Our neighborhood watch people call the police and report suspicious behavior only. Our police actually have a good relationship with the community and will actually respond to multiple complaints from residents trying to clean up their neighborhoods. Of course, I'm lying about all this. My friend Nick wrote a song called "The Cops in My Town", and it went something like this: The cops in my town will squeeze your nuts And they won't put up with up with no ifs or ands and especially no buts Especially no buts They get their sleep on the top floor of the parking garage .................................................................... And their cars you cannot dodge Their cars you cannot dodge That's all I remember. Wish I had written it down. Anyway, the parking garage bit was a reference to one of our senior officers who brought a lounge chair and an alarm clock to the parking garage to get a bit of shut-eye before calling in. Of course, one time he slept through and everybody found out. And in case you are wondering what happened to the pair of young officers who decided to get even with the local newspaper for anti-cop press by getting drunk as skunks and whipping golf balls at the newspaper office. One made detective and the other just became our new police chief. Folks, you can't make this stuff up. Here's to you George Wannabe. I hope you must pay for taking that boy's life. You had no business freaking him out in the first place. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 01 Jul 13 - 05:59 PM That's right George. It doesn't matter one whit whether Trayvon became proactive in the encounter (as a whole). GUILTY! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:00 PM Yup, SJL... You murder a kid and you do time... Not get a medal from Redneck Nation... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:07 PM You know what Bobert? I'm beginning to like you. I'm beginning to like you a whole lot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:08 PM The unalterable fact is that when Zimmerman did his duty as a block watch person and called the police about seeing what he construed to be a suspicious person (a black teenager walking home from a convenience store after buying a box of candy), the police told him not to approach the "suspect." Zimmerman disobeyed the police and confronted Martin anyway. If Zimmerman had obeyed the police, the whole matter would be sorted out by now. Trayvon Martin would most cartainly still be alive and this whole asininely tragic episode would never have happened. There was an old Western on television a few decades back called "Have Gun, Will Travel." Whenever you watched the show, you could be damned sure that Paladin was going to shoot somebody before the show was over! Like the acquaintance I talked about up-thread, undoubtedly Zimmerman was trigger-happy and itching to use his 9 mm. pistol. Otherwise, he would have just sat tight like the police told him to do. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:14 PM Def. "Those assholes always get away" - eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:28 PM Yeah, Don, but Paladin was more often than not on the right side of things- he did have a pretty good moral code. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:35 PM The difference between Paladin and Zimmerman. Paladin wasn't just trigger-happy, he made certain he knew what he was doing. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:47 PM Roger that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:22 AM And I was about to say that if any should oppose Don, come back in the next decade and ask us what we think then. Ain't gonna be any different. Shut up and go to sleep Don. I never was into crystal meth. Why are you still up? Am I am laughing? Seriously? Get out of town! The world is full of dumb fucks. Let us strive not to be one of them, |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:28 AM Huh? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:40 AM ""This entire thread is about the ILLEGAL withholding BY the Prosecution of evidence, contrary to US law."" You made the comment Bruce, that you would not take race into account, so how about a response to my question: "They, absent the public outcry, were not even going to arrest the killer, let alone try him. Can you, hand on on heart, say that you believe that would have been their reaction had the races been reversed as per your earlier comment?" ____________________________________________________________________ ""Bobert thinks that is just fine as long as they string Zimmerman up. Do you agree with him, or with the goal of a fair trail, under the law, that will not be thrown out for procedural errors, regardless of the final verdict?"" I agree with you, that anybody accused of a crime should have a fair trial! Bobert thinks this trial will be anything but fair, and I regret that I must agree with that. The whole procedure from the time of the killing has been handled by the authorities as though Zimmerman were some kind of local superhero, fighting crime on the streets, and their foot dragging over the arrest shows clearly that they didn't want any arraignment or trial. The prosecution too is seemingly making a complete dogs breakfast of the trial. The only logical conclusion, as far as I can see, is that the trial has already been held and the fix is in for Zimmerman to walk. If he had killed a white man, he would have been the Hispanic murderer, but it was only a black kid, so who cares? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:51 AM Richard Bridge, who is a well respected UK lawyer, took the trouble to research the disclosure rules in the USA. Based upon the results of that research, he gave the opinion that the pictures on Trayvon Martin's phone which were the basis of the defence complaint did not fall within the realms of necessary disclosure under US LAW! This comment was studiously ignored by Bruce! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 02 Jul 13 - 06:03 AM Here it is! ""Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge - PM Date: 06 Jun 13 - 02:48 AM Bah. Why don't people look shit up. From Cornell University: - "Upon a defendant's request, the government must permit the defendant to inspect and to copy or photograph books, papers, documents, data, photographs, tangible objects, buildings or places, or copies or portions of any of these items, if the item is within the government's possession, custody, or control and: (i) the item is material to preparing the defense; (ii) the government intends to use the item in its case-in-chief at trial; or (iii) the item was obtained from or belongs to the defendant". So in the present case the key question is whether the item is material to preparing the defence. While the material MIGHT be evidential of Martin's character, it seems to me that that what may be in issue (that is not the same thing as what will necessarily be in issue) is what Zimmerman reasonably believed Martin's intentions to be that night. It is very hard indeed to see how month-old photos that Zimmerman had never seen could influence Zimmerman's belief on that night. It looks to me therefore as if the photos were not discoverable."" Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Jul 13 - 06:11 AM So, why not let the jury decide? Why withhold anything from the defence? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 02 Jul 13 - 07:55 AM Yup. The fix is in for Zimmerman to walk. Shame, shame. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 08:07 AM Don T, When asked by Bobert, I supplied a scenario where the phone TEXT messages might be significant evidence. He never bothered to comment on that. Why do you insist on talking about only the photos? Is your argument so weak that you must resort to using that sort of tactic? As for whether this will be a fair trial, I expect that the jury will be directed to convict Zimmerman "for the public good" to prevent social reaction, regardless of his guilt or innocence. If the trail would have been unfair had the defendant been black, then that would have been wrong. Obviously. But to use that as an excuse to prevent a fair trial for this defendant is also wrong. In ANY case, if one reverses the races of the individuals involved, and comes to a different conclusion, then one is a racist. Period. Too many here have demonstrated that that is what they are, |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 08:35 AM Don F, In your post of 1 Jul 13 - 06:08 PM you state three times that "The police" told Zimmerman not to follow Martin. I have previously provided references and quotes from the trial where a witness stated that the 911 operator, who talked to Zimmerman and told him not to follow the suspect, did not have the right to give Zimmerman orders. From pdq- Date: 13 Jun 13 - 08:00 PM "...he was legally bound to avoid the situation as the police ordered him to stand down..." Zimmerman said he was following the suspect and the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that." First, that is a suggestion, not an order to "stand down". Second, it came from the dispatcher (not a cop) who has no authority to order a civilian to do anything. Besides, Zimmerman was the authorized neighborhood watchman at that time. My post- 26 Jun 13 - 08:28 AM " Already proven that one of Bobert's standard lies is just that- the "Police told him not to follow" line. It was the 911 operator: "According to another witness, a 911 operator, it is not within the purview of 911 operators to give orders to callers." " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:33 AM Thank you, DonT, for re-posting Richard's well reasoned legal opinion on the stuff in Martin's cell phone... As difficult as it is for the folks who see Zimmerman as some folk hero for gunning down a black kid there is no way in hell that Zimmerman could have known what was in Martin's phone or how that gave Zimmerman some reason to murder Martin... This is beyond debate for rational thinking people... And this is why I no longer respond to people who can't even get that far in their reasoning... One cannot discuss, reason or debate anything with people who, frankly, are irrational... And, yes, the prosecutors are just going thru the motions here... Reminds me of the time when I took a neighbor to court for shooting his gun irresponsibly and rounds were flying over my head while I worked in my own garden... About 3 minutes into that trial I knew that the prosecutor saw the case as some gun-rights thing and was bungling the hell out of it... I was whispering to the prosecutor things that he should be doing and saying but the prosecutor was ignoring me... Then it looked as if the judge was about to dismiss when I jumped up and took over the prosecution, approached the bench and told the judge in no uncertain terms that if he dismissed the case then he was "going to turn my property into my neighbor's one man war zone" and that it would be on him (the judge) "if anyone got shot"... That's what the real prosecutor should have done... The judge, BTW, continued the case which kept my neighbor playing nice and not shooting at us... The Zimmerman prosecutor ain't much better than the bozo that was appointed to my case... This is a kangaroo court... Worse than the O.J. court... Worse than any I've seen... Shame on Florida... Shame on the South... Shame, shame, shame... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:42 AM And shame on Beardy as a Florida Apologist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:59 AM "Jurors today heard George Zimmerman's account in his own words of his fatal confrontation with Trayvon Martin as prosecutors played a dramatic audio tape of Zimmerman being questioned by police shortly after the shooting. Zimmerman is heard telling a police officer how he saw Martin walking through his Sanford, Fla. neighborhood on a dark, rainy Feb. 2012 night. As a neighborhood watchman he tried to follow him in his car because there had been a series of break-ins in the gated community. Zimmerman said he lost sight of Martin, got out of his car to call police and was walking back to his vehicle when the 17-year-old attacked him. "He jumped out of the bushes and he said 'What the f..k is your problem, homie?'" Zimmerman said on the tape. "And I got my cell phone out to call 911 this time, and I said 'I don't have a problem.' And he goes, 'No, now you have a problem,' and he punched me in the nose." In court, jurors listened closely to the tape, while Zimmerman showed no emotion and Martin's father closed his eyes from time to time. Zimmerman told police he fell down to the ground after being punched repeatedly. "I tried to defend myself. He just started punching me in the face, and I started screaming for help. I couldn't see. I couldn't breathe." "He puts his hand on my nose and mouth, and he says 'You are going to die tonight.' He said "the suspect" was "mounted on top of me" and began to bang his head onto the ground. "As he banged my head again, I just pulled out my firearm and shot him," Zimmerman said. He said Martin fell backward. "And he's like 'Alright, you got me, you got me.'" Under questioning, Officer Doris Singleton, who conducted the audio interview, said Zimmerman appeared shocked when he learned Martin's wound was fatal. "He's dead!?" she quoted him as saying. "I thought you knew that," she said she replied. Zimmerman "kinda slung his head and shook it," she said. Jurors were also shown a second interview, this one videotaped by police a day after the slaying. In this version, Zimmerman re-enacted the confrontation and added that he pulled out his gun "after he hit my head against the concrete several times."" http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/describes_jumped_confrontation_trayvon_I5bI2yMehibUIdCyF6XT8H?utm_source=SFnewyorkpost&utm And "Zimmerman told the police officer that he lost track of Martin and got out of his truck to look for a street name he could relay to police dispatcher. When the dispatcher suggested Zimmerman didn't need to follow Martin, Zimmerman started to head back to his vehicle. At that point, Zimmerman said Martin jumped out of some bushes, punched him and he fell to the ground. Zimmerman said that Martin began hitting his head against the sidewalk as Zimmerman yelled for help and that Martin told him, "You're going to die tonight." With Zimmerman's shirt and jacket pushed up during the struggle and his holstered gun now visible, he thought Martin was reaching for his firearm holstered around his waist. Zimmerman told the officer that he shot Martin and the teen said, "You got me." In a written statement, Singleton read in court, Zimmerman refers to Martin as "the suspect." Singleton said it didn't appear that Zimmerman showed any anger when talking about the teen. Prosecutors must show that Zimmerman acted with ill will or a depraved mind in order to get a second-degree murder conviction. Singleton recounted that Zimmerman noticed a cross she was wearing and said: "In Catholic religion, it's always wrong to kill someone." The officer responded, "If what you're telling me is true, I don't think that what God meant was that you couldn't save your own life." Zimmerman also acted surprised when Singleton told him Martin was dead. "He's dead?!" Singleton recalled Zimmerman saying, before he lowered his head toward the table in the interrogation room. Jurors also heard from the lead detective in the case, Officer Chris Serino, who asked him several pointed questions about whether the teenager could have felt threatened because Zimmerman was following him." http://tampa.cbslocal.com/2013/07/01/zimmerman-to-officer-in-catholic-religion-its-always-wrong-to-kill-someone/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:06 AM ANd as for what the posters here "Know" about the cue: On Monday, CNN showed George Zimmerman's Social Security number and other personal information live over the air, including address, date of birth, and phone number. Officer Doris Singleton was testifying when the prosecutors showed a narrative report including Zimmerman's information. That immediately launched a round of tweets by Zimmerman haters celebrating knowledge of that information. This is hardly the first time Zimmerman's personal information has been distributed by those who oppose him. During the initial coverage of the Zimmerman trial, Spike Lee retweeted the home address of what he thought was Zimmerman's home address. It turned out to be the wrong address. Roseanne Barr then tweeted Zimmerman's parents' home address. "If Zimmerman isn't arrested I'll rt his address again. maybe go 2 his house myself," Barr tweeted. This isn't the first element of media bias in the Zimmerman case, either. The Associated Press originally reported that Zimmerman was white. That falsehood was repeated for days by the media, heightening the racial aspect of the case. The media also broadcast photographs of Zimmerman from a 2005 arrest rather than current photos, and conversely broadcast photographs of Martin as a pre-teen, not the 17-year-old he was at the time of the killing (the media's photographic choices actually impacted witness testimony during the trial). NBC News manipulated tape of Zimmerman's 911 call to make it seem that Zimmerman had targeted Martin because he was black, rather than responding to 911 dispatcher questions. CNN also isolated audio of Zimmerman purportedly calling Martin a racial slur during the call -- an allegation that ended up being completely false. Both ABC News and NBC News also alleged that Zimmerman's injuries did not exist, releasing badly-pixellated photographs from the night of the incident. As trial testimony has shown, Zimmerman was indeed injured during the incident with Martin. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/07/01/CNN-broadcasts-Zimmerman-social-security So, Bobert, if you can't lynch Zimmerman, maybe you can join in burning out his parents. But make sure you ignore any evidence that he acted just like you would have... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:34 AM "Serino, who unsuccessfully recommended that manslaughter charges be filed against Zimmerman soon after the shooting, said Zimmerman appeared to be relieved when told him the shooting had been videotaped. "Thank God," Zimmerman replied. Serino said based on his response he thought Zimmerman was either a pathological liar or telling the truth, but concluded that Zimmerman truly wished the incident was videotaped. The shooting, however, really wasn't taped. " http://abcnews.go.com/2020/george-zimmerman-recalled-trayvon-martin-gosh/story?id=19543886#.UdLk4RZ1CS1 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:56 AM My apologies, all. I appear to have provoked yet another bout of bloody bloggy Beardy postarrhoea. Perhaps a change in his diet would be helpful, it the paregoric isn't working. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 11:02 AM I note that the Zimmerman Haters have not made one comment about the evidence presented at the trial. I guess their lynching is being threatened- though I am sure Bobert and his racist Greggie boy are looking for the tree- since they have the rope ready and waiting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 11:28 AM Another fucking lie noted: " This comment was studiously ignored by Bruce! Don T." " Date: 14 Jun 13 - 08:23 AM TO REPEAT: Since Bobert continues... Bobert, I gave you a scenario where the TEXTS would be significant, and you keep going on about the PHOTOS. BOTH were withheld- Are you trying to get around the fact that I answered your question??? Or are you just being an asshole on general principles, as your racist friend Greggie is?" Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:37 AM Bobert, YOU have never acknowledged, or discusses the strength of MY comment. Do I have to repeat it another time??? Have you forgotten it? Are you just ignoring anything you don't agree with? I gave you a sample text that WOULD HAVE BEEN EVIDENCE that could have been on the phone, and withheld by the prosecution - Yet you keep on about pictures? Why? YOUR posting as if I had not answered your request, WHICH I DID, is being an asshole. If you don't want to be considered an asshole, stop acting like one. Date: 14 Jun 13 - 09:42 AM From: beardedbruce - PM Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:10 AM And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this: "I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him." Sure want to be sure that the defense can't get anything like that- why , the lynching might not go as Bobert wants. I had commented on that very point- that it was not the photos, of whatever age, but the text messages that could have supported the defense allegation that Martin attacked Zimmerman. Yet you bigoted, racist assholes keep repeating lies, and ignore the evidence presented at the trial. Greggie boy really does represent the majority of liberals here on Mudcat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 02 Jul 13 - 11:54 AM Look stop bashing Bruce. I cannot condone the actions of Zimmerman. A reasonable man would not have left his car. That is what the law is supposed to be based on reason ability. I also don't condone the actions of Martin. If the testimony is true he should not have confronted Zimmerman. However, deadly force ... No don't get into such situations if you are armed. The law is pretty clear when you are given the responsibility of gun ownership. But Bruce is entitled to have his opinion without the name calling don't you think |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:12 PM Juicy Brucie - if what you say Zimmerman said was what Zimmerman really said, does that not make it wholly clear that the contents of Martin's phone (about which Zimmerman could not possibly have known) could absolutely not have been evidence relevant to Zimmerman's state of mind at the time of the shooting? The only purpose of releasing the information is to prejudice against the victim of the shooting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:15 PM Just a perfect example of never ever ever ever get yourself in any situation that you have to defend yourself, both wrong .. either one could have run away. You fight, you defend when attacked but only and I mean only if there are no options. With all of my training in hand to hand or with firearms or sharp edged weapons. I am not afraid to run .. hell that is my first and foremost option. Defend only when absolutely necessary, was any of this necessary ... NO |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:22 PM Tricky Dickie, Did you read my example of what MIGHT have been on the phone that would have been evidence? If so, how can you ask your question- I established how the text could have supported the Defense claim that Martin attacked Zimmerman. If not, you have no right to make your comment, and have shown yourself to be a total asshole. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:25 PM Bruce is indeed entitled to his own opinion, Dan, however perverse and unreasonable and unsupported by fact and/or logic that opinion may be. But he is not entitled to his own facts, as someone once said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:28 PM The Defense was saying that they were going to claim that Martin attacked Zimmerman. "And what IF a text that was kept from the defense was like this: "I'm gonna check out *** house, and see what I can take. And if anybody gets in my way, I'll beat the shit outta him." This shows MARTIN's intent, and is certainly evidence that the Defense would be entitled to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:30 PM Oh, and by the way, Dan - the person most addicted to name-calling is Bruce himself, as is obvious in almost all of his posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:32 PM Whereas Greggie boy and Bobert the Magnificent are entitled to state their opinion and require all to accept it as proven fact, even when contradicted by the Real World. After all, Bobert knows the Truth, regardless of what happened here on Earth. The rest of us better go back to our slave shacks and accept what Massa Bobert tells us, regardless of what we see, hear, or think. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:36 PM "the person most addicted to name-calling is Bruce himself, as is obvious in almost all of his posts." Bullshit, Greggie boy. Anyone can look at your posts and see that you can't even post without name calling. Do I need to post a few hundred of your recent posts in their entirety to show what you consider "discussion" if you don't agree with the other person??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:37 PM So Beardy, the "facts" on which you base your "case" - such as it is - are "could have", "might have been", "perhaps", "should have", "what if", "maybe", "would possibly" & etc. The sad thing is that you're serious. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:39 PM Do I need to post a few hundred of your recent posts in their entirety... Oh, please do, Beardy. That would be great. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:48 PM The sad thing is that you are unwilling to address the facts, and insist on attacking those you disagree with. This indicates that you have no factual basis for your opinions, and thus have to attck the person who points out things that do not meet your desired view. I was asked to give a POSSIBLE example of evidence that COULD have been in the information withheld by the Prosecution- I did so, even if Bobert and Richard have continued to lie and claim I did not. If it is withheld, a mistrial could be declared, and I doubt anyone wants that- thou I suspect Bobert will support social unrest and riots regardless of what happens, just so he can claim that anyone who disagrees with him is racist. I have presented the information avaliable from the trial, while others present only unsupported opinions. The sad thing is that you are the representatives of those who disagree with me- what a letdown for the Liberals of the world, if you are the best that they can do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:56 PM In ANY case, if one reverses the races of the individuals involved, and comes to a different conclusion, then one is a racist. Period. Too many here have demonstrated that that is what they are, You don't have to be a racist to recognize racism at work. I agree with the idea that if the man with the gun had been black he would probably have been arrested that night. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:12 PM Greg F''s contribution to reasonable discussion on this thread: Date: 31 May 13 - 12:53 PM You're getting overexcited again, Beardy, and somewhat incoherent as a result. Also not good for your blood pressure, you know. Date: 31 May 13 - 03:21 PM However, I don't see the purpose of the thread, There is none. Beardy doesn't have to have a purpose to post nonsensical crap ad nauseum. Date: 31 May 13 - 03:34 PM BLINDFOLDED? Hell, he can cut and paste mountains of bullshit IN HIS SLEEP! Date: 02 Jun 13 - 03:17 PM A bullet from the back of a bush Took Medgar Evers' blood A finger fired the trigger to his name A handle hid out in the dark A hand set the spark Two eyes took the aim Behind a man's brain... But he sure as hell can be blamed. Date: 04 Jun 13 - 11:16 AM Why have any trial at all? Why look at the evidence? Why bother risking a JURY might let him go? Is that what you are saying??? No, that's what YOU'RE saying, Beardy, or rather shouting/ranting. I haven't read anything by Bobert that says or remotely implies any of your screed. Date: 05 Jun 13 - 08:15 AM Yes, beardedbruce... Use your wildest imagination Should be no problem, his wildest imagination is the motivating factor behind most, if not all, of his threads. Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:30 PM Those aren't "reasons" Beardy - they're suppositions, BS and smoke. As usual. I suppose if he thought he was the Lone Ranger or Spiderman that would be just fine with you as well? Does reality have no meaning for you? Date: 05 Jun 13 - 02:46 PM Elmore, Beardy's fixation with lynching is only one of a host of his problems which need to be addressed by mental health professionals. Don't get him started calling anyone who disagrees with him a "racist scumbag" - as if Jews were a "race". Date: 05 Jun 13 - 03:06 PM Actually, Elmore, he's amusing in small doses - kind of like a toddler throwing a tantrum. Date: 07 Jun 13 - 12:07 PM So What, Beardy? Date: 08 Jun 13 - 11:33 AM Suspect BB wouldn't [disagree], either... Oh, you kidder, you. That really IS amusing. Date: 10 Jun 13 - 02:10 PM That's right, Beardy - you want a "fair trial - just so long as Zimmerman is exonerated. Gotcha. Date: 11 Jun 13 - 05:35 PM They probably have read it, Richard - they just are incapable of comprehending it. Date: 13 Jun 13 - 11:14 AM Calm down, Beardy - you're spraying spittle again. Date: 17 Jun 13 - 12:12 PM Send me to the back of the bus. I'm starting to believe that BullshitBruce thinks he's a Negro, instead of just a jackass. So, Bullshit: how old were you in 1963? Date: 17 Jun 13 - 04:33 PM So, *you* rate Negros as below jackasses, as well as considering "Black and a Democrat " the same as "dumb Ni**er"? Since he used "just" in *his* posting. He considers that *any* second class citizen must refer to Negros, from his postings. All YOUR words, BeardedBullshit, not mine. In addition to other problems, you apparently have difficulty in reading and/or comprehending the English Language. Get help. Date: 18 Jun 13 - 03:31 PM The US belief that resort to a firearm is socially normative is out of whack by many other countries' standards. Its also out of whack with the standards of many - if not most - thinking people here in the US too, Richard. Date: 19 Jun 13 - 10:52 AM So what is the difference between you and the Klan The KLAN? "LYNCHING"?? "The color of your sheet"?? This poses another question: What is the difference between yourself and an obnoxious, irrational, ignorant, foul-mouther asshole? Date: 19 Jun 13 - 12:03 PM Pretty limp-dick response, Beardy. Where's your usual verbosity & rapier-like wit? Date: 23 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM Necrophilia? Date: 26 Jun 13 - 09:31 AM I am interested in finding out the truth Yeah, right. By the way, Beardy, what's this lynching fixation of yours? Someone already asked you that a while back, & you failed to answer. Date: 28 Jun 13 - 12:31 PM Not only would Texas buy him a new gun, they'd elect him to the US Senate. Date: 28 Jun 13 - 02:59 PM Oh, dear - another bout of bloody postarrhoea. Condition may be approaching critical. Date: 01 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM Hey! Ol' Lynchin' Bigot Bruce is back! With the same lynchin', bigot horseshit! Tiresome. Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:36 PM Yet he does accept it, because the victim was black and the defendent is white/hispanic. More bullshit from Bullshit Bruce, who chooses to conveniently ignore 300 years of southern history and precedents. For an obnoxious asshole that keeps going on about "lynching" one might expect some actual knowledge of the history of lynching- suggest that he read Philip Dray's At The Hands Of Persons Unknown for a start, or any of DuBois' works on the subject, or the sources cited in Dray's bibliography. Date: 01 Jul 13 - 03:43 PM Do you have more evidence that I have missed? BullshitBruce does not, and never has, let actual evidence get in the way of his Niagara of horseshit, KB. Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:28 PM Yeah, Don, but Paladin was more often than not on the right side of things- he did have a pretty good moral code. Date: 01 Jul 13 - 06:47 PM Roger that. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:42 AM And shame on Beardy as a Florida Apologist. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:56 AM My apologies, all. I appear to have provoked yet another bout of bloody bloggy Beardy postarrhoea. Perhaps a change in his diet would be helpful, it the paregoric isn't working. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:25 PM Bruce is indeed entitled to his own opinion, Dan, however perverse and unreasonable and unsupported by fact and/or logic that opinion may be. But he is not entitled to his own facts, as someone once said. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:30 PM Oh, and by the way, Dan - the person most addicted to name-calling is Bruce himself, as is obvious in almost all of his posts. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:37 PM So Beardy, the "facts" on which you base your "case" - such as it is - are "could have", "might have been", "perhaps", "should have", "what if", "maybe", "would possibly" & etc. The sad thing is that you're serious. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 12:39 PM Do I need to post a few hundred of your recent posts in their entirety... Oh, please do, Beardy. That would be great. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:14 PM "You don't have to be a racist to recognize racism at work." No, but to change one's opinion about what is right based on the race of the individuals IS racism. And that is what I see here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:18 PM Page after page of hysteria. THAT's what hysteria looks like. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:18 PM Let me know if I missed any of your words of wisdom, Greg. I want to give you full credit for your contributions to demonstrating Liberal attitudes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 02 Jul 13 - 01:52 PM Don Firth: "Page after page of hysteria. THAT's what hysteria looks like." Don should know!!!....Mudcat's got quite a few of his...wanna' see em? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:04 PM Brucie - whatever you might wish, Martin is not on trial. His state of mind is not in point. His intentions are not in point. His character is not in issue. Only (a) what actually happened and (b) what Zimmerman reasonably believed are in point (to an issue of self-defence). The contents of a phone about which Zimmerman knew nothing illuminate neither. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:17 PM Dickie, " Only (a) what actually happened and (b) what Zimmerman reasonably believed are in point (to an issue of self-defence). The contents of a phone about which Zimmerman knew nothing illuminate neither." I think you are wrong. The contents of text menages might well provide supporting evidence for what happened. If they stated "If anyone follows me, I am going to run like hell!" the defense case is weakened- if they stated "If anyone tries to stop me I'l beat the shit out of them." the defense case is strengthened. When the defense claims that MARTIN attacked Zimmerman ( leading to the shooting), evidence that MARTIN had intentions of violence would certainly be significant evidence, and bolster the case of the Defense. I do not know if that is the case in these texts, but it could be, and thus the need for the JUDGE to rule on admissibility as evidence, NOT the prosecution. IF Martin attacked Zimmerman, it would reinforce a claim that Zimmerman was in fear of his life, and support the rest of Zimmerman's testimony. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:28 PM whatever you might wish, |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:37 PM Wishin' in one hand... shittin' in the other...which do you think will fill up first??! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:45 PM "You got me." Really? Who says that except in an old western? Almost makes it sound like it wasn't so bad doesn't it? The fact that George Zimmerman was relieved when he learned the shooting was videotaped does not impress me. When a cop says something like that during interrogation, there is at least a 50% chance he or she is lying. I know that. So does George. Let's not forget how he lied to the court about his assets. George is a liar. And where was this photo in the immediate aftermath of the incident? Hard to believe it would not have surfaced when the need to gain public sympathy was so urgent that the Zimmerman Defense League" hauled out the friendly neighbor of color to say what a good guy he is. That is not a proper police evidence photo by the way. The video however is evidence. And it tells a different story. Zimmerman Video And, you cannot beat somebody up in the way Zimmerman claimed he was assaulted without getting some of that person's DNA on your hands. There's a lot of lying going on here. A lot of it. Can I refresh your memory a bit more Brucie? Trayvon's body laid in the medical examiner's office for three days before his parents were notified. During this period the parents were frantically searching for him and had even reported him missing to the Sanford police. Unbelievable. But by all means, our primary concern should be whether Whittle Wannabe Georgie gets a "fair" trial. To hell with Trayvon's parents right? After all, they're only black people. They will just have to make due with whatever treatment they are given. If nothing else, this incident in its entirety is truly eye-opening. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 02:53 PM Gee whiz, Beardy, I couldn't find any "fucking scumbags" or "racist scumbags", or "fucking racists", or "lynching bastards" or "fucking liberals", "no fucking mentions", "resident lynch mobs", "lying racist scumbags", "acting like a scumbag", "you ARE full of shit" or any of tha tsort of thing in any of my posts that you so generously provided. OH WAIT! Those are YOUR words! I'm sure your reading public would be grateful for any other juvenile nonsense that you'd care to pollute this thread with. Have at it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 02 Jul 13 - 03:04 PM Greggie boy, I haven't used "lynching bastards" - I don't know your mother's marital status, if you had a mother and did not hatch from under some rock. I use words that describe what people have shown themselves in their own words, in their own post, to be. So, in your case, "lying racist scumbag" is the appropriate term. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 03:49 PM Like I said, Beardy - pitiful. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 02 Jul 13 - 04:00 PM I'll start this slowly Brucie. What Martin THOUGHT is not in point. Only what he did. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 02 Jul 13 - 05:30 PM Most certainly, but I cannot talk about this anymore myself. It's so ugly, I don't want to even think about it anymore. Brucie, you're a pain in the ass, but then, aren't we all? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 02 Jul 13 - 07:20 PM Well, Greg, ol' buddy... That is why I don't respond to BB's posts any more... He loves to invent things he wishes you had said, claims you said them and then calls you a bunch of filthy names for having said them... That, IMHO, is irrational... Not to mention dishonest... Like I said... I once knew a very intelligent clinical psychologist when I was in social work who told me "you can't reason with illogical and crazy people"... Important lesson... You might want to just leave BB alone... His arguments are childish, irrational and dishonest and smokescreens for his highly partisanship... He doesn't give a rip about justice... Leave him alone... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 02 Jul 13 - 08:33 PM That's OK, Bobert- Beardy is currently petitioning the government for a posthumous pardon for William Zantzinger, too. That 6 month sentance was cruel and unusual punishment, and there was no real evidence that he'd killed anyone. Perhaps being wrapped up in that campaign will give him less time to vomit his horseshit here. One can only hope. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 02 Jul 13 - 08:47 PM If not then we don't need to feast on his vomit... Let it be... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bert Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:19 PM A very important piece of evidence has been withheld. A week before he was killed Martin bought a pair of Argyle socks. Of course he deserved to be shot |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:42 PM That, sadly, is what it's going to come down to, Bert... "If it don't fit, ya' gotta acquit..." B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:52 PM If he ate a twizzler ya gotta aquizzle |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 02 Jul 13 - 09:59 PM Snoop Lion defense |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:11 PM Don't Bogart that joint my friend pass it over to me... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 02 Jul 13 - 10:59 PM more Snoop wisdom! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:50 AM You know..all you guys who are fanning hatred, really ought to cool it. NOBODY was there, and NOBODY knows for sure what happened, or really, for sure, everything that led up to it...and THAT IS a FACT! What if....just what if everything happened as Zimmerman said it did??..must the race card triumph, just because of race?? Everybody needs to chill out..BIG TIME!...I remember when the Arizona shooting happened with Gifford, the same guys who are pointing fingers then, are pointing fingers now...and they all blamed this nutcase, as being a right wing nut, who was shooting because he was a right wing nut case...and I called for restraint..and people were shocked that I wasn't on the bandwagon...well, this is pretty much of the same thing. Everybody, both sides of the 'argument', all emotionally charged..and raging with their emotions...regardless of the FACTS...just assumptions, rumors, presumptions, and a lot of fucking wishful thinking! Knock it off..calm the fuck down..chill out, and let the evidence come out as it does. One person is dead, and it really was a tragic mistake. If you think Zimmerman decided one night, to go out 'nigger hunting', after dinner, I think you're a fucking moron! If you think because Zimmerman was following Martin, was just cause for Martin to turn around and punch him out, and assault him, you're fucking idiotic!! If you think this thing escalated, because people misread the moment, you're probably closer to what actually happened...in other words, 'reality'. If you think this sad event is reason to make political hay out of it, well you're only fanning the fires for more hatred and violence...and that's REAL fucking stupid, idiotic, and moronic in full blown royalty!..If anything, we should be on the side of peace..and calm...but working each other up, on stuff, when you REALLY DON'T know what the fuck happened, then you are a fucking disgrace, to everything civil, to everything just, and everything that most of you 'SAY'(?) that you stand for! Calm down, and let it unfold the way it does.....maybe, when all the facts finally come out, you might not have so much crow to eat!..AND...as a bonus, you would have not stirred up fear and loathing, needlessly. Patience...the wheels of time roll slow...but grind fine! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bert Date: 03 Jul 13 - 06:17 AM I don't know GfS, maybe Zimmerman did go "out one night". We don't know. But I don't see that Martin's phone records are any more relevant than the color of his socks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Jul 13 - 06:57 AM Why withhold them and create a conflict, and a cause for doubt after a conviction. Let the defence have everything and the jury can judge the relevance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Jul 13 - 07:14 AM His state of mind is not in point. His intentions are not in point. His character is not in issue. Zim claims self defence. He has to convince the jury that he was attacked. All of those factors might be considered to have made an attack more likely or less likely, therefore in point. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 03 Jul 13 - 07:28 AM No. They are not issues in the case. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 03 Jul 13 - 07:30 AM I should also point out that if a man with a gun is following you, you are really quite likely reasonably to apprehend an intended assault, and are therefore entitled to use reasonable force in self defence. So "Martin assaulted Zimmerman" is by no means a foregone conclusion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Jul 13 - 07:44 AM Of course it is not a foregone conclusion! If I were on the jury, having to decide if it was murder or self defence, I would want to know about all the things that led up to that encounter. The judge decides what evidence is admissible. The jury decides what weight to put upon it. Why keep evidence from the defence? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:32 AM Because Bobert has already convicted Zimmerman, based on biased press reports, before the trial even began. Bobert claims to have such solid Southern roots he "Knows" exactly what happened, just from the race of the victim and defendant. One has to wonder just what dark past he is covering up, from his childhood days in the South, where every white is a Klansman. And then there are his continuous accusations of "racism" against all that disagree with his political view. He seems to be projecting his own attitudes on everyone- Those of us who dislike the liberal actions ( or attempts) of this administration, and supported conservatives in the past, can't have ANY ( Shouting at Bobert) reason to dislike Obama except "racism". That seem to be the focus and only point that Bobert can ever put forward- ANY failure to agree with Obama MUST be racism, since that seems to be his own controlling factor. He can't even understand that to support Obama when we objected to the same things by white WOULD be racism What is he going to do if Condoleeza Rice runs for President? Then I will claim any lack of support is "racism" on his part, and he will deny it- the rules he puts on others don't apply to him,, as everyone knows. Only conservatives are "racist", never the liberals who treat blacks like their own private pool of votes, not even giving them the payoffs they give unions and their bank supporters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:37 AM "It's been a great week for gay activists, but Dr. Cornel West is not happy. As the postmodern professor par excellence explained to radio host Tavis Smiley last Sunday, the advances made by gays and lesbians mean that "we black folk are just being pushed to the back of the bus": Again this has something to do of course with what history books will say. The irony of the age of Obama in which black folks found themselves pushed to the back, [and] our gay brothers and lesbian sisters more and more pushed to the center. Perhaps West is right, and identity politics really is a zero-sum game. Then again, the good doctor may simply be suffering from a touch of radical conditionedness. " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:45 AM And this latest blogoshit relates to the Zimmerman case how, exactly, Beardy? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:51 AM Bobert, "He loves to invent things he wishes you had said, claims you said them and then calls you a bunch of filthy names for having said them" Care to give some example, or should I just call you a lying bastard whose "buddy" has stated that "Black, and a Democrat" is the same in his mind as "a dumb Ni**er"? His posts are still there ( at last check)- and I have offline copies of the thread in case his mud elf enabler cleans up in an attempt to cover up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:53 AM Greggie, And your attacks contribute what to this thread? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:55 AM Oh, that's right- you apply rules to other that you don't bother to follow yourself. Typical Liberal, from the support you get here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:02 AM In a segment discussing the start of the trial of George Zimmerman for the 2012 murder of Florida teen Trayvon Martin, MSNBC anchor Tamron Hall noted that many are concerned that the trial has the potential to exacerbate racial tensions in the United States. Hall and her guests fretted about the "firestorm" that the Martin trial could set off. After making this appropriate and responsible observation, Hall politicized the trial noting that President Barack Obama appears to be on the side of the prosecution while conservatives and Fox News Channel are seemingly supportive of the Defense. "The emotions involved in this are tremendous," Hall observed in a question to The Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart. "You've written about it. You've even been, if you will, attacked by the attorneys representing George Zimmerman." "You have people who have that pit in their stomach. The worry that the outcome of this trial could set off a firestorm, quite honestly," she continued. "And folks are worried about that, honestly." Capehart said that the Martin family, which has called for calm and asked for the public to abide by the decision ultimately reached by a Florida jury, is concerned about unrest. "Even though the national outrage has died down, the sort of red hot passions that this case has embroiled, for lack of a better word, are still there," Capehart noted. "The level of vitriol and also passion that attends to this case is very, very real." Capehart said that the calls for calm from all the parties involved were helpful to quell the racial tension that the Zimmerman case naturally evokes. After that bit of responsible reporting, Hall proceeded to politicize the Martin case by observing that Republicans support an accused murderer while Obama would have loved Trayvon like a son. Fortunately, she was only observing how "others" have inflamed the nation with their coverage of the case. "You have others, I mean, who have tried to turn this into a political story, Jonathan," Hall noted. "We know that the president gave his heartfelt words that, if he had a son, he would look like Trayvon, but we also know that George Zimmerman went on Fox News a lot because he felt that he had a sympathetic ear from conservatives." In March of last year, MSNBC brass defended the actions of their anchor, Rev. Al Sharpton, who traveled to Florida in the wake of Trayvon Martin's death in February, to hold political rallies with the stated aim of forcing local police to charge and arrest Zimmerman. "We didn't hire Al to become a neutered kind of news presenter," said MSNBC president Phil Griffin. MSNBC prime time anchor Lawrence O'Donnell spent one memorable segment last year angrily interrogating an empty chair after his scheduled guest, Zimmerman's attorney, cancelled last minute. "He literally ran away," O'Donnell said, "he is in our car right now taking him away from the studio." Zimmerman is suing NBC/Universal, a fact that every MSNBC anchor has been forced to disclose amid their hourly coverage of the trial, after the network aired a misleading edit of his 911 call which made it appear as though he told the operator that Trayvon Martin was black unsolicited. In fact, he was asked to describe Martin's appearance. When Hall says that "others" have politicized this case, one would have to assume that she is not only referring to Fox News and the President of the United States. Hopefully, she is also talking thinking her fellow MSNBC colleagues. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:16 AM Source of latest blogoshit, Beardy? Or did you make it up yourself? Also, you never supplied the source or the relevence of the previous blogoshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:18 AM SANFORD, Fla. - For days last summer, various news outlets analyzed the voice of George Zimmerman during his Feb. 26, 2012 call to Sanford police, and reached a conclusion that was inflammatory, shocking and false. Asked by HLN anchor Nancy Grace what he heard on the tape, one of the lawyers representing the family of Trayvon Martin said without equivocation: "He said coon." No, in fact, both sides of the divisive case now agree: He said, "punks." Local 6 tracked the earliest mention of the epitaph to an amateur blogger who, like many, was outraged that Zimmerman had not been charged in connection with his shooting of the unarmed 17-year-old. A local TV station in Orlando aired a report that parroted the blog entry and, from there, the misinformation was off and running to national cable networks. It was one of many pieces of misinformation that have filtered into the public consciousness since Zimmerman shot Martin and claimed he acted in self defense. As 500 potential jurors prepare to begin showing up here next week, Local 6 reviewed a few other myths or misstatements: Trayvon Martin was not a heavily tattooed, bearded man, contrary to a well-traveled email claiming the media was hiding that image of Martin. The man pictured in the email is a 33-year-old rapper known as Game. Nor was Martin a 6-foot-2-inches, 175-pound bundle of muscled mass, as the email claimed. He was 5-foot 11-inches, 158 pounds, according to his autopsy. (Zimmerman was listed at 5-foot-7, 204 pounds in a medical record created the day after the shooting; a jail record states he was down to 185 pounds when he was finally arrested in April 2012.) Another falsehood wasn't promulgated by anonymous e-mailers or reckless bloggers, rather, it was broadcast in open court last week by Zimmerman's defense attorney, Mark O'Mara. O'Mara stated he had recovered video from Martin's cell phone showing Martin taped two of his "buddies" beating up a homeless man. In fact, it was video of two homeless man fighting over a bicycle, O'Mara acknowledged days later. He apologized for the misstatement. Finally, the most trivial of the myths, but one so prevalent it should be corrected: There was no iced tea. The Skittles and iced tea narrative, along with the hoodie Martin was wearing, has become iconic in the aftermath of the shooting. But evidence photos released last week show it was actually an Arizona brand fruit drink Martin carried with him when he died. Again, a trivial matter, but, for those truly interested in facts, one that needs to be corrected. http://www.clickorlando.com/news/myths-misstatements-surround-trayvon-martins-death/-/1637132/20441210/-/9jlkj1z/-/index.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:19 AM Greggie, The only shit being posted is you. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbc-anchor-concerned-about-zimmerman-trial's-firestorm-potential-proceeds-to-politicize-it/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:49 AM Keith A in Hertford, Your argument that stuff in Martin's life prior to being murdered is fair game is not only wrong but down right disrespectful to the victim... There is a reason why past sexual activities by rape victims is not admissible in court... The logic is that it does not justify the rape... The exception, of course, is spousal rape... But the fact that a woman has had _____ sex partners in her life does not give an unknown rapist an excuse for his behavior... It is not relevant... As for leaving it to the judge and jury to decide??? If the trial is conducted fairly then, yeah, that's the way it is supposed to work, however, we have already seen enough misconduct by both the judge and the defense team to see that is not the case here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: pdq Date: 03 Jul 13 - 09:58 AM ...here is a photo of the back of Zimmerman's head the night of the shooting: http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/ht_george_zimmerman_head_dm_120419_ssh.jpg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:17 AM "A witness in the George Zimmerman trial described his wounds as "insignificant" and "non–life threatening." Dr. Valerie Rao, a medical examiner, made the determination after reviewing video and photographs of Zimmerman after his deadly confrontation with Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman, who faces a second-degree murder charge for shooting the unarmed teenager, said Martin repeatedly slammed his head against the ground. Rao told the jury she believed that happened maybe once. Zimmerman claims he shot Martin in self-defense." Read it at ABC News July 2, 2013 6:04 PM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:20 AM Ok, ready to fry George again! Don, huh? End of big night of drinking. Nonsensical bordering on incoherent. BWI. Ought to be a law against it. They need to invent a smart phone with a built in alcohol sensor that will cut you off from posting just as soon as your ability to reason slips away until morning. If I have ever posted anything that didn't make sense or emailed songs about brother, it's generally that. I know it seems like some sort of psychotic break but it's not. So I'm pretty sure I was making fun of people (of which I have known several growing up in the drug culture of the seventies and eighties) who drink and snort coke or crystal so they can stay up all night and half the next day getting drunker and more strung out instead of going to sleep. I'm pretty sure I was announcing my superiority over such foolish individuals. Except a.) It was completely off topic and b.) completely devoid of any decipherable context. I'm going to have to tell my drinking partners to start hiding my phone after 12. There's no other way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:23 AM Brother should be brotherhood :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:30 AM Your argument that stuff in Martin's life prior to being murdered is fair game is not only wrong but down right disrespectful to the victim... By "fair game" do you mean admissible as evidence. It is usual for the judge to decide. You know which one was "the victim" already? How? If the trial is conducted fairly then, yeah, that's the way it is supposed to work, however, we have already seen enough misconduct by both the judge and the defense team to see that is not the case here.. You think evidence should be withheld because you think the trial may not be fair? That would make the trial unfair if it wasn't already! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:37 AM Bobert has already decided that the only "fair" trial is one where Zimmerman gets the maximum sentence, regardless of any evidence. Since Bobert knows all, anything less would obviously be proof of "racial" prejudice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:54 AM No, Keith, I don't think "evidence" should be withheld... What I am saying is that whatever was on Martin's phone - unless it implicated that he knew Zimmerman and/or planned on hurting Zimmerman - is not evidence... Richard Bridge, who is also an attorney, says it isn't evidence... Seems the only folks who think it is evidence are the same people who didn't think Zimmerman should have been charged in the first place and that was long before anyone knew about Martin's cell phone... Hmmmmm??? Seems that these folks have major prejudicial leanings about what really happened... Reminds me of the stuff that used to go on here in the South... But again, Keith... Why is anything that Martin did prior to being murdered relevant to the case??? Please use facts and not irrational arguments that have been made here before that are not facts but obvious and ***admittedly*** fictional scenarios... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:54 AM Anyway, Bobert has stated that he does not want a "fair" trial, he wants Zimmerman convicted. He already knows what happened, and has decided guilt. " From: Bobert - PM Date: 18 Jun 13 - 12:52 PM ... 2. We agree but if Martin (the victim) gets a fair trial, Zimmerman has to be convicted of, at the very least, wrongful death... " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:59 AM Richard Bridge: "I should also point out that if a man with a gun is following you, you are really quite likely reasonably to apprehend an intended assault, and are therefore entitled to use reasonable force in self defence. So "Martin assaulted Zimmerman" is by no means a foregone conclusion." Speaking of 'foregone conclusions' you seem to think that Martin KNEW that Zimmerman had a gun....would you, as an unarmed person, attack someone WITH a gun??? Your supposition, seems to have a bit of bias there, Ol' Chap! Nobody KNOWS, not you, not Bobert, not any of us...so, as per aforementioned, 'Chill out!' GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:04 AM You're right. Beardy. It is obviosly the iced tea that the entire case hinges upon. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: pdq Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:05 AM "A witness in the George Zimmerman trial described his wounds as...'non–life threatening.' " ~ Valarie Rao "Zimmerman, who faces a second-degree murder charge for shooting the unarmed teenager, said Martin repeatedly slammed his head against the ground. Rao told the jury she believed that happened maybe once." Note how ABC "news" accentuates the "unarmed teenager" point for their purposes when it is not needed to convey the facts. More important, both statements by Dr. Roa are opinions and should not be allowed to stand, just as the cop's opinion that "Zimmerman is telling the truth" was struck from the record by the judge. Heck, if Zimmerman had already received "life-threatening injuries", he would not have been able to defend himself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:21 AM "You know which one was "the victim" already? How?" Are you joking? In my experience, in a murder trial, the victim is is generally the dead one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:24 AM Bobert: " This case isn't an "Okay, I meet you on the street" case, bruce... This is a case where the victim was stalked and confronted... That is a major difference... The facts of the case as we know them are that Zimmerman got out of his vehicle with a gun and confronted the victim... That isn't at all the scenario that you have just presented... Your scenario has nothing to do with the realities of this case... " Trial: ""Jurors today heard George Zimmerman's account in his own words of his fatal confrontation with Trayvon Martin as prosecutors played a dramatic audio tape of Zimmerman being questioned by police shortly after the shooting. Zimmerman is heard telling a police officer how he saw Martin walking through his Sanford, Fla. neighborhood on a dark, rainy Feb. 2012 night. As a neighborhood watchman he tried to follow him in his car because there had been a series of break-ins in the gated community. Zimmerman said he lost sight of Martin, got out of his car to call police and was walking back to his vehicle when the 17-year-old attacked him. "He jumped out of the bushes and he said 'What the f..k is your problem, homie?'" Zimmerman said on the tape. "And I got my cell phone out to call 911 this time, and I said 'I don't have a problem.' And he goes, 'No, now you have a problem,' and he punched me in the nose." In court, jurors listened closely to the tape, while Zimmerman showed no emotion and Martin's father closed his eyes from time to time. Zimmerman told police he fell down to the ground after being punched repeatedly. "I tried to defend myself. He just started punching me in the face, and I started screaming for help. I couldn't see. I couldn't breathe." "He puts his hand on my nose and mouth, and he says 'You are going to die tonight.' He said "the suspect" was "mounted on top of me" and began to bang his head onto the ground. "As he banged my head again, I just pulled out my firearm and shot him," Zimmerman said." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:27 AM Okay, GfinS... Are you willing to admit that this trial is a sham if the stuff found on Martin's phone has nothing to do with the case... You, and others, seem is fine to parade your fishing expedition out there that somehow because Martin did this or that in the past justified Zimmerman, who BTW didn't know Martin or if he even owned a cell phone, in murdering Martin... That's the issue here... The defense and the judge seem to have no problem allowing Martin's past to be used to paint Martin as someone that needed to be murdered... For what??? Smoking pot and talking smack??? If that was a capital offense in America then about 300,000,000 Americans deserve to be murdered... More insanity from the King of Insanity... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:29 AM http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/george-zimmerman-trial-race-is-a-subtext-not-the-focus/2013/07/02/a296611e-e262-11e2-a11e |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:35 AM Washington Post says "page not found", Beardy (big surprise. b |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 11:40 AM Mudcat Linkmaker: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/george-zimmerman-trial-race-is-a-subtext-not-the-focus/2013/07/02/a296611e-e262-11e2-a11e Entered link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/george-zimmerman-trial-race-is-a-subtext-not-the-focus/2013/07/02/a296611e-e262-11e2-a11e-c2ea876a8f30_story_1.html So the Link maker truncates, and "Liberal Voice " claims a victory.... I guess Liberals need to claim whatever victories they can, since they can't supply facts to support their viewpoint. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM the fuckin horse your beating is dead folks ... no one is going to budge on their opinions so why fight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM That's right, Beardy, its always someone else's fault, never yours. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:40 PM here is the reader digest condensed version ... two guys got into a confrontation. Both guys too macho to run away .. had to show off their testosterone. One is dead the other's life is ruined forever no matter how it shakes out |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:46 PM people forget that OJ was a Buffalo Bill. He would come to buffalo to sign autographs and people lined the streets. After the trial he couldn't give away the damn things. The lawsuit took away his home and cash. His life ruined even though he was found not guilty. Then he commits another crime and ends up in jail for 30 years. Nobody is going to win on this one either way |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:46 PM Not quite, Ol'ster... One guy stalks another guy with a gun... The stalked party gets murdered in the course of defending himself... Why is the stalker getting a pass??? He instigated the confrontation... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 12:54 PM And Bobert knows what he is saying- after all, he was there, right?????? NOT. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jul 13 - 01:17 PM Bobert: "Are you willing to admit that this trial is a sham if the stuff found on Martin's phone has nothing to do with the case..." Huh??....That's like asking me if it would be a sham, if he was watching cartoons on his T.V earlier in the day...Who knows what's on his phone..AND , more so, a phone narrative, is not conclusive that the narrative isn't colored, to fit the persons having it....so I guess the answer to your question is 'Maybe, Maybe not.' Bobert: "You, and others, seem is fine to parade your fishing expedition out there that somehow because Martin did this or that in the past justified Zimmerman,...." I have said nothing of the sort..you just interjected that. You're starting to use Firth's tactic, of making up stuff that nobody said, and then arguing it, as if it was said! Bobert: " who BTW didn't know Martin or if he even owned a cell phone, in murdering Martin..." Or a gun, for that matter.. You really gotta relax a second...take it easy...take a big breath. You're getting so wound up in this that your starting to show signs of mental and emotional fatigue. Like i said before, NOBODY knows for sure what happened..let it play out...and BTW, the prosecution is fucking up his own case, more than Zimmerman's own defense. Regardless, I have my hunches, that usually bear out...but CALM really is the best place to stay! ...I mean, I think it would be silly to get so worked up about it, that I'd take to the streets, waving a piano over my head, huh? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM Sanford Police Chief Cecil Smith and other city officials are worried that the outcome of the George Zimmerman trial could spark "violence" and have crafted a "secret law enforcement" plan to deal with potential social disorder. A CNN report shows Sanford police going door to door in an attempt to calm residents about possible unrest in response to the Zimmerman verdict. "Our worst fear is that we will have people from outside of the community coming in and stirring up….violence in the community," Smith told CNN's David Mattingly. Sanford Mayor Jeff Triplett echoes Smith's concerns, warning that just one person intent on violence could spark wider disorder and "a provocation of violence". City Manager Norton Bonaparte is similarly on edge, fearing a Rodney King-style riot if Zimmerman is found not guilty. "I'm saying that's a scenario that's certainly a possibility," said Bonaparte, adding that plans had been made through law enforcement but that he would not go into detail on the nature of what they were. Police Chief Cecil Smith was similarly evasive when asked if SWAT teams or "special personnel" were on standby to respond to disorder. "As far as the particulars of the plans, we're not releasing that," Smith told CNN. Authorities have also enlisted the help of local pastors who are acting as "observers" in the Zimmerman trial and will then report back to their congregation. The involvement of pastors is interesting in light of a program first reported by Infowars back in 2006 under which the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was training pastors and other religious representatives to become secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to "obey the government" in preparation for a declaration of martial law, property and firearm seizures, and forced relocation. As we reported earlier today, scores of Twitter users have threatened to riot and loot if George Zimmerman is acquitted. Other prominent voices have also warned of potential civil unrest, including former Chicago police officer Paul Huebl, who said that he fully expects "organized race rioting to begin in every major city to dwarf the Rodney King and the Martin Luther King riots of past decades" if Zimmerman walks. With police already going door to door to calm Sanford residents in anticipation of unrest, some are worried that social disorder could be used as a pretext for gun confiscation in a similar vein to how Hurricane Katrina was used as a justification to disarm residents of New Orleans. http://www.infowars.com/sanford-police-chief-fears-violence-in-response-to-zimmerman-verdict/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 03 Jul 13 - 01:40 PM INFOWARS, Beardie? WEith Alex Jones, world-famous conspiracy theorist and general all-around lunatic? This is beneath even your usual standard of horseshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 01:42 PM "This is beneath even your usual standard of horseshit." You mean I am approaching your standards, Greggie boy????? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:06 PM No, I don't. Nor does anyone else who has followed your posting history. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:11 PM Well, they should worry because if Zimmerman walks, gun confiscation will probably occur just as it did during Katrina. That is, whether violence erupts or not, as one of the "pre-emptive" (where you are penalized for what you might do rather than what you do) measures our government is so fond of these days. And once confiscated, they won't get them back. The police should have arrested and charged Zimmerman with at least manslaughter and Trayvon's parents should have been notified immediately. Basic things. A lot of this is on the Sanford police IMO. It's the ultimate irony that they will now provide a secret remedy for an outrageous situation that they themselves helped to create. At the end of the day, I'm glad I live in an area where what George Zimmerman did wouldn't fly. People around here do not get rewarded for disregarding instructions from law enforcement and dispatchers are considered representatives of their departments at any given time- a little common sense. Having a law like Stand Your Ground is akin to deputizing all gun owners. Let's turn State St. into the Wild West. Sure. Why not? Like it's not enough of a mess with three rowdy bars in close proximity. GfS, it really does look like they're throwing the fight. Do you think it could have anything to do with the fact that George Zimmerman's father was a magistrate in the Virginia court system. Think of what a valuable resource that is in the real world, in terms of connections, and more importantly legal knowledge and advice. I don't think that book he wrote made any sense except to a racist. It's a hoot though. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_DBEmPjkac&sns=em |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:13 PM I had a feeling that some 'unrest' might occur, but I hadn't heard of all this other stuff, Bruce. Do y9ou think the government, in concert with the corporate media is fanning this(with the help of our resident 'fans') to instigate unrest..and using the case to spark it? Just a question.....and I hope the answer is 'No'....nonetheless, I'm sure there are political idiots out there who would want it to go viral! Mayne, even in here..God Forbid! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,TIA Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:20 PM Just a little sample of the reliability and rationality of Infowars (Alex Jones). Absolutely bat shit crazy and obnoxious on the BBC June 9, 2013. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hc8DEpM4-6A click |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:30 PM No idea how true any of these details are - but the "Liberal Agenda" is to outlaw private firearm ownership- How better than more riots? It will be "Temporary, for our own good". Got to make sure the "Peeple" are under control, and do what they are told. And riots would distract from all of Obama's other problems. Just look at how 1968 got Johnson off the heat for Vietnam. Of course, the entire population, minorities included, lost a lot, but since when have people with a "Cause" ever worried about the impact of heir manipulations? Dead black teenagers only matter when they can be used for political purposes, or this administration would have done far more in minority communities than it has. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:42 PM Greggie, s\So you think that CNN is not a good enough source, when you don't agree with it??? A CNN report shows Sanford police going door to door in an attempt to calm residents about possible unrest in response to the Zimmerman verdict. "Our worst fear is that we will have people from outside of the community coming in and stirring up….violence in the community," Smith told CNN's David Mattingly. Sanford Mayor Jeff Triplett echoes Smith's concerns, warning that just one person intent on violence could spark wider disorder and "a provocation of violence". City Manager Norton Bonaparte is similarly on edge, fearing a Rodney King-style riot if Zimmerman is found not guilty. "I'm saying that's a scenario that's certainly a possibility," said Bonaparte, adding that plans had been made through law enforcement but that he would not go into detail on the nature of what they were. Police Chief Cecil Smith was similarly evasive when asked if SWAT teams or "special personnel" were on standby to respond to disorder. "As far as the particulars of the plans, we're not releasing that," Smith told CNN. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:46 PM No idea how true any of these details are Of COURSE you're not, Beardy, but nonetheless you still willingly and enthusiastically smear this horesehit all over the place with abandon. As expected. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:47 PM Greggie, You and Bobert are the ones engaged in shit-spreading- It seems to be your true area of expertise. You must take pride in being so talented. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 02:57 PM Pastors aim to keep peace at Zimmerman trial By Mark I. Pinsky, special to CNN Sanford, Florida (CNN) – As opening arguments begin, courtroom seats are at a premium at the trial of George Zimmerman, charged with second degree murder in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager. But in an unusual arrangement, four seats in the second row, just steps from the jury box, have been assigned to a group called "Sanford Pastors Connecting." The multi-racial ministerial association has pledged to bear witness to the high-profile proceedings during the trial and to keep the peace afterward. All of the clergy in the courtroom project have agreed to support the jury's verdict in the racially-charged case, which sparked large rallies and marches led by civil rights figures like the Rev. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. As needed, the pastors will report courtroom events to crowds expected to gather outside the courthouse, as well as to their congregations, and have agreed to head off inflammatory rumors. "Regardless of what the verdict is, we can avoid the violence," said the Rev. Robert K. Gregory Jr., of the Good News Jail & Prison Ministry in Sanford. "If we work together, trust can be built." Zimmerman, a member of the Neighborhood Watch in his gated community, is accused of stalking and fatally shooting Martin, who was staying with his father, on February 26, 2012. The defense claims that Martin, returning from a convenience store, turned on Zimmerman, who then fired in self-defense. The Zimmerman trial: What you need to know Two dozen media spaces on the courtroom's polished wooden seats have been assigned by lottery, with an equal amount set aside for the general public. Another twelve spots in the rectangular chamber are reserved for the Zimmerman and Martin families. The pastoral rotation is the idea of the U.S. Department of Justice's Community Relations Service. A Seminole County Sheriff's inspector, who is also an ordained minister, handles the scheduling. Among the Christian clergy who have signed up, there are evangelical and mainline congregations; tiny, urban parishes and suburban megachurches. "We're looking at providing leadership, to comfort people through the word of God and prayer," said the Rev. Sharon Patterson, of Getting Your House in Order Ministries, a small African-American congregation. "We want our presence to encourage them to understand that as long as God is in control, everything will work out all right," the pastor said. Patterson brings a particular past to her courtroom witnessing. She once aspired to be a lawyer herself, spending summers when she was first teaching public school, and had no air conditioning at home, going from trial to trial. While most Sanford-area African-American congregations rallied around the Martin family and their call for justice immediately following the shooting, some predominately white churches and clergy were divided. The Rev. Alan Brumback, pastor of Sanford's Central Baptist Church, was one of the first – and few – local white clergy to join the predominately black marches and demonstrations in the wake of the Martin shooting. However, Brumback, whose congregation is multi-racial, said he would not be a part of the courtroom program. "I am calling my church to pray for our city and to share the only news that can bring reconciliation," he said, "the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That is my only agenda." Live blog: Zimmerman trial begins Whatever it is, the verdict will be God's will, said the Rev. Lowman J. Oliver III of St. Paul Missionary Baptist Church in Sanford. "We pray that the outcome will be just and fair to all parties," he said. "How will it look? I'm not able to answer that. Our roles are as peacemakers. It's more important that we send a message that we sustain the peace." However, Oliver said, peaceful acceptance of a verdict does not mean people will have to agree with it. They can certainly have "a righteous response," as long as it is nonviolent. "There is a history of division in this community, and there is a history involving violence against black youth" that must be addressed, said the Rev. Joel Hunter, of Northland Church in Longwood, Florida. A prominent evangelical, Hunter is also a close confidant of President Obama's. After a long, tedious day of sitting together during jury selection, Hunter, Oliver and Gregory were finishing each other's sentences. Laughing, they admitted that they were unused to sitting still and silent in unpadded pews for so long – while others did the talking. http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/24/pastors-aim-to-keep-peace-at-zimmerman-trial/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 03 Jul 13 - 03:01 PM Paregoric, Beardy, Paregoric's the thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 03 Jul 13 - 03:03 PM http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/03/justice/zimmerman-trial-updates/index.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Jul 13 - 03:12 PM Bobert. whatever was on Martin's phone - unless it implicated that he knew Zimmerman and/or planned on hurting Zimmerman - is not evidence... If it is not, the defence will not be able to use it, so why withhold it? Richard Bridge, who is also an attorney, says it isn't evidence... Richard Bridge may be an attorney, but he does not know what it is, so how can he state that? But again, Keith... Why is anything that Martin did prior to being murdered relevant to the case??? The jury have to decide if M attacked Z. They have to make a judgement on how he might behave in that situation. His past behaviour is relevant. Sorry, but it is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 03 Jul 13 - 05:12 PM What you are missing here, Keith, is that the stuff on Martin's phone has been made public - by Zimmerman's attorney - which tends to poison the jury pool... That is wrong and the judge should have issued a gag order on both the defense and the prosecution... This is what bad justice looks like... If the defense had taken the material to the judge - in his chamber - in the first place for a ruling on whether or not it was related to the case then I'd have no problem what so ever... Basic law... Not brain surgery here... Martin's civil rights have been trampled here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jul 13 - 05:58 PM Bobert: "What you are missing here, Keith, is that the stuff on Martin's phone has been made public -.." Ya' know, Martin seem to know he was being followed, right?...and was bugged about it, right?...bad enough that he turned around and confronted Zimmerman, right? ..and all the while, he's talking to his girl friend, right?...OK..I think we could all agree on that. the question would then go to, Do you think Trayvon really felt in jeopardy? Right? Some say he did..some say not...well, if I was being followed by a guy who had a gun, and I knew it..and I felt threatened by it...and had a cell phone, I'd be calling 911....wouldn't you??? Right! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 03 Jul 13 - 06:00 PM Bruce, I found out about Katrina from the NRA, stay away from infowars. Alex Jones, while presenting certain facts, is framing them in the most provocative way possible, inciting unrest. Infowars is creating a nice hotspot for NSA surveillance. Alex Jones is a government shill. I only support revolutionaries who preach non-violence and don't go on about the second amendment. Our forefathers could never have imagined the state of weapons technology today. Your government has you so outgunned, you're going to need to find another way to protest the mechanisms of what I like to refer to as the "State Apparatus." I think that's what Edward Snowden had in mind but it seems to have backfired somewhat. Civil disobedience and peaceful protest are still time honored methods of making your point- unless of course you're still waiting for your "change" from Obama. The guy's a bust in that department. If I was a pastor in Sanford, I would refuse to be enlisted by the Sanford police to quell civil unrest- not after the way they protected George Zimmerman and disregarded Trayvon's family. Instead, I would tend to my own flock and invoke Dr. King in hopes that in my community, things would not go on that reinforce the worst stereotypes of racists. I would develop my own secret plan. My secret plan would go into effect if Zimmerman walked. I would organize a peaceful protest of the verdict and fail to apply for a permit. You're not supposed to have to get special permission to exercise a right. Then face down on the ground with hoodies up. Right in the middle of a non-designated "free speech zone" like say, all along Main St. from one end of town to the other. But you'd have to stay down from say like noon to 3. That's plenty long enough to lay face down on the ground. From what I've heard from peaceful protesters, that's where the specially trained riot police want you anyway (On the ground!). Why not save them the trouble of putting you there? Better visual to make the point anyway. The way I see it, assembling and dispersing would be the tricky part cuz you have to stand up for that. Otherwise, my secret plan is solid. Shhh...Secret plan. Let it be said that we took the verdict lying down :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 03 Jul 13 - 07:40 PM Who knows, GfinS... The only story we have is from a guy who has already been caught lying about other stuff... Zimmerman has no credibility here... Do you have any money??? No... A big fat lie... Do you have knowledge of Florida's stand your ground laws??? No... Another big fat lie... Bottom line here??? The fact's haven't changed... Zimmerman stalks Martin... Zimmerman calls police... Police tell him to stay in his vehicle and that real cops are on the way... Zimmerman gets out of car and approaches Martin with a gun... Martin gets murdered by Zimmerman... Everything else really doesn't much matter... That ***is*** the case... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:16 PM Well, if that is the case, I'm sure he could get convicted on the charge of lying. Your scenario has WAY too many skips and blank spots...so if I were you, I wouldn't get all worked up about it based on your 'analysis'. As I noted before, this is a case of young guys, misreading each other, and the circumstances. Why Zimmerman didn't stay in his truck, is as flimsy as Martin not calling 911....had either one of those things happened...this thread wouldn't be here today! ..and then you'd still be waiting for another incident to play the apologetic for. This really is overblown by the media..and also he's being tried in the media, instead of the courts....and ALL the wannabe armchair lawyers and wannabe political activists are having a field day, getting their legal briefs from T.V. anchormen and all the hype....well almost all of the wannabe activists...Firth has wisely abstained! ...as far as I'm concerned, let the courts handle it....the prosecutors, in my opinion, fucked up when they charged him for first degree, instead of a lower charge....now proving first degree, is WAY harder with the evidence that the have shown, SO FAR! Manslaughter, they had a far better chance with..first degree...mmm..not so sure. Stupid fuckers should have stayed in his car, and/or Martin should have dialed 911. You ever wonder if Martin talking to his chick might have said, "Fuckin' honky followin' me, here, you listen, I'm goin' to take his fuckin' honky ass out!"......maybe it's a good thing they withheld it and left something like that out! Now don't 'soil' your panties..it was only a 'what if' supposition. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:23 PM yup but Martin should have taken off running away when he knew he was being followed. Zimmerman should have stayed in the car. My point I think is still valid, Macho behavior and who has the biggest dick thing. and now one dead and the others life ruined even if he walks or is found guilty it is over for him. Sad but a good lesson for others on what not to do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:26 PM I'm not "all worked up", GfinS... I saw OJ get away with murder... I know what the deal is here... I'm just calling the ballgame as I see it... Zimmerman will get his no matter the outcome of this case... Karma will fuck him up for what he has done... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:31 PM I don't know Manslaughter would have been easier to prove. 2nd degree murder much harder to prove. Don't get me wrong I think myself he is guilty as sin but like I said Florida, that f'd up state ... I bet he walks away and I also bet there will be riots again from all those who don't like the verdict. Fucked up world we live in anymore .. I didn't like it when OJ walked either but I didn't want to set anything on fire because of it. We see this a lot sadly only a couple of people don't like a verdict then it is fun and games from a mass of humanity. Kinda like when the home town team wins something .. for some damn reason people look for any reason to riot. I mean good people who wouldn't think of doing that are jumping on cars or rushing out on the field to tear up the stadium .. someone has to explain that crowd dynamic to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 03 Jul 13 - 08:37 PM How do you know you he didn't, Ol'ster... This entire story is being concocted by a ***proven*** liar who is trying to save his own ass... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:02 PM Either way it goes, rioting or any other form of civil unrest that may come of this, is just as fucked up as the act itself! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 03 Jul 13 - 10:18 PM point well taken bobster I don't know you are right and he may have |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 04 Jul 13 - 01:53 AM This entire story is being concocted by a ***proven*** liar who is trying to save his own ass... Very likely. The jury will be aware that the guilty always lie at their trial anyway, and will put little or no weight on his assertions. It is not at all unusual for a killer to plea self defence. Guilty or not, the jury must acquit unless convinced beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased did not attack the accused. Apart from the conflicting evidence, they will also need to assess the position of the deceased on a scale from violent thug to gentle saint. They will need evidence of his past to do that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 08:38 AM ""When asked by Bobert, I supplied a scenario where the phone TEXT messages might be significant evidence. He never bothered to comment on that. Why do you insist on talking about only the photos? Is your argument so weak that you must resort to using that sort of tactic?"" Because the defence, who were definitely aware of the photos when they complained, have complained of no other items from the phone. No such evidence as your hypothetical nonsense would have escaped complaint, had any such existed. Remember that the complaints were made after the substance was known to the defence. They could hardly complain before they knew there was something to complain about. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 08:45 AM ""In ANY case, if one reverses the races of the individuals involved, and comes to a different conclusion, then one is a racist. Period. Too many here have demonstrated that that is what they are,"" Still obfuscation and disingenuous avoidance of answering a very pertinent question. If the neighbourhood watchman had been black (pretty unlikely in Sanford) and the dead man been white, do YOU believe the authorities would have been as reluctant to act as they were in this case? A simple YES! or NO! is all that's required to answer this simple question. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 04 Jul 13 - 08:48 AM Thank you, Don T... I guess that was written by the usual suspect whose posting I no longer bother to read... Sorry, Keith, but whether Martin was a thug or a saint is not relevant here... Zimmerman didn't know who the hell Treyvon Martin was... Plus, being a thug does not carry the death sentence as long as the thug doesn't commit murder... Was Martin a murderer??? Your position is the same as a defense attorney asking a rape victim about her sexual past as if that justified the rape... Your thinking is flawed here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:03 AM ""Just a perfect example of never ever ever ever get yourself in any situation that you have to defend yourself, both wrong .. either one could have run away. You fight, you defend when attacked but only and I mean only if there are no options. With all of my training in hand to hand or with firearms or sharp edged weapons. I am not afraid to run .. hell that is my first and foremost option. Defend only when absolutely necessary, was any of this necessary ... NO"" And if black youngster, Trayvon Martin, had turned and run from Zimmerman, the only difference would likely have been a bullet in his back, rather than his chest. Some Choice he had! Dead either way! In my book an unarmed innocent, guilty only of walking while black, has been murdered, because any action he took to prevent Zimmerman from shooting him is arguably self defence. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:10 AM My thinking is not flawed. If the deceased attacked the defendant, there is a defence of self-defence. The prosecution must prove that he did not, and the jury must believe it. If the defendant was known to be a violent thug, an attack is more believable. If he was a gentle saint, it would not be. Obviously it is not proof, but it is evidence that can be taken into account. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:33 AM When Zimmerman got out of his car - not in question - to continue stalking Martin - also not in question - anything that Martin did, under Florida's stand-your-ground and self-defense statutes was justified... That includes walking up to Zimmerman and punching Zimmerman in the face... The law says that if you feel threatened you have a right to defend yourself... This is the exact same statute that Zimmerman's attorney - the "self defense" argument - in defending Zimmerman... This is where your thinking is flawed, Keith... On one hand you say it's okay for Zimmerman to use the "self defense" argument but not okay for that same statute to apply to an unarmed black kid being stalked by a larger man with a gun... If you can't get that then I might have to add you to the list of people here who are incapable of rational thought... Reconsider, dude... You are digging a hole trying to get out of it... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:36 AM ""More important, both statements by Dr. Roa are opinions and should not be allowed to stand, just as the cop's opinion that "Zimmerman is telling the truth" was struck from the record by the judge. Heck, if Zimmerman had already received "life-threatening injuries", he would not have been able to defend himself."" Bleeding from head wounds is almost always particularly copious and small cuts can look far worse than they are. The good Dr is an expert, and her opinion would be treated as expert by any court, but of course Peedee knows better. What are your medical qualifications Peedee? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:41 AM ""Zimmerman said he lost sight of Martin, got out of his car to call police and was walking back to his vehicle when the 17-year-old attacked him."" Something in his vehicle requires that he walk away from it before making a phone call? Even when he has lost sight of a man who he regards as a likely criminal, having profiled him as Hoodie = Crook! Does it sound likely? NO!! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:53 AM self-defense statutes was justified... That includes walking up to Zimmerman and punching Zimmerman in the face... If that is true in your country, I am amazed. you say it's okay for Zimmerman to use the "self defense" argument It is Bobert. Not just me saying it. but not okay for that same statute to apply to an unarmed black kid being stalked by a larger man with a gun. Try to take race out of it It might be OK, but I doubt it would stand up whatever the colour. You might well be right about Z's guilt, but you can not know. Even the court has not heard both cases yet. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 09:57 AM ""Sanford Police Chief Cecil Smith and other city officials are worried that the outcome of the George Zimmerman trial could spark "violence" and have crafted a "secret law enforcement" plan to deal with potential social disorder................. ..........""Our worst fear is that we will have people from outside of the community coming in and stirring up….violence in the community," Smith told CNN's David Mattingly."" Preparing the ground already!! They could always set "innocent" George on 'em! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:05 AM ""No idea how true any of these details are - but the "Liberal Agenda" is to outlaw private firearm ownership- How better than more riots? It will be "Temporary, for our own good". Got to make sure the "Peeple" are under control, and do what they are told. And riots would distract from all of Obama's other problems. Just look at how 1968 got Johnson off the heat for Vietnam."" Now Beardie has lost it and gone batshit. The trial of some gung ho hotshot killer is another Vietnam war. Take your meds BB. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:15 AM ""Apart from the conflicting evidence, they will also need to assess the position of the deceased on a scale from violent thug to gentle saint. They will need evidence of his past to do that."" They aren't allowed to bring up Zimmerman's past record in evidence until and unless he is convicted. You believe that they should be able to blacken a dead teenager, who can't answer for himself? Typical! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:16 AM Okay, Keith... Leave out the word "black" if you like... That's fine with me... My argument is still valid... The defense is going to be built around Zimmerman's story, Keith... Zimmerman has already shown that he is not only a liar but a scheming lair, as well... Remember when he was jailed and all the gun-nuts were sending in large sums of money for his legal defense??? Zimmerman told the judge he didn't have any money for his defense while using juvenilistic code talk on the jail phone telling his wife to hide the money... It was well over $100,000... He has since been caught in other out-right lies... One about Martin grabbing his gun and another about having no knowledge about the Florida statutes after taking a class on them??? So, the defense is trying to shift the blame for the murder on the victim... Don T. is correct in his taking apart the Zimmerman portion of the story about Zimmerman having to return to his vehicle to make a phone call... That is also a very suspect account of the way things could have happened that defies logic... And yes, Keith, the Florida laws are ridiculous... There is an account where a guy was awakened to the sound of someone outside his house, looked out the window and saw someone messing with his truck, grabbed a machete, chased the guy down the block and killed him with the machete... The guy claimed "stand-your-ground" and no charges were brougt... Insane laws pushed by the NRA... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:18 AM GONE batshit, Don? No worse, really, than his usual spew of horseshit. But don't be too hard on him; he' a real campaigner for justice, you know. He worked tirelessly to have the conviction of John Demjanjuk overturned, and is currently on the board of The Michael Karkoc Defense Fund. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:22 AM Bobert, Keith just doesn't get it, does he? In Florida, its impossible to "take race out of it". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:50 AM Maybe Greg, but we are better than that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:51 AM I know BB and Keith would like to pretend that there is no racial aspect, though how they know that Zimmerman didn't profile Martin as Black = likely drug dealer or user looking to burgle a house is a bit of a mystery. He knew Martin was black and described him to police as such. However, there is another aspect, which no doubt they would prefer not to consider. Martin grew up black in the Southern USA where, in the eyes of many of its denizens, black people are sub human thugs, pimps and drug dealers. Finding himself, during an innocent trip to the shop, being stalked by what must have looked like a white man to him, who followed him in a car and then got out to continue following, he must have felt threatened. Tell me then why you believe that Florida's "Stand your ground" Law wouldn't apply to him and why you don't see his confronting the stalker as self defence under that law? Zimmerman made himself the aggressor by stalking Martin and, by Florida's own law, Martin was not required to retreat, especially as he was unarmed, and three and a half stone lighter than Zimmerman. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:58 AM Just to save you guys from having to think, the answer to my own question is: The Florida "Stand your ground law" is for the protection of Redneck Nation against those dangerous and uppity........ Well, you know the rest. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jul 13 - 12:01 PM It seems that there are those in here that WANT this to be about a hatred filled murder. You sad pieces of shit! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 04 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM Maybe Greg, but we are better than that. Who are "we" Keith? "We" aren't trying the case. Theoretical is one thing, reality is another. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 04 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM Right Greg. We are not trying the case, just discussing aspects of it. I know BB and Keith would like to pretend that there is no racial aspect, It is race that makes this a cause celebre instead of just another shooting. I am not pretending it is not an issue, just saying it should not be for us. though how they know that Zimmerman didn't profile Martin as Black = likely drug dealer or user looking to burgle a house is a bit of a mystery I do not know any such thing. I do not understand those of you who somehow do know that Zim is guilty. That is just prejudice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 04 Jul 13 - 03:14 PM Yo, GfinS... I can see that you haven't spent too much time in the South... Maybe you need a quick refresher... In 1979 there was a planned, legal and non-violent civil rights demonstration in Greensboro, NC... Redneck Nation (klan + Nazis) decided to set up an ambush and shot into the demonstration killing 5 demonstrators and wounding others... How many of rednecks were charged??? Give up??? Zero... Don's 10:51am post tells it like it is... I know... I worked was working pretty much exclusively with black people when that occurred... I know how black people feel here in the South... Eugene Robinson, who grew up in South Carolina, has written about it... It ain't some figment of someone's imagination... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jul 13 - 05:36 PM Bobert: "In 1979....." That was 34 fucking years ago!!..You remember?..when Byrd was part of the KKK and Democrat senator!!!...and Democrats were vastly PRO- segregationist!....and that was SUPPOSED to be 16 MORE years after Democrat Gov. Wallace was blocking integration!!..Are you trying to tell me that the South is a bunch of slow learning idiots???....Oh yeah, I forgot, your from the South...never mind. You've MORE than answered that one already! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 04 Jul 13 - 07:07 PM Your history is wrong GfS. Many Democrats left to become Republicans in the 1950s and 1960s because they opposed the Civil Rights movement. Bobert is talking about 1979. Yes, the "Reagan Democrats" also switched over in 1980, but the Democrats who were "vastly pro-segregationist" were already Republicans in 1979. The South is not slow-learning. Many feel that they have nothing to learn. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 07:30 PM ""It seems that there are those in here that WANT this to be about a hatred filled murder. You sad pieces of shit!"" Goofus has no idea where the faeces is being produced. Another one who thinks black = bad! Who presents the case for a dead black child? NOBODY! Not the prosecution, not the defence, and certainly not the law enforcers of Sanford, Fla, who just want the case to go away. Moral: If you are black, stay indoors after dark, or the neighbourhood watch will kill you! And they'll get away with it! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 04 Jul 13 - 07:41 PM ""I do not understand those of you who somehow do know that Zim is guilty. That is just prejudice."" One 204lb man of stocky build, carrying a 9mm automatic, versus a 156lb teenager armed with a bag of candy. Teenager gets a 9mm slug and dies, while bigger man has a couple of superficial cuts to the head, which he would not have had if he'd left the job to the PROPER authorities. Why would we think he was a gung ho thug, detertmined to score a hit? Go on, you tell us why you think that unreasonable! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 04 Jul 13 - 08:37 PM Seems that a couple folks here are all to ready to just let this thing pass... Just like the Greensboro massacre... Just like the Jim Crow lynchings... They just joke around as if this case doesn't mean squat to them... It's like a sporting event to them... Well, think about someone you love and think how you'd feel if someone murdered that person and people were making a hero out of the murderer and then the justice system was just going thru the motions and not much more... Frankly, I'm gertting a little sick and tired of these people's lack of caring about much more than partisan BS and not about justice... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 04 Jul 13 - 10:23 PM Bobert, I'm afraid this SOB is walking, no matter how much I agree with your feelings and your opinions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 04 Jul 13 - 11:54 PM Bobert: "Frankly, I'm gertting a little sick and tired of these people's lack of caring about much more than partisan BS and not about justice..." WHAT??????!!!! That coming from YOU????? You've had this guy ready to be hung from the moment the story broke! And 'Guest' whatshisname....You got data to back up your claim?..Democrats, in the South were VERY pro-segregationist! Was Wallace? Was Byrd?..among others...Jeez!...Nice to hide behind 'Guest', huh? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 05 Jul 13 - 02:11 AM Don, you can not know. That is all emotion and prejudice for one subgroup against another. Your verdict may well be correct, but you can not know. I work with troubled and violent teenagers. Our little centre is plagued with sweet wrappers and drink cans, so I know candy is not evidence of innocence. I also know some kids who could make mincemeat of a slightly overweight 29 years old, so the weight difference is not evidence of guilt either. Bobert, I regret joining this and admit I am out of my depth here. Zimmerman and Martin are just names to me, and I have no emotional involvement. I though some dispassionate objectivity might be welcomed. I do not get your North South thing at all and it is not the case that if I am not for one side I must be against it. I do hope that justice is done here. keith. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 05 Jul 13 - 05:57 AM ""Don, you can not know. That is all emotion and prejudice for one subgroup against another. Your verdict may well be correct, but you can not know."" I can apply basic logic, pay heed to what is happening, and see which side has the more credible. Pity you can't! But that's your problem. What you call all emotion for one sub group (how you always manage to dehumanise those groups), is in fact a perfectly logical process. Perhaps we could hear your reasons for disagreeing with my comment about Martin's right, feeling threatened, to invoke "Stand your ground". Of course, somebody else would have to invoke it for him following his 9mm body piercing. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 05 Jul 13 - 06:07 AM Perhaps we could hear your reasons for disagreeing with my comment about Martin's right, feeling threatened, to invoke "Stand your ground". Your "comment" was this question, "Tell me then why you believe that Florida's "Stand your ground" Law wouldn't apply to him and why you don't see his confronting the stalker as self defence under that law?" I do not believe that. Everyone has or should have equal rights under the law. As I said, I just do not know enough about these issues in US and I quit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 05 Jul 13 - 06:16 AM Just a thought Keith! Trayvon Martin wasn't simply a sub group, or a black. He was a seventeen year old schoolboy, slight of build and doing nothing wrong. He had the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, according to the constitution of a country, many of whose people would regard him as a second class citizen. Whatever, nothing that he could do to a stronger, heavier man with his bare hands would justify a death penalty, let alone an unauthorised execution. There are holes in Zimmerman's story you could drive an eighteen wheeler through. How do you think justice for his death can be achieved?....Can they give him back his life? Justice for Trayvon is not possible! Zimmerman was out on the street with a loaded gun (against neighbourhood watch policy) and looking for a confrontation. That tells me all that I need to know about his motives. Testimony as to Zimmerman's fine qualities doesn't really impress, given that the whole of Sanford seems to be rooting for acquittal Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 05 Jul 13 - 08:49 AM Ditto... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 05 Jul 13 - 09:41 AM the whole of Sanford seems to be rooting for acquittal 'Course they are! That black boy had no business being in a white neighborhood in the first place. Damned uppity! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 05 Jul 13 - 10:28 AM You tell him, Sabrina Fulton: "Mark O'Mara, the criminal defense attorney representing former neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman, on Friday urged the mother of slain teen Trayvon Martin to admit that her son may have "caused his own death." O'Mara began his cross-examination of Sabrina Fulton by apologizing for her loss. "You need to ask a question," Fulton replied. The defense attorney then tried to throw cold water on Fulton's assertion that it was her son's voice screaming on a 911 call the night he was shot and killed by Zimmerman. "If it was your son, in fact, screaming as you testified, that would suggest that it was Mr. Zimmerman's fault that led to his death," O'Mara observed. "And if it was not your son screaming, if it was, in fact, George Zimmerman then you would have to accept the probability that it was Trayvon Martin that caused his own death, correct?" "I don't understand your question," Fulton said. "I heard my son screaming." "You certainly had to hope that was your son screaming even before you heard it, correct?" O'Mara continued. "I didn't hope for anything," Fulton insisted. "I just simply listened to the tape." "I don't meant to put you through this any more than necessary, but you certainly would hope your son, Trayvon Martin, did nothing that could have led to his own death, correct?" O'Mara tried again. "What I hope for is that this wouldn't have ever happened and he would still be here," Fulton shot back. "That's my hope."" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: pdq Date: 05 Jul 13 - 10:57 AM Follow @msnbc_us... Varying accounts of what happened between Zimmerman, 28, and Martin, 17, inside the gated community in Sanford, Fla., on Feb. 26 have trickled out to the public via state prosecutors, lawyers and relatives. But on Thursday morning, Zimmerman's defense team released a trove of information gathered in the initial days of the investigation that includes a never-heard police interview with Zimmerman and a video re-enactment of the shooting. The one hour, 11-minute videotaped police interview was conducted almost exactly 24 hours after the single gunshot fired by Zimmerman pierced Martin's chest. Police used the interview to perform a computerized voice stress analysis, which detects psychological stress based on voice patterns, on Zimmerman. Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, had called police to report a suspicious person when he spotted Martin. In the videotape, he walked officials through what happened next as he approached Martin. "I reached for my pocket, and I was looking for my phone, and he just punched me in the nose. And I fell backwards, to the side, somehow I ended up on my back. He ended up on top of me and he just kept punching my face and my head," Zimmerman said, adding that he was "screaming for help" as Martin allegedly pummeled him. "He told me, 'Shut the f*** up.' I kept yelling for help," Zimmerman told police. Zimmerman said Martin "took my head and slammed it into the concrete several times." As they fought, Zimmerman said, his jacket and shirt rose up, revealing his gun. Martin then said, "You're going to die tonight," according to Zimmerman. {shortened because that is all you need, really} |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest Pot and Kettle Metaphor Date: 05 Jul 13 - 11:02 AM Perhaps this belongs in the old "delicious irony" thread Date: 04 Jul 13 - 11:54 PM I think a perennial Guest just accused a Guest of hiding behind "Guest". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: pdq Date: 05 Jul 13 - 11:25 AM Neighbor Jonathan Good testifies about Martin-Zimmerman fight By Mike Schneider and Kyle Hightower | The Associated Press SANFORD, Fla. — Two neighbors and a police officer gave accounts Friday in George Zimmerman's murder trial that seemed to bolster the neighborhood watch volunteer's contention that he was on his back and being straddled by Trayvon Martin during a confrontation with the teen. Neighbor Jonathan Good said it appeared the unarmed teen was straddling Zimmerman during their confrontation, while another neighbor, Jonathan Manalo, said Zimmerman seemed credible when he said immediately after the fight that he had shot Martin in self-defense. Officer Tim Smith said on the witness stand that Zimmerman's backside was covered in grass and wetter than his front side. All three were called as prosecution witnesses on the fifth day of testimony. Good, who had perhaps the best view of the fight of any witness, said he did not see anyone's head being slammed into the concrete sidewalk, which Zimmerman has said Martin did to him. Good initially testified that it appeared "there were strikes being thrown, punches being thrown," but during detailed questioning he said he saw only "downward" arm movements being made. Zimmerman has claimed that he fatally shot 17-year-old Martin last year in self-defense as the Miami-area teen was banging his head into the concrete sidewalk behind the townhomes in a gated community. But under prosecution questioning, Jonathan Good said he never saw anyone being attacked that way during the fight between Zimmerman and Martin. "I couldn't see that," Good said moments later while being cross-examined. Good, the second person to take the witness stand Friday, said he heard a noise behind his townhome in February 2012, and he saw what looked like a tussle when he stepped out onto his patio to see what was happening. He said he yelled, "What's going on? Stop it." Good testified he saw a person in black clothing on top of another person with "white or red" clothing. He said he couldn't see faces but it looked like the person on the bottom had lighter skin. Martin was black and was wearing a dark hoodie. Zimmerman identifies as Hispanic and was wearing a red jacket. "It looked like there were strikes being thrown, punches being thrown," Good said. Cross-examination Later, under cross-examination, he said that it looked like the person on top was straddling the person on bottom in a mixed-martial arts move known as "ground and pound." When defense attorney Mark O'Mara asked him if the person on top was Martin, Good said, "Correct, that's what it looked like." Good also said the person on the bottom yelled for help. Good was in the middle of dialing 911 inside his townhome when he heard a gunshot, he said. Zimmerman, 29, could get life in prison if convicted of second-degree murder. Zimmerman followed Martin in his truck and called a police dispatch number before he and the teen got into a fight. Zimmerman has denied the confrontation had anything to do with race, as Martin's family and their supporters have claimed. Manalo, whose wife had testified earlier in the week, was the first neighbor to step outside and see what happened with his flashlight after he heard a gunshot. He took cellphone photos of a bloodied Zimmerman and Martin's body, and those photos were shown to jurors on Friday. Manalo also described Martin's hands as being under his body. Manalo said Zimmerman didn't appear shocked and acted calmly. After police officers arrived and handcuffed Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer asked Manalo to call his wife and tell her what happened. Manalo started to tell Zimmerman's wife that her husband had been involved in a shooting and was being questioned by police when "he cut me off and said, 'Just tell her I shot someone,"' Manalo said. Under cross-examination, Manalo said when he asked Zimmerman what happened, the neighborhood watch volunteer told him, "I was defending myself and I shot him." "From what you could tell at that moment, that seemed completely true?" asked defense attorney Don West. "Yes," Manalo said. Other testimonies The first police officer and the first paramedic to respond to the shooting also testified Friday. Smith testified that when he saw Zimmerman after the shooting, the neighborhood watch volunteer's backside was covered in grass and wetter than his front side, bolstering defense attorneys' contention that Martin was on top of Zimmerman. As he walked to the squad car after he had been handcuffed, Zimmerman told the officer that "he was yelling for help and nobody would come help him," Smith said. {shortened because all that needs to be said was said} |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 05 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM Hey, 'Guest'..you miss the point....'Guest' alone, could be a bazillion different people. It helps to have a continuity....and if there is to be an exchange, it help to know that you're talking to the same person. That way someone doesn't just post, as 'Guest' and that post, whether it be inane or wonderful, is part of an ongoing exchange, instead of random, fragmented and a pot shot out of the meandering chaos. In regards to the case..... ..and at that, my first post on this thread, I said I wasn't even going to into this thread. It seems pointless to 'argue' media 'facts'(as reported) against media inspired emotional hysteria. My point was, and still is, let the evidence unfold..let it go its course. The whole thing is sad, tragic...and overblown with media attention. It has become divisive, and unproductive. There are numerous crimes committed across racial lines, BOTH ways. To single out one, and get a hard-on about it, is really quite pointless. The whole thing was needlessly jumped into, and recklessly done, on both people's parts.....and ridiculously silly to ennoble the quasi-macho bravado of either one of them. Neither one is a hero, neither one, needed to do what they did, and quite frankly, BOTH of them were pretty fucking stupid!...and the universe doesn't cut stupidity any slack....it moves immediately right in picks up the slack, ....as witness this screwed up event, and the melodramatic, showtime trial...in which everybody is 'making book' on which way it may fall. Sad and tragic....but not worth ANOTHER act of violence of any sort, to its outcome. Some may disagree, and want to join a torch bearing crowd demanding 'THEIR' version of justice, either way....such persons are complete idiotic fools! Good Night, Gracie! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 05 Jul 13 - 12:42 PM {shortened because all that needs to be said was said} According to whom, PeeDee? The Knights Of The White Camelia? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 05 Jul 13 - 01:14 PM I have a question: This all happened in the dark. Was the area exceptionally well lit? Unless it was, it would be hard to see *red* as a color. As they say, all cats are gray in the night. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 05 Jul 13 - 01:34 PM My recollection of the aphorism, Ebbie, is that at night, all cats are black. Your mileage may differ. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 05 Jul 13 - 01:36 PM ""I have a question: This all happened in the dark. Was the area exceptionally well lit? Unless it was, it would be hard to see *red* as a color. As they say, all cats are gray in the night."" There's a great deal about this case which doesn't bear examination Ebbie. For example, the witness who, said at the time, that when she came out of her house, after the shot, Zimmerman was astride Martin. She has miraculously vanished from the proceedings, while all effort seems to be aimed at proving the opposite. If I were a member of Martin's family, I would be petitioning the court to fire and replace the prosecution team, who are apparently going through the motions and losing the case. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 05 Jul 13 - 02:01 PM Sorry, Greg F: "And as in the dark all Cats are grey, the Pleasure of corporal Enjoyment with an old Woman is at least equal, and frequently superior, every Knack being by Practice capable of Improvement." Ben Franklin I would go further and affirm that a *White* cat in the night appears grey, never *Black*. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: pdq Date: 05 Jul 13 - 02:28 PM ...from just after the shooting last year: Frank Taaffe, a neighbor, told CNN that Zimmerman "had a passion for the safety of our neighborhood and he demonstrated to the rest of us that one person could make a difference. And he was an average guy, just like me." In a separate interview, Mr. Taaffe told the Washington Post, "George is a good dude. He cares about this community. He's not a vigilante out looking for trouble." ...from recent court testimony: The first police officer and the first paramedic to respond to the shooting also testified Friday. Smith testified that when he saw Zimmerman after the shooting, the neighborhood watch volunteer's backside was covered in grass and wetter than his front side, bolstering defense attorneys' contention that Martin was on top of Zimmerman. As he walked to the squad car after he had been handcuffed, Zimmerman told the officer that "he was yelling for help and nobody would come help him" Smith said. {I had no sympathy for Zim until I read that statement. He seemed to think he was doing an important job a watch captain, but nobody came to help him when he was in trouble. I sense some real pain here.} |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 05 Jul 13 - 04:09 PM Hi, Ebbie : "Beware of the night, child. All cats are black in the dark." JEAN GENET, The Blacks "In the dark, all cats are black." ― John Cage "In the deep night of metaphysics, all cats look black." ― Terry Eagleton, Walter Benjamin or Towards a Revolutionary Criticism Plenty more where these came from. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 05 Jul 13 - 04:17 PM He seemed to think Yeah, PeeDee he "Seemed to think"- who gives a shit what his delusions were? He was a fake wannabee law enforcement officer with no training and no qualifications and would likely have failed the psych evaluation for any police force in the country. And he placed HIMSELF in trouble, ignoring what the professionals told him to do. Sympathy? get real, bud. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 05 Jul 13 - 06:05 PM "At night, all cats are grey." —Alexandre Dumas, in The Three Musketeers For all of the whooping and yelling and accusations and insults and speculations, the one think that sticks out in my mind is that this whole tragic incident would not have happened if Zimmerman had obeyed the police and stayed in his car as he was told to do until they got there, rather than taking it upon himself to play vigilante. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 05 Jul 13 - 07:44 PM I hope that after this sham of a trial that this court house burns to the ground... This is what a lot of us Southerns thought was over here... Guess not... Emmett Till... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 06 Jul 13 - 02:51 AM 'This is what a lot of us Southerns thought was over here...' It is, and you can keep it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 06 Jul 13 - 03:30 AM Greg F, can I help it that your guys couldn't get it right? :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 06 Jul 13 - 08:17 AM No, I s'pose ya can't. ;>) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 06 Jul 13 - 12:03 PM Well the long and short. Anyone carrying a weapon is obligated to avoid an situation that would require its use. First lesson taught in gun training. You use it, you will be charged with murder till they sort it out. He was carrying, he needed to stay in the car and let the cops handle it. Just cause you are carrying ya can't walk around a drug neighborhood in an inner city with twenties sticking out of your pocket so you can use your weapon. You are duty bound to avoid that stuff. It is legal to carry a firearm in a bar, but no one I know that would go into a bar with a weapon. Ya just don't do it. That thing is to be used only to save a life, your own or others in a situation you cannot avoid |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 06 Jul 13 - 12:09 PM Well, Dan, its the old story - cowboy with no training who thinks he's a law encforcement officer. Recipe for disaster every time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 06 Jul 13 - 12:10 PM For example, the witness who, said at the time, that when she came out of her house, after the shot, Zimmerman was astride Martin. She has miraculously vanished from the proceedings, while all effort seems to be aimed at proving the opposite. Zimmerman acknowledged that he got over Martin after the shot, so this is not in contention. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 06 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM You bet, Keith, blah blah blah. Its a great deal more complicated than your sound bites. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Red Queen Date: 06 Jul 13 - 12:57 PM GfS, Zimmerman didn't shoot Trayvon out of hatred. He did it out if cowardice. You don't shoot an unarmed man unless you are a scumbag. George Zimmerman is a scumbag. The delusions of grandeur that he had running around other there, fancying himself some sort of hero? He is a repugnant piece of shit. He caused the entire. If somebody was obviously tailing me, not sure how I could "misread" that. Justice for Trayvon. And off with that motherfucker's head. Red Queen has spoken. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Red Queen Date: 06 Jul 13 - 01:00 PM I hate autocorrect. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 06 Jul 13 - 01:08 PM Ya' know what folks??? Real cops would have found where the bullet went after going thru Martin... If it was in the ground, guess what??? Zimmerman was on top... If not, Martin was on top... However, it seems that real cops have not been involved in this case and the phoney baloney ones wished that this would just go away and still do... Normal... Welcome to the South, Part 386... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 06 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM No, that's 'The South 101', Bobert. 'The South 386' is a graduate level course. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 06 Jul 13 - 01:24 PM Yeah, Greg... Yer right... Most Southerners never get to the 300 level courses because they can't pass the 001 remedial courses, let alone the 100 and 200 level prerequisites... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Red Queen Date: 06 Jul 13 - 01:39 PM You're both right. And hiding the truth from Trayvon's parents for three days tells you everything you need to know about the Sanford Police Dept.- that is, if you want to call it a police department. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 06 Jul 13 - 01:58 PM Real cops would have found where the bullet went after going thru Martin... If it was in the ground, guess what??? Zimmerman was on top... If not, Martin was on top... The bullet did not exit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 06 Jul 13 - 02:44 PM What??? A 9mm fired from i inch did not exit??? Ol'ster??? Is that possible??? It sure doesn't sound possible... I mean, a 9 mm packs one shit load of power to not go thru a 150 pound kid... In other words??? I don't believe that... Heck, I shot a 20 pound muskrat with .22 "short" that went thru the thickest part of his body... No, I don't/can't believe that to be true... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 06 Jul 13 - 04:21 PM ""Well the long and short. Anyone carrying a weapon is obligated to avoid an situation that would require its use."" Everywhere except in Florida Dan! ""Stand your Gound?"" And it is significant, that it was in Florida that this man thought he had a right to ignore advice and deliberately put himself in confrontation. Trayvon Martin had no such choice. He went on an innocent mission to buy sweets and a drink, and was stalked by a man who was larger than him. Would you turn your back to walk away in those circumstances? I would not, and I live in the UK where guns are very rare, but a piece of lead pipe can do almost as much damage. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 06 Jul 13 - 04:27 PM If, for example, the stalker is not a vigilante, but a mugger! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 06 Jul 13 - 05:03 PM When a friend of mine and I were out "plinking" one afternoon (wooded area with a good backstop), I fired a 9 mm. bullet into a 5 ½ inch tree trunk from about eight feet out, with my Smith & Wesson Model 39 9 mm. automatic, and the bullet went clear through the tree trunk, leaving a gaping hole on the far side of the tree. Where the bullet wound up, I have no idea, except that it couldn't go far because of the bluff-side about thirty feet behind the tree. One of the problems with a 9 mm. is that it generally goes right through the person being fired at and winds up God knows where! Bad news in a crowded area! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 06 Jul 13 - 05:16 PM Hollow point bullet. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 06 Jul 13 - 05:48 PM I which case, there would be a great deal of damage to the victim's body. There would be no doubt as to the location of the bullet. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 06 Jul 13 - 05:51 PM Still should have exited, Keith, even if badly distorted... What's the muzzle velocity... This is simple physics here... If the story is that the bullet couldn't travel 10 inches thru a chest cavity then I not only suspect a police cover-up but a coroners cover-up, as well... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 06 Jul 13 - 05:58 PM Everywhere except in Florida Dan! Unfortunately, no. There are a whole bunch of other "stand your ground" asshole states. Florida, although possibly more demented than most, is not alone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 06 Jul 13 - 06:28 PM Yeah, plenty of other "stand your ground" states that say it's okay to murder someone if you ***say***, "I felt threatened"... So much for being civilized nation... I mean, these laws are nothing but right wing NRA sponsored laws... They didn't just arrive in these states by accident... Big $$$ is pushing these stupid laws because they sell guns... Lots of guns... Follow the $$$... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 Jul 13 - 10:01 PM Huff puff, huff puff... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 06 Jul 13 - 10:12 PM Do you deny the NRA's role in these laws, GfinS??? A simple yes or no will do just fine... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 07 Jul 13 - 12:23 AM Don't try to get me sucked back into this bullshit..frankly, I don't give a political rat's ass! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 07 Jul 13 - 03:55 AM I not only suspect a police cover-up but a coroners cover-up, as well. Also Richard Kirsk the funeral director? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 07 Jul 13 - 10:17 AM It's the South, Keith... In 1979 five peaceful demonstrators were murdered in plain daylight by several KKK members who were lined up along a parade route... No arrests were made... Trayvon Martin had been long buried before Zimmerman was even charged... The muzzle velocity of a 9mm is approximately 1300 ft. per second... Hmmmmmm??? The chest cavity of a 150 pound human is less than 10 inches... Hmmmmmm??? What kind of police work was done here??? I mean, real cops have ways of figuring stuff out about shootings... Why wasn't it done here??? Hmmmmm??? Like I said, "Welcome to the South", especially parts of Florida which are as redneck as redneck can be... These folks didn't even want to charge Zimmerman... They were perfectly happy to just let Martin's life go the way of those 5 people the Klan gunned down in Greensboro... This is the culture here... I'm still waiting for Ol'ster to weigh in on the ballistics here but having a hard time wrapping my head around cops not being able to figure out what position Martin was in when he was shot... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 07 Jul 13 - 12:28 PM This is what a lot of us Southerns thought was over here... I know something of what used to happen. Racist killers going free. Black people killed with impunity. Maybe this is a continuation of it, but it might not be. Anyway, they can not disappear an exit wound. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 07 Jul 13 - 02:27 PM Things haven't changed all that much except the rednecks have learned where and where not to use the n-word... Here in North Carolina schools are being re-segregated... Like other southern states laws are being put in place to make it harder for black folks to vote... Black folks are 4 times more likely to get the death penalty in capital cases... You know, the usual stuff... I'm still waiting for Ol'ster to weigh in on the ballistics question but still believe there has been some pretty shoddy police work in this case... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 08 Jul 13 - 09:35 AM "Because the defence, who were definitely aware of the photos when they complained, have complained of no other items from the phone. No such evidence as your hypothetical nonsense would have escaped complaint, had any such existed." FROM OP: ""ORLANDO, Fla. -- A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin's cellphone has been placed on administrative leave after an attorney testified that prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense, an attorney said Wednesday." Too bad some here do not bother reading the OP in a thread before spouting shit off. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 08 Jul 13 - 09:55 AM Too bad some people here don't bother to do anything BUT spout horeshit off, Beardy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 08 Jul 13 - 10:02 AM It might easily depend on which attorney said it... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 08 Jul 13 - 10:07 AM Apparently no exit wound. "In testimony, Sergeant Anthony Raimondo, the Sanford, Fla., policeman who initially responded to the shooting, said that after arriving at the gated community where the incident took place, he found Martin on the ground without a pulse and tried to resuscitate him. Raimondo asked for plastic to try to seal Martin's exit wound, but found none and tried to save his life. "I breathed for Mr. Martin — or I tried to," Raimondo said. When emergency medical workers arrived, they hooked up an EKG machine to him, but he was pronounced dead at the scene. Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/06/25/graphic-photo-drives-trayvon-martins-parents-from-court-room/#ixzz2YSl38Rmc" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 08 Jul 13 - 10:12 AM He would have to seal both wounds if there were two. "wound" singular. The word "exit" has crept in by mistake. There was no exit wound. The lack of one could not be faked. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 08 Jul 13 - 10:14 AM http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-convicted-murder-manslaughter/story?id=19598422&page=2#.UdrIjxZ1CS0 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 08 Jul 13 - 10:15 AM "Too bad some people here don't bother to do anything BUT spout horeshit off, Beardy." Obviously, from your post, Greggie boy. Still working on the duct tape for your hamster... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 08 Jul 13 - 10:18 AM "Raimondo called out to the gathering crowd to help by giving him plastic wrap and Vaseline to try to seal the chest wound. He said he lifted Martin into a sitting position to find the exit wound and seal it first, but he did not find the exit wound. Raimondo did, however, feel a cold can -- the soft drink Martin had just bought -- in the pocket of his hoodie. After he could not find an exit wound, Raimondo said, he laid Martin back down and resumed CPR. Rescue workers arrived and hooked Martin up to an EKG machine, but the teenager was pronounced dead. Raimondo said he put a blanket over him, out of "respect for the deceased," as well as to preserve evidence and to limit trauma to relatives who might come upon the scene." http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-george-zimmerman-trial-death-detailed-20130625,0,6626610.story |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 08 Jul 13 - 11:47 AM "SANFORD, Fla. (AP) -- George Zimmerman's best friends and a former co-worker took the witness stand Monday at his second-degree murder trial to testify that it's Zimmerman's voice screaming for help on a 911 call and not that of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. The three friends joined a series of witnesses called by the defense who have testified that Zimmerman is screaming for help on the 911 call moments before he fatally shot Martin. After the call was played for Sondra Osterman in the courtroom, defense attorney Mark O'Mara asked who it was. "Yes, definitely. It's Georgie," said Sondra Osterman, who testified she first met Zimmerman in 2006 while working with him at a mortgage company. Sondra Osterman and her husband, Mark, describe themselves as the best friends of Zimmerman and his wife." http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NEIGHBORHOOD_WATCH?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-07-08-10-38-20 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 08 Jul 13 - 11:53 AM So I was right eh Keith? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 08 Jul 13 - 12:04 PM Absolutely, Beardy! I'm sure that Sondra Osterman had many opportunities to hear Zimmerman screaming while working with him at a mortgage company, so that she would know what his voice, when screaming, would sound like. You bet. More of the same Beardy Horseshit |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 08 Jul 13 - 12:09 PM Er, no Richard. Wrong again. No exit wound or ever any suggestion of one. You put up a partial report of what Raimondo stated, and it contained a error. The fuller report that I provided gives his statement that there was no exit wound. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 08 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM HUH? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 08 Jul 13 - 03:40 PM Idiot. That is exactly what I said he said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 08 Jul 13 - 04:12 PM Richard, I said that there was no exit wound. You came back with "Apparently no exit wound." and a cut and paste of a sloppy piece of journalism that referred to an exit wound. Wrong Richard. Not apparently but actually no such wound, and your cut and paste was shite. Any reason for that cut and paste, and how does it make me an idiot?? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 08 Jul 13 - 05:23 PM Idiot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 08 Jul 13 - 05:45 PM I would not have used that word Greg, but yes, he was being very silly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 08 Jul 13 - 05:52 PM Now, there's your reading comprehension problem in action again, Keith. The word was in response to YOUR post, and obviously applied to your august self. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 08 Jul 13 - 06:31 PM Go and fucking read it again Keith. The post I gave showed the ossifer sought and exit wound and there was none. Are you not supposed to be a teacher? If so god help your pupils. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 08 Jul 13 - 06:58 PM Jeez! These love-fests can get kind of saccharine. . . . Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 08 Jul 13 - 07:46 PM Well, seems that Judge Nelson is continuing to nudge this trial to acquittal... Everything is going according to plan... "Another poor boy dead in the ground" (Blind Lemon Jefferson)... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 08 Jul 13 - 09:45 PM I think the judge should have allowed the testimony from voice recognition experts. It's highly reliable. Those who have done the analysis have said the voice screaming is not George Zimmerman. I don't believe it is either. I have listened to it several times myself and it sure sounds like a 17 year old screaming to me. I think GZ tried to detain TM at gunpoint. I think TM began screaming for help when he saw the gun, a very minor scuffle ensued in which TM attempted to defend himself and may have landed on top briefly (or even more likely GZ's neighbor John simply lied about that). I think TM screamed continuously until he was shot. All George Zimmerman has done is lie. He says he was jumped on his way back to his vehicle. I don't believe that. He indicated that he had no intention of following police instructions by telling the dispatcher that police should call him when they arrived so he could tell them where he was at. If he had intended to return to his vehicle, he would have indicated that. It is so obvious that this kid was murdered and that the incident is entirely Zimmerman's fault. If he walks away from this any faith I had left in the justice system will be gone. I mean, what does it say when someone wanting to play cop provokes a confrontation with an unarmed boy and ends up shooting him goes free? To me it means no black kid is safe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 09 Jul 13 - 10:19 AM Agreed, GUEST, but this isn't a real court... It's a kangaroo court, Southern style... The judge certainly should have allowed the testimony of "expert witnesses" if she was going to allow all of Zimmerman's friends to testify that that they thought the voice was Zimmerman's... What a joke of a trial... Too bad that Martin, the victim in the case, doesn't get an appeal... Welcome to the South, ya'll and... ...come back, ya' hear??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 09 Jul 13 - 10:29 AM "Another poor boy dead in the ground" Well, Bobert, I think things are in pretty good shape, musically. Take "The Lonesome Death Of Hattie Carroll", swap a few words around - [ same number of syllables: Zimmernam/Zantzinger, Hattie Carroll/Trayvon Martin & so on ] - and we're all ready to go. Shows just how far "The New South" has come since 1963. Ah, but you who philosophize disgrace And criticize all fears Bury the rag deep in your face For now is the time for your tears. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 09 Jul 13 - 12:25 PM SANFORD, Fla. (AP) -- A pathologist hired by the defense says George Zimmerman's account of how he fatally shot Trayvon Martin is consistent with the forensic evidence. Dr. Vincent Di Maio testified Tuesday that the trajectory of the bullet and gun powder on Martin's body support Zimmerman's version that Martin was on top of him when Zimmerman fired his gun into Martin's chest. Di Maio says the gun's muzzle was against Martin's clothing and anywhere from two to four inches from Martin's skin. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NEIGHBORHOOD_WATCH?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-07-09-10-15-15 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: kendall Date: 09 Jul 13 - 12:47 PM The only things I like about the south is a few people and the local music. The rest of it sucks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 09 Jul 13 - 01:06 PM Now wait a minute there, Capt'n... We got cool cars, great food, warmer winters and pretty womenz here... Doesn't much make up for our 19th century thinking but thought it should get a mention... I find it interesting that the defense was allowed to parade a bunch of Zimmerman's friends as witnesses who claimed that the voice on the recording was Zimmerman's but the prosecution wasn't allowed to offer "expert witnesses" that would have offered "voice recognition technology", as in science, that the voice wasn't Zimmerman's... Southern style justice at work... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 09 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM There were also witnesses who testified to the voice being Trayvon's. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 09 Jul 13 - 02:06 PM (CBS/AP) SANFORD, Fla. -- A nationally renowned gunshot wound expert testified Tuesday that Trayvon Martin's gunshot wound was consistent with accused murderer George Zimmerman's story that the teen was on top of him and leaning over when he was shot. George Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain standing trial in the teen's shooting death, has said Martin attacked him and was on top of him just before the fatal gunshot. Prosecutors have argued Zimmerman profiled the teen and started the confrontation. Taking the stand for the defense, Dr. Vincent Di Maio, a forensic pathologist, said that Martin's gunshot wound was consistent with the gun's muzzle being against his clothing, which would have been two to four inches away from his body when he was shot. "If you lean over someone, you notice the clothing tends to fall away from the chest," Di Maio said. "If instead you're lying on your back and someone shoots you, the clothing is going to be against your chest." Trayvon Martin's mother, Sybrina Fulton, left the courtroom as Di Maio testified. The jury saw graphic photos of Trayvon Martin's gunshot wounds in court. Who was the aggressor in the Feb. 26, 2012 altercation in the Sanford, Fla., gated community has been a key issue in Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial, which is in its eleventh day of testimony. Di Maio said that Trayvon Martin would have been alive for about one to three minutes following the gunshot wound, but would have been able to move and speak for at least ten to fifteen seconds. The testimony was a contrast to the remarks of a medical examiner who conducted Martin's autopsy, who said that the teen could have been alive for up to ten minutes after the gunshot. Dr. Shiping Bao also said he didn't believe Martin would have been able to move after receiving the shot. Prosecutors have said that George Zimmerman told investigators he moved Martin's arms away from his body after the gunshot, although Martin was found with his arms tucked beneath his chest. Answering a question from defense attorney Don West, Di Maio said that someone may be able to move their arms after receiving a similar gunshot. Zimmerman's injuries indicate "you've had severe force, it's not just like you bumped your head or something like that," Di Maio said. Zimmerman's injuries were consistent with having his head hit against concrete more than once, Di Maio said. The former neighborhood watch captain said the teen smashed his head into a sidewalk several times before he claimed he acted in self-defense. The testimony was a contrast to another medical examiner, Dr. Valerie Rao, who testified for prosecutors that Zimmerman had "insignificant" injuries that didn't appear to result from multiple impacts against concrete. Pointing to photos of Zimmerman's injures, Di Maio also said Zimmerman's nose may have been fractured, an injury he said was consistent with being punched in the nose, as Zimmerman said Martin did. Di Maio also said it's possible to receive trauma without visible wounds. "You can get severe trauma to the head without external injuries, actually," Di Maio said. Di Maio also explained that if clothes taken into evidence are wet and packaged in plastic bags, and not paper bags, it can ruin the samples since "bacteria multiplies and you get mold and it stinks to high heaven." Defense attorneys believe DNA evidence found on Martin's hooded sweatshirt and undershirt was degraded since the clothing wasn't packaged properly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 09 Jul 13 - 02:07 PM http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57592866-504083/george-zimmerman-trial-trayvon-martin-was-on-top-of-zimmerman-when-teen-w |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 09 Jul 13 - 02:17 PM A pathologist hired by the defense says George Zimmerman's account of how he fatally shot Trayvon Martin is consistent with the forensic evidence. Gee, BullshitBruce, ya think a hired gun paid by the defense would say anything else? Horseshit, again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 09 Jul 13 - 02:24 PM Damn, BullshitBruce- your expert Di Maio is a real wonder! A fractured nise may be consistent with being punched in the nose! DAMN! Whooda Thunkit? As for the rest of the might be, could be, its possible, & related nonsensical speculation seems Di Maio has pretty much adopted the Beardy horseshit line. You two working together? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 09 Jul 13 - 02:29 PM So, Greggie boy, you think Bobert is full of shit for complaining about the prosecution expert being disallowed? After all, he would just say what the Prosecution wanted, and not provide any evidence. When you add some evidence to your opinions you have a right to comment- I have seen no support for your comments other than attacks on people without basis. If you are so sure that Zimmerman is innocent that you want him lynched, rather than getting a fair trial, like Bobert has stated, maybe you better get your sheets back on and head down to Florida. I am still working on that duct-tape... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 09 Jul 13 - 02:32 PM Wiki. Dr. Vincent J. M. Di Maio is an American pathologist and a nationally renowned expert on the subject of gunshot wounds.[1][2] Di Maio is a board-certified anatomical, clinical and forensic pathologist, and a private forensic pathology consultant.[3] He attended St. John's University and the State University of New York (SUNY), and received postgraduate training at Duke University, SUNY, and the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner of Maryland.[4] Di Maio is a veteran of the U.S. Army Medical Corps, and served as chief medical examiner of San Antonio, Texas until 2006, when he retired; Di Maio has more than 40 years of experience as a forensic pathologist.[4][5] He has been editor-in-chief of the Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, and a professor of the Department of Pathology at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.[4] Di Maio is a fellow of the National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME) and the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, and in 2011 he was appointed to the Texas Forensic Science Commission by Governor Rick Perry.[3][6] Di Maio has authored or co-authored four books and numerous articles related to forensic pathology, and has won several awards for his work, including the Outstanding Service Award from the National Association of Medical Examiners. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 09 Jul 13 - 02:36 PM But Greggie boy and Bobert DON'T want experts, or evidence, or even the truth- THEY want to string up that Hispanic "cracker" regardless of the evidence. Sounds a lot like the "Old South" is alive and well in Bobert and Greggie boy - String them up, regardless of their guilt. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 09 Jul 13 - 02:58 PM Dr. Vincent J. M. Di Maio is an American pathologist and a nationally renowned expert AND Dr. Di Maio is being paid to get Zimmerman off. But he sure was on point about a punch to tthe nose possibly being the cause of a broken nose - even tho tha , and most of the rest of his "testimony" has nothing to do with his supposed expertise on gunshot wounds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 09 Jul 13 - 03:00 PM Beardie, that duct tape would have a better application in being applied to stem the tsunami of your postarrhoea. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 09 Jul 13 - 03:02 PM And the prosecution is being paid to convict Zimmerman- so the whole fucking trial is meaningless, according to you. Bobert has stated the only fair trial will be in Zimmerman is convicted, You have denied any value to any evidence presented by the defense ( and prosecution!) So what is the difference between you two and the Klansmen who "knew" the blacks they strung up were guilty???? Not a damn bit, as far as I can see. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 09 Jul 13 - 03:23 PM So what is the difference between you two and the Klansmen who "knew" the blacks they strung up were guilty???? Not a damn bit, as far as I can see. And that, BullshitBruce, clearly delimits the extent of your vision. Or should I say, your delusion? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 09 Jul 13 - 03:28 PM Attack me all you want ++I++ didn't say that "Black, and a Democrat" was the same as "dumb Ni**er"- YOU did, Greggie boy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 09 Jul 13 - 03:45 PM You guys can't miss this article: http://m.guardiannews.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/07/george-zimmerman-trial-trayv |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 09 Jul 13 - 05:02 PM Good article, GUEST... Yes, a black family is far less likely to see justice than a white family... That is a reality... As for the forensics??? I haven't heard anything that was presented by the prosecution... Maybe someone else has but it seems that the prosecution should have had their guy in their corner... They had to know that th4e defense planned on using a hired gun "expert witness"... That's been one of my beefs with this trial... Seems like the state is going thru the motions but not much more... There will be no justice here, people... None... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 09 Jul 13 - 06:07 PM A lot of hypotheticals in here..very little 'evidence', withheld or supporting the actual criminal case. The more I hear of the actual trial, and not the commentaries about 'racism', the more I'm inclined to think it will not take the jury very long to reach a decision. That being said, I don't think I'm inclined to try the case here, nor demonstrate, or make up evidence to support a bias. You can do that!...and have...and it is stupid, silly, and destructive, and only demonstrates how reverse discrimination is still discrimination, still racism, and still exactly what some of you accuse others of doing, while claiming some sort of 'righteous blathering' all in the name of 'justice'. Frankly, I thought, just based on the presentation in court, (not here), that the prosecution did a great job of proving Zimmerman's case! Scream and bitch all you want, but I think Zimmerman walks. It's the press that got everyone worked up, trying to sensationalize it into something it's not. ..and that being said, I'm still not getting sucked into it. See ya'! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 09 Jul 13 - 06:16 PM Ain't attackin' YOU, BullshitBruce - only the obvious horseshit that you post. Please pay attention. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 09 Jul 13 - 06:37 PM Greg: "Please pay attention." Maybe he is, and that's why he's not responding to your posts! GfS P.S. In fact, I wasn't going to either..but I thought a 'clue' may be helpful! But, out of curiosity..what feels better, your tongue or your balls? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 09 Jul 13 - 07:33 PM "Hired gun" expert witnesses are a problem for justice. This is why (and I never thought I'd have a good word to say for the Woolf "reforms") the new UK Common Procedural Rules encourage (and in some cases require) a single agreed expert whose duty is to the court. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 10 Jul 13 - 01:03 AM Agreed Richard. Like this expert: http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/zimmerman-case-dr-hirotaka-nakasone-fbi-and Why didn't the judge allow the tape to be heard in court and then admit the testimony of someone with the expertise to establish that the science simply isn't there to properly identify the screams? Then the judge could have disallowed all biased testimony as to whose voice it was. Think about it. Here, sitting in the courtroom you have two parents who list their 17 year old son. Every night they go home to their tv and listen to all the talking heads say over and over how the screams on the are the "most crucial piece of evidence." Believing their son was the victim, It had to be painful enough for them to have to defend that the screaming for help was their son, for Trayvon's father to be second guessed in court because he told police he didn't know whether it was Trayvon's voice (it was so wrong for police to deal with a parent in shock this way), but then a veritable troupe of Zimmerman supporters saying, "Yes, that's Georgie" etc. All that could have been avoided. All of was useless testimony, except for the defense who used it to their advantage by keeping the jury focused on the last 3 seconds of the encounter instead of the "most crucial" minutes that led up to it. Not to mention the days, weeks, months, and years that led up to it in the life of George Zimmerman. The following article gives insight into how he eventually killed somebody: http://www.tampabay.com/news/humaninterest/trayvon-martins-killing-shatters-safe |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 10 Jul 13 - 01:07 AM Sorry for all the typos. I got this tiny little screen and this tiny little keyboard, it's late and I'm tired :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 10 Jul 13 - 01:58 AM I think the press has exploited this trial, and now it's gotten too hard to get the genie back into the bottle. It seems no matter what evidence is produced, people have made up their minds, both sides, on their own verdict. the prosecution has presented an anemic case, and in fact helped the defense, You can say that Zimmerman was a cold blooded killer, or Martin was the aggressor, but if you're locked into whatever you WANT the verdict to be, you're not into justice, or finding out what really happened...you just want your verdict to fill the appetite for your personal biases, and truth to tell, whatever the verdict is, I doubt very much that your appetite will be satisfied. My own opinion is that this was completely avoidable, but it happened because of two morons, trying to prove something, that was out of their league...and that goes for Martin, too. I do think, that if Martin's cell phone conversations were released, it might be a surprise for the prosecution, that he bragged to his girlfriend, about confronting Zimmerman....however, that is only speculation, but nonetheless a possibility. Both of them misread each other, both of them re-acted out of their 'misreadings' Zimmerman could have watched Martin from his car...and a guy following you from behind was no excuse for Martin to start punching him out. there doesn't seem to be much question in regards to Zimmerman being on the bottom, of the altercation. Cops arrived, and found his back wet and with grass clipping on it. Zimmerman's account matches the forensics expert, as to who was where, when the gun was fired...-plus the eyewitness seems to corroborate Zimmerman's account. I think the press has done everyone a disservice, in their coverage of the story. it's been over politicized, and treated like a major sports event. I'm not going to argue or debate the opinion...just looking at it, the way it is unfolding. If Zimmerman is acquitted, I really hope there is no violent riots or demonstrations...and if there are, I hope and pray, that NONE of you participate. It would be even more stupidity than the original event. If Zimmerman is convicted, the only lesson that comes out of it, is, don't be a wannabe cop, with a loaded gun...your emotions may not be up to the reality! ..and judging from the angst about it, they're not! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 10 Jul 13 - 09:10 AM There is no justice here, GfinS... You seem to lose sight of the facts... This is a Southern court where black people have traditionally gotten screwed... This is a Southern judge who, like most Southern judges, is partisan... This judge has already rigged this trial's outcome and guess what??? Ya' give??? Treyvon Martin doesn't get an appeal... As for the media??? They are complicit, too... Seems that all the commentators are saying "It's going to be difficult to get a prosecution"... What??? You don't think the jury pool has heard those comments??? Of course they have... That is called poisoning the jury pool... The stuff on Martin's phone should not be admissible... In releasing it that also poisons the jury pool... This is O.J. all over except worse because is is exposing something that we Southerners have known for years and that is white people in the South still harbor racist feelings toward black people... And in the words of the late Walter Cronkite, "And that's the way it is..." B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 10 Jul 13 - 09:14 AM Guest, I think you're making some pretty powerful inferences there. Zimmerman's background shows a lack of good judgement and a distorted sense of threat or danger. He also clearly indicated that he REALLY did not want the kid to get away. Therefore, the most plausible theory was the gun came out in an attempt to detain the "suspect." Look, in my neck of the woods, any record of having attempted to assault a police officer and/or domestic incident would have resulted in a flat denial of a concealed weapons permit and for good reason! I'm telling you, that gun came out, and when calls for help (from either one, doesn't matter) weren't answered, Trayvon Martin attempted to defend himself (which ever one ended up on the top or bottom, again doesn't matter), Zimmerman simply shot him. End of story. It really doesn't take a genius to figure this one out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 10 Jul 13 - 10:26 AM And btw, Zimmerman has a psychiatric diagnosis of adult ADHD. Here are the the symptoms: Mental Disorganization Recklessness Marital Difficulties Extreme Distractibility Poor Listening Skills Extreme Restlessness In addition, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder often leads to problems controlling emotions. Many people with adult ADHD are quick to explode over minor issues. Often, adults with ADHD feel as if they have absolutely no control over their emotions. Many times, their anger fades as quickly as it flared, long before the people who dealt with the outburst have gotten over the incident (ie: Trayvon Martin). 4% of the population are diagnosed with adult ADHD. It is an indicator of a troubled individual with behavioral issues, someone who shouldn't have a gun. Zimmerman probably got this diagnosis as a result of one of the unfortunate incidents in his background. And people should also realize that medications that may be prescribed do not cure disorders, they are an attempt to manage symptoms. Additionally, many times the cure is worse than the disease. Zimmerman was taking Adderall, often called prescription speed. It has a full slate of physical and mental side effects comparable to methyl amphetamine and cocaine. And one of them is clearly aggression! It's one of the great myths and true hypocrisies of American society, aided by drug war propaganda, that a little marijuana is dangerous while very dangerous prescription drugs are not. My son smoked marijuana as a teenager and it made him very non-aggressive. That is effect it has on most people. So marijuana does not make people aggressive and people who believe it does have never touched it and are informed by "Reefer Madness." But speed, on the other hand, sure does make people very aggressive. Anyone but a moron knows that. Big Pharma in bed with the psychiatric establishment will do anything to make money regardless of the consequences to individuals and society. Anyone but a moron knows that too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 10 Jul 13 - 10:39 AM I've done my share of both pot and martial arts and can tell you that the last thing in the world you want to do when you have a buzz on is get into a fight... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 10 Jul 13 - 11:01 AM Dream on. You guys are ignoring the circumstances that led to him being shot, and trying to make it solely a case of him being shot, because Martin was black. Do you think Zimmerman would have shot him, if Martin wasn't on top of him, beating him up??? Yes, I agree that it was a lack of good judgement..on both of their parts. Yes, it would have never happened, if Zimmerman had remained in his car, against the advice of the officer who advised him to stay in his car, BUT, Zimmerman getting out of his car, against that advice, was in itself NOT breaking a law. It was dumb, yes, and he followed Martin, which eventually led to him being assaulted by Martin, according to the evidence...but following a person, does NOT give permission, common sense, or reason, for that person to turn around and accost the guy following you...and technically, and legally, Martin was the first to break the law, by doing so. It was a stupid act of bravado, as was Zimmerman trying to take the law in his own hands. IT WAS ALL STUPID! Guest: "He also clearly indicated that he REALLY did not want the kid to get away. Therefore, the most plausible theory was the gun came out in an attempt to detain the "suspect." Your 'logic' is based on a 'theory'(your words) and a supposition, that he shot him because, 'he REALLY did not want the kid to get away.'...while ignoring the fact, supported by witnesses, and the evidence, by witnesses AND the officers arriving at the scene(Zimmerman' back was wet, had grass on the back, which got there by being UNDER Martin)..I don't think not letting the 'kid get away' was the determining factor, at that point, do you??? Bobert: "It's going to be difficult to get a prosecution"... What???" Originally they weren't even going to charge him, because it was obvious TO THEM that it was self defense...it went to court because of the political fallout, trying to appease guys like you! Bobert: "The stuff on Martin's phone should not be admissible..." And why not? If it was on, while the crime was being committed, why not? You'd be arguing the other way, if it had picked up Zimmerman saying, "You damn nigger, I'm going to shoot you, just for the fuck of it!".....but it didn't, it had what it had, and it didn't support YOUR 'cause', regardless that it was considered an 'ear witness'...it just didn't have what YOU wanted on it.. Guest: "Zimmerman's background shows a lack of good judgement and a distorted sense of threat or danger." Which is completely irrelevant LEGALLY, to what happened in those moments, of the actual crime. The FACT remains, that the prosecution didn't have much to work with, to prove that Zimmerman is guilty, BEYOND a shadow of a doubt, even on a foggy day...and in THIS country(or what's left of it), you are innocent, unless PROVEN guilty...and that hasn't happened,(yet). Also, you talk about the jury pool being influenced by the media..well I certainly hope they weren't listening or watching MSNBC, who doctored the tapes, editing them, to make it sound like, Zimmerman only shot him, because he was black, and George was a racist. You did know about that, didn't you??..or are YOU the one being poisoned by the press releases, and still hung over from it?!?! now you may not like it, neither do I, but the media HAS fanned this up, to bolster the political prejudices of both sides...and that IS a fact...I'm not going to give them the satisfaction of playing their divisive game. You can..and are..YOUR apologetic discrimination, has allowed you to be played like a fiddle...and you're playing THEIR tune!!! Fact is, this was a needless, stupid chain of bad judgements, that led to a dead kid, beat up wannabe, and gas thrown on the biases of a nation, already willfully divided, by the media, exploiting hatred. Don't play...don't play their game....don't be their pawn...be above their manipulations of people's negative emotions. Personally, if truth be known, you had more remorse for your cat that dies, than Martin. Martin only gives you a soap box..get off it! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 10 Jul 13 - 11:08 AM ""But Greggie boy and Bobert DON'T want experts, or evidence, or even the truth- "" Come off it Bruce, FFS! They just want ALL the experts, ALL the evidence, and the WHOLE trurh. Not just what will acquit a man who:- 1. Ignored advice to leave the police to do their job. 2. Racially profiled and confronted a subject. 3. Shot an unarmed schoolboy. 4. Went to work with a loaded gun which, it has been said, is against neighbourhood watch policy. You talk of lynchings! Just what IS your interest in seeing Zimmerman acquitted? Do black kids deserve execution for walking through a gated community? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 10 Jul 13 - 11:29 AM ""Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, had called police to report a suspicious person when he spotted Martin. In the videotape, he walked officials through what happened next as he approached Martin. "I reached for my pocket, and I was looking for my phone, and he just punched me in the nose."" So, the defence claim that Martin should have known that George was reaching for a phone, and not a gun? As it turned out, that wasn't so far fetched, was it? If I were black, in Florida, I certainly wouldn't take a chance on that. Faced with the likelihood of being shot in the back if I turned and ran, I too would have smacked him in the jaw, and made every effort to prevent him reaching into his pocket. So would anybody else with half a brain. Unfortunately for Martin, he was considerably outweighed and unable to control Zimmerman, and lost his life as a result. Ironically, if he had turned and run, Zimmerman would have paid the penalty he deserves. An entry wound in the back is just so difficult to explain. Instead, the local law enforcement and Zimmerman's cracker friends have got their story together and with the judge sleeping through the trial, the neighbourhood hero will walk free. After all, it's only another dead n****r. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 10 Jul 13 - 11:37 AM Once again, Don T is proud to show how stupid he is! Don T: "Not just what will acquit a man who:- "1. Ignored advice to leave the police to do their job." Not Illegal..bad judgement, but bot illegal "2. Racially profiled and confronted a subject." That is a jump to conclusions,,AND not illegal! "3. Shot an unarmed schoolboy." A. He wasn't in school, so play the sympathetic game... B..and your little unarmed 'schoolboy', was six inches taller than Zimmerman, on top of him beating the crap out of him..THAT IS WHAT THE TRIAL IS ABOUT...the question of self defense or not! 4. Went to work with a loaded gun which, it has been said, is against neighbourhood watch policy. 'It has been said'???? Huh??? Against 'neighbourhood watch policy' is not in itself a crime. EVERYTHING you posted has very little to do with anything other than circumstantial hearsay..adjectives. A trial is supposed to judge the accounts of witnesses, to determine if the accused is guilty as charged. Eulogies and platitudes are not evidence to the facts. The fact that you bring that up in here, is evidence of something else...but that's another story.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 10 Jul 13 - 11:44 AM Don T: "Ironically, if he had turned and run, Zimmerman would have paid the penalty he deserves. An entry wound in the back is just so difficult to explain." We cross posted..I didn't think you were going to get any sillier..but you did! You assume that Zimmerman would have shot him in the back, running away??? That's quite a jump, chump...and he is not being charge with that...BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HAPPEN ANYWHERE BUT IN YOUR MIND! Jeezus peezus! How much more idiotic does it get?? Oh my God, I shouldn't have asked....you'll tell me! Hey, I'm only stating what the case has shown. I don't have a pig in this race..you guys do...so ham it up! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 10 Jul 13 - 12:07 PM True :-) But I have to say, it could have been worse. If George Zimmerman had been shot and killed with his own gun in the struggle, Trayvon Martin would have been arrested and held until trial, sold out by a court appointed attorney, have already been convicted and would be sitting in a prison cell by now. Because even as the victim, we see an overriding assumption of black male criminality at work here. Imagine if it had turned out another way. Because a disturbed individual was running around with a loaded gun and an itchy trigger finger, Trayvon Martin's fate was sealed either way. I believe that. When I heard Zimmerman say in an interview with Sean Hannity that it was God's will that he shot Trayvon Martin, I thought I was going to be sick. No remorse. Instead, he attributed his own will to God. Now that's delusional. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 10 Jul 13 - 12:45 PM Do black kids deserve execution for walking through a gated community? Damn right they do, Don! Now you're thinkin' like a Floridian and like Bullshit Bruce! A long time comin' but you've finally turned the corner. ;>) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 10 Jul 13 - 12:58 PM GfS: "Do you think Zimmerman would have shot him, if Martin wasn't on top of him, beating him up???" Yes! Simple fact is that Zimmerman wanted to shoot someone. A black teenager in a hoody walking home after buying a bag of candy at the local 7-11? Perfect target! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 10 Jul 13 - 01:00 PM GfinS, Your insistence on defending Zimmerman's every little screw up borders on racism... Like Don T said... I want justice and I want the truth and we ain't getting either here... We're getting Southern style racist justice that gives the defense everything and and anything it wants and fucks with the prosecutors, who BTW, ain't all that great to begin with... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 10 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM I heard that there were recordings available of someone's cries for help. That Zimmerman's friends said it was Zimmerman and Martin's family members said it was Martin. The suggestion was made that they submit the recordings for scientific voice analysis, which would be the logical, intelligent thing to do. But the judge would not allow it to be put in evidence. Is this, indeed, true? And if true--why would the judge disallow it? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 10 Jul 13 - 01:35 PM A voice recognition expert was called by the State and did testify. "Trigger happy" A fair description of a person who waits until he has been beaten up and then fires a single shot? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 10 Jul 13 - 01:47 PM Trigger happy? You bet, Keith - deadly force applied unnecessarily. Zimmerman's life was never in immediate danger. See commentary by olddude, et al. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 10 Jul 13 - 01:57 PM "A voice recognition expert was called by the State and did testify." Not according to anything I've read or heard. Just the opposite. Can you document that? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 10 Jul 13 - 02:20 PM Guest, I never said that Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin because he was black nor because he didn't want him to get away. There was a struggle but it's a fact that Zimmerman was the true instigator... Race enters into this case in two ways. 1.) Zimmerman racially profiled the kid. Deny it if you want but it's there. 2.) How race generally and predictably plays out in the justice system, especially in the South, is the second thing to consider. Deny it if you want but it's there. Have you ever had a gun pointed at you? Trust me, until you do, you don't how you might react. There are people who do not readily submit to a stranger attempting to detain them at gunpoint without the legal authority to do so. I am of course arguing my own theory. So you're saying that an unarmed individual pursued by a gunman has no right to defend himself. Meanwhile, an armed pursuer has the right to "defend" himself against an unarmed individual's attempts to do the same - with lethal force. Well ok, it's a little twisted, but sure, why not? Hey, your guy's about to walk. You want me to run out and grab some beers so we can celebrate? I'll be right back :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 10 Jul 13 - 02:41 PM CBS News july 1 2013. George Zimmerman trial: Voice expert testifies during second week of testimony State witness Dr. Hirotaka Nakasone, a senior voice recognition scientist with the FBI, testifies in the George Zimmerman trial in Seminole circuit court, July 1, 2013 in Sanford, Florida. / Photo by Joe Burbank-Pool/Getty Images (CBS/AP) It's not possible to scientifically identify who is screaming in the background of a neighbor's 911 call placed to dispatchers the night of the fatal confrontation between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin, an FBI audio expert testified at Zimmerman's murder trial Monday. However, a person who is familiar with Zimmerman's voice or Martin's voice might have a better chance of identifying it, according to the expert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 10 Jul 13 - 02:46 PM The judge would NOT allow the prosecution to have testimony of either of the two "expert witnesses" that were trained in voice recognition technology... Both, BTW, had previously said that whereas they could not verify the voice was Martin's that they were sure it wasn't Zimmerman's... That ruling came before the start of the trial and has been 9mm slug to the chest of the prosecution... That's one reason why I say this trial is rigged to get Zimmerman off... One needs to keep in mind the reality that the folks in Florida, especially those sending in big $$$ for Zimmerman's defense, didn't give a flying fig that Martin had been murdered... "Another poor boy dead and in the ground" (Blind Lemon Jefferson) is fine with them... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: pdq Date: 10 Jul 13 - 03:10 PM Dr. Hirotaka Nakasone, a senior voice recognition scientist with the FBI, testified that there were just over 2 seconds of un-interruped screams and that the recording was of very poor quality. He said the standard for the FBI is 20 seconds of good quality recording involving 16 clearly-spoken words. Still, that would not be absolute enough to decide a man's guilt in a murder case. The judge correctly decided that all the "voice identification" experts (the Defence has three more themselves) would not be allowed in the actual trial, for obvious reasons. The testimony was in the pre-trial hearings, although Nakasone was called back and gave his opinion(s). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 10 Jul 13 - 03:20 PM Well, if the recording was of such poor recognition then why did the judge allow a parade of Zimmerman worshipers to testify for the defense... And why were the two "expert witnesses" that the prosecution lined up not allowed to testify... That's bullshit, pdq... I've got friends who I haven't spoken with in years and when either I call them or they call me we know each other by our voices with a simple, "Hello"... This Dr. Nakasone sounds like another Zimmerman worshiper... This trial is as bogus as a $3 bill... Only the white Republicans here don't see it that way... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 10 Jul 13 - 03:31 PM Sorry, Bobert. If a black man were convicted on as little evidence as has been presented, you would be ( rightfully) screaming about the rush to judgement. There were two prosecution experts and three defense experts who were ready to testify- the judge determined that NONE ( emphasis, not shouting) could accurately determine who it was screaming, and presented testimony from one expert to that effect, letting the jury know that someone who knew the screamer might be able to tell. It is up to the jury as to whether the cries are believed to be from Martin or Zimmerman- NOT ( emphasis) you. You have wanted this whole trial to be overturned, advocating illegal actions by the prosecution that would throw it out. You have stated that the only "fair" verdict would be conviction of Zimmerman, regardless of the evidence and his guilt. Please tell me how, other than the color of the people you hate, you are any different from those Klansmen that lynched blacks they "knew' were guilty? Why have a trial, if you will only accept your predetermined result? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 10 Jul 13 - 03:32 PM 600 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: pdq Date: 10 Jul 13 - 03:43 PM The guys with machines that do voice recognition are not the same as friends and relatives of the two principles. Dr. Hirotaka Nakasone: "It's not possible to scientifically identify who is screaming in the background of a neighbor's 911 call placed to dispatchers the night of the fatal confrontation between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin...However, a person who is familiar with Zimmerman's voice or Martin's voice might have a better chance of identifying it..." Hence, the judge allowed a parade of "witnesses" on both sides to give their opinion(s). Martin's mother said it was her son, friends of Zimmerman said it was him. Nobody was exactly objective. Since the neighbor Jonathan Good said he saw Martin straddling Zimmerman and repeatedly smashing a fist in his face, we need to stop trying to suggest that it was Martin screaming for help. It was Zimmerman as the only true eye witness to the fight has testified. Yes, Jonathan Good said he saw Zimmerman scream for help. A cop testified that Zimmerman said he helped protect the neighborhood, but when he yelled for help, nobody came. He was clearly dissapointed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 10 Jul 13 - 04:03 PM That's strange, pdq... The two "expert witnesses' that the prosecution had lined up to testify each said they didn't think the voice matched Zimmerman's... This entire idea that if enough subterfuge is thrown into the trial that Zimmerman will get away with this murder seems to be what the court and the defense wants... This judge should not have allowed the recording to go public, nor should she have allowed the defense to go public with private property of the victim as, no matter how many time you or the other Zimmerman worshipers say it, has no relevance to this trial... So what if Martin smoked pot... I smoke pot, too... Doesn't give anyone the right to murder me or if they do use that as evidence on why I deserved to be murdered... Like I have pointed out... The righties here don't want justice... They want for Zimmerman to get away with murder... Normal... As for this supposed Martin smashing blows down on Zimmerman??? That's a joke... Give me 5 seconds to pound down on you and you are going to look like fucking hamburger... That's bogus... Plus, the other neighbor saw it the other way... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 10 Jul 13 - 05:53 PM The unnamed Guest above makes powerful points. If what he says about Zimmerman's head problems is accurate, Zimmerman was a murder waiting to happen. He so badly wanted to be white (and rich) in a racist community that he'd murder a black to prove he was white. It sticks out a mile. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 10 Jul 13 - 06:06 PM Yep, 600 and counting, Beardy & damn near a third of 'em your horseshit. Quite an accomplishment. Congratulations. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 10 Jul 13 - 08:00 PM ""Once again, Don T is proud to show how stupid he is! He wasn't in school, so play the sympathetic game... B..and your little unarmed 'schoolboy', was six inches taller than Zimmerman, on top of him beating the crap out of him..THAT IS WHAT THE TRIAL IS ABOUT...the question of self defense or not!"" Six inches taller, WOW, what an advantage! He was also three and a half stone lighter cretin! Which of those do you suppose is more advantageous in a fight. Zimmerman initiated the confrontation. In a civilised country, that would outweigh the disadvantage of being black. ""You assume that Zimmerman would have shot him in the back, running away??? That's quite a jump, chump...and he is not being charge with that...BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HAPPEN ANYWHERE BUT IN YOUR MIND!"" NO I DO NOT, Fuckwit, and that wasn't what I said! I made it clear that if I were a black kid who had spent the whole of my life in Florida, I would not have risked my life on the assumption that I wouldn't be shot in the back. And on seeing the man confronting me reach for a pocket, I would have taken preventive action, exactly as Martin did. It's called "Standing Your Ground" under the law of that state, and Martin, fearing that Zimmerman was reaching for a weapon, should have been entitled to the protection of that law. BUT HE WAS BLACK, and now HE IS DEAD! And the whole state seems determined to give his killer a free pass. As for the voice recognition "expert" who fudged any answer, he wasn't the only one who did those tests, just the only one who wouldn't commit to an opinion. Why were the others not called? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 10 Jul 13 - 08:09 PM ""The testimony was in the pre-trial hearings, although Nakasone was called back and gave his opinion(s)."" Yet they allow all Zimmerman's cracker mates to testify that it was his voice, one after the other, against the one statement from Martin's parents. Such wonderfully even handed (WHITE) American justice! And Bruce talks about Zimmerman as a lynch mob victim. Ope season has been declared on Floridian black kids, God help 'em! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 10 Jul 13 - 08:10 PM Pretty logical arguments, Don... Ones that are completely lost of right winged, gun nut Republicans who think that murdering blacks is just fine... We all know how this would have gone down if the races were reversed... That's not an argument... It's just reality... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 10 Jul 13 - 08:14 PM ""If a black man were convicted on as little evidence as has been presented, you would be ( rightfully) screaming about the rush to judgement."" So answer my bloody question! Do you seriously believe that a black man wouldn't have been tried convicted and on Death Row by now, had the situation been reversed? Of course he would! And that is exactly what is wrong with the US. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 10 Jul 13 - 08:17 PM Southern justice ain't justice... I've seen it all my life... It is disgusting... We have not moved out of Jim Crow's neighborhood... We just act nicey, nice... No changes behind that "grinnin' in your face"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 10 Jul 13 - 08:21 PM ""Hence, the judge allowed a parade of "witnesses" on both sides to give their opinion(s). Martin's mother said it was her son, friends of Zimmerman said it was him. Nobody was exactly objective."" No Peedee, a parade of Zimmerman's friends (trustworthy and open minded of course....no bias) against a grieving mother of a dead child. I know which one is less likely to have the will or stamina to stand up and LIE in court, and if you are honest, so do you. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 10 Jul 13 - 09:50 PM Why is it that those who seem to hate President Obama the most also appear to be the same ones who want to see George Zimmerman acquitted? What is the common denominator here? (Strokes chin, deep in thought. . . .) Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 10 Jul 13 - 10:18 PM It's so interesting to see the peace loving, 'so-called liberals' getting so worked up over rooting for a weak case, and ignoring the evidences that they've become such peace loving, 'so-called liberals'..yet the saddest part of it all, is watching you destroy yourselves over it, and in your rhetoric, trying to inspire, MORE of the racist filled hate that you claim to hate! Let's not kill the nigger..kill the crackers! Simply amazing! Bobert, man like I've grown to love you, if you will...it is REALLY a bummer, for me to watch you insist that you'd be 'successful' at turning people to hate one another..in the name of some sort of retribution, because they were hated before...and now we can hate back...and be supported by other haters!....maybe you can recruit some really GOOD haters...then you can be proud of yourself. Firth can Knight you into the 'The Golden Order of Intelligent Haters'. This cannot be a wonderful energy going through your music, either...in fact, your vitriol is pretty fucking ugly! Don T's is just stupid...but your is ugly! Firth just grabs anything that sound like it can be made into a political crisis, and needs HIS resolution, NOW, or be deemed a bigot hater!! Hey man, if I saw you playing on the railroad tracks and i knew a train was coming, I'd yell at you to get off the tracks....only to find you arguing with me that the train was a concoction of the TEA Party Express!...even as it gets closer and closer. Some things are just NOT a 'political' event...some are just stupid things that political people promote as political...hey, you know what?..Fuck 'em. I just hope that NOBODY who you talk to, or who might read your posts, gets 'inspired' to 'rally' or protest or in anyway promote, which results in violence that results from this, act of stupidity..or YOU will be as responsible as you claim Zimmerman was in instigating it...GET OFF THE TRACKS!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 10 Jul 13 - 11:11 PM I've always wondered what "blithering" meant in the expression "blithering idiot." Now, I know. Thanks for the demonstration, Goofy! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 10 Jul 13 - 11:13 PM Your welcome...glad you understood it! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 10 Jul 13 - 11:58 PM Your graphic demonstration made it quite clear, thank you. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 11 Jul 13 - 12:29 AM You're welcome, glad you understood it. I suppose to you, people instigating hate, makes more sense, huh? Or political jerk-offs, politicizing a stupid act, makes sense to you?..well, OK. Ya' mind if others don't subscribe to your dark 'reality'?..or do you HAVE to get a power geez, in getting people to hate?? To me...that is a blithering idiot...you might not see it that way..but really, so what? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 11 Jul 13 - 01:16 AM You don't have to keep demonstrating, Goofy. I got it the first time. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 11 Jul 13 - 07:19 AM Goofus just doesn't get it. HE is the one making this political, when in fact it is PURELY a race issue. He just can't admit that a black kid in the Southern US lives with racial animosity from white people from his first day at school until the day he dies. What policeman would believe that, in a face to face confrontation, with the available choice of gun or phone, Zimmerman reached for the phone? Only one who didn't want to see an honorary white man go to jail for killing an insignificant black kid. Martin must have feared that Zimmerman was reaching for a gun, and if he did, then his actions were self defence, even in Florida. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 11 Jul 13 - 07:24 AM Of course, in know-it-all Goofus' mind, there's nothing rotten in a society which allows a punch to be repaid with a bullet, and calls THAT self defence. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 11 Jul 13 - 07:34 AM IF I am being beaten, with no sign of an end to it, how close to death must I be before I can fire the single shot? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 11 Jul 13 - 07:39 AM "IF I am being beaten, with no sign of an end to it..." "A witness in the George Zimmerman trial described his wounds as "insignificant" and "non–life threatening." Dr. Valerie Rao, a medical examiner, made the determination after reviewing video and photographs of Zimmerman after his deadly confrontation with Trayvon Martin. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 11 Jul 13 - 08:10 AM Yes. He declined medical attention and walked. IF I am being beaten, with no sign of an end to it, how close to death must I be before I can fire one shot in self defence? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Saniy Date: 11 Jul 13 - 08:50 AM Don(Wyziwyg)T: "Goofus just doesn't get it. HE is the one making this political, when in fact it is PURELY a race issue." Oh???Is that a fact????.....Take your pick!.. Read well!!! Now compare that to this.....and BOTH are funded by our tax dollars! Like I Said, Brainy: I suppose to you, people instigating hate, makes more sense, huh? Or political jerk-offs, politicizing a stupid act, makes sense to you?..well, OK. Ya' mind if others don't subscribe to your dark 'reality'?..or do you HAVE to get a power geez, in getting people to hate?? To me...that is a blithering idiot...you might not see it that way..but really, so what? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 11 Jul 13 - 08:53 AM The UK's CPS guidelines. http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/self_defence/#Reasonable_Force Since the availability of a gun (as in Zimmerman's case) would have been unlawful in the UK in and of itself, I do not see that Zimmerman's use of the gun could have been reasonable. Comparably the UK coroner has found this shooting to be an unlawful death - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-23193571 We await hearing whether the police marksman involved is to be prosecuted. The deceased was in a car with at least three guns, was a career criminal, but the marksman's evidence that he thought the deceased was trying to shoot at the marksman and had failed to go down after being shot 6 time, when the marksman delivered a classic "double tap" headshot was rejected by the coroner. Because it was an inquest not a prosecution it has come out that the marksman has killed twice before - which may make a fair trial by UK standards hard to achieve. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 11 Jul 13 - 08:58 AM how close to death must I be Foolish question. When, exactly, was Zimmerman within a thousand yards of being "close to death", Keith? I've rec'd worse injuries from playing with an aggressive hamster. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:14 AM We know, Greggie boy. And I am still looking for more duct tape for you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:24 AM OK, I am not disagreeing Greg. IF I am being beaten, with no sign of an end to it, how close to death must I be before I can fire one shot in self defence? Vision going? Losing consciousness? Breathing impaired? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:25 AM Yeah, Beardy, I expect you used up the last supply to stem the postarrhoea as suggested. Your customary horseshit has been conspicuously absent for almost 24 hours. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:28 AM From Richard's link. In assessing the reasonableness of the force used, prosecutors should ask two questions: was the use of force necessary in the circumstances, i.e. Was there a need for any force at all? and was the force used reasonable in the circumstances? The courts have indicated that both questions are to answered on the basis of the facts as the accused honestly believed them to be (R v Williams (G) 78 Cr App R 276), (R. v Oatbridge, 94 Cr App R 367). To that extent it is a subjective test. There is, however, an objective element to the test. The jury must then go on to ask themselves whether, on the basis of the facts as the accused believed them to be, a reasonable person would regard the force used as reasonable or excessive. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:34 AM Let me tell ya'll something... I saw Zimmerman's attorney acting out what he would like the jury to believe... If Martin had been in that position then Zimmerman's injuries would be much worse... I mean, you give me 5-10 seconds to pound away and your face is going to look like raw hamburger... The injuries seen in the pictures of both the back of the head and the face are not consistent with reality... But don't believe me... Take your ignorant selves down to any MMA dojo and ask the sensei... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:36 AM (CNN) -- The George Zimmerman investigation was hijacked "in a number of ways" by outside forces, said the former police chief of Sanford, Florida. Bill Lee, who testified Monday in Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial, told CNN's George Howell in an exclusive interview that he felt pressure from city officials to arrest Zimmerman to placate the public rather than as a matter of justice. "It was (relayed) to me that they just wanted an arrest. They didn't care if it got dismissed later," he said. "You don't do that." When Sanford police arrived on the scene on February 26, 2012, after Zimmerman fatally shot unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, they conducted a "sound" investigation, and the evidence provided no probable cause to arrest Zimmerman at the scene, he said. It had nothing to do with Florida's controversial "Stand Your Ground" law, he said; from an investigative standpoint, it was purely a matter of self-defense. Zimmerman told police he killed Martin after the teen attacked him. While the evidence at the time corroborated that claim, the ex-chief said, Lee's lead investigator made a recommendation that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter. It was a matter of protocol, Lee said. Arresting Zimmerman based on the evidence at hand would have been a violation of Zimmerman's Fourth Amendment rights, he said. Thus, the Sanford police presented a "capias request" to the state's attorney, asking that the prosecutor determine whether it was a "justifiable homicide," issue a warrant for arrest or present the case to a grand jury. "The police department needed to do a job, and there was some influence -- outside influence and inside influence -- that forced a change in the course of the normal criminal justice process," Lee said. "With all the influence and the protests and petitions for an arrest, you still have to uphold you oath." "That investigation was taken away from us. We weren't able to complete it," he said. One example involved the 911 tapes, in which neighbors implored dispatchers to send police as a voice in the background screamed for help. The Sanford police intended to release the tapes once the probe was over, Lee said, because you can't publicize evidence amid an investigation. Instead, the mayor told him on March 16 the tapes had been released to Martin's family and the public. The family was asked to help identify voices, Lee said, but if police were in charge of the investigation, they wouldn't have presented evidence to a group. "It should be done individually so there's no influence on the other people in the room," he said. "Then, there's no questions that can be brought up about how (an identification) was obtained or whether it was influenced." I'm happy that at the end of the day I can walk away with my integrity. Releasing the evidence to the public was problematic, as well, because it created the potential for someone to concoct a "story about what they observed when they really didn't observe it," he said. Martin family attorney Jasmine Rand said that she doesn't believe that playing the tapes to a room full of people "makes any difference to the outcome of the case." "We have to remember that that was played for the family in a private room because they were hearing the last moments of their son's life as he cried for help," Rand told CNN's Erin Burnett on Wednesday night. "And I think Sybrina Fulton (Martin's mother) got up and walked out of that room. She didn't sit in there and talk to everybody, because she had a visceral reaction when she heard her son yell for help and she couldn't help him because she knew he was dead." Lee was placed on paid leave March 22, 2012, after the Sanford City Commission expressed a lack of confidence in him. The same commission rejected his resignation in a 3-2 vote a month later, with dissenting commissioners questioning the fairness of Lee's losing his job. Two months later, Lee was sacked. City Manager Norton Bonaparte said in a news release, "The police chief needs to have the trust and respect of the elected officials and the confidence of the entire community." Lee believes lack of confidence did play a role in his dismissal, he told CNN, but he also believes Bonaparte faced political pressure and terminated him "without cause," which was permitted under his employment contract. "I upheld my oath," Lee said. "I'm happy that at the end of the day I can walk away with my integrity." Rand told CNN that Lee lost his job because he "failed to conduct a fair and impartial investigation." "I personally thank God that he doesn't have the ability to fulfill his vision to uphold an arcane practice that has no place in our legal system," Rand said. Asked whether he would do things differently given the opportunity, Lee, a 30-year veteran of law enforcement, said there always are things he could change in hindsight, but he stands by the investigation. At every turn in the 40-minute interview with CNN's Howell, Lee doggedly defended his investigators, saying race never played a role in any decision and that his officers "conducted an unbiased review." Investigators knew letting Zimmerman walk free for 46 days was an unpopular decision -- and they took abuse for it -- "but they performed professionally. That's the mark of a strong police department." Lee took issue with the media casting his department as apathetic or lackadaisical in the case. "A lot of the information that was given out as fact was misinformation," he said. "It was reported in some media that we didn't conduct an investigation for two weeks, but yet in that same media they would show a photograph of a crime scene with crime scene tape, with patrol cars and blue lights and investigators on the scene." Lee shrugged off the notion that he was hired to clean up racism and other problems in the department. His goal upon becoming chief was to improve professionalism and trust, and he set several goals, all of which were met during his 10-month tenure, he said. One of his greatest regrets, he said, is that the Zimmerman investigation ultimately shattered his childhood dream to be police chief of the community where he was raised. "It's a dream of a vision that is going to be unrealized," he said. "I'm at peace with it on most days. I'm a man of faith. But it stings." http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/10/justice/sanford-bill-lee-exclusive/index.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:41 AM Testifying for the defense earlier in the day was Dennis Root, a safety and law enforcement instructor who is also a use of force consultant. Root testified that he offered his services to Zimmerman's lawyers after hearing about the shooting on the news. Once hired, Root said he reviewed evidence in the case including 911 calls, witness statements and reports from police and the medical examiner. Root also evaluated the physical capabilities of Trayvon and Zimmerman and said he found that Trayvon was "physically fit" while Zimmerman was "not a fighter." Zimmerman would have been "lacking," in a fight with the teen, Root said. Evidence and photos of Zimmerman's injuries illustrate that there was a fistfight and support Zimmerman's story, Root told the jury. "It's clear he was struck and his head made contact with the concrete," said Root, who also interviewed Zimmerman to form his opinion. Zimmerman would have found himself physically "lacking" in a confrontation with Trayvon, Root said. Later, O'Mara asked Root whether Root believed Zimmerman had any other option than to shoot Trayvon. "I don't believe he did," Root replied. http://www.freep.com/usatoday/article/2504917 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:46 AM So, Bobert, that would indicate that Zimmerman was correct in being in fear for his life. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 11 Jul 13 - 10:23 AM All that being said, this case is being used, to foment civil unrest..and those fomenting it don't really give a damn about Martin, his family, the merits of the case, evidence, even race...they are just looking for a hot button issue, and this is it(or one of them). For me personally, I'm not into 'trying the case' in the Mudcat forum, or in the press, or at the coffee shop...what DOES concern me, and you as well, though you might not be aware of it....YET...is the deceitful, manipulation of some VERY evil people, opportunists of the worst kind, to suck people into the re-action, that they've been organizing, since the beginning!!..before they even knew the facts or the outcome...AS YOU HAVE SEEN!! Don't fall into it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Matter of fact, you should recognize and mark those who are doing this, promoting it, fanning it, and pay very little or no attention to them. They are shills, either unwitting ignorant, or consciously in on it. They don't give a damn about the race issue, except to exploit it, for some VERY twisted political end..that has NOTHING to do with correcting the ills of the past! ..or even having genuine compassion for anyone but their own political avarice! Walk away...GET OFF THE TRACKS!! How much more evidence do you need?????????..You, and a lot of other people are being conned!. Don't go for it!...Learn a new tune. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 10:37 AM Bullshit on both counts, GfinS... You are one of the most rabid Zimmerman defenders here... Any argument that might implicate your hero is met with reams and reams of rebuttal... You are no different from the other one here... As for me not caring about Martin??? Like I said, "Bullshit on both counts"... If I, along with others here, didn't care about Martin we wouldn't be so bugged by the disrespect that the Florida cops, prosecutors and the judge are showing Martin... Anymore mythology you'd like to share with us??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM Authorities are concerned that flash mobs angry at the verdict could use Twitter to organize similar unrest. As we reported last week, a plethora of individuals have promised to stage riots and looting if George Zimmerman is found not guilty. The latest round of controversy focused on popular clothing brand 'Illuminati' – which yesterday tweeted to over a million followers, "The Only Justice for Trayvon Martin is to take the Life of George Zimmerman." The case already sparked looting by Trayvon Martin supporters last year when gangs of teenagers ransacked a Walgreens in north Miami in reaction to the fact that Zimmerman had not yet been arrested. Detective Munib Ahmed outlined a plan to calm irate Trayvon supporters via Twitter during last night's meeting, remarking, "What we're concerned about is all the people starting rumors or instigating fights [through social media]. So we're trying to get ahead of the game [and] quell the fight before it starts." Pastor Michael K. Anderson, of New Jerusalem First Baptist Church in Hollywood also called for Twitter to be used to quell disorder. "They'll hear a lot of [rumors] but they'll know the truth if they're following us [on social media]," he stated. Numerous prominent voices, including former Chicago cop Paul Huebl have warned that the outcome of the trial will lead to riots that could surpass those seen in the aftermath of the Rodney King beating. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM On Tuesday, the popular clothing line Illuminati issued a tweet calling for the murder of George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer on trial for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, Twitchy reported. "The Only Justice for Trayvon Martin is to take the Life of George Zimmerman, (sic)" Illuminati tweeted. The tweet angered a number of Twitter users, some of whom demanded Twitter ban the account. "@twitter, please BAN @ThelIluminati ~ they are OPENLY CALLING FOR MURDER. If you don't, we will take legal action," one person tweeted. As of this writing, the short message was retweeted over 770 times. Twitchy said that many agreed with the tweet's sentiments, but others held a different view. "It is a crime to call for the murder of an individual, right? @TheIlluminati is essentially inciting violence against #Zimmerman," one person tweeted. The Illuminati account has well over a million followers, and appears to be the official account for a clothing brand that deals in conspiracy theories and offers t-shirts with slogans like "F**k the Police" and "United Snakes of America." No mention of the tweet was seen at Illuminati's website or Facebook page, but the message caused quite a stir on Twitter. This is not the first time Twitter users have called for Zimmerman to be murdered. Recently, a number of people threatened to kill Zimmerman if he was acquitted, and others said they would murder random white people. Celebrities like Roseanne Barr and Spike Lee have stirred the pot, as have civil rights figures like Jesse Jackson and MSNBC host Al Sharpton. On Monday, Mark O'Mara, Zimmerman's attorney, told CNN's Piers Morgan that his client would never be safe if he is acquitted, due to the fact that many would never accept the evidence presented in the case. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 10:48 AM On Thursday, Twitchy reported that the social media site Twitter has exploded with death threats against George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer on trial for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. Twitchy said that several also threatened to kill random white people if Zimmerman is not found guilty. Most of the tweets captured by Twitchy were racist and profane in nature. "I'll kill him," tweeted "Lindsey Franco." "Watching the Zimmerman Trial. If he don't get life ill kill him myself (sic)," said the ironically named "Love." The tweet was deleted, but not before Twitchy captured it. "Trayvon Martin need justice ! Gimme me tha pistol ill kill Zimmerman myself," declared another Twitter user. One person offered to kill Zimmerman for $20, and several said they would murder random white people. "If they don't kill Zimmerman Ima kill me a cracka (sic)," said one person, using a racial term for white people that Mediaite's Tommy Christopher said is a "proud nod to the region's history, and one's own ancestry." "If George Zimmerman win I'm gonna kill a fat white boy dat look lik George Zimmerman I swear lol (sic)," tweeted "Creeplife." Last year, Martin supporters flocked to Twitter, using the site to express their desire to see Zimmerman killed. The volume of threats was so high that a member of the family wrote the Seminole County NAACP, saying blood would be on their hands if Zimmerman was harmed. The unidentified family member said "the rest of the racists that have rushed" to judge Zimmerman will also have blood on their hands if he is hurt. "You need to call off the dogs. Period. Publicly and swiftly," the letter added. The New Black Panther Party put out a $10,000 bounty on Zimmerman's head with a "Wanted Dead or Alive" poster and issued calls to murder white people. "Kill these racist honkeys, these crackers, these pigs, these pink people, It has been long overdue!" the group said in a tweet that has since been deleted. From the beginning, the Zimmerman case has brought out the worst in many people, including some in Congress who prejudged Zimmerman to be racist without knowing all the facts. Civil rights activists like Jesse Jackson and MSNBC's Al Sharpton used the shooting to whip up racial strife in the country. The FBI, however, said in a report that racism was not a factor in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:06 AM Walk away....just as Zimmerman OR Martin should have...walk away! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:16 AM Martin tried... He told his girlfriend that he was being followed... "Followed???" Doesn't that imply he was walking away??? Logic 001 (remedial, non-credit for boneheads) B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:20 AM Only Bobert would consider jumping on someone and beating their head against the ground after being asked what he was doing to be "walking away. It looks like it has been determined who threw the first punch- yet that is not enough for the Zimmerman haters here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:26 AM btw, Bobert, there is no "guilty by reason of public opinion". The verdict, if just, should be based on the evidence presented, and not the fear of what might happen if the "wrong" verdict is rendered. That is what you have complained about happening in the past to black defendants: Are you so sure you want to establish it as being valid here as well? That would justify all those past trials as being "just as valid". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:39 AM ""IF I am being beaten, with no sign of an end to it, how close to death must I be before I can fire one shot in self defence? Vision going? Losing consciousness? Breathing impaired?"" Of course, with the ground at your back, an assailant who weighs 156 lb, you could use your superior weight (204 lb, a three and a half stone advantage) to simply throw him off (simple enough, anybody who has changed a gearbox without removing the engine has done as much (130 - 150lb for a family sized car)). No he's only a crooked black kid and he's given you the excuse you need. Easier and more satisfying (maybe even heroic if he turns out to be the crook you estimate him to be) to shoot him. _______________________________________________________________ Think about the converse: Based on your experience as a black youth in Florida, you see the guy who just challenged you reach for a pocket. You believe he may be going for a gun, and you fear he will use it. He isn't a cop! Is he a mugger?......What do you do. 1. Do nothing. Just wait for the bang? 2. Turn and run and wait for the bang? 3. Grab him and make sure he doesn't reach that pocket? Doesn't Florida's own "Stand your Ground Law" cover you for that? Well NO! NOT IF YOU ARE BLACK! That law is only for real people. And, for Goofus' benefit, that isn't promoting race hatred! It is exposing the level of institutional racism in the Southern States and specifically in Sanford Florida, where it is apparently a Capital Offence for black people to do their shopping after dark. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:46 AM So, Don, you are saying that if Bobert was on top of me, beating the crap out of me, I would have no problem pushing him off before he could hurt me? I have a few pounds on him... Bobert: "I mean, you give me 5-10 seconds to pound away and your face is going to look like raw hamburger.." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 11 Jul 13 - 12:39 PM ""So, Don, you are saying that if Bobert was on top of me, beating the crap out of me, I would have no problem pushing him off before he could hurt me? I have a few pounds on him..."" No BB! I'm saying that you would be capable of rolling and throwing him off before he could begin to beat you to a pulp! And so could Zimmerman if he hadn't been so intent on reaching for old Betsy! In the UK, I wouldn't have to worry about getting a gun out of my pocket (since they are rightly illegal), so whoever was on top of me would be leaving PDQ, and probably singing soprano for a week, unless he outweighed me by a considerable margin. I'm 72 and I reckon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 12:39 PM Right, Don... There doesn't seem to be any logic in the defense's "story"... It has more holes in it than swiss cheese... Here's what we do know to be factual: 1. Zimmerman profiled Martin 2. Zimmerman called police 3. Zimmerman was told by the police to stay in his vehicle 4. Zimmerman disobeyed police and got out of his vehicle with a gun 5. Zimmerman followed Martin 6. Zimmerman shot and killed Martin Those events are not in dispute... Here's the defense's story about the events: 1. Martin attacked Zimmerman - Not likely... See Don T's comments on the size differential... 2. Martin got Zimmerman down on the ground - Not likely... Again, the size differential makes that claim very doubtful 3. Zimmerman was the one who screamed for "help" - Not likely... Someone yelled for "help", a shot was fired a second later and that voice was not heard again... Here's what else we know: 1. Zimmerman lied in court when he was asked if he had money for his defense... 2. Zimmerman lied in court about not having an understanding of Florida's "stand your ground" and "self defense" laws... Here's where the court (judge) has made serious mistakes: 1. No gag order thus allowing Zimmerman's attorney free shot at poisoning the jury pool... 2. Not permitting prosecution to present "expert witnesses" who were well versed in voice recognition technology... 3. Permitting a stream of Zimmerman's friends to testify that the voice on the tape was Zimmerman's... That pretty much sums up this case... Of course, the Zimmerman worshipers here will take the above facts and twist and twist on them because they are the facts... They will play head games with words and try to make chicken salad out of chicken shit... All the twisting in the world doesn't change the facts... It's just wishful thinking on their part... And in the words of the late Walter Cronkite, "And that's the way it is..." B~ (Note to bb: I'm sure that you have been trying to bait me but I don't read your posts because you do not have anything rational to say any more so write whatever you want... I'll skip right on by you...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 11 Jul 13 - 12:42 PM Guess I spoke too soon; another bout of BullshitBruce chronic bloody postarrhoea. Apparently his duct tape suipply ran out after all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 11 Jul 13 - 12:46 PM For fuck sake. You people are for the most part Americans. I cannot believe in all honesty how any of you expected a fair trial when it comes to a dead Black kid. Back in the early days a car driven by a White guy struck two Black men walking along an Alabama road. One man was thrown 140 feet and the other went through the car's windshield. Both barely survived. One was charged with leaving the scene of an accident and the other with breaking and entering. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: pdq Date: 11 Jul 13 - 01:04 PM This is no time for comedy GUEST,anon (as if we do not know your real identity). If Zim is not convicted, there will be race riots as stirred up by Eric Holder, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and the sympathetic "news" people. Only question is whether 1000 will die or 10,000. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM So, why bother with a trial at all, since the verdict has been determined by popular opinion? If he is not found guilty, he will be free for as long as it takes the government to come up with a "star chamber" trial to make sure he gets convicted. And this is what passes for justice... I hope all are just as happy the next time, when the precedent is used to railroad someone because of opinion as fanned by the press. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 01:23 PM GUEST: It hasn't been all that long (1979) since the KKK gunned down 5 peaceful civil rights demonstrators in Greensboro, NC... This happened on broad day light in front of hundreds of witnesses... No charges were ever brought... Normal... These KKk'ers were not all that different than what we are seeing from the Zimmerman worshipers here and elsewhere... S.S.D.D.... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 01:58 PM SANFORD, Fla. (AP) — The six female jurors who will determine whether George Zimmerman committed second-degree murder when he fatally shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin last year could begin deliberating as early as Friday. During almost three weeks of testimony, they have listened to 56 witnesses — 38 for the prosecution and 18 for the defense. A number of items have been the source of conflicting testimony, and jurors will have to sort out those contradictions once they get in the deliberation room. Zimmerman is pleading not guilty to second-degree murder. He claims he fatally shot Martin in a scuffle at the townhome complex where Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch volunteer and where Martin was visiting his father's fiancee. Martin was black and Zimmerman identifies himself as Hispanic. Some civil rights activists argued that the delay in charging Zimmerman was influenced by Martin's race, and protests were held around the nation in the 44 days before Zimmerman was arrested. Here are five questions jurors will have to sort out. ___ WHOSE SCREAMS ARE ON 911 CALLS? Convincing jurors about whose voice is screaming for help on 911 calls that captured audio of the fight has become the primary goal of prosecutors and defense attorneys. Martin's mother, father and brother testified it's the Miami teen screaming for help on recordings of the 911 calls made by Zimmerman's neighbors. Zimmerman's mother, uncle, father and five friends told jurors it was the neighborhood watch volunteer's voice. One of Zimmerman's neighbors, Jayne Surdyka, says the screams were those of a boy. ___ WHO WAS ON TOP? Zimmerman was wearing a red jacket and Martin had on a dark hoodie. Zimmerman's former neighbor Jonathan Good, perhaps the witness with the best view of what happened, says he saw a person in dark clothing straddling someone in red or white clothing and making downward movements with his fists in a mixed-martial arts maneuver known as "ground and pound." Neighbors Selma Mora and Surdyka say the person on top got up after the shooting. Zimmerman's attorneys claim Zimmerman had been on the bottom but got on top of Martin after he fired his gun. ___ HOW DID POSITION OF MARTIN'S ARMS CHANGE? Zimmerman told investigators that Martin was on top of him, pounding his head into the pavement. After he fired his gun, he says, he got on top of Martin and spread his arms. However, a photo taken moments later by Zimmerman's neighbor shows Martin's arms under his body. Defense expert Vincent DiMaio testified Martin could have moved his arms in the 10 to 15 seconds he would have been conscious after being shot in the heart. ___ DID ZIMMERMAN ACT IN SELF-DEFENSE? Zimmerman has argued all along he acted in self-defense, although he passed up chance for a self-defense "stand your ground" hearing in which a judge could have thrown out the case without it going to a jury if the judge was convinced there was enough evidence to support it. Zimmerman's community college instructor, Alexis Francisco Carter, told jurors that a person can claim self-defense if they have a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. Jurors will get further instructions on self-defense from the judge. ___ DID ZIMMERMAN ACT WITH ILL WILL, HATRED, SPITE OR EVIL INTENT? In order to get a second-degree murder conviction, prosecutors must show that Zimmerman acted with ill will, hatred, spite or evil intent. Prosecutors have argued that profanities Zimmerman uttered under his breath while he watched Martin walk through his neighborhood were evidence of ill will and hatred. But when asked by prosecutors and defense attorneys, no witness said Zimmerman acted with these traits. http://news.yahoo.com/questions-jurors-must-consider-zimmerman-trial-230257024.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 02:09 PM "White Hispanics," "Creepy-Ass Crackers," "Teenage Mammies," and "Suspicious A--holes who always get away" -- that is the vernacular of the George Zimmerman trial. George Zimmerman faces life in jail as a jury considers second-degree murder charges against him for killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. But thanks to the media he is already sentenced to life in the American public's mind as a racist. NBC edited a tape of Zimmerman's call to police as he was following Martin to make him appear to be focused on Martin's race. The New York Times has referred to him in unique racial terms as a "white Hispanic." The terminology was necessary to have the story fit into a well-worn news narrative throughout American history from the Scottsboro Boys to Emmett Till to Rodney King – the black victim of white racism. Hispanic people can be as racist as black or white people in a country with a deep history of racism. But, apparently for the Times, Zimmerman's whiteness was important. It fit their good versus evil tale of a white racist killing an innocent black man. The media is clearly guilty of playing on the most primitive racial divisions in our society to fuel racial animosity and boost ratings. In June, before the trial started, a CNN poll asked Americans if they believed the murder charges against Zimmerman were true or false. Without any courtroom testimony or evidence, but based on the racially charged media coverage, 62 percent of Americans said the charges were "probably true" or "definitely true." My bet is that poll would have different results today. The trial has failed to prove Zimmerman acted with a "depraved mind" – as required for a second-degree murder conviction – or even with a racist mind. He certainly killed Martin. And the jury may decide he is guilty of second-degree murder or manslaughter. But what we heard in the courtroom fits with an FBI report that found race was not a factor in Martin's shooting death. The strong public judgment of Zimmerman's guilt in the poll reflected a racially weighted media telling of the story. Photos of a bloodied Zimmerman after the incident, Zimmerman's claim of self-defense and the police decision not to charge Zimmerman all got a dismissive glance from the press and contributed to public assumptions about Zimmerman before the trial. Liberal and conservative news TV and radio have played to the racial theme, too. The left, notably Rev. Al Sharpton, have made the case a crusade for racial justice. The right-wing media, especially talk radio, has responded by making Zimmerman a hero. In fact, Zimmerman's lawyer, Mark O'Mara, created an online site that attracted more than $145,000 from people who somehow made Zimmerman into their champion, possibly their great white hero. The national focus on race in this case hit a high point when Rachel Jeantel, a 19-year-old student, testified that she spoke with Martin just before he was killed. Jeantel, Martin's friend, told the court that Martin complained that a "man was just watching him." And Martin described this man, Jeantel said, as a "creepy, white, excuse my language, cracker --- creepy-ass cracker." Jeantel's testimony set off a stupid debate, requiring total ignorance of slavery and legal segregation, about the equivalence of blacks using "cracker" to describe whites, versus whites using the word "nigger" to describe blacks. And Jeantel's physical appearance, as a dark, heavyset young woman, speaking with a Southern dialect as she gave the lawyers a lot of attitude with her curt answers, contributed to the racial view of the case. She became the "teenage mammy," in the words of a sociology professor quoted in the New York Times, caricatured for "not being smart and using these racial slurs and not being the best witness." And now the media, especially conservative talk radio outlets, are fixated on the possibility of race riots if Zimmerman is acquitted. Meanwhile, Twitter and other social media sites are full of threats from angry black people to kill Zimmerman if he is not held accountable by a jury for killing Martin. Martin, the 17-year-old, is dead. But he has not escaped the racial slander attached to this case. Zimmerman's backers note that Martin had smoked marijuana – as if that is unusual among American teenagers. They seem delighted to find online messages in which he took on a rapper, street-thug persona and posed as a tough guy. These are all caricatures of two real people caught in a tragedy. Zimmerman should have listened to the 911 emergency dispatch operator who told him to stop following Martin. Why did he have a gun if he was simply part of a neighborhood watch program? He had no basis to suspect Martin of any crime. So why does he describe Martin as "suspicious" to police? Why does he apparently lump Martin with people he describes as "these a--holes, they always get away." Why didn't Martin just walk away from Zimmerman? But Martin is dead. He can't speak for himself and get beyond the box of racial stereotypes the media built for him. Zimmerman is alive. He has chosen not to speak at his trial, and although the prosecution played an interview he did with Fox News' Sean Hannity, it is still no match for skipping an ideal chance to tell his story when everyone is listening in the courtroom and on television. Now, no matter what the verdict, he is going to carry his box of racial stereotypes around until his death. His identity will always be as a want-to-be cop who trailed a black kid who was not doing anything wrong, got in a fight with him, pulled out a gun and killed him. Ultimately, it is the job of the media to give straight, objective coverage of any story. Whatever the final verdict on Zimmerman, the media is clearly guilty of playing on the most primitive racial divisions in our society to fuel racial animosity and boost ratings. There are no winners here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Jul 13 - 02:24 PM As presented at trial: Zimmerman, 29, says he shot Martin because he feared for his life, and much of the testimony last week could bolster his self-defense claims. Prosecutors this week are expected to try to show discrepancies in Zimmerman's story. Here's Zimmerman's account, from the interview played in court and a written statement he made: Zimmerman tried to follow Martin in his car after calling 911. He left the vehicle to find the direction where the "suspect" went, even though the 911 dispatcher told him he didn't need to follow the teen. Singleton also testified that Zimmerman included the term "suspect" without coaching from her. She never labeled Martin that. Martin "approached him" and asked, "You got a problem?" Zimmerman said no, and Martin responded, "You do now." Martin punched Zimmerman in the face, making him fall backward. Martin got on top of him. Zimmerman yelled for help multiple times, but Martin told him to "shut the f*** up." Martin started smashing Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk. Martin went to grab for Zimmerman's now exposed firearm (Zimmerman told the dispatcher he was armed) and said, "You're gonna die tonight, mothaf*****." Zimmerman un-bolstered the gun first and shot Martin. An onlooker told Zimmerman he was going to call the police, but Zimmerman already had. When the police arrived, Zimmerman placed his hands above his head. When an officer asked who shot Martin, Zimmerman said, "I did." Two parts of the conversation with Singleton didn't make it onto the recording. Singleton testified that Zimmerman didn't even know Martin had died. When he found out, she said he "slung his head down." According to Singleton, Zimmerman also asked her about her cross, saying "In my religion, it's always a sin to kill somebody." Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/george-zimmermans-police-statement-2013-7#ixzz2YlKkX5l7 Nothing was presented by the prosecution to indicate any of this did not occur. All the circumstantial evidence supports this set of events, according to the experts who testified. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 11 Jul 13 - 03:19 PM Thanks, BullshitBruce, for anotherextensive run of blogoshit that has nothing to do with anything. Attaboy. Keep up the "goode work". Not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 03:26 PM A positive step (I guess) is that the judge has ruled that Zimmerman can be convicted of a lesser charge... I think he should have been charged with 1st degree murder hate crime myself since he profiled Zimmerman... Given the way the trial has been conducted, however, odds are that he will not pay for this murder in any manner... Well, at least in this court... Maybe in civil court but it's not certain that Martin's parents would have the cash for the level of attorneys that would be required to go up against Zimmerman's donors... Of course, if they were awarded judgement, Zimmerman would go into his rope-a-dope, I-don't-have-any-money routine so it is doubtful if the Martins would ever see a single dime from this creep... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 11 Jul 13 - 04:30 PM Incidentally, it was repeatedly reported that Martin had broken Zimmerman's nose. From the photos, it seems far more likely to me that he simply gave him a bloody nose. I've never had my nose broken but I've had many a bloody nose. Is everything called a "broken nose" nowadays? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 11 Jul 13 - 05:01 PM And all of the Zimmerman apologists here are conveniently ignoring the fact that IF ZIMMERMAN HAD STAYED IN HIS CAR AS THE POLICE TOLD HIM TO DO, this never would have happened! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 05:03 PM I have had my nose broken twice (football, boxing), Eb, and my brother has had his broken once (baseball) and in all three cases both eyes blackened... Plus, looking at the pics of the back of Zimmerman's head and factoring in the other lies he has been caught telling I'm wondering if he didn't self inflict those wounds on himself because they were so superficial that they didn't require any stitches??? Had someone really pounded his head on concrete the wounds would be a lot more severe and and each one would be accompanied with a big knot, as well... Doesn't much matter... The trial, if you can call it that, is over and Zimmerman will soon be acquitted of murder... Who says you can't get away with murder??? Happens every day... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 11 Jul 13 - 05:07 PM Sorry to shout, but everybody who blames Trayvon Martin for his own murder is studiously ignoring the obvious! Don Firth P. S. In matters like this, I have a low disgust threshold. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 11 Jul 13 - 05:38 PM Bobert: "You are one of the most rabid Zimmerman defenders here... Any argument that might implicate your hero is met with reams and reams of rebuttal... First of all, THE ABOVE is an outright LIE! you're getting as bad as Firth! Show me a post where I defended Zimmerman! Now to YOUR 'defense' of opinions, vs evidence... Bobert: "Here's what we do know to be factual: 1. Zimmerman profiled Martin Not a crime, and no proof that he did profile him. That is an assumption or opinion, which is not evidence. 2. Zimmerman called police Not a crime, is it? 3. Zimmerman was told by the police to stay in his vehicle True, and he should have stayed put..but, going against that advice is not a crime. 4. Zimmerman disobeyed police and got out of his vehicle with a gun True, but not a crime. 5. Zimmerman followed Martin True, but not a crime. 6. Zimmerman shot and killed Martin True, but the circumstances are what the trial is about..if it was self defense, it's not a crime...if it was premeditated, AND PROVABLE, then that is a crime. So far, premeditation has not been proved. Those events are not in dispute... BULLSHIT! Here's the defense's story about the events: 1. Martin attacked Zimmerman - Not likely... See Don T's comments on the size differential... 'Not likely' is what?? an opinion or wishful thinking? It is NOT evidence that was supported by the trial. "See Don T's comments on the size differential..." It only matters if he was a witness....so it's not evidence. You say you took martial arts..so did I AND taught it to a Sheriff's department, and two officers from a town within the county..and I got news for you, size matters little in martial arts...and you SHOULD know that! 2. Martin got Zimmerman down on the ground - Not likely... Again, the size differential makes that claim very doubtful You might be right on that one, Zimmerman laid down and said 'Straddle me, and start slugging me'...and tell the eye-witness to watch!...'Not likely'??? ..then what did the eye-witness see?? Martin on top..You're 'not likely' is also no evidence..it is a very biased opinions, supported by NO ONE but your imagination...not by evidence! 3. Zimmerman was the one who screamed for "help" - Not likely... Someone yelled for "help", a shot was fired a second later and that voice was not heard again... Except the eye witness said the guy on the bottom was calling and screaming for help!..The recorded calls on the cell phone could not be confirmed by anyone, to be entered into evidence Here's what else we know: 1. Zimmerman lied in court when he was asked if he had money for his defense... True...but that is a separate charge, and not relevant to the events leading up to the shooting. 2. Zimmerman lied in court about not having an understanding of Florida's "stand your ground" and "self defense" laws... True...that's a perjury charge, not a murder charge...TWO different crimes. (By the way, Holder has done some serious lying under oath too, but you don't seem to mind...and one of those lies led to the deaths of border patrol agents...but it gets a pass from you, right? Here's where the court (judge) has made serious mistakes: 1. No gag order thus allowing Zimmerman's attorney free shot at poisoning the jury pool... But President Obama didn't poison anything by saying Martin was like his son??? Shit, even Nixon got a lot of crap about his pre-trial comments about Charles Manson, but again, this president gets a pass, right?? 2. Not permitting prosecution to present "expert witnesses" who were well versed in voice recognition technology... They cancelled each other out, one was for the prosecution, one for the defense...then it turns out there was not enough time on the recording to make a determination, one way or the other...right? 3. Permitting a stream of Zimmerman's friends to testify that the voice on the tape was Zimmerman's... ..and Martins mom said it was Trayvon's...but the dad wasn't so sure, and put reasonable doubt on the mom's testimony. The prosecution opened up that can of worms by calling the mom to the stand FIRST. .in which case, it allows the defense to call theirs to rebut! Bobert: "That pretty much sums up this case..." That pretty much sums up this case... Look, I'm NOT defending Zimmerman...as I've said ALL ALONG, it was acts of stupidity..on both their parts. All I've done was address YOUR opinions, that are NOT evidence, just opinions, as to the law. As I've said before. I DO NOT HAVE A PIG IN THIS RACE....my main concern, is that this doesn't spawn any more violence, and especially, any more violence spurred on by you, or anyone emotionalizing it for political leverage.... THAT'S ALL! I do not want to hear about more whites shooting blacks because of them defending themselves, because some stupid, reckless idiot, whipped them up in a frenzy to attack each other..because those who do, would be an accomplice to whatever crimes comes out of it! Also, you have not addressed the issue of Holder's DOJ sending people down to train them how to demonstrate. ..as Axelrod said, 'A good crisis is a terrible thing to waste'. What a fucking shit head! Care to address reality??? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 11 Jul 13 - 05:49 PM Correction:: It was Rahm Emanuel who said, ""You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." Sorry, Axelrod...it was the other dickhead! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 11 Jul 13 - 06:38 PM If I were walking down the street in the evening and someone approached me pointing a gun at me, I think I could safely assume that I was being attacked. And Zimmerman didn't just go against police advice by getting out of his car and accosting Martin, he was going against their orders. They told him to stay in the car and not approach Martin. Martin was doing nothing illegal when accosted by Zimmerman, and he had every reason to be frightened of him and try to defend himself. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 06:53 PM So, GfinS... Right after you state that your not a Zimmerman worshiper you go and defend Zimmerman point by point... Uh huh??? Delusional... Not quite as bad as the "other guy" but getting there... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 11 Jul 13 - 07:18 PM Firth: "If I were walking down the street in the evening and someone approached me pointing a gun at me, I think I could safely assume that I was being attacked." That's probably true...but NOT what happened according to all accounts..so knock it off! Your supposing is NOT evidence, it's only supposing! Bobert: "So, GfinS... Right after you state that your not a Zimmerman worshiper you go and defend Zimmerman point by point..." I was NOT defending Zimmerman, and AM NOT defending Zimmerman, I'm only stating what points of the law, as you listed the 'charges'. If you want to 'try' this case, in your mind, you still have to relate to what happened and what didn't..and if you look at this actual case, you have to have ALL the points backed up with admissible evidence, that is substantiated...and though you have circumstantial points, you have to tie them in, with THIS actual case..not by hypotheticals, or emotional 'what ifs'....just by supported facts. What I posted was your accusations, held up to the law...in this case or any other. Nobody has proved or disproved the self defense part, as of yet, except the eye-witness who saw Zimmerman on the bottom, getting punched. How he got there, or what immediately preceded that, is anybody's guess....that being said, you can't convict someone based on a guess....Right? Hey, if Zimmerman ILLEGALLY provoked this, then he SHOULD go down...but nobody has proven that, have they? By the way, neither of you have broached my questions/comments on perjury by Holder, and the deaths of the border patrol agents...or Nixon getting blasted for his remarks about Manson, before his trial..what's the matter??..You can't live up to your own double standards???? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 07:27 PM Hells bells, GfinS... You have defended Zimmerman at every turn... You don't have to lie about it... You and the other guy are the two biggest Zimmerman worshipers here... Hey, I don't give a rat's ass about it but for you to deny it is like a joke... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 11 Jul 13 - 07:51 PM Goofball, that is EXACTLY what happened! That part was clear--UNTIL people like you started trying to muddy the waters. Now, what possible reason could you have for doing that, usless you have already assuned that Martin was the guilty party here. And WHY, I wonder, would you do that? . . . a seventeen-year-old black kid out walking at night must be up to some kind of mischief, right? Don Firth P. S. Where do you live? Mississippi? Alabama? Georgia? Where? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 08:25 PM That's the point I kinda suggested a couple days ago, Don... GfinS denies everything but is complicit in some pretty racists thinking here... And a double dose of denial... I mean, you can't go claiming to be this neutral party and then go about trashing the prosecution's arguments... That is called lying... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Songwronger Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:08 PM So what's the status on this case? I haven't been following. Will Obama and Bill Ayers get their desired race riots out of it? Judicial Watch published an interesting article yesterday. They did a Freedom Of Information Act search and learned that the Obama/Holder team sent people to agitate in the case. Federal racial agitation paid for by taxpayers: http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/documents-obtained-by-judicial-watch-detail-role-of-justice-department-in Documents Obtained by Judicial Watch Detail Role of Justice Department in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it has obtained documents in response to local, state, and federal records requests revealing that a little-known unit of the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Community Relations Service (CRS), was deployed to Sanford, FL, following the Trayvon Martin shooting to help organize and manage rallies and protests against George Zimmerman. •March 25 – 27, 2012, CRS spent $674.14 upon being "deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain." •March 25 – 28, 2012, CRS spent $1,142.84 "in Sanford, FL to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain. •March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent $892.55 in Sanford, FL "to provide support for protest deployment in Florida." •March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent an additional $751.60 in Sanford, FL "to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31." •April 3 – 12, 2012, CRS spent $1,307.40 in Sanford, FL "to provide technical assistance, conciliation, and onsite mediation during demonstrations planned in Sanford." •April 11 – 12, 2012, CRS spent $552.35 in Sanford, FL "to provide technical assistance for the preparation of possible marches and rallies related to the fatal shooting of a 17 year old African American male." And so on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:24 PM Fuck off, wrong man... Go back to your cave... Like you said, you haven't been keeping up so why do you feel like you have a right to pollute this thread with your Obama hate??? Start another Obama hate thread while catching up with the facts of this case, dude... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Songwronger Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:30 PM Fuck you, you drunken sot. All you can do to keep the light off your shame of a president is to fake some care about a dead kid. You're a disgrace. Obama murders dozens or hundreds like him around the world every day, then he preens onstage and says Trayvon Martin could have been his son. And you do your duty like the whore you are and try to draw attn away from Obama's world-class crimes with focus on this. You're the worst racist I've come across on this site, Bobert. Obama and Holder sent feds in to agitate. Busted. Documents provided by Judicial Watch. Oh, and did I say fuck you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:41 PM "Is everything called a "broken nose" nowadays?" Ebbie, trust me on this one: a broken nose hurts like a sonumabitch. I have broken about 30 bones in various parts of my body including my nose. I recall the broken nose but not most others. As for the marks on the back of Z's head from hitting the sidewalk: I received worse than that by sliding into second. There are two times in my life I smacked fellows' heads into concrete (completely justified if you ask me). Didn't look like those marks Z had. In fact, I'd be a bit ashamed to tell anyone about it. I thought they grew 'em tougher in the south. Seems I thought wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:49 PM Whatever, wrong man... No, you are the racist, dude... Get over the fact that Obama is black, asshole... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 11 Jul 13 - 09:58 PM It's pretty obvious that Songwronger has psychological problems. They manifest themselves in his rabid hatred of Obama. Goofballupagus claimed once that he was a family counselor (could cure gays of their "perversion"). Maybe he can help cure Songwronger of his hate psychosis. No. More probably they'd go out and have a few beers together and become bosom buddies. They seem to share the same delusions.. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 11 Jul 13 - 10:11 PM Well, you are the two guys who keep giving him airtime. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 11 Jul 13 - 10:14 PM I think they are suffering from "Polymorphous Perverse Guilt Syndrome", Don... Lotta that going 'round in Denial-ville... Yeah, maybe they do need to get a beer together and talk these issues out??? I donno??? Ain't my problem, thank you... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 11 Jul 13 - 10:31 PM Bobert: "No, you are the racist, dude... Get over the fact that Obama is black, asshole..." Pardon me...actually he's half black, half white. Bobert: "I mean, you can't go claiming to be this neutral party and then go about trashing the prosecution's arguments.." But it is upon the prosecution to PROVE those arguments, and substantiate them...which has not happened. Just like you call me a racist...That is so full of shit I can smell you from here...OK, you argue it, but now you have to prove it. The prosecution can say anything...it doesn't mean that's the way it is..until he provides corroborating evidence..neither the prosecution you, or Don has been able to do that...and calling people names is NOT a substitute! Ever heard of 'All bark, no bite'? Bobert: "You have defended Zimmerman at every turn..." Show me or shut up! Because I actually understand the law, I'm only stating what evidence was proved, and which was not. I agreed with you, on the things that were proved, and merely pointed out to you, what was not proved...I'm sorry that you can't see that...maybe you've got too much reverse discrimination in your own eyes..which, BTW, is racism. My larger concern is the aftermath, after the verdict has been made public. I DON'T want to see more race riots, I DON'T want to see more killing, property damage or more hate..nor do I want any of us on here to promote that for any reason..IT'S WRONG!...Now. you think I'm alone on that???.... and even WE agree!!!! Here, Listen to this blithering racist'..on your favorite news channel! Stop listening to that wannabe political agitator, condescending fool! you're on the wrong side on this one from listening to him! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:00 PM Anonymous GUEST, they are the ones who are giving themselves airtime. Have you noticed how may "hate Obama" threads Songwronger starts, GUEST? Sometimes several per day. And invariably, his lapdog, Goofball, joins in as his cheer leader. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:03 PM You know, if you learned the correct use of the ellipsis your communications would be much clearer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:09 PM If you are addressing me, anonymous GUEST, I DO use the ellipsis correctly. I have a number of style manuals on my bookshelves, I have some thirty published magazine articles, and among other things, I have worked as an editor. Which particular ellipsis are you beefing about? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:23 PM Don, I was referring to GfS. He's a nice guy but his punctuation pisses me off more than his opinions ever have. I know what a good writer you are, except maybe when you let BOLD PRINT TAKE OVER. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,olddude Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:25 PM Well again, why anyone would do a neighborhood watch with a firearms puzzles me. Ya just don't do it .. Your suppose to watch from your car or your house and use a cell phone to inform police. If he felt his life was in danger again the law ain't going to look kindly at it since your put yourself into that situation that was not necessary. Carrying a firearm is serious business, ya have to know the law and kinda figure out how the law will look at you if you use it. Again it is only for dire situations that you cannot avoid. Manslaughter would probably been easier to prove. I carry, A lot, but I was in law enforcement and gov agencies. States like Florida bug me because they are too easy to get a firearm with little training |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,olddude Date: 11 Jul 13 - 11:59 PM maybe you guys could just get a license and go fishing with me. a lot more fun then fighting. Been catching world class bass |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 12 Jul 13 - 12:07 AM olddude, The way it looks, manslaughter, acquittal or hung jury, depending on the outside political pressure. Up until they opened it up for a lesser charge, it looked like acquittal...but now, that's changed. However, manslaughter requires negligence, and if it is argued successfully, the self defense issue could throw that out the window, for the reason, that self defense, is based on, it's 'either him or me', AND if he had reason to believe, that his life was in danger, or he was fearing about receiving 'great bodily harm'..as the law reads. Now, in Florida, the prosecution gives its final closing arguments, then the defense has its shot...but in Florida, the prosecution gets a final rebuttal, after the defense's closing statements. It's not like that in all states, but there it is. Up until yesterday, there were seven possible verdicts..today, I believe there are three, as listed above. I do not believe he will be found 'guilty' of 1st or 2nd degree murder. The prosecution is WAY to far away from proving that..that's why the plead for going to a lesser charge option. That being said, I'm not rooting for any of them above another...just analyzing the way it unfolded in court...though some of our resident racists won't believe that. Frankly, I think the story was blown WAY out of proportion, but, it WAS politicized for the purpose of dividing people into further polarizations, and they got that! Now if everyone can remain calm, no matter what the verdict, HOPEFULLY it might signal a return to unity, and a greater disregard for force-fed media pandering politics. Let's hope for that..along with a more responsible media...(but more than likely, that won't happen). Oh yeah, almost forgot, any takes on the Holder perjury, lying about his program, and the dead border agent??? Nixon pre-trial Manson statements? Obama's?? Silly cherry picking hypocrites! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 12 Jul 13 - 12:11 AM Right across the road, out front is a lake. our state's record bass was caught out of it..but not by me. We'll have to get together sometime! Up here, there is a lot of trout. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 12 Jul 13 - 12:20 AM "Oh yeah, almost forgot, any takes on the Holder perjury, lying about his program, and the dead border agent?" (Pardon me for quoting the sentence without the extra and unnecessary question marks.) Holder wouldn't lie. He works for the government. That's what I've been told. That said, it's got little to do with the conversation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 12 Jul 13 - 12:31 AM Sorry about the upper case stuff, GUEST. But I sometimes feel that if I don't shout loudly enough, there are people here who simply won't get it. Futile, of course. I could tattoo it on their foreheads backwards so that every time they looked in the mirror they would read it and still not get it. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 12 Jul 13 - 01:40 AM GfS, have you lost it entirely? In that link Sharpton is totally non-racist and speaks ONLY of non-violent reactions. I listened to the speech and read the transcript: Do you object to ANY part of it? What is the matter with you? "Let me be very clear," Rev. Sharpton said, "from the beginning of this when I was called [by the Martin family] and came in just to say this should go to trial and should not be decided in a police station, this family has said 'We believe in peace, and we believe in trying the criminal justice system,'" he said. "I went and helped to lead and organize the first big rally in Sanford, where tens of thousands of people came," he continued. "And from that rally all the way through the rallies and the marches subsequent, leading to this trial, not one brick has been thrown, not one window broke." "Justice requires that we stay non-violent and not become what we fight," he added later. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 12 Jul 13 - 06:45 AM Ebbie, I was being facetious (to Bobert). Trying to point out to him that Sharpton and I were both saying the same thing, but Bobert is accusing me of being the racist. I thought maybe he'd believe what I was saying if it came from a black man TOO! (Bobert can't see his own racism, and thinks it's 'everybody else') This is what I said: (everything in brackets, I added for clarity) "My larger concern is the aftermath, after the verdict has been made public. I DON'T want to see more race riots, I DON'T want to see more killing, property damage or more hate..nor do I want any of us on here to promote that for any reason..IT'S WRONG!...Now. you think I'm alone on that???.... and even WE agree!!!! Here, Listen to this 'blithering racist'..on your favorite news channel! Stop listening to that wannabe political agitator,(meaning Don Firth)condescending fool! you're on the wrong side on this one from listening to him!" That being said, I'm usually NOT a fan of Sharpton..but hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day! On this one, Ebbie, we are in agreement...(grit your teeth). GfS GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 12 Jul 13 - 07:24 AM Manslaughter sounds perfectly reasonable to me. And I think it's the best that can come out of this. Georgie needs about 8-12 years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 08:07 AM "If I were walking down the street in the evening and someone approached me pointing a gun at me, I think I could safely assume that I was being attacked." Except even the prosecution has not accused Zimmerman of approaching anyone pointing a gun. "And Zimmerman didn't just go against police advice by getting out of his car and accosting Martin, he was going against their orders. They told him to stay in the car and not approach Martin." I posted the 911 op. saying that "they did not need him" to do that- NOT an order, and 911 operators cannot give orders per testimony. "Martin was doing nothing illegal when accosted by Zimmerman, and he had every reason to be frightened of him and try to defend himself." Agreed, AS WAS ZIMMERMAN. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 08:17 AM ZIMMERMAN was doing nothing illegal when accosted by MARTIN, and he had every reason to be frightened of him and try to defend himself. Throwing a punch is an attack, asking what someone is doing is NOT. At least, this is what is claimed by the defense, supported by the available evidence, and not refuted by the prosecution. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 08:26 AM For all the Zimmerman haters out there, please answer one question: WHO threw the first punch/ made the first physical attack? The defense claims it was Martin, the prosecution witnesses have supported that , and the evidence seems to as well. So who threw the first punch???? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 12 Jul 13 - 09:42 AM WHO threw the first punch/ made the first physical attack? We don't know for sure, BeardedBullshit, and niether do you. Why don't you go back to posting cut-and-paste blogoshit? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 09:44 AM "We don't know for sure, BeardedBullshit, and niether do you. " So how the fuck can you say that Zimmerman is guilty if you do not now the facts???? Oh, that's right- his victim was black, so he must be guilty- What a bunch of racist bigots!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 12 Jul 13 - 10:13 AM Interesting reading, ya'll... Well, the ones I read, that is... Seein' as I have pretty much laid the case out before that even a crash test dummy would get there is no reason to rehash that... I would be perfectly happy with any conviction that would put Zimmerman behind bars for what he has done here... He, like O.J. back when, doesn't deserve a pass just because gun-nut-America is paying for his high priced legal team... "8-12" sounds about right... And Ol'ster's comments are right on... There is a reason they call it Neighborhood ***Watch*** and why they don't call it Neighborhood ***Shoot***... If you want to shoot, go to a firing range or a turkey shoot... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 10:20 AM Barring any unforeseen complications, George Zimmerman's defense team is expected to rest its case this afternoon. While the trial's not over yet, many observers have already made up their minds: Zimmerman will be found not guilty. Last weekend Washington Post writer Gene Weingarten tweeted, "I don't like George Zimmerman, & he caused this to happen, but from what I've read he will, and should, walk." ABC analyst Dan Abrams wrote, "I just don't see how a jury convicts [Zimmerman] of second degree murder or even manslaughter in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin." The Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel predicted that "unless the prosecution rallies, don't be shocked if Zimmerman walks away totally free." I think they're right. Over the past two weeks, trial-watchers have seen a lot of things: bad jokes, anguish, rage, odd disparagement of Zimmerman's physical capabilities. But there's one thing we haven't seen: a compelling, factual rebuttal to Zimmerman's account of what happened the night Trayvon Martin was killed. Here is what we know: Trayvon Martin died in Sanford, Fla., on Feb. 26, 2012. If George Zimmerman hadn't been there, Martin would still be alive. Zimmerman found Martin suspicious. He called 911. A confrontation ensued. Beyond that, the facts are unclear. There's not much physical evidence in the case. Other than the defendant, there are no eyewitnesses. Zimmerman claims that he was attacked by Martin, and that he shot him because he felt he was at risk of great bodily harm. We can certainly speculate as to whether or not he's telling the truth, but can we say for sure? Zimmerman's the only one who was there, and none of the prosecution's witnesses came close to conclusively refuting his story. That's a problem for the state. To convict Zimmerman, the prosecutors have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. That hasn't happened. And if the prosecution can't prove its case, then Zimmerman should walk. Many will see this as an unsatisfying outcome; many will think it shouldn't be this easy to kill someone, concoct an uncontradictable excuse, and get away with it. But a legally satisfying verdict cannot always be the same as a morally satisfying verdict. It would be unjust if Zimmerman were convicted based not on the strength of the evidence against him, but rather on the public sentiment against him. http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/07/10/george_zimmerman_trial_trayvon_martin_s_shooter_is_probably_going_to_walk.html?wpisr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Poetry Bird Date: 12 Jul 13 - 10:43 AM ""1. Zimmerman lied in court when he was asked if he had money for his defense... True...but that is a separate charge, and not relevant to the events leading up to the shooting."" You advocate believing a proven liar, even when the lie was delivered under oath in a court of law? Exactly HOW is that not relevant to the whole of his testimony? It would, anywhere but the Southern US, make the jury think very hard about whether the rest of his teatimony could be given any credence. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 12 Jul 13 - 10:43 AM We're not discussing "The Facts", BeardedBullshit We're discussing a single "fact". So you can review: Q. So who threw the first punch? A. We don't know. There. OK? Remember now? And now, back to our regularly scheduled B-B-Blogoshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Poetry Bird Date: 12 Jul 13 - 10:46 AM ""1. Zimmerman lied in court when he was asked if he had money for his defense... True...but that is a separate charge, and not relevant to the events leading up to the shooting."" You advocate believing a proven liar, even when the lie was delivered under oath in a court of law? Exactly HOW is that not relevant to the whole of his testimony? It would, anywhere but the Southern US, make the jury think very hard about whether the rest of his teatimony could be given any credence. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 12 Jul 13 - 10:58 AM The other day on a show the point was made that if the gun was not already out of its holster *before* Zimmerman was on the ground it would have been well-nigh impossible for Z to get to it while on his back, not to mention that it would scarcely have been possible for Martin to have known it was there. The proscecution,in its summing up yesterday, made the same point. So how did Zimmerman get the handgun out? Mind you, by his own demonstration, it was *behind* the halfway point of his side. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 12:37 PM With the prosecution's witnesses making the defense's case, the inquisitors' last stand is to claim that, if the races were reversed, the black guy would have been instantly charged with murder. As explained in The New York Times: "Had Mr. Martin shot and killed Mr. Zimmerman under similar circumstances, black leaders say, the case would have barreled down a different path: Mr. Martin would have been quickly arrested by the Sanford Police Department and charged in the killing, without the benefit of the doubt." (Also, CNN could have dropped the "white" and referred to Zimmerman exclusively as "Hispanic.") The people who say this are counting on the rest of us being too polite to mention that it is nearly impossible to imagine such a case in a world where half of all murders and a majority of robberies are committed by blacks. To reverse the races with the same set of facts, first, we're going to need a gated, mixed-race community, similar to the Retreat at Twin Lakes, that has recently experienced a rash of robberies by white guys. The only way to do that is to enter "The Twilight Zone." There were at least eight burglaries in the 14 months before Zimmerman's encounter with Martin. Numerous media accounts admit that "most" of these were committed by black males. I'm waiting to hear about a single crime at Twin Lakes that was not committed by a black male. Just six months before Zimmerman's encounter with Martin, two men had broken into the home of a neighbor, Olivia Bertalan, while she was alone with her infant son. She had just enough time to call 911 before running upstairs and locking herself in a room. The burglars knew she was home, but proceeded to rob the place anyway, even trying to enter the locked room where she held her crying child. Bertalan had seen the burglars just before they broke into her house -- one at the front door and one at the back. They were young black males. They lived in the Retreat by Twin Lakes. In another case, a black teenager strode up to Zimmerman's house and, in broad daylight, stole a bicycle off the front porch. The bike was never recovered. Weeks before Zimmerman saw Martin, he witnessed another young black male peering into the window of a neighbor's house. He called the cops, but by the time they arrived, the suspect was gone. A few days later, another house was burglarized. The thieves made off with jewelry and a new laptop. Roofers working across the street had seen two black teenagers near the house at the time of the robbery. When they spotted one of the teens the next day, they called the police. This time, the roofers followed the suspect so he wouldn't get away. The cops arrived and found the stolen laptop in his backpack. This was the same black teenager Zimmerman had seen looking in a neighbor's window. The only reason it's hard to imagine the Zimmerman case with the races reversed is that it's hard to imagine a white teenager living in a mixed-race, middle-class community, mugging a black homeowner. This is not a problem of society's reactions, but of the facts. There is, however, at least one case of a black homeowner fatally shooting a white troublemaker. He was not charged with murder. In 2006, the ironically named John White was sound asleep at his nice Long Island home when his teenage son woke him to say there was a mob of white kids shouting epithets in front of the house. The family was in no imminent danger. They could have called 911 and remained safely behind locked doors. But White grabbed a loaded Beretta and headed out to the end of the driveway to confront the mob. A scuffle ensued and White ended up shooting one of the kids in the face, killing him. White was charged and convicted only of illegal weapons possession -- this was New York, after all -- and involuntary manslaughter. He was sentenced to 20 months-to-four years in prison, but after serving five months was pardoned by Gov. David Paterson. With all due compassion for the kid who was killed, the public was overwhelmingly on the father's side -- a fact still evident in Internet postings about the case. The kids were punks menacing a law-abiding homeowner. Even the prosecutor complained only that Paterson hadn't called the victim's family first. The local NAACP had campaigned aggressively on White's behalf. There were no threats to riot in case of an acquittal. The centerpiece of White's self-defense argument was his recollection of his grandfather's stories about the Ku Klux Klan. George Zimmerman's memory of young black males committing crimes at Twin Lakes is somewhat more recent. John White wasn't jumped, knocked to the ground, repeatedly punched, and his skull knocked against the ground. He wasn't even touched, though he claimed the white teen was lunging at him. Talk about no reason to "follow," there was no reason for him to leave the safety of his locked home. White's son knew the kids by name. They could have waited for the cops. So, yes, this case probably would be very different if Zimmerman and Martin's races were reversed. It is only when the victim is black that we must have a show trial, a million-dollar reward paid to the victim's parents and the threat of riots. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 12:50 PM A short while ago, the jury in the trial of George Zimmerman was handed the case. Zimmerman's fate is now entirely in the hands of the six women selected to consider the evidence. When the verdict is returned, whatever it happens to be, there's one thing that's important to remember: Those women know more than you. RELATED: Zimmerman's Quiet 'Not Guilty' Plea Here's what I mean by that. No matter how much of the trial you watched on CNN, those jurors almost certainly saw more of the evidence than you did. They held documents in their hands. They saw what the witnesses—and Zimmerman—were doing while not on camera. They were excluded from hearing evidence that the judge deemed inappropriate or inadmissible. They have been instructed on the specific components of the law. And, most important, they are the only ones who know what arguments are being used to persuade each other to reach a unanimous decision. Each of these things is an important part of the process of a criminal trial; I'll break out why below. But again: While we can watch the trial through the keyhole provided by CNN, we should never convince ourselves that we know better than the people in that room. This is admittedly personal. For much of the year 2009, I sat as a juror on a well-publicized trial in New York City. Thousands of people each year sit on juries, of course, but few sit on ones that last a long time and are the subject of intense scrutiny. And in few—including the one in my experience—are the repercussions as high as in the case presented to these six women. Jurors must evaluate the evidence. While both sides present opening and closing arguments, the central component of a criminal trial is the evidence. And in our system, that evidence is introduced through witnesses. If the prosecution has computer analysis that shows important information, it must call a computer analyst to the stand to explain how it was developed. Every physical thing is linked to a human representative. What this means is that the person and the evidence are inextricably linked. Jurors are asked to evaluate the witness as placeholders for the evidence. Not only in the case of eyewitness testimony—is the witness squirming in his seat? Does he seem believable?—but in expert testimony, too. Credentials are considered, but so is the presentation. Did that doctor seem uncertain in answering his question? Did she qualify her analysis? When the camera in the courtroom shows the lawyer asking the question and not the witness answering it, you're missing part of the evidence. Physical evidence also offer details not conveyed over the television. Tiny details—textures, discolorations, notes—can all be elements that play into the decision-making process jurors use. Those details may not be conveyed, even in high-definition. Then, of course, there is the response of the man on trial. What is George Zimmerman doing while the evidence is being presented? How is he reacting? Zimmerman is frequently shown during CNN's boradcast, but not always. His demeanor is something the jurors must consider. This works both ways, by the way. The attorneys for either side are also watching the jurors, evaluating their reactions as the case is made. In our case, consultants sat in the audience, rarely taking their eyes off of us and taking notes in a notepad. Jurors only see evidence that's admissible. Criminal trials are not about guilt. They are about whether or not someone broke a law. This is a very important distinction. Imagine that laws didn't exist. If you killed someone, you are guilty of committing that act. But you are not guilty of murder, because murder requires a violation of the law. Or imagine that a law is passed so that murder requires the use of a gun. If you stab someone to death and are put on trial for murder, you should not be found guilty. During a criminal trial, there are only three participants. There are the prosecution and defense, presenting evidence through witnesses and rebutting the evidence of their opponents. And then there is the jury, which is asked to evaluate it. The judge is a referee, there to evaluate the process, not the case. He or she evaluates the law. The judge knows the specific details of the statutes under consideration and makes determinations about which evidence is allowable in that context. Courtroom observers—and non-sequestered people following press coverage—know things that a judge might consider unduly prejudicial if presented to a juror. As a person watching from the outside, you are more than welcome to judge the defendant based on that evidence. But if the judge excludes it from consideration by the jury, there's a reason, based in the law. The jury only worries about what the law says. This is an important point, worth repeating. If that law states that murder requires a gun, the jury cannot find a serial strangler guilty of murder. When the jury retires for its deliberations, the instructions are clear: does the evidence presented in court surpass any reasonable doubt that the particular laws at issue—in the Zimmerman case, manslaughter or murder—were violated? The jury is not judging if Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin. It is not evaluating if he is a thief or if he is cheating on his wife. It is there to read Florida's statutes and see if the evidence builds high enough that they are all convinced that Zimmerman should be punished. Deliberations are much, much harder than they seem. The most surprising aspect of my jury service came in the sixth month, in the first hour that we all returned to the jury room and were asked to deliberate. (This was also the first moment that any of us ever spoke about the presented evidence with one another.) One component of the case seemed, to me, open-and-shut. I assumed that, of the twenty or so charges, it could be dealt with quickly. I was wrong. Disagreement was substantial and significant. Arguments were presented and the law assessed. Eventually, I changed my mind. This is the process. As any Twelve Angry Men fan knows, it's people—regular people in an extraordinary circumstance—asked to work out any substantial differences of opinion. Imagine finding five random people on the street and coming to unified agreement on any issue. That's what these six women must do: reach a unanimous verdict on the matters of law before them. It's cajoling and argument and empathy and mind-reading and frustration for hours and hours. It was, if I'm honest, also fascinating and deeply enjoyable. That you, on your own, decided George Zimmerman's guilt or innocence based on your sense of whether or not he killed Trayvon Martin is fine. It is your opinion. But when those six women, exhausted and perhaps frustrated, emerge from their sequestration to announce their verdict, remember that your disagreement is worth little to nothing. You didn't see the case they did. And the case they saw was the only one that matters. http://news.yahoo.com/zimmerman-jury-better-able-judge-fate-162313256.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 12:55 PM Don T, "You advocate believing a proven liar, even when the lie was delivered under oath in a court of law?" Does this apply to the prosecution witness as well? She also lied to the court in earlier sworn statements- Should she be believed? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 12 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM I've just watched the closing arguments, very well done by John Guy(prosecution), I may add and all I can say, is that the verdict will be determined by emotions vs the 'letter of the law'. Emotions: guilty of something lesser charge or.. Letter of the law: He walks, or get's lighter charge. Both: Hung jury GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 12 Jul 13 - 01:51 PM I am truly amazed at how much time and energy Beardedbruce has to devote to his blatantly biased speculation about this case. Why does he insist on defending Zimmerman, who shot a black teenager who was guilty of nothing but going to a nearby convenience store and buying a bag of candy? In about fifteen minutes, I am going to listen to a radio discussion of the case with some attorneys and other folks who are in the know. I'll be back. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 01:59 PM I am truly amazed at how much time and energy many here have to devote to their blatantly biased speculation about this case, without regard to the evidence presented by both sides. I suspect the proper charge should have been involuntary manslaughter, which could easily have been proven, but the Zimmerman haters here and in the press forced the 2nd degree charge, which could not be proven with the evidence that the prosecution had. By upping the charge, and by the prosecution's efforts to keep evidence form the defense, this case has been rigged by the Zimmerman haters to either let him go free, or to have any convictions thrown out for mistrials. The only reason I can see is the desire for many here to have race riots, violence, and more young black men killed. Just my opinion- but that is worth as much as any other's here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Stilly River Sage Date: 12 Jul 13 - 02:19 PM Photo of Trayvon Martin right after attack. This photo speaks 1000 words. At least. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 02:59 PM Previous post: From: Jack the Sailor - PM Date: 05 Jun 13 - 11:05 AM >>People do dumb things- that DOES NOT make them "murderers". << The person picking the fight cannot claim "self defense" if it turns deadly. That is just common sense. And the defense has claimed that Martin "picked the fight" by throwing the first punch. So Martin did NOT have a right to 'self-defense', according to JtS's statement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 03:20 PM With the verdict drawing near, police and city leaders in Sanford and other parts of Florida said they have taken precautions for the possibility of mass protests or even civil unrest if Zimmerman, whose father is white and whose mother is Hispanic, is acquitted. There were big protests in Sanford and other cities across the country last year when authorities waited 44 days before arresting Zimmerman. Guy told the jury the case wasn't about race. "It's about right and wrong," he said. "It's that simple." http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/12/Jurors-start-deliberating-George-Zimmerman-case |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 12 Jul 13 - 03:23 PM The discussion on the radio consisted of an interviewer talking with a reporter from the Tampa Bay Times who is following the trial, a legal expert from the University of Connecticut, and a couple of other people, mostly reporters following the case. Although they did not agree on a number of things, they did agree that the whole trial was dancing around the race issue, trying to avoid it, while it was clear from Zimmerman's initial phone call to the police that he was very fixated on Martin's being "a black teenager, and he looks like he's up to no good!" At which point, the police dispatcher told him to stay put, don't approach him, and wait for the police to get there. If Zimmerman had done what he was told, this incident would never have happened. Two things are clear: Zimmerman initiated contact with Martin after the police told him to stay in his car and watch until they got there. And the girl whom Martin was talking to on his cell phone said that Martin told her, "There's a creepy looking cracker out here, and he's following me!" "Cracker" is a racial slur, but at the same time, it is clear that Martin was afraid of Zimmerman, who was following him. And so whatever Martin did at that point could be construed as "self-defense." Whether it was Martin who attacked Zimmerman or the other way around, Zimmerman was the initial aggressor for approaching Martin at all when told by the police not to. But it is questionable whether Martin would have physically attacked someone who was larger than he was, outweighed him by nearly fifty pounds—and was carrying a 9 mm. automatic! But then, does the "stand your ground" law not apply to black teenagers? And no, Beardedbruce, I don't think anyone here is eager to see race riots, as you claim. Far from it! But it is abundantly clear that race is a major factor in this case. The panel on the discussion program pretty much agreed that, so far, the trial itself was deeply flawed. Don Firth P. S. Maggie, thanks for linking to that photo. It's pretty hard to look at, but it shows the raw reality. For those who look at this photo—and LOOK!—also read what Adam Weinstein was written, below the photo. I cannot help but share his rage and disgust at the chain of circumstances that brought this about. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 03:25 PM George Zimmerman defense attorney Mark O'Mara used physical exhibits in his closing argument to demonstrate to the jury the size disparity between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin. Martin was 5'11 and 158 lbs. at the time, while George Zimmerman clocked in at a clinically obese 5'7" and 204 lbs. The exhibit, which was not entered into evidence, was meant to show the jury that Zimmerman reasonably could have feared for his life once he was in a fight with Martin. O'Mara then showed a photo of Martin with his shirt off to the jury, stating, "here's him three months before that night, it's in evidence, take a look at it. Because this is the person… who George Zimmerman encountered that night. This is the person, who all of the evidence was attacked — or attacked George Zimmerman, broke his nose or something close to it and battered him on something." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Jul 13 - 03:41 PM "Although they did not agree on a number of things, they did agree that the whole trial was dancing around the race issue, trying to avoid it, while it was clear from Zimmerman's initial phone call to the police that he was very fixated on Martin's being "a black teenager, and he looks like he's up to no good!" " Not the case, if you read the evidence instead of the newspaper reports that were proven wrong months ago. The dispatcher brought up the question of what race the person was, and Zimmerman answered. No fixation except in the minds of Zimmerman haters trying to make this a racial issue. "At which point, the police dispatcher told him to stay put, don't approach him, and wait for the police to get there." agreed. Zimmerman made a bad call- "If Zimmerman had done what he was told, this incident would never have happened." True, and if Martin had not taken a swing at Zimmerman, attacking him, knocking him down, and making him fear for his life, this incident would never have happened. "Two things are clear: Zimmerman initiated contact with Martin after the police told him to stay in his car and watch until they got there. " Not proven- he stated he was on his way back to his car when he was attacked. No evidence otherwise. "And the girl whom Martin was talking to on his cell phone said that Martin told her, "There's a creepy looking cracker out here, and he's following me!" "Cracker" is a racial slur, but at the same time, it is clear that Martin was afraid of Zimmerman, who was following him. And so whatever Martin did at that point could be construed as "self-defense."." This is the witness who lied in sworn statements, but should be believed when you want Zimmerman to not be believed for because he lied in sworn statements?? Throwing the first punch is "self-defense? Then Zimmerman shooting Martin without any further words on seeing him would be, as well, if he was scared. NOT what I believe, but you have stated that "it is clear that Martin was afraid of Zimmerman, who was following him. And so whatever Martin did at that point could be construed as "self-defense."" it is clear that Zimmerman was afraid of Martin who was pounding his head against the ground.. And so whatever Zimmerman did at that point could be construed as "self-defense." "But it is questionable whether Martin would have physically attacked someone who was larger than he was, outweighed him by nearly fifty pounds—and was carrying a 9 mm. automatic!" Martin was taller, in better shape, and had fighting experience- which witnesses testified Zimmerman did not. And HOW could Martin have known that Zimmerman was armed, any more than Zimmerman could know if Martin was armed or not???? It is much clearer that Zimmerman would not physically attack a person taller and stronger than himself, especially when he had a gun- YET the evidence is that there was a physical struggle before the shooting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 12 Jul 13 - 03:52 PM Beardedbruce, most of the statements you are making are in direct contradiction to what I have heard and read. "Did!" "Did not!" "Did!" "Did not!" "Did!" "Did not!" That's the level of your argument. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 12 Jul 13 - 06:21 PM "Did!" "Did not!" "Did!" "Did not!" "Did!" "Did not!" That's the level of your argument. You're being genereous, Don - BullshitBruce HAS no argument. But he is the current master of blogoshit. Credit where credit is due: ShitMeister Bruce. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 12 Jul 13 - 07:20 PM The truth no longer matters here... I agree with GfinS... This case will be decided on emotions... 5 white Southern women v. 1 black Southern woman... The safe bet is Zimmerman walks and gets away with murder... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 12 Jul 13 - 07:26 PM Well, "Generosity" is my middle name (actually, it's "Richard," but whotthehell!). Just had a thought: Suppose Trayvon Martin had been the self-appointed block watch person sitting in his car, and he spotted George Zimmerman walking down the street with a package of candy in his hand? And suppose, after calling the police about seeing a white man in the neighborhood behaving suspiciously, Martin had got out of the car and confronted Zimmerman, after being told by the police not to approach him, but to stay in his car and watch? And suppose during that ensuing confrontation, Martin had shot Zimmerman with a 9 mm. automatic and killed him? I wonder how Beardedbruce and some others would react to that scenario? I think that might just tend to put a somewhat different complexion on the incident (grim pun fully intended!). Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 12 Jul 13 - 08:27 PM Bobert: "I agree with GfinS... This case will be decided on emotions..." After passing out, from reading that, and getting back up to the desk, I want to point out to you, that the jury requested the list of EVIDENCE from the court. Though every commentator says, Nobody has any idea what it going on in the deliberations, let me give you a reasonably educated 'guess'. First, John Guy's (Prosecution attorney) laid out an EXTREMELY impassioned, final rebuttal...pointedly playing to the women's emotions and maternal instincts. (I personally thought he overplayed it, but that's only my take, and I try to keep that out of it). Repeatedly using the word 'child' and closing with 'He was just a child, on his way home'..very slick...however, if the women picked up on that, as a form of manipulation, they will resent him for it! If, on the other hand, it resonated with them or some of them, but not all(more than likely) the request for the list of EVIDENCE would seem to be a likely request, for them to compare, the 'safe' EVIDENCE against the 'awakened maternal emotions'...and they may go through them, CAREFULLY, weighing the emotional impact, against the EVIDENCE, to reconcile the 'accepted facts' vs the emotional sense vs what they WANT to believe, one way or the other...Hence, the chances for a split, or hung jury, just got bigger. How it comes out, I can't tell you..BUT, THAT is the debate, in room. Bet on it! GfS P.S. Working with that, an what must be felt, as the weight, of both pressure, and backlash, may factor in on one or more, wanting 'out' of the decision, and responsibility, especially for the backlash. I don't envy the stress. BUT..SOMEBOBY, will get a book deal out of it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 12 Jul 13 - 08:30 PM Frothing Firth: "Well, "Generosity" is my middle name (actually, it's "Richard," but whotthehell!)..." Spare us, will ya'? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 12 Jul 13 - 08:32 PM What I fear, GfinS, is that the jury will use whatever it can to justify its decision... That's the way its done here in the South... No matter how fucked up the behavior there is ***always*** a rationale... It's a Southern thang... Boy, I'd love to be wrong here but I've seen and experienced way too much in my life here in Dixie... This area of the country is 100% good ol' boy... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 12 Jul 13 - 08:49 PM I wish I wuz in de land ob cotton....... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 12 Jul 13 - 09:00 PM No, you don't, Greg... Stay where you are... Here in North Carolina the recently elected Republican General Assembly and Governor are trying to take this state back to the 1800s... And pulling it off... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 12 Jul 13 - 09:13 PM So Goofball responds to the joke, but has nothing to say about the statement itself. That would require some thought. Typical. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 12 Jul 13 - 11:24 PM Bobert: "What I fear, GfinS, is that the jury will use whatever it can to justify its decision..." The jury is six women...therefore,. 'the women will use whatever it can to justify their decision'....(women have a 'need to feel innocent')...and that is ANY decision they'd come up with. Though out 'logic' and the 'logical', the way you would understand it! Also, by in large, 'women get uncomfortable in HAVING to make decisions'. (Nature of the gender)...if they 'talk' about it and 'bond' with each other, it gets easier. If they are 'comfortable' going with the 'letter of the law', YOU will think they are being 'heartless', because it didn't go the way you thought. if they go another way, it will be because they 'all felt good' about it..and each other. As for them sharing your 'racial struggle nostalgia', that would be hard to say..depends on their ages and what they grew up with..and from where, MAYBE. ..and so much for our 'half-time' entertainment report! When it's all done, and they interview them, just keep in mind what I'm saying here, now. It will ALL make sense. Notice how John Guy's closing arguments plays to exactly what I just ran down, in the last three posts....and keep in mind, he emphasized emotions, and building of argument, using their emotional link, to fill in the gaps..but NOT the EVIDENCE, as presented. Very persuasive!!..but NOT LOGICAL to the known facts, to arrive at a verdict!! You might not agree with me on that...but it IS the strategy he employed. As for me, I'm just watching...no pig in the race...hope there is no violence afterwards...Oh, and BTW, you can scroll back in the thread, and those who argue FOR a guilty verdict, ALSO are coming from an emotional place, vs those who argue that Zimmerman in innocent, based their position on the EVIDENCE, as presented, and a logical place! Using your experience with 'wimenz' as you have referred to them, you draw your own conclusions.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 12 Jul 13 - 11:30 PM This one replaces the other one..take it out, please! Bobert: "What I fear, GfinS, is that the jury will use whatever it can to justify its decision..." The jury is six women...therefore,. 'the women will use whatever it can to justify their decision'....(women have a 'need to feel innocent')...and that is ANY decision they'd come up with. Throw out 'logic' and the 'logical', the way YOU would understand it! Also, by and large, 'women get uncomfortable in HAVING to make decisions'. (Nature of the gender)...if they 'talk' about it and 'bond' with each other, it gets easier. If they are 'comfortable' going with the 'letter of the law', YOU will think they are being 'heartless', because it didn't go the way you thought. If they go another way, it will be because they 'all felt good' about it..and each other. As for them sharing your 'racial struggle nostalgia', that would be hard to say..depends on their ages and what they grew up with..and from where, MAYBE. ..and so much for our 'half-time' entertainment report! When it's all done, and they interview them, just keep in mind what I'm saying here, now. It will ALL make sense...THEN! Notice how John Guy's closing arguments plays to exactly what I just ran down, in the last three posts....and keep in mind, he emphasized emotions, and building his argument, using their emotional link, to fill in the gaps..but NOT the EVIDENCE, as presented. Very persuasive!!..but NOT LOGICAL to the known facts, to arrive at a verdict!! You might not agree with me on that...but it IS the strategy he employed...there definitely is a connection to what I'm saying!! As for me, I'm just watching...no pig in the race...hope there is no violence afterwards...Oh, and BTW, you can scroll back in the thread, and those who argue FOR a guilty verdict, ALSO are coming from an emotional place, vs those who argue that Zimmerman in innocent, based their position on the EVIDENCE, as presented, and a logical place! Using your experience with 'wimenz' as you have referred to them, you draw your own conclusions.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 12 Jul 13 - 11:59 PM GfS, FFS! It's not a pig in the race, it's a dog in the fight! He deserves 2nd degree murder but I'll take manslaughter. C'mon. George Zimmerman is not right in the head. And he created that situation. And he killed that kid. And he lied about everything. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Jul 13 - 12:35 AM You sound rather emotional! I'm not saying he did or didn't, or why...I wasn't there, and neither were you. I was merely talking about the closing arguments, and how they were 'geared', and what the prosecution was exploiting...which, I found rather persuasive..and leaning on the emotional side, vs what the established, accepted evidence was. Obviously, it struck a resonate chord in you. As for me, I'm not jumping to conclusions either way. As stated before, this whole thing was the result of TWO people making VERY poor decisions, and VERY stupid ones at that!..VERY VERY stupid, and tragic ones, at that! In any event, of which way it goes, I hope for the well being of everyone concerned in the aftermath, that MORE people are not hurt, or killed, either as angered and hateful, or in self defense! This shit has GOT to be overcome!!...Will it be??..Depends if we, as a whole, wise up!! GfS GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 13 Jul 13 - 02:41 AM Stop. He took a life. He's not sorry. As a matter of fact, he said in his interview with Sean Hannity that it was God's will. Lord have mercy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Jul 13 - 03:44 AM History teaches us that man never learns from history. Do we ALL get hateful and angry for the actions of stupidity, and repeat the same actions on those we disagree with??..because of THIS trial?? The same day Trayvon was killed, there were 25 murders in Chicago...where's the outrage?..None!..Did you know there were more murders in Chicago last year, than we lost service men in Afghanistan, in the same time period?? What?? No outrage?? ..not only 'no outrage', the media didn't bother to put the microscope on that, which was BIGGER, as it did on the Zimmerman/Martin shooting...matter of FACT, nobody even cared to know..and another thing, most of the murdered were black. What's the matter?? They didn't matter??? Do you even know how many of those murdered were under the age of 16??..Why not?..Never bothered us to check?? We didn't care? We didn't know??..Why not? Zimmerman lied, about Martin and the circumstances around that...so did Holder, about sending guns to the Mexican drug cartels...nobody seems to give a shit, and when it's brought up, it gets 'dismissed' because it gets 'labeled' as being partisan 'concern'. Two border agents were killed, who were fathers of young children..who gives a shit that Holder lies about it..but Zimmerman is somehow more evil? Benghazi?..lies and dead people, but let's play politics, make excuses for Susan Rice lying TO THE WORLD, at the U.N...or Hilary's "What difference does it make??!!" she screams at the hearing...How much does THAT matter??...But two stupid idiots make immature decisions on the street, get into a fight, and one shoots the other...Well stop the presses, and get ready to riot, and kill more, perhaps??..and why? Was it more 'important'?..or was it politicized and we had our noses rubbed in it?? If you had an 'opinion' about it, one way or another, it was reason to hate, or be hated???? Was the emotional loss for the 25 murdered in Chicago, the same day, less??..AND Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the country! Florida has the 'stand your ground law' and that get's more attention, then how many drug related murders happened in Chicago, the same day, while Holder lies about supplying the drug cartels with guns?????????? How many stray bullets hit TRULY innocent children the same day, in Chicago?? Kids who DIDN'T take a punch at anyone..Do you know?? Care??...Why not?? Does it matter? Yeah, why not? Thoughtfully, GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 13 Jul 13 - 11:11 AM You have made several points. It's unbearably sad. Shall we go for Marx with a lampshade on his head? Could be :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Jul 13 - 11:30 AM Do ya' think the light would go on??..or is it just another lampshade? Maybe some people find in 'more convenient' to stay in the dark...no matter what the lamp looks like. Maybe there is a light within us, that we've been too distracted to turn on..or even know how important it is to turn on! Maybe we keep getting diverted, from looking for the switch..(either way you see it). Regards, Guest, guest guest! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Arkie Date: 13 Jul 13 - 11:34 AM From what little I actually know, there is no indication that Zimmerman planned to murder someone that evening. Neither have I seen any indication that Zimmerman contacted police a second time indicating that the suspect was trying to run. Had Zimmerman waited for police and on their arrival, Martin began suspicious action, that creates another scenario. If Zimmerman had used reasonable judgement and allowed Martin to be approached by uniformed officers, the outcome would most likely have been different. So he was guilty of poor judgement without question. That judgement ended in death. In my thinking, it is irrelevant whether Martin initiated physical contact. He had as much right to defend himself from what appeared to be a threat as did Zimmerman. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Jul 13 - 12:40 PM Arkie, I agreed with you, but only up to a point. Martin screwed up when he attacked Zimmerman, otherwise you'd have to assess the threshold, of 'reasonable fear', and then you're back to square one. Here's a point, that I've noticed from the beginning, in which I DO agree with you. Look at the picture of Zimmerman, the police took right after the incident. OK?..now for a moment, take off the blood, and imagine looking at him, without the injuries..OK?...Personally, I would have not liked a mug like that following me, either. I think BOTH of them had reason to 'suspect' each other...That being said, NEITHER of them had the right, or reasonable cause, to initiate anything! I still think it was reckless stupidity all the way around. martin had a cell phone in his hands, as well. If he was so alarmed, HE should have called the police!..Imagine the police getting calls from BOTH of them..it could have all been calmed down, right over the phone!!! Absolute stupidity!!!!!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 13 Jul 13 - 04:17 PM No, Arkie... If Zimmerman had planned to murder Martin that night it would be 1st degree murder... The fact that Zimmerman instigated the conflict by stalking Martin before killing him makes it 2nd degree murder... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Jul 13 - 04:36 PM Bobert: "The fact that Zimmerman instigated the conflict by stalking Martin before killing him makes it 2nd degree murder..." There you go again, Bobert..let me help you out,again,.. IF Zimmerman instigated the conflict before killing him, makes it 2nd degree murder... That is a little more accurate, TO THE LAW, not your opinion, or any one else's. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 13 Jul 13 - 04:43 PM Martin screwed up when he attacked Zimmerman Of course we only have Zimmerman's word that this actually happened. Maybe it did but there is only one person still alive who knows for sure. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 13 Jul 13 - 04:50 PM Zimmerman is a confessed liar... Period... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 13 Jul 13 - 05:47 PM Sorry to be "Johnnie One Note" here, but I keep coming back to the fact that if Zimmerman had bloody-well stayed in his car as the police told him to do, this tragic incident would never have happened. I don't what to see Zimmerman hang, but if he gets a cell in the Hard Rock Hotel for a good stretch, it will give him a chance to think it over, and will also get him off the streets. Think about it: If Zimmerman walks, the tacit implication is that he was justified in what he did. And who's black teenage son is he going to kill next? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Jul 13 - 05:55 PM Bobert: "Zimmerman is a confessed liar... Period..." Do you believe him?? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 13 Jul 13 - 08:03 PM Of course, I don't, GfinS... He has been caught in several lies already and so why should I??? Or you??? Or anyone??? I doubt if his high priced legal team does either but... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 13 Jul 13 - 08:59 PM Whatever we opine, Zimmerman's going away for manslaughter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 13 Jul 13 - 09:08 PM I'd take that, Elmore... Zimmerman shouldn't be able to get away Scott free from this... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 13 Jul 13 - 09:17 PM But we have an admission on Zimmerman's part that Trayvon tried to escape him once. And if you believe Trayvon's friend (which I do), he caught up to him. Rachel said Trayvon said, why are you following me?" And Zimmerman said, "What are you doing around here?" Makes sense. Trayvon saying, "You got me." No, Zimmerman is a liar and worse not right in the head. And it's like this: If George Zimmerman gets acquitted, I'm writing our DA. And I'm going to say, "Is it just me or have the people in Florida lost their sense of right and wrong?" I will ask him to make a public statement to the effect that vigilantism is something we are fortunate enough not to have to deal with. We rely on law enforcement. We let cops be co |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 13 Jul 13 - 09:34 PM Couple eight years incarcerated and Zimmerman will be introduced to enough people who think he's a creep that he'll pay for what he has done... I don't believe his story... It has more holes than Swiss cheese... And let's get real here... Did you see his attorney bring in a chunk of concrete??? That was retarded... "Hey, honey, I'm going to walk down the Qick-Mart for some candy... Have you seen that concrete block... I'd like to carry it down there and back with me'... Duhhhhhh.... I donno... I've lived in the South most of my life (20 years in Wes Ginny but it's just like the South)... I've seen so much injustice against black people that my cup run'eth over... Seems that the two Zimmerman defenders here are both Yankees??? Strange... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 13 Jul 13 - 09:53 PM ps. And not anybody who has a hankering for it. And then I will write Governor Cuomo and tell him why his gun legislation failed so miserably. I will explain how he jumped the gun and went off half-cocked. He failed to learn anything about guns. One of the first things I asked my NRA friend was "Don't you have to pull a safety off or something?" Looking for premeditation. He said no. Zimmerman didn't have that kind of gun. I wish that lawyer on CNN had not spent so much time in the library when he brought up that non-existent argument with a glee reminiscent of Columbus discovering America. Know thy guns and fully interpret the practical implications for law enforcement. What do you want? Do you want them doing their thorough background checks or do you want them counting bullets in a clip? Not that they are going to worry about that but- constantly new rules being passed down every time some politician wants to look good, from people who never did the job one day in their life. I imagine it wears on ya. Know thy guns. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 13 Jul 13 - 09:58 PM I love you Bobert. You're my Israeli ally. We will argue night and day but ours will be a civilized world. Cheers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 13 Jul 13 - 10:04 PM I ain't Jewish... And I ain't no Israeli apologist... But... ...many of my friends are Jewish.... LOL... (Actually, that statement is true) Never mind... I'm gonna shut this off and play some music... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jeri Date: 13 Jul 13 - 10:12 PM This thread's gonna get interesting when the verdict gets to everybody here. Or not. Judging by what usually happens, there will be slamming to the left, slamming to the right, and the whole reasonable middle will be somewhere else. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 13 Jul 13 - 10:17 PM Oh my. I didn't think the jury would find him guilty of murder but to find him Not Guilty of anything does surprise me. Oh, my. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 13 Jul 13 - 10:38 PM Just saw a special report on the news. Zimmerman walks! (I think I'm going to throw up. . . .) Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 13 Jul 13 - 10:38 PM Welcome to the real South, ya'll... Come back, ya' hear??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Jul 13 - 10:54 PM Manslaughter, in Florida Check it out! Gfs |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 14 Jul 13 - 12:10 AM I am stunned. There is now a move afoot to bring civil charges against him, as was successfully done in the OJ case. The indisputable fact is that this man killed an unarmed person. If he had not been carrying a loaded weapon this would not have happened. If he had not been armed and the whole incident had taken place as described, #1: he would probably not have followed him in the first place and just reported in as he was supposed to do. #2: if there had been a confrontation he would probably have more conciliatory and/or have fled. Frankly, I believe he unholstered his gun before the confrontation- as has been made clear by a number of persons, it is virtually impossible that he got to his gun while lying on the ground. Ain't the "equalizer" wonderful? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 14 Jul 13 - 12:40 AM Really thought he'd get convicted of manslaughter despite the flawed manner in which the prosecution conducted the case. What a shame. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 14 Jul 13 - 01:08 AM Somehow I don't think we've heard the end of this. In fact, I'm sure we haven't. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 14 Jul 13 - 01:48 AM From THE NATION Magazine White Supremacy Acquits George ZimmermanDon Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 14 Jul 13 - 03:44 AM Don, I agree with you. Well written. I wish I could agree that people will take to the streets. Uh-uh, this is gonna be a cold war. This verdict is not good. It insults America. Lincoln should have let them go. They will never be part of America. I'm going to start excluding them, starting now. Florida who? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 14 Jul 13 - 08:11 AM From The Atlantic: "What the verdict tells us is, to the astonishment of tens of millions of us, you can go looking for trouble in Florida, with a gun and a great deal of racial bias, and you can find that trouble, and you can act upon that trouble in a way that leaves a young man dead, and none of it guarantees that you will be convicted of a crime." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 14 Jul 13 - 08:11 AM From Gawker: "If you're a black man and you don't remain vigilant of and obsequious to white people's panic in your presence then you must be prepared to be arrested, be beaten, be shot through the heart and lung and die on the way home to watch a basketball game with your family." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 14 Jul 13 - 08:32 AM To paraphrase Mr. Zimmerman, "These a-holes, They always get away." Well he got away, but he'll pay a price in a hundred different ways. The jury has spoken. Not Guilty. Now the case goes to the court of public opinion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 14 Jul 13 - 08:40 AM William Zantzinger killed poor Hattie Carroll..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 08:52 AM For those hoping to see Zimmerman taken to civil court by Martin's family, I wouldn't hold your breath on it either happening or them prevailing... Seems that Zimmerman's gun-whacked out supporters will funnel as much $$$ as necessary to Zimmerman's legal team, as we have just seen, to swamp the complainant's legal team... He with the most gold wins... Like I said last night... Southern style justice has been served up... I've seen it over an dover during my life... Some things just never change... I called this one long ago... Nothing to see here, people, so just move on... Another poor boy dead and gone B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:15 AM Greg F, had to look that one up. Sounds about right. |
|
Subject: BS: Not guilty? Not Guilfy??? From: GUEST,saulgoldie Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:18 AM Not guilty?? OK, so demonstrators don hoodies. They carry signs that read: "I pray for George Zimmerman. I am armed with words. I am standing my ground. " They walk one at a time in front of Zimmerman's house. One at a time. One demonstrator stands in front of the house. for a minute. The next demonstrator waits 50 yards away. After the minute, the demonstrator moves on, and the next demonstrator comes and stands for one minute, and so on. They are all on public ground. Perhaps the same thing is done in other locations significant to the trial. The defense attorney's office; news media outlets (especially CNN and Nancy Grace's office). And, of course, the Florida capitol. building. This could even be done in other venues, like relevant locations where we live. Saul |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Not guilty? Not Guilfy??? From: GUEST Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:45 AM American justice just became an oxymoron. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 14 Jul 13 - 10:15 AM http://m.wftv.com/news/news/local/statement-martin-family-attorney-benjamin-crum |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 14 Jul 13 - 10:52 AM Bury the rag deep in your face For now is the time for your tears. Makes me so goddamn proud to be a U.S. citizen I could just shit. So, Bobert- where do I send my contribution to the fund to prosecute this sumbitch in civil court? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jeri Date: 14 Jul 13 - 10:52 AM It really is a bitch when juries render verdicts based on the evidence and the law and not on popular opinions, which are based mostly on what they and their "team" believes. Of course, "righteous indignation" is the fad of the day. If I'm going to get pissed off about something, I look back at what would have kept this killing from happening, despite what else went down. I think it's the fact that Zimmerman, who seems a little iffy in the "rational judgement" department, had a gun. If he hadn't, he likely wouldn't have even pursued Martin. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 14 Jul 13 - 10:56 AM It really is a bitch when juries render verdicts based on the evidence I hope you don't mean to suggest that is what happened in this instance? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 14 Jul 13 - 11:08 AM ""Personally, I would have not liked a mug like that following me, either. I think BOTH of them had reason to 'suspect' each other...That being said, NEITHER of them had the right, or reasonable cause, to initiate anything!"" One of them said, I reached for my phone(dubious, when facing a possible aggressor). The other without doubt saw that move toward a pocket by a non uniformed man who might easily have been a mugger, and couldn't possibly predict what would come out of that pocket, but might very reasonably have surmised that it would be a gun. So he would seem to be covered by the "Stand your Ground" law, if he pre-empted an expected attack. The only possible reason why he was not accorded that right under Florida Law is the colour of his skin. That is not an emotional response, it is a fact. HOWEVER: We now know that blacks in Florida do not warrant the protection of the state's own laws, and should stay indoors after dark, because it's open season if they don't. The Judge and the Defence have confirmed vigilante law for blacks, with the collusion of the most inept prosecution team in recent history, and the murderer of an innocent teenager walks free, exactly as expected. I sincerely hope that nobody will carry out a death threat on Zimmerman, because I believe he should live out his life as the pariah he deserves to be, with the constant fear that somebody might! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 14 Jul 13 - 11:34 AM ""Personally, I would have not liked a mug like that following me, either. I think BOTH of them had reason to 'suspect' each other...That being said, NEITHER of them had the right, or reasonable cause, to initiate anything!"""" One of them said, I reached for my phone(dubious, when facing a possible aggressor). The other without doubt saw that move toward a pocket by a non uniformed man who might easily have been a mugger, and couldn't possibly predict what would come out of that pocket, but might very reasonably have surmised that it would be a gun. So he would seem to be covered by the "Stand your Ground" law, if he pre-empted an expected attack. The only possible reason why he was not accorded that right under Florida Law is the colour of his skin. That is not an emotional response, it is a fact. HOWEVER: We now know that blacks in Florida do not warrant the protection of the state's own laws, and should stay indoors after dark, because it's open season if they don't. The Judge and the Defence have confirmed vigilante law for blacks, with the collusion of the most inept prosecution team in recent history, and the murderer of an innocent teenager walks free, exactly as expected. I sincerely hope that nobody will carry out a death threat on Zimmerman, because I believe he should live out his life as the pariah he deserves to be, with the constant fear that somebody might! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 14 Jul 13 - 11:36 AM Would some kind elf remove the heavily underlined mess please. Some days I bloody hate HTML Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 11:43 AM Greg, There is such a fund... Google TrayvonMartin.com and see if that works... Yo, Jeri, I guess you were perfectly okay with the O.J. Simpson verdict, as well... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 14 Jul 13 - 11:59 AM Watched more of this circus than I should've.I'm not sure the prosecution made its case. Hoped against hope for a verdict of manslaughter. Justice was not served. Yet the Supreme Court (most of it) thinks racism is dead. They should check that out with Trayvon Martin's folks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 12:19 PM OK..OK OK..Calm down, and get your FACTS straight..Hear me out, I was correct before, now I'm going to clue you in, OBJECTIVELY, as I was doing before. First of all, as to race, which is everyone's REAL concern, there were six women on the jury, and if you scroll back, you'll see my post on that, and to the prosecution's closing statement to them. I said that it would be a debate amongst them, as to which way it would go, EMOTIONS vs EVIDENCE. All it took was ONE juror to not go along with either way, and it would have been a 'hung jury'. In case some of you didn't know, one of the women is black. Therefore, I believe that they went through some detailed analysis sorting out the EMOTIONS vs EVIDENCE. (either that or they REALLY resented the prosecution for exploiting their maternal instincts, which I don't know to be a fact, but We'll be listening to the interviews with the jurors, for any trace of it. I don't think they would come right out and say it though. Second: Had this not been politically pressured, and influenced by the President's remarks, Jackson, and Sharpton, at the onset, to stir it up, the investigation could have gone on PROCEDURALLY ...but it was rushed through, pandering to the EMOTIONAL elements, and the pressure from the 'activists', trying to make a name for themselves. In doing so, they replaced the D.A. with Corey, who erroneously proceeded to by-pass letting it go to the Grand Jury, who would have been able to accurately find the appropriate charge to charge Zimmerman with. She royally fucked up!..but the pressure was on, and she was going to champion it. She went for the unprovable 2nd degree murder charge. She is an asshole! Third: As to, the civil charges. I don't know if you know this or not, but the 'stand your ground' law, completely nullifies that. whether you agree with the law, or not, because of it, a civil wrongful death suit would have no legs...at all, and might not even be able to be filed, despite the 'news' media's pundits, expounding otherwise...and the self defense argument might really fuck up any federal civil rights charges, as well...so don't hold your breath. However, if they proceed to file RECKLESSLY, as they did originally, this is going to be just another fiasco...but you never know with the dickhead running the VERY corrupt DOJ!! As it is now, I AM relieved (so far) to see the re-action by the public has been SO FAR peaceful. If the wannabe activists, wallowing in the 'racial civil rights struggle nostalgia'(Jackson, Sharpton and the likes) start trying to whip it up, then THEY should be charged with conspiracy to incite civil unrest! Sharpton made some remarks, which I posted in a link, which I agreed with, urging people to be calm. Truth to tell, Sharpton had an idea how this was going to turn out, and he HAD to urge people to stay calm, after he helped whip up the 'so-called racial outrage', because if he didn't, he KNEW his days of being seen as some sort of 'spokesman for civil rights' were over..and he would be seen as irrelevant!..and FACT is, he's made a LOT of money promoting racial divisions and exploiting them! As far as the verdict, those women went with the known and accepted EVIDENCE pertaining to the LETTER OF THE LAW, over the emotional pandering that they had presenting to them. I don't think it was altogether an easy verdict for them, because MANY people think that Zimmerman should have drawn some legal responsibility for his part in the situation..but given the choices they had, thanks to a rush to judgement from the political pressure to exploit, and in doing so, bi-passing the Grand Jury, they reached the LEGALLY correct verdict, given the choices they had to work with. My last post, I posted the manslaughter statute of Florida. As you can see, the prosecution did not broach the subject, to produce the EVIDENCE, to prove that it was manslaughter, during the trial, and once again, you can't convict anyone without evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt. Don't get pissed at me...I'm just the messenger..and those are the FACTS, without a personal opinion, of which way you might think I was 'hoping' for. As per aforementioned, "I don't have a pig in the race!" You can celebrate, or grumble on your own...as long as it it peaceful and nobody else gets hurt or killed, through any related acts of stupidity, because of the verdict. Glad to have been of service, to define the LEGAL aspects... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 12:27 PM Oh, and one more very real aspect...Zimmerman now has grounds for a very real MASSIVE false arrest lawsuit! We'll see how it goes... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 12:56 PM ..and a book deal......... .....and a movie deal......... Personally, If he does that, he SHOULD share the proceeds with the Martin family. It may never replace the loss, but if he did, remember, he DID say he was sorry to them...we'll see! ..and one more thing...it was either 34 or 36 FBI agents interviewed Zimmerman prior to the trial, as to his racial prejudices....all of them said there was no evidence that he had any!!! There goes the federal civil rights charges! Some of you may disagree, for a myriad of reasons, in that case, you might want to check yourselves! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 14 Jul 13 - 01:17 PM Yo! GeistInsanity! Bugger off one time, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 01:54 PM Hey Yo-yo! one would think, that given Greg F's track record in Mudcat, one of the moderators would have politely put a bug in his ear..or rear..or.. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Poetry Bird Date: 14 Jul 13 - 03:06 PM One would think that anybody sporting a moniker with the word sanity, would understand that "Stand your Ground" should apply to the citizens of Florida. Not just the WHITE (or, as in this case, honorary white when stalking blacks) citizens! From my earlier post:- ""One of them said, I reached for my phone(dubious, when facing a possible aggressor). The other without doubt saw that move toward a pocket by a non uniformed man who might easily have been a mugger, and couldn't possibly predict what would come out of that pocket, but might very reasonably have surmised that it would be a gun."" Are you suggesting that he should have stood and waited to be shot? Isn't that the purpose of "Stand your Ground"? The prosecution rolled over and threw the game because they had absolutely no intention of securing a conviction. So in the end nobody presented Trayvon Martin's case. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 14 Jul 13 - 03:17 PM the moderators would have politely put a bug in his ear.. As opposed to the perennial bug up your ass, Insanity? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 14 Jul 13 - 03:26 PM To the well known US misdemeanour DWB is now added WWB. But it carries a death sentence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 04:34 PM GfinS, You can take it to the bank that neither Zimmerman or his attorney's have any interest in a lawsuit for false arrest... They both know the facts of the case and they understand that the DoJ still can bring the same charges under federal hate crime law... They also understand there is a good chance that Martin's family, after it has had a little time to digest this bungled verdict, may be bring a wrongful death suit against Martin... So, there won't be any such action coming from the Zimmerman case... Plus, it would be a civil suit and that would expose Zimmerman to the witness stand... He wouldn't have a choice but to testify or risk losing that suit with whatever cash amount would be attached to it... Them's is the facts here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 14 Jul 13 - 04:44 PM Richard, Walking While Black, in certain geographic areas, has ALWAYS merited a death sentance. This is nothing new, and is a long and hallowed tradition in the U.S. southland. Check out Phillip Dray's At The Hands Of Persons Unknown, New York, Random House, 2002. The "New South", my areshole. Welcome to 1868. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 05:10 PM Yes, and as I have pointed out here earlier, the KKK gunned down 5 peaceful demonstrators in 1979 in Greensboro, NC and got away with it... Eastern NC has been especially racist going back forever and the Klan is still very active... BTW, speaking of the Klan, I recall my freshman year in college in Richmond, Va... I had an old 50's English Ford that wasn't all that reliable and for every hour I spent driving it I spent another hour fixing it... Anyway, one night I got curious about what was outside of Richmond so the English Ford and I ventured out into the country... I was on this very deserted country road outside an area they just called Short Pump which wasn't even a crossroads but just a rural area... It was a pretty dark night and then I noticed that I was driving toward a lite up area... It was way down the road but the light was so bright that I thought maybe it would turn out to be rural high school football game all lit up... Well, much to my horror, as I got closer I discovered the light was coming from a big bonfire and as I got closer I reckon ya'll can guess what was going on... Yup, a Klan rally out in big field... Musta been a couple hundred Klansmen in the white robes... I could see them plain as day... No way I was going any further so I turned around and got the hell out of there... Now I don't know what they were up to but I knew that lynchings were still happening so I was glad they didn't run me down in one of their pick-up trucks and string me up for having longish hair and wearing sandals... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 05:26 PM Bobert: "You can take it to the bank that neither Zimmerman or his attorney's have any interest in a lawsuit for false arrest..." Though I posted that, I'm not saying they should.. that being said, I'm merely pointing out how absolutely terribly the case was handled, when the racial overdose or out of control emotions were whipped up, causing the prosecution to go around the 'normal' procedure...speaking of which, judging from some of the posts since the verdict, there still are people who just don't seem to get it! Zimmerman DIDN'T get what was coming to him, because of all the flapping about the racial issue. As I posted before: "..and one more thing...it was either 34 or 36 FBI agents interviewed Zimmerman prior to the trial, as to his racial prejudices....all of them said there was no evidence that he had any!!! There goes the federal civil rights charges! Some of you may disagree, for a myriad of reasons, in that case, you might want to check own selves!" Zimmerman SHOULD have been charged with something that would have stuck..but 2nd degree murder wasn't it..and because of it, it failed. No amount of screaming and tantrums are going to change that. Sharpton, to appear relevant, is going to lobby and press for federal charges, so he says. Everyone who is bitching vociferously, obviously DON'T understand the LAW!!. Also, the 'stand your ground' premise was NOT used in this case, but may be used 'successfully in any civil lawsuits. Now if you want to bitch at me, you're wasting your time..I DIDN'T WRITE the law, nor am I particularly in agreement with it. I just posted the posts I did, because I understand the law, as it applied down there. What 'seems fair', or 'unfair', I have not opined, one way or the other(remember the pig race)..all I was doing was trying to do was clarify the hurdles, and let people see clearly what was LEGALLY going on. No need whatsoever to spit nails at me, or in other words, "Don't shoot the messenger!" When you apply your(generically speaking) angst about the racial issue, or the age issue, I applied the FACTS of the law, and posted them. You may disagree, about the law, or the way it was applied, but at least I told you ACCURATELY what they were, are, and how they either applied of didn't apply. Fair enough? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 05:47 PM Bobert: "Yes, and as I have pointed out here earlier, the KKK gunned down 5 peaceful demonstrators in 1979 in Greensboro, NC and got away with it..." THAT case is completely irrelevant, to the Zimmerman case. If you want to address past issues, all the way back to pre- Civil War days, you can waste your time doing it. If you insist on bringing up other cases, try addressing the issues I brought up, about Holder, Clinton and the others...Meanwhile, this case, as others are NOT a 'tit for tat' game. Either the charges stand up, as charged, or they don't..PERIOD! They didn't..and the prosecution, couple with the racial/political pressure is why! That is the REAL FACTS...ask ANY attorney!!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 14 Jul 13 - 07:00 PM WASHINGTON — The Justice Department says it is looking into the shooting death of Trayvon Martin to determine whether federal prosecutors should file criminal civil rights charges now that George Zimmerman has been acquitted in the state case. The department opened an investigation into Martin's death last year but stepped aside to allow the state prosecution to proceed. In a statement Sunday, the Justice Department said the criminal section of the civil rights division, the FBI and the U.S. Attorney's office for the Middle District of Florida are continuing to evaluate the evidence generated during the federal probe, in addition to the evidence and testimony from the state trial. The statement said that, in the government's words, "experienced federal prosecutors will determine whether the evidence reveals a prosecutable violation." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 14 Jul 13 - 07:12 PM "experienced federal prosecutors will determine whether the evidence reveals a prosecutable violation." Don't hold your breath in today's AmeriKKKa |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 07:37 PM GfinS, Have you ever lived in the South??? If so, when and where... Like Northern Virginia ain't "the South"... Ya' see, the KKK has everything to do with this case in that racism has been passed down from one generation to another and today's racist generation may not understand the lineage... A concise answer will suffice here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 14 Jul 13 - 08:36 PM Here, Bobert, and others, this as posted since my last post!!!!!!!!!! Prosecutors 'Should Be Disbarred' Friday, 12 Jul 2013 06:22 PM By Bill Hoffmann Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz says the prosecutors in the George Zimmerman murder trial should be charged with "prosecutorial misconduct" for suggesting the defendant planned the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin. "That is something no prosecutor should be allowed to get away with … to make up a story from whole cloth," Dershowitz told "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV. "These prosecutors should be disbarred. They have acted absolutely irresponsibly in an utterly un-American fashion." Editor's Note: Weird Trick Adds $1,000 to Your Social Security Checks Zimmerman, a 29-year-old neighborhood watch volunteer, is charged with gunning down Martin, 17, as the two fought following a confrontation in the gated Sanford, Fla., community where Zimmerman lives — an act the defendant said was in self-defense. In the prosecution's final argument on Friday, lawyer John Guy said Zimmerman deliberately followed Martin and "shot him because he wanted to." Dershowitz called Guy's statement "such speculation. How does he get into the mind of Zimmerman? He hasn't cross-examined him, he hasn't met him. "To ask the jury to believe that is to ask the jury to convict based on complete and utter speculation and that's not the way the law operates." A day earlier, prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda said Zimmerman — whom he labeled a "wannabe cop" — "followed" and "tracked" Martin after profiling him as a criminal. Dershowitz said not only should Zimmerman have not been charged with second-degree murder, but prosecutors should not have pushed to have manslaughter and child abuse added to the list of possible jury verdicts. "[It's] utterly irresponsible. … The idea that the prosecution can try the case on a murder theory and then, at the last minute, substitute manslaughter, even though it seems to be permitted generally under Florida law — it's a big mistake to allow it in a case like this," he said. "And then the very idea of even suggesting child abuse in a case like this is so irresponsible." Dershowitz praised the closing argument of defense lawyer Mark O'Mara. "He did the right thing by being methodical and factual because this is a case where the prosecution's case is all emotion and the defense case is all factual," the famed civil-rights lawyer said. "Emotionally, obviously everybody can identify with a young, unarmed 17-year-old who ends up dead, and emotionally, as President [Barack] Obama said, he's all of our children." Dershowitz — whose clients have included Claus von Bulow, Mike Tyson, Patricia Hearst, and former televangelist Jim Bakker — said the case has "reasonable doubt" written all over it. Editor's Note: Weird Trick Adds $1,000 to Your Social Security Checks "Nobody knows who started the initial physical encounter, who threw the first blow — and if you don't know that you have to have a reasonable doubt," he said. "Nobody knows for sure who screamed, 'Help me, help me.' You have to have a reasonable doubt about that. Nobody knows for sure who was on top and who was on bottom, though the overwhelming forensic evidence suggests that Zimmerman was on the bottom having his head banged by a younger, stronger man. You have to have reasonable doubt there." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 08:46 PM Delete the other post this is the same but I forgot to sign in, and edit two ads. Thank you! Here, Bobert, and others, this as posted since my last post!!!!!!!!!! Prosecutors 'Should Be Disbarred' Friday, 12 Jul 2013 06:22 PM By Bill Hoffmann Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz says the prosecutors in the George Zimmerman murder trial should be charged with "prosecutorial misconduct" for suggesting the defendant planned the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin. "That is something no prosecutor should be allowed to get away with … to make up a story from whole cloth," Dershowitz told "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV. "These prosecutors should be disbarred. They have acted absolutely irresponsibly in an utterly un-American fashion." Zimmerman, a 29-year-old neighborhood watch volunteer, is charged with gunning down Martin, 17, as the two fought following a confrontation in the gated Sanford, Fla., community where Zimmerman lives — an act the defendant said was in self-defense. In the prosecution's final argument on Friday, lawyer John Guy said Zimmerman deliberately followed Martin and "shot him because he wanted to." Dershowitz called Guy's statement "such speculation. How does he get into the mind of Zimmerman? He hasn't cross-examined him, he hasn't met him. "To ask the jury to believe that is to ask the jury to convict based on complete and utter speculation and that's not the way the law operates." A day earlier, prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda said Zimmerman — whom he labeled a "wannabe cop" — "followed" and "tracked" Martin after profiling him as a criminal. Dershowitz said not only should Zimmerman have not been charged with second-degree murder, but prosecutors should not have pushed to have manslaughter and child abuse added to the list of possible jury verdicts. "[It's] utterly irresponsible. … The idea that the prosecution can try the case on a murder theory and then, at the last minute, substitute manslaughter, even though it seems to be permitted generally under Florida law — it's a big mistake to allow it in a case like this," he said. "And then the very idea of even suggesting child abuse in a case like this is so irresponsible." Dershowitz praised the closing argument of defense lawyer Mark O'Mara. "He did the right thing by being methodical and factual because this is a case where the prosecution's case is all emotion and the defense case is all factual," the famed civil-rights lawyer said. "Emotionally, obviously everybody can identify with a young, unarmed 17-year-old who ends up dead, and emotionally, as President [Barack] Obama said, he's all of our children." Dershowitz — whose clients have included Claus von Bulow, Mike Tyson, Patricia Hearst, and former televangelist Jim Bakker — said the case has "reasonable doubt" written all over it. "Nobody knows who started the initial physical encounter, who threw the first blow — and if you don't know that you have to have a reasonable doubt," he said. "Nobody knows for sure who screamed, 'Help me, help me.' You have to have a reasonable doubt about that. Nobody knows for sure who was on top and who was on bottom, though the overwhelming forensic evidence suggests that Zimmerman was on the bottom having his head banged by a younger, stronger man. You have to have reasonable doubt there." Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz says almost exactly what I was telling you!!! GfS S |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 08:51 PM I generally agree with Alan but he's 100% wrong here... Think his advanced age is interfering with his usual clear thinking... Sorry, Alan... You are wrong as wrong can be... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 08:58 PM Poetry Bird???? If you're really into poetry, stick to that. You certainly know nothing about law!! ..and looking at your post, you look like an emotional train wreck, as well! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:00 PM He might not, but I do... This verdict was 100% wrong... Southern style justice for the __________________ (fill in your number) time... Seen it all my life... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:00 PM Bobert, get your shit together, man....and answer me this, as long as you're into speculating... Why did the black woman also vote for a not guilty verdict??? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:03 PM ... defendant planned the fatal shooting... Well he followed him after the police told him not to. Sounds a bit like planning to me. If he had backed off as he was told then Trayvon would still be alive. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:10 PM GfinS, When you answer me about how many years you lived in the South then we can talk about Southern black women, a subject I know one heck of a lot about... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:27 PM here's your answer: Since when did the South secede, and NOT be a part of the U.S.?? Therefore, the South is under the same judicial system, as the rest of the country! Zimmerman was acquitted..GET OVER IT!..and by the way, I quoted Sharpton about being calm, I gave you Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, a civil rights attorney, and Professor, on the emotional vs factual aspects of the case..OK..how about this one? Read Obama's full statement: "The death of Trayvon Martin was a tragedy. Not just for his family, or for any one community, but for America. I know this case has elicited strong passions. And in the wake of the verdict, I know those passions may be running even higher. But we are a nation of laws, and a jury has spoken. I now ask every American to respect the call for calm reflection from two parents who lost their young son. And as we do, we should ask ourselves if we're doing all we can to widen the circle of compassion and understanding in our own communities. We should ask ourselves if we're doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence that claims too many lives across this country on a daily basis. We should ask ourselves, as individuals and as a society, how we can prevent future tragedies like this. As citizens, that's a job for all of us. That's the way to honor Trayvon Martin." That was YOUR guy, and our president..... ..and me, your bud! So, like I said, "Get your shit together, man!" GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:28 PM In other words??? BS and no answer... Normal for you, GfinS... And... ...800... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:29 PM 800! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:36 PM BTW, are you going to answer the question. GfinS??? You ask me lots of questions and I try to answer them... I've asked you hundreds of questions over the years and you have never answered one single one... That is called truth avoidance... Until you start answering some of my questions don't ask me any more... All you are doing is playing games and avoiding reality with you games... Square business... Now, you ready to discuss Southern black women??? If not, then don't ask me to answer your "ahh-hah-excuse-me-I'm-ignorant-but-I'm-tryin'-to-hide-it" dumbass questions... No more fucking games... Just answer the question... Tell us about your past living here in the South... That is a fair question since you seem to want to speak as someone who understands the South... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:37 PM 800??? Wrong twice, GfinS... You are on a roll... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:52 PM Bobert: "800???" Yeah, we cross posted..pretty close to the same time! Now, to my question...I already know the answer, as to why the black woman voted to acquit..I just wanted you to think about it, and come to your senses. Look, I avoided even coming on this thread, till about the very end...and when I got here, I gave you VERY straight answers and insight to the trial..ALL of which, turned out accurate. I didn't say that either you or I were going to like it or agree..but I hung and walked you through it...even the aftermath..right? What else can I do??..I've been a good enough friend to be accurate for you. I've pleaded with you to 'Get off the tracks', in other words do NOTHING to inspire or instill hated, bigotry, and racism into anyone else. I've tried to dissuade you from taking parts in any protests or demonstrations, where someone might get hurt..including YOU! What else can I do, with these little letters on the screen?? so..I'll pop in and take a look here and there, but for the most part, I'm done! BTW, my Dad was born in Missouri. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:54 PM So, GfinS... Tell us why a Southern black woman would vote to acquit... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 14 Jul 13 - 09:56 PM Fascinating reading: Sanford, Florida Has a History of Brutal Racist Oppression: KKK Once Drove Hall-Of-Famer Jackie Robinson Out of TownCLICKY Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 10:04 PM Thank you, Don... Apparently GfinS thinks that the world is filled with all these wonderful people who wouldn't dare be racists... Maybe GfinS will read what you have posted and realize where I am going with my questioning... Doesn't much matter... GfinS wants to hide a terrible jury decision behind the vote on one black woman... I understand this as do most Southerners... Everything plays into these stories... So, GfinS... Please enlighten us as to you knowledge of the South... Your experiences here...Your knowledge of bacl women in the South... These are reasonable questions since you are justifying your opinion of the verdict by singling out a blackwoman... Now, GfinS... Please answer the question... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: CET Date: 14 Jul 13 - 10:23 PM "Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert - PM Date: 14 Jul 13 - 11:43 AM Greg, There is such a fund... Google TrayvonMartin.com and see if that works... Yo, Jeri, I guess you were perfectly okay with the O.J. Simpson verdict, as well..." B~ That's unworthy of you Bobert. This case is nothing like O.J.'s. Jeri makes a good point. Zimmerman was racially biased. That seems clear enough. A bad law allowed him to be carrying a gun. No doubt on that score. He had no business following Martin. However, none of that leads inevitably to the conclusion that he murdered Trayvon Martin. There was some evidence on which the jury could conclude that Zimmerman acted in self defence and the prosecution seems to have failed to disprove self defence beyond a reasonable doubt. The law requires that guilt be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Sometimes that means that people who are possibly or even likely guilty are acquitted. Some of those people have repugnant habits and ideas. I don't mean that jury verdicts are never perverse. Sometimes they are and O.J. Is a case in point. However, juries are obliged to, and usually do, decide on the basis of the evidence presented to them and not on emotion and popular pressure. I don't we can say that the Zimmerman jury failed to do that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 10:44 PM Sorry, GUEST, but I didn't initiate the comment that the jury had spoken so get over it... That was Jeri's take on the verdict... Verdicts are wrong... O.J., the most famous of today's murderers who got away with it, is the obvious case... The number of folks exonerated from death row is "Argument B" seein' as a lot of folks don't keep up with that little factoide... As for this jury and the thousands of juries though out the South in the past??? Sad grade... So, GUEST, I disagree with you that my post was "unworthy"... I came up in the civil rights movement... My mom and I were both arrested for civil-disobedience... I worked in the jail house as a teacher... I was a social worker... All in the South... I went years were I barely saw white people... If anyone here is ***worthy*** of talking about race and having seen up-close Southern justice, it is me... This ain't no brag... This is fact... If you doubt my resume then PM and I'll give you references... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Jul 13 - 10:46 PM Sorry, that last post was to CET... My bad... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Songwronger Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:35 AM The current stack of headline links on the Drudge Report. The Obama/Ayers team is pushing hard to get their race riots: VERDICT DIVIDES... Sanford residents wary, on edge... Demonstrators in cities across country... CA protesters break windows, start fires... Cause Gridlock In Midtown Manhattan... Teen threatens 'mass homicide' on TWITTER... NY Giants Star: 'Zimmerman Doesn't Last Year Before Hood Catches Up to Him'... Beyonce holds moment of silence at concert... Celebs React... Sharpton: 'Slap in Face'... OBAMA: HONOR TRAYVON WITH GUN-CONTROL... Justice Dept: Under Review... *PAPER: Federal case would face obstacles... **Lead Cop Told FBI Zimmerman Not A Racist... Sen. Reid: 'This isn't over'... Pastor delivers sermon in hoodie... Will jury remain anonymous? TIMELINE: Media's prosecution of Zimmerman... Legal Team Sets Sights On NBC... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: michaelr Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:38 AM CET: "none of that leads inevitably to the conclusion that he murdered Trayvon Martin." Really? Which one had the gun? Which one is dead? Someone please retitle this thread "Justice withheld". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:35 AM ""Everyone who is bitching vociferously, obviously DON'T understand the LAW!!. Also, the 'stand your ground' premise was NOT used in this case, but may be used 'successfully in any civil lawsuits."" No Goofus, it is you who don't understand, because you are too busy spouting your own opinions to listen to any incoming comment. The authorities didn't screw up this case through incompetence, in fact they did the most deliberate and competent job of wrecking a case they didn't want to win that I have ever seen. They didn't want to arrest him....FACT! They didn't want to charge him....FACT! They didn't want to try him.......FACT! The made DAMN SURE they didn't convict him. This is not about the LAW, as you seem to think, it's about WHITE LAW! Today Zimmerman is a white hero, but when the case is over and forgotten, he'll be just another goddam wetback to them. ___________________________________________________________________ BTW, Here's something to try for yourself. Lie down on the floor and get a friend to kneel astride your chest. With his thigh between your arm and your torso and his lower leg along your side to well below your waist, try to reach the point on the rear half of your side, which Zimmerman identified as the position of his gun. I tried this, and I coudn't reach it at all, but even had I got my fingertips there, I could not have drawn a gun, because it would be trapped in the crook of his knee, or between his leg and my body. The same experiment with my arms between his leg and my body, trapped at my side, was equally impossible. The only possible conclusion is that liar George drew the weapon before he was knocked to the ground by a punch, and the struggle that ensued was Trayvon's desperate attemts to stay alive. Try it out for yourself if you doubt my word. The greenest prosecution lawyer should have thought of having that demonstrated. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:53 AM Above it is argued that Dershowitz asserts there was reasonable doubt. If you want to know what he REALLY thinks about reasonable doubt look at the list of people he has defended. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 15 Jul 13 - 05:03 AM Don, how did he manage it in the reconstruction? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 15 Jul 13 - 06:07 AM Richard, how would a list of his clients tell us anything about his view of "reasonable doubt" which is a well understood concept anyway? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: CET Date: 15 Jul 13 - 06:47 AM Bobert: I actually knew about your civil rights work. I've also been reading your stuff on Mudcat for years and I have always considered you to be one of the voices of sanity. That's why I wrote "unworthy". It seemed to me that you were taking a dig at Jeri that wasn't up to your usual standard. I meant no disrespect to you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 06:56 AM ""Don, how did he manage it in the reconstruction?"" Don't be naive Keith, it was a reconstruction and the bloke on top wasn't trying hard to stop him. If Trayvon Martin (17 to Zimmerman's 29) were the "Younger, stronger man", as portrayed by the defence, Zimmerman would never have reached that gun. The truth is that Zimmerman either drew the gun before he was punched, or threw the three and a half stone lighter kid off, and then shot him dead. Self defence?....NO WAY! Still don't believe it Keith? Don't make an ass of yourself. Try it out with someone who is really trying to hold you down. That's what I did! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 08:26 AM Since when did the South secede, and NOT be a part of the U.S.?? 1861. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 08:58 AM CET, I was taking a dig at Jeri... This idea that since the jury decided that Zimmerman had a right to shoot and kill Martin that everyone should just accept that and move on doesn't sit well with me... I felt the same way when the jury acquitted O. J. Simpson and am happy knowing that O.J. is now in jail where he belongs... What I am mostly concerned about is this ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Committee) that is pushing all these extreme right wing laws where-ever they see a chance of getting these laws on the books... The way the law in Florida reads anyone can murder anyone if they say they felt threatened... It doesn't matter who instigates the conflict... That is insanity and these laws come directly from the NRA to ALEC to a statehouse in your neighborhood... So, yeah, CET... Anyone who agrees that it's okay to gun down people because a jury will let them off is going to get a "dig", at the very least, by me... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: number 6 Date: 15 Jul 13 - 09:29 AM From a poet friend of mine ... he's a Vietnam Vet, and a U.S. expat now living here in N.B. There Seems To Be Something Wrong There seems to be something wrong with America as those of us on the outside look in the question is why won't America fix it.. there seems to be something wrong with America that those of us on the outside see which many Americans will staunchly disagree .. on the outside we thought America was the land of freedom and equality perhaps it was and still could but right now today it's an elusive dream.. it's the wild old west it's every man or woman for themselves a nation of shoot em up or pass the buck and if you want to see how corruption is done just turn your television to an American new organization in full view you'll see American's disintegration not one word will be spoken on how to save their nation there's seems to be something wrong with America that those of us on the outside see which many Americans will tragically and VIOLENTLY disagree.. Clyde A. Wray July 15, 2013 All Rights Reserved |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 15 Jul 13 - 09:42 AM To be fair Bobster, I don't see many persons of colour being likely to be acquitted by reason of those laws. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 15 Jul 13 - 09:53 AM Some points of English Law for comparison. 4. In court, the claim of self defence is proved if the defendant,genuinely believed they were being attacked, or where in imminent danger of attack and the response was proportionate to the perceived threat. 5. If you are attacked, the courts will not expect you to calculate an exact amount of reasonable force. 6. If you perceive you are threatened, you are entitled to act in self defence and not be penalised by the courts – "…if the defendant makes a genuine mistake about the exsistence of a threat, they are entitled to rely on self defence as a defence even if no threat actually existed…..". 7. In law you do not have to wait for the first blow – "…. a defendant need not wait until they are struck before using force in their defence…." The court of appeal has ruled that, – "……a defendant is entitled to use self defence by striking their assailant before they are struck; and in exceptional circumstances, arm themselves against an expected imminent attack. 8. Although you are expected to show reasonable restraint, as a matter of law you are not obliged to retreat or show unwillingness to fight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:02 AM Source? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:06 AM You are 100% correct, Richard... The application of these laws is up to the local authorities... In Florida, the local authorities didn't even want to bring charges against Zimmerman... You missed an important fact, Keith, in that it was Zimmerman who initiated the conflict by stalking Martin... By your "points of English Law" Martin had every right to defend himself... Even if it meant pounding Zimmerman's head into the concrete... Nice piece, Number 6... Yes, there is something very wrong with America and it all could be fixed by making our elections fair... Right now we have 90% of elected officials who come from "safe districts" meaning there is no value in compromise... That creates grid-lock where there really is no "governance"... Like I have suggested over and over... We would do much better if we appointed our representative by a blind lottery - much like jury duty... That way we would get a cross-section of America without BIG $$$ buying and owning representatives... BTW, two very rich guys -the Koch brothers - have bought representatives in just about every state in the United States... They own - yes, own, - half of out North Carolina delegation in both the US House of Representative and our statehouse in Raleigh... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:21 AM No Bobert. Wiki. " Furthermore, a defendant does not lose the right to claim self-defence merely because they instigated the confrontation that created the alleged need for self-defence. A person who kills in the course of a quarrel or even crime they started might still act in self-defence if the 'victim' retaliates or counterattacks." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:31 AM Thread drift. When we lived in New Hampshire we worked for the Democratic party despite the fact that our town was very conservative. Now that we've moved to the most conservative congressional district east of the Mississippi (in the North Georgia Mountains), it hardly seems worth the effort. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:31 AM AH! Blog-O-Paedia! Must be true, Keith. Absolutely. Have you got any real sources you can quote? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:31 AM KeithA, does "self defense" include killing? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:32 AM ""6. If you perceive you are threatened, you are entitled to act in self defence and not be penalised by the courts – "…if the defendant makes a genuine mistake about the exsistence of a threat, they are entitled to rely on self defence as a defence even if no threat actually existed…..". 7. In law you do not have to wait for the first blow – "…. a defendant need not wait until they are struck before using force in their defence…." The court of appeal has ruled that, – "……a defendant is entitled to use self defence by striking their assailant before they are struck; and in exceptional circumstances, arm themselves against an expected imminent attack. 8. Although you are expected to show reasonable restraint, as a matter of law you are not obliged to retreat or show unwillingness to fight."" Thank you Keith for proving MY point. Since Zimmerman followed Martin, and instigated the confontation (indisputable since, had he stayed in his car as advised, there would have been no confrontation), Martin was entitled to claim self defence, and since Martin used bare hands against the threat of a gunshot, a claim of unreasonable force could not possibly prevail. Yet Martin was accorded no such entitlement to a claim of self defence, and under US law as applied to this case, using a gun is a reasonable response to a punch in the face and being physically restrained by an unarmed teenager. I don't believe that the concept of "reasonable force" is known to the US legal system in general, and more specifically to the Southern States. Did you try what I suggested yet? I thought not. You never would agree to anything which would make you have to withdraw an argument. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jim Carroll Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:43 AM It has just been announced on the news that there are moves afoot to have the case re-tried by the Federal Court - rightly so. It has been long established without doubt that people of the 'wrong colour' are unlikely to receive a fair hearing in certain parts of the US - as shown by the Rodney King beating and the fact that the 'Death Rows' of America are predominantly populated by 'blacks' - or maybe it's just true that Afro-Americans are just 'culturally implanted' killers and natural criminals!! Interesting but far from surprising to see the usual suspect defending a verdict which is obviously flawed. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:43 AM ""No Bobert. Wiki. " Furthermore, a defendant does not lose the right to claim self-defence merely because they instigated the confrontation that created the alleged need for self-defence. A person who kills in the course of a quarrel or even crime they started might still act in self-defence if the 'victim' retaliates or counterattacks."" Keith, a simple yes or no question. If a man in street clothes followed you in a car, then on foot, and then finally confonted you face to face, late at night in a deserted street, would you deny that you would fear, or have reason to fear that he meant you harm? That is what happened to Trayvon Martin. He had genuine reason to fear harm or risk to life and limb. That was not taken into account, because he was: 1. Black! 2. Walking through a gated community! 3. Wearing dark clothes and a hoodie! Heaven help the next black kid who fancies a bag of sweets and a drink after dark. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM Ebbie, yes. Don.I thought not. You never would agree to anything which would make you have to withdraw an argument. Neither of us has rolled on the floor with someone over this Don, and I have not put forward any argument to withdraw. Just stated facts and asked questions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:48 AM Sorry. Ebbie, yes. Don.I thought not. You never would agree to anything which would make you have to withdraw an argument. Neither of us has rolled on the floor with someone over this Don, and I have not put forward any argument to withdraw. Just stated facts and asked questions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:49 AM Bugger! I forgot reason 4: 4. Because he can't argue the point, since he is most conveniently DEAD! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:53 AM Once again the Hertford LIAR accuses someone without any evidence at all. One of us did lie (not roll) on the carpet and test this. One of us hasn't the guts to risk being not just wrong, but stupidly wrong. Guess which is which folks. There's no prize because it's too easy. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 11:08 AM After interviewing nearly three dozen people in the George Zimmerman murder case, the FBI found no evidence that racial bias was a motivating factor in the shooting of Trayvon Martin, records released Thursday show. Even the lead detective in the case, Sanford Det. Chris Serino, told agents that he thought Zimmerman profiled Trayvon because of his attire and the circumstances — but not his race. Serino saw Zimmerman as "having little hero complex, but not as a racist." The Duval County State Attorney released another collection of evidence in the Zimmerman murder case Thursday, including reports from FBI agents who investigated whether any racial bias was involved in Trayvon's Feb. 26 killing. The evidence includes bank surveillance videos from the day of the killing, crime scene photos and memos from prosecutors. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/07/12/155918/more-evidence-released-in-trayvon.html#.UeQPehZ1CS1 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 15 Jul 13 - 11:10 AM Shooting someone is not a reasonably proportionate response - not least because the gun Z was carrying could not have been lawfully so carried in the UK. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 11:13 AM MIAMI — After five weeks of trial and 56 witnesses, few legal observers believed prosecutors came close to proving Sanford, Fla., neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman committed second-degree murder when he shot and killed Trayvon Martin in February 2012. So for many legal analysts, it was no surprise that jurors rejected even a lesser "compromise" verdict of manslaughter, acquitting Zimmerman outright of all criminal charges and deciding he acted in a reasonable way to protect his own life. The acquittal was a stinging blow for prosecutors and their decision to file the second-degree murder charge against Zimmerman, who was not initially arrested by Sanford police after claiming self-defense. And it was a resounding embrace of the defense's strategy during closing arguments not just to establish that prosecutors hadn't proven Zimmerman guilty, but also to show he was "absolutely" innocent. "The jury clearly believed that you have a right to defend yourself," said Jude M. Faccidomo, the former president of Miami's Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. "Especially when cases are so gray, like this one was, self-defense really resonates because people can associate with being afraid." And while some also have questioned the state attorney's office acceptance of a mostly white jury, a more diverse panel would have returned the same verdict, lawyers who have watched the case believe. "After seeing the quality of the evidence presented by the state, the diversity of the jury really didn't matter in the end," said Larry Handfield, a prominent African American Miami criminal defense lawyer. "But it would have helped the community in giving more credibility to the decision to acquit Zimmerman." By now, the basic outline of the confrontation between the 29-year-old volunteer watch coordinator and the 17-year-old Miami Gardens, Fla., student have become familiar through wall-to-wall television coverage and thousands of news stories. Prosecutors said Zimmerman "profiled" Martin, who was returning from a nearby convenience store and was walking through the gated Retreat at Twin Lakes neighborhood where he was staying with his father. Zimmerman called a non-emergency police number to report Martin as "suspicious." A violent struggle followed on rain-slicked grass and a concrete walkway. During the confrontation, Zimmerman shot and killed Martin at point-blank range. A look at the evidence shows why the jury rejected the state's case. For prosecutors intent on proving the more serious charge, proving the "ill-will," "hatred" or "spite" needed to convict on second-degree murder hinged on painting Zimmerman as a frustrated, would-be cop fed up with intruders in his gated Sanford community. To do so, they focused on Zimmerman's past - over defense objections - introducing evidence of his interest in law enforcement, including a ride-along with Sanford police, a class on criminal justice, an unsuccessful application to a Virginia police department. Prosecutors also played five calls to police that Zimmerman made in the several months before the shooting, in an attempt to show a pattern of "profiling." They also introduced evidence about his membership at a mixed martial arts gym. Their most important evidence to prove "ill-will" was Zimmerman's call to a Sanford police non-emergency dispatcher when he first spotted Martin, saying "these assholes always get away" and, according to prosecutors, muttering "fucking punks" under his breath "If there was ever a window into that man's soul, it was that defendant's words on that phone call," prosecutor John Guy told the jury Friday in a poignant closing argument that appeared to have at least one juror emotionally strained. Guy's closing argument was typical of a state's case that drew heavily on emotion and emphasized the youth of the victim, as well as one of the most important witnesses: Martin's friend, Rachel Jeantel, 18 at the time of the shooting. She was speaking to him by phone moments before he died and recounted her recollection that Martin told her someone was following him. Jeantel told jurors that Martin told her of a "creepy-ass cracker" watching him as he walked home from the convenience store, and of hearing the man angrily demand to know what Martin was doing in the neighborhood. Jeantel said she then heard a bump that she assumed was Martin's cell phone headset hitting the ground, followed by Martin's voice: "Get off! Get off!" Her testimony was not polished or articulate, and she sparred for hours with defense attorneys - at one point crying "what!" when told she had to return for a second day of testimony. But her story remained unchanged. "I thought she was a good witness. I thought the jury would be sympathetic to her because she was an (18)-year-old kid, she was inexperienced at testifying and that made her come across as credible," said Miami defense lawyer Andrew Rier. Zimmerman's prosecution was made tougher under Florida's 2005 Stand Your Ground law, which eliminated a citizen's "duty to retreat" before using lethal force in the face of a deadly threat - an instruction given to jurors on Friday. And the state's case also was filled with blunders, legal experts say. Many of the witnesses called by the state seemed to benefit the defense, including one neighbor, John Good, who claimed he saw Martin pin Zimmerman to the ground. Another witness, Sanford Police officer Tim Smith, told jurors that Zimmerman, just after the shooting, claimed he was yelling for help to no avail. Both pieces of testimony seemed to bolster the defense's version of the encounter. Prosecutors also called the lead Sanford police investigators, using them to introduce each of Zimmerman's videotaped statements and a walk-through of the crime scene Zimmerman did with police a day after Martin's death. During one of the statements, lead Detective Chris Serino seemed skeptical when Zimmerman insisted he never "followed" Martin. While there were some inconsistencies between his accounts of what happened, they seemed fairly small, court observers said. And defense attorneys got Serino to agree during testimony that it's normal for stories to vary slightly with each re-telling. Legal observers noted that playing the videos in court eliminated the need for Zimmerman himself to take the stand - a tactic that may have helped the defense by allowing Zimmerman's voice to be heard in court without risk of cross-examination. "I think it was a strategic error (for the state) to allow him to testify without getting cross-examined," Faccidomo said. "I don't think the inconsistencies carried as a great a weight with the jury as they thought it would." Serino, on defense questioning, also suggested he believed Zimmerman's account, a statement later stricken from the record by the judge - but nevertheless heard by jurors. "The state should have objected before he had a chance to answer," said attorney Handfield. "But it's too late. You can't unring the bell. You can't ask the jury to not consider something they already heard. They're human." Prosecutors also pinned their hopes on a chilling recording of a 911 call made by a neighbor near the fight scene. After a number of hearings away from the jury, Nelson ruled against prosecutors' request to allow audio experts to testify that Martin was the one crying out for help on the recording before the fatal gunshot is heard. So prosecutors turned to Sybrina Fulton, Martin's mother, and Jahvaris Fulton, the dead teen's older brother, to identify the voice on the recording as Martin. They served as powerful emotional witnesses. Sybrina Fulton, head held high, told jurors that she wished that her son hadn't died. "My youngest son is Trayvon Benjamin Martin," she articulated carefully when asked his name. "He's in heaven." And Jahvaris Fulton recounted for jurors the shock and grief of listening to the recording for the first time. But their testimony also seemed to spur the defense to call a wave of eight witnesses, from Zimmerman's own mother to his best friend, to make the opposite claim, that the voice crying out for help on the tape was Zimmerman's. The testimony also served a more important purpose: to humanize Zimmerman and show a circle of friends that included an African American neighbor. In the end, neither the state nor the defense dwelled at length on the recording in closing arguments. "A battle of family members, of whom you believe more, that's a big prosecution loser," said Jean-Michel D'Escoubet, a former Miami-Dade prosecutor. "The evidence was so conflicted that the jury can't make heads or tails of it. It just muddied up the water and created reasonable doubt." The defense case suffered some setbacks, too, especially when Nelson on Wednesday refused to allow into evidence text messages from Martin's phone which suggested that the teen was a brawler at home in Miami Gardens. Nor did the judge allow the jury to consider as evidence a high-tech computer animation showing a defense version of how the deadly fight between Zimmerman and Martin unfolded. But in all, lawyers say, the defense presented a mostly confident, methodical case that sought to pick apart the lack of evidence in the state's case. Lawyers Mark O'Mara and Don West even shunned the chance to tarnish Martin though Nelson had allowed the defense to introduce the slain teen's toxicology report showing he had smoked marijuana. "The state would have argued that marijuana doesn't make someone hostile, and the defense probably didn't want to look like they were disparaging Trayvon Martin," Priovolos said. Their approach was evident at closing arguments. While prosecutor Bernardo de la Rionda was mocking and at times shrill, O'Mara was calm and conversational, opening with a long, professorial discussion on the history of trial law, then dissecting the state's case. Zimmerman's neighborhood watch history? "Tell me one witness who said George Zimmerman patrolled that neighborhood . . . not one," he told jurors. The sound of the wind on Zimmerman's call to police, suggesting he was chasing Martin? The weather report shows "the wind was up," O'Mara said. The belief Zimmerman was the aggressor? "One piece of evidence that my client attacked Trayvon Martin?" O'Mara asked jurors. "Landed one blow even?" Miami defense attorney David O. Markus said that the closings arguments offered something of a role reversal for prosecutors and the defense. "The initial summation by the prosecution was what you see many times from defense lawyers - passionate and trying to poke holes or raise doubts in Zimmerman's version of events," he said. "On the other hand, the defense accepted the burden of proof and methodically and dispassionately went through the evidence and the elements, much like a prosecutor would normally proceed." The acquittal vindicated O'Mara's strategy. He not only maintained that the state hadn't proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt, but riskily admitted he wanted to take on the "burden" of proving his client's "absolute innocence." He even wished, half-playfully, that the verdict form has a check box for "completely innocent." Under the law, the defense has no burden to prove anything. Only prosecutors must prove a case, beyond a reasonable doubt. "I really like the strategy," Markus said. "Many times, cases come down to whether you can show the jury that you really believe in your client. What better way to do that than to tell the jury that you aren't relying on burdens of proof but instead that you believe he is innocent?" Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/07/13/196615/state-never-proved-its-case-legal.html#.UeQQohZ1CS0#storylink=cpy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 11:27 AM An interesting comment I came across... "I'll start out by saying that, in my opinion, George Zimmerman was wrong to continue to follow Trayvon Martin. He should have stayed in his car, called the police, and let them handle the perceived situation. If he would have done that, this entire tragedy would have been avoided. That's the truth of it. That's a fact. That is a hypothetical situation. It didn't happen that way, and we have a young man dead. It's a horrific turn of events and an unnecessary death occurred. Let's look at another hypothetical. Let's look at what would have happened if Trayvon would have turned around to face George Zimmerman. What do you think would have been the end result if Trayvon would have said, "Excuse me sir, but you're following me. Is there something I can help you with?" instead of a physical confrontation. If he would have responded to George Zimmerman with courtesy and opened a dialogue. Would he be dead right now? What would have happened do you think if Trayvon had answered George Zimmerman with politeness; with mutual respect and told George Zimmerman he had just left the store and was on his way home with his Skittles. Does anyone reading this really believe George Zimmerman would have shot him? Do you really believe that George Zimmerman was "hunting"? The fact is Trayvon Martin would be just as alive today as he would be if George Zimmerman would have stayed in his car. If Trayvon had treated Zimmerman with the respect a young man should use whenever dealing with an older person. Instead Trayvon resorted, if the facts brought out in the trial can be believed, to gangster mentality. He resorted to violence and acted in a confrontational manner when dealing with an adult. I am from a different time and it seems a different world sometimes. When I was young, my peers and myself were raised to have a modicum of respect for our elders. Two hypothetical, both with the same result. A tragedy averted. Now, I don't know how Trayvon was raised. I am not saying he wasn't given a loving and proper home life as a child. I am saying that, if he was, he didn't use his parents upbringing when dealing with George Zimmerman. It seems he used his learned behavior from his environment. Who is really to blame for Trayvon Martin's death? Who was it he was emulating with his behavior? Again, in my opinion, Trayvon's death can be laid at the feet of the person or persons that helped to create his environment. Music, sports heroes, examples in his life perhaps? " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 15 Jul 13 - 11:29 AM Richard. Shooting someone is not a reasonably proportionate response - not least because the gun Z was carrying could not have been lawfully so carried in the UK. Thanks. I am sure you are right but, .would the possession of a gun be treated as a separate crime? .the fatal weapon might be, say, a screwdriver. Don. What lie am I accused of now? Unlike you (see cycle thread) I do not do it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:00 PM "I'll start out by saying that, in my opinion, George Zimmerman was wrong to continue to follow Trayvon Martin. He should have stayed in his car, called the police, and let them handle the perceived situation. If he would have done that, this entire tragedy would have been avoided. That's the truth of it. That's a fact. Agreed up to that point. The rest of the post reads as a feeble attempt to shift blame and whitewash Zimmerman for not doing that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:00 PM Beardy, your latest colossal dump of blogoshit, speculation and nonsense is in aid of what, exactly? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM Greggie boy, your continued posting and even existence is of what value, exactly? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:27 PM ABC News Chief Legal Affairs Anchor and Mediaite founder Dan Abrams appeared on ABC's This Week predicted that the Department of Justice would not file charges against George Zimmerman, despite the outrage following Saturday night's acquittal and pressure from the NAACP. "There will be a federal investigation, they will publicly discuss it, and there will not be charges filed," Abrams said. "They can't win in this case. They won't win, and they know that." Abrams drew a line between the legal and moral aspects of the case. "There are two separate questions here that we're discussing, and I think it's important to distinguish them," Abrams said. "One is a sort of broad societal right and wrong, and what is wrong with our society. That is a fair question to ask. But that is a different question than talking about what happened in that courtroom." "But every time we get to that nexus, we never seem to accept the fact that race in this country is real, that color will get you killed," Tavis Smiley responded. "I believe in looking at a case by case situation, but in the aggregate, every time we have this issue, somebody can always explain away why this person got off, why this person was not found guilty, and what we have is a bunch of dead black men." Host George Stephanopoulos asked Abrams if the Zimmerman acquittal or the anger surrounding it would have any bearing on future Stand Your Ground cases, or possible repeal of the law. "This didn't end up being a Stand Your Ground case," Abrams reminded him. "They waived the Stand Your Ground hearing, this became a classic self-defense case in Florida. Are people going to talk about it? Yes. Are they going to be able to point to this case and say this is the example of Stand Your Ground? No." http://www.mediaite.com/tv/abcs-dan-abrams-predicts-doj-will-not-charge-zimmerman-they-wont-win-and-they-know-that/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:32 PM ""Especially when cases are so gray, like this one was, self-defense really resonates because people can associate with being afraid."" Pity they can't apparently associate with the fact that unarmed 17 year old black schoolboys might be afraid when accosted by a non uniformed stranger, late at night. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:41 PM ""What would have happened do you think if Trayvon had answered George Zimmerman with politeness; with mutual respect and told George Zimmerman he had just left the store and was on his way home with his Skittles. Does anyone reading this really believe George Zimmerman would have shot him? Do you really believe that George Zimmerman was "hunting"?"" Does anyone reading this really believe George Zimmerman would have listened to him, or believed him? You say Zimmerman wasn't hunting. Are you a mind reader now? He started by carrying out his duty as a neighbourhood watch volunteer. He informed the authorities and was advised to stay in his car. He ignored that advice and went after Martin, confronted him and in the ensuing scuffle picked up a couple of minor cuts, finally executing a totally innocent stranger. I'd hate to see the death toll, if he WAS hunting. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:55 PM more comments... "It is sad that so many define "Justice" as finding Zimmerman guilty in spite of the facts. This lynch_mob mentality is a sad commentary on our society. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:12 PM ""Neither of us has rolled on the floor with someone over this Don, and I have not put forward any argument to withdraw."" Since I did test my belief that it would be impossible to reach the gun in the way Zimmerman described it, the first half of your comment above is a UNTRUE! You put forward the fact that it was possible in a staged reconstruction, as a rebuttal of my comment. Therefore the second half of your sentence above is also UNTRUE! What is the definition of a deliberately untrue statement? According to the Oxford Engish Dictionary (and every other English dictionary}, a LIE! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:14 PM The bar for a federal case is set very high in terms of evidence... A DoJ prosecutor would have to to "prove" that Zimmerman wanted to kill Martin because Martin was black... This idea of "proof" when there are no witnesses to the crime is all but impossible unless Zimmerman had told someone that he was going out to "kill a nigger"... That's the level of evidence that would be required for the feds to take the case... They took the Rodney King case because of the video... Had there not been a video then there would not have been a case, even if a witness had come forward because the white cops, like Zimmerman has done, would have created their own story and stuck by it... The problem here is that these "stand-your-ground" laws are too open ended... The concept of self-defense has been around forever but "stand-your-ground" is relatively new and pushed by the NRA to sell more guns and make people fearful... I mean, if I know that someone wants me dead and that all they have to do is make sure there are no witnesses when they shoot me and then claim they were scared that I might harm them, regardless of the facts, then, yeah, makes me want to carry a gun just to shoot back when some asshole thinks he has the right to shoot me 'cuase he doesn't like me... These laws must go... They may sell a lot of guns but they are making everyone a target for someone who wants to kill them and knows they can get away with it... Murder is murder, people... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:20 PM "It is sad that so many define "Justice" as finding Zimmerman guilty in spite of the facts. What's a helluva lot sadder, Beardy, is your uncritical support of a murderer and that YOU define "Justice" as finding Zimmerman innocent, in spite of the facts, the context, the several sub-texts and common sense. However, that is exactly what one would expect of BullshitBruce, purveyor of 14-karat horseshit by the truckload. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:27 PM The court has stated that Zimmerman is not a murderer. Any claim to the contrary is something that has to be backed up with proof. We are waiting, you members of the lynch mob- WHERE IS THE PROOF? The prosecution did not present it. The prosecution did not even present any alternative explanation to the circumstantial evidence beyond what the defense stated. The claim of the defense of self-defense is supported by the evidence presented, unlike the story the prosecution tried to put before the jury. The jury judged based on the cases presented, and came to a decision. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:31 PM Bobert, you stupid fool, "This didn't end up being a Stand Your Ground case," Abrams reminded him. "They waived the Stand Your Ground hearing, this became a classic self-defense case in Florida. Are people going to talk about it? Yes. Are they going to be able to point to this case and say this is the example of Stand Your Ground? No." You have been told before, yet you keep making this false statement. That makes you a proven liar, and thus you should not be paid any attention to- all your previous life is declared to be not worth considering, and everything you say is not true- Just as you stated about Zimmerman. Or do you get special rules because of your pure-Southern background? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:33 PM Would've been nice if Zimmerman offered Trayvon a ride home on that rainy February night instead of offing him. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:35 PM Disgusting verdict. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:35 PM ""more comments... "It is sad that so many define "Justice" as finding Zimmerman guilty in spite of the facts. This lynch_mob mentality is a sad commentary on our society."" No Bruce, Justice is finding Zimmerman guilty BASED on the facts: 1. That Trayvon Martin was accosted by a man in civilian clothes, whose first words were "What are you doing here", a classic opening for a vigilante, a mugger, or just a n****r hating cracker. I would not assume that his attentions were friendly, would you? 2. This stranger (by his own account of events), without further conversation, reaches for a pocket. He says he went for his phone. Who was he calling? He had already called the police, and been advised to let them do their job. However, that move toward the pocket would have scared the shit out of me, so I don't suppose that Martin would be any less afraid that it would be a knife or a gun about to appear. Now you have the conditions for a reaction based upon a genuine fear of bodily harm or death. A classic situation of self defence by Tayvon Martin. If you cannot, or will not, see that this fulfils the legal conditions for the boy to pre-empt the expected attack under the State of Florida's own laws, then you are wilfully blind to the civil rights of black Americans. And so are the law enforcement authorities of that institutionally racist state. A disgrace to 21st Century America. Tell me where you think my facts or conclusions are in error Bruce! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:41 PM Face it, Elmore... Zimmerman saw himself as some kind of KKK Superman out to protect his white neighbors by not allowing no uppity n****r boy to cut thru their property... That's the long and short of the story or Zimmerman would have stayed in his car... This verdict is no different than the O.J. verdict and will one day be looked back upon as one of America's worst verdicts... The people here celebrating, BTW, seem to be the same Obama-hating rednecks that we've had the displeasure of knowing here in this music community who don't know squat - or care - about music... Normal... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:42 PM But as anger flared from coast to coast, President Obama, who's spoken on the case before, urged Americans to keep their calm: 'I know this case has elicited strong passions. And in the wake of the verdict, I know those passions may be running even higher. But we are a nation of laws, and a jury has spoken. I now ask every American to respect the call for calm reflection from two parents who lost their young son.' Relief: George Zimmerman breaks into a smile of relief a few moments after being cleared of all charges The verdict on the case that has bitterly divided the nation, after the jury took more than 16 hours and 20 minutes over two days to reach their conclusion. They unanimously decided the neighborhood watch volunteer and would-be cop justifiably killed the unarmed teen because he believed his life was threatened on that February night in Florida last year. As the judge announced that Zimmerman had no other business with the Seminole court just after 10pm on Saturday, his mother, who was sat in the court, beamed a smile for the first time during the trial and his emotional wife broke down in tears. Zimmerman jubilantly embraced both - realizing that after a year and a half of living as a hermit and virtual recluse - he was now a free man. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2362973/Protests-erupt-coast-coast-George-Zimmerman-goes-FREE-Second-day-demonstrations-planned-night-anger.html#ixzz2Z8YpvWC4 Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:42 PM ""The prosecution did not present it."" Damn right! The whole prosecuting team should be disbarred and jailed for deliberately selling out to the racist n****r haters, and throwing black civil rights on the shit heap. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:47 PM The writer who said that a 17-year-old kid should be polite to his "elders" is missing a crucial point: Zimmerman was not, say, 50 years old, he was young, young enough that no one should feel that s/he was battling an incapable person. On the other hand, a 29-year-old could be expected to have better judg(e)ment than a teenager. I continue to believe that Zimmerman was carrying an "equalizer", and most likely had it out of the holster when he was following Martin. Speaking of following: when Z was asked "Are you following him?", Z answered "Yes"; he did not say I WILL follow him, or I am THINKING of following him, he clearly implied he had already been following. Quite possibly Martin was already aware that there was a man in pursuit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:50 PM """This didn't end up being a Stand Your Ground case," Abrams reminded him."" This is most definitely a "Stand you Ground" case, but the guy with the right to claim it is DEAD, and no other bastard has bothered to claim it for him. You can paint a turd gold Bruce, but when you try to exchange it for cash, somebody is going to tell you what it really is. Ditto Zimmerman and the latterday Scottsboro case. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:52 PM "a classic opening for a vigilante, a mugger, or just a n****r hating cracker." Or anyone else, seeing a person they did not know in an area they lived in. I do it all the time- and ask if I can help them. "I would not assume that his attentions were friendly, would you?" I would not assume his attentions were NOT friendly- but then we judge others by how we would have said it. "2. This stranger (by his own account of events), without further conversation, reaches for a pocket." Actually, he stated that he reached for the phone after Trevon said "You do now" So there was conversation. "Now you have the conditions for a reaction based upon a genuine fear of bodily harm or death. A classic situation of self defence by Tayvon Martin." Who threw the first punch? Being asked a question does not justify throwing a punch. Very well. The next time I meet someone on a dark night, and they ask me what I am doing there, if their hands are not visible I will assume they have a gun and I will jump them and pound their head into a bloody pulp- you have stated that is ok. And I will expect all those here that think Zimmerman guilty to take to the streets and support me, regardless of the race of the individual I kill- or be proven racist scum like Greggie boy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:55 PM Don, I only have your word that you rolled on the floor with someone for research. You know why I do not take your word without question. I have not lied about any of that. You put forward the fact that it was possible in a staged reconstruction, as a rebuttal of my comment. I did no such thing. I just asked you about the re-enactment. I asked, "Don, how did he manage it in the reconstruction?" Since then I have watched it. I do not lie Don. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:59 PM 1. The prosecution didn't really try very hard to prove its case. 2. Many of the points the prosecution did try to enter into evidence were denied by the judge. 3. One does not have to delve into the history of court decisions very deeply to know that what a court decides and what is really the case are not necessarily the same thing. If Zimmerman had stayed in his car as the police told him to do, this would never have happened. And even so, George Zimmerman was armed with a 9 mm. automatic. Trayvon Martin was armed with a box if Skittles and a can of iced tea. Zimmerman was (is) a frustrated wannabe cop with a gun and an itchy trigger finger. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:00 PM In the reconstruction, KeithAofH, you may -or may not - have noticed that O'Mara reached for a weapon at the front of his body, not behind the curve of the hip. Totally different scenario. In commentary, the point was made that prosecutor - inexcusably - did not challenge it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:00 PM "Having followed the story from it's beginning to the end of the trial, it was obvious that this was a political trial, President Obama & other politicians comments saw to that. The original prosecutor was removed because he felt there was nothing to challenge the self defence claim of Zimmerman. Trayvon Martin's girlfriends evidence shows that he was the racist by his comments when on the phone to her, not Zimmerman, who has mentored black teens and raised money for a black man in his neighbourhood. " "The Race issue seems to be clouding the protestors' reactions in this. This case has been through a valid trial and evidence put forward and considered. A forensic pathologist has also considered the evidence. Zimmerman's injuries looked pretty bad to me and were photographed by both civilian bystanders and police at the time. Lawyers for the deceased "school boy" (actually he had been suspended following several issues one of which involved drugs) are bound to try and paint a picture of a trigger-happy vigilante and an innocent school boy buying sweets - that's their job." "Justice has been served... It's time for the Country to move on.. Whether you like the verdict or not, it is what it is..that's the beauty of our Justice system!! ''Innocent until proven guilty''... The Prosecution didn't prove their case ''beyond a reasonable doubt''... The ''Race-Baiters'' have divided our country, along with the President... It's time to keep ''politics'' out of our COURTS... This case should have never been filed in the first place..." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:03 PM ""The verdict on the case that has bitterly divided the nation, after the jury took more than 16 hours and 20 minutes over two days to reach their conclusion."" It is documented fact that the longer a jury deliberates, the less likely a conviction. What seems to happen is that the pro guilty are more inclined to give in because they are fed up and want to go home, and an cquittal is at least safer than chancing an unjust conviction. Given the time it took, the verdict wasn't unanimous until they had reached that point. Somebody must have been for a conviction for 16 hours and nineteen minutes. Far from the way that the verdict has been portrayed by the Zimmerman groupies. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:08 PM ""I would not assume his attentions were NOT friendly- but then we judge others by how we would have said it."" So you would open the conversation with "What are you doing here"? That's what Zimmerman did, and it doesn't sound friendly to me, nor I suspect to anyone else who wasn't rooting for "Good ole boy George". In fact it sounds rude and aggressive, but hey, you know your own idea of good manners. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:12 PM " Somebody must have been for a conviction for 16 hours and nineteen minutes. " And somebody was convinced of Zimmerman's innocence for longer than that. They had questions, they asked for an inventory of the evidence, and they gave it thought- Not what the Bobert/Don/Greggie lynch mob wanted to happen, but the way the system is supposed to work. They decided based on the facts as presented, and not from a pre-determined conviction that they knew Zimmerman was guilty regardless of the facts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:14 PM Based on evidence presented, the decision of the jury was the right one. In all cases of this type, it is difficult to judge exactly what happened. There is a verdict in Scottish courts (still valid?) of "not proven." This leaves many people unsatisfied. In the South today, many Blacks have been elected to important office, where they function together with the elected Whites. Most white southerners accept the fact that everyone is equal before the law, in business and government, and should be treated with respect socially as well. This does not mean, however, that social acceptance goes so far that Whites willingly accept Blacks into their families. Parents instill their inner feelings in their children, often unknowingly, and this type of segregation, not only in the South but throughout the country, will continue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:34 PM Here in the Charlotte, NC area most of the schools are pretty much segregated... Okay, go to a black high school of a 1000 students and there might be a dozen or so whites kids and most of them transfers so they can play on a better football team... Same with white high schools... This is by design, people... Southerners love using whatever loopholes there are in laws to try to do things the Southern way... Segregation is the Southern way... We have two sets of rules here in the South... Kill a black person and that's okay... Kill a white person and it's not... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:38 PM Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk Daily Mail? Read MORE??? Why would anyone with a brain read it in the FIRST instance, Beardy? But thanks for the latest truckload of anonymous blogoshit which means less than nothing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:38 PM If it's early evening, I have been to the local convenience store, and am walking back to where I am staying, and someone approaches me and says, "What are you doing here?" I think I would be justified in thinking that I am being challenged. Especially if the person is addressing me in an aggressive and accusatory manner. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:41 PM If it required a brain, Greggie boy, you would be out of the running. Tell me again how your attacks on people prove anything other than the fact the you have no basis for your opinions other than what you see in your lower intestine. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:41 PM The obvious is only obvious to rational thinking people, Don... Not racists, rednecks and tin-foilers... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:42 PM So, Bobert, I know you qualify for at least two of those, but are you admitting to the third as well? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:49 PM In the South today, many Blacks have been elected to important office Yup, 'some of their best Negroes are their friends'. (Ochs) Most white southerners accept the fact that everyone is equal before the law... Please supply evidence to substantiate this. Parents instill their inner feelings in their children, often unknowingly And just as often, knowingly and willingly. And you come by your expertise on Southerrn culturte & history how, exactly? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:52 PM Tell me again how your attacks on people prove anything Will gladly do so, BullshitBruce, once you've told us all how your truckloads of horseshit prove anything. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 15 Jul 13 - 02:54 PM If someone is in my neighbourhood and looks as if they are lost, I might ask them if I could help them. I would never dream of saying "What are you doing here?" I would see that as remarkably aggressive bad manners. It would invite a hostile response. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 03:43 PM Another "rational" response, McG... The problem here is these people are not rational, or mannerly of all that bright... Hence, "What are you doing here" is about all they are capable of... Especially when they got a big gun... Rude, boorish, angry people hurt people... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: catspaw49 Date: 15 Jul 13 - 03:59 PM This killing began in the evening when GZ decided to go on "patrol" and put his gun on his hip. The neighborhood watch supervisory people asked that they NOT carry guns but GZ is a wannabe but failed police officer. Upon encountering TM he could have given him a shout in a friendly manner that he was with the neighborhood watch and could they talk for a minute. This is a well used procedure in those groups. If TM had run off he would then have called 911. He called 911 anyway but then quite obviously stated in words having profiling all through them that "these assholes always get away." He was told he didn't need to follow TM, "We don't need you to do that," but he did anyway. From that point on there are witnesses with bits and pieces of uncertain knowledge on both sides but make no mistake, the fight started because GZ did not do what he was told and disobeyed the tenants of the neighborhood watch. There is no certain evidence as to which was on top when as they were probably both there at different points and the evidence supports that. GZ had very minor injuries and TM hands showed very little sign of being in a fight. A few minutes later TM was dead and GZ was alive and admitted freely that he shot TM. If the prosecution had started with that simple narrative and ended with it as well, they would have won. GZ exercised his rights under the fifth amendment not to testify so we are left with several of his previously given statements which do not match and were never questioned as they could have been by the prosecution. Trayvon Martin cannot give us a statement. His rights mattered not at all to GZ and now Trayvon Martin has none. Mark O'Meara is one helluva' fine attorney, the prosecution was less than stellar, and this killing happened because George Zimmerman left his home hoping to perhaps nab the people who had burglarized the neighborhood. He was hoping to be a big hero. He also put his gun on his hip. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:00 PM http://live.wsj.com/video/opinion-were-the-zimmerman-verdict-and-trial-fair-2013-07-15-141152221/CC15DF06-D983-424C-99B8-B14F49C |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:04 PM Only the six female jurors know for certain what testimony or evidence convinced them to acquit George Zimmerman of murder charges in the death of Trayvon Martin, but there were key moments in the trial that appeared to undermine the prosecution's case for conviction. Here are five of them. Chris Serino was the lead investigator looking into the shooting of Martin and initially urged the Sanford, Fla., prosecutor to charge Zimmerman with manslaughter, a recommendation that was rejected. Serino was called to the stand by the prosecution and was expected to be a key witness against Zimmerman. In his "just-the-facts" style of answering questions, Serino was repeatedly questioned by the prosecution and defense about Zimmerman's version of what happened that night. But in a surprise, the investigator was asked by Zimmerman's lawyer whether he believed Zimmerman was telling the truth, and the cop answered, "Yes." The next day the prosecution asked that the jurors be directed to disregard Serino's comment and the judge agreed, but the damage may have been done. John Good was another prosecution witness whose words may have helped Zimmerman more than the prosecution. Good lived near where the fatal shot was fired and appeared to have had the best view of the brief fight between Zimmerman and Martin. Good testified that he saw what he believed to be Martin on top of Zimmerman. "The color on top was dark and the color at bottom was…red," Good said referring to the men's clothing. At another point he told the court that the person on the bottom had "lighter skin color." Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who was wearing a red and black jacket that night. Martin, who was black, was wearing a dark sweatshirt. "The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help,'" Good said. Under cross examination by Zimmerman's lawyer, Good said he believes he saw Martin on top punching Zimmerman "MMA style," a reference to mixed martial arts. "The person on top was ground and pounding the person on the bottom?"asked Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara. "Correct," said Good Rachel Jeantel was Trayvon Martin's friend who was talking with him on a cell phone until just moments before Martin was killed. She told the jury that Martin was scared of a "creepy a** cracker" who was following him and just before losing contact with Martin said she heard him say, "Get off. Get off." But under a grueling cross examination by Zimmerman's lawyer Don West Jeantel conceded that it was difficult to hear what Martin was saying and that she did not know who threw the first punch when Zimmerman and Martin came face to face. "The last thing you heard was something hitting somebody?" West asked her. "Trayvon got hit," Jeantel said. "You don't know that, do you?" the defense lawyer said. "No sir," she said. "You don't know that he didn't take his fist and drive it into Zimmerman's face do you?" the lawyer pressed. "No sir," Jeantel replied. Renowned forensics expert Vincent Di Maio may have been one of Zimmerman's strongest witnesses. He told the jury that the pattern of powder burns and other forensic evidence on Martin's body indicated that the teenager's sweatshirt was two to four inches away from his body at the time he was shot, meaning that Martin was leaning forward over Zimmerman when he was killed. "The medical evidence is consistent with his [Zimmerman's] statement," Di Maio told the Florida court. The words of Trayvon Martin's father were also used to undermine the prosecution's case. A key battle in the trial was over who was heard screaming for help in the background of a 911 call before the fatal shot was fired. Martin's family insisted the voice was their son's voice, while Zimmerman's parents told the court it was Zimmerman screaming. Serino testified that when Martin's father, Tracy Martin, first heard the tape he said it was not Trayvon. "He looked away and under his breath said, 'No,'" Serino told the court. A second police officer gave a similar description of Tracy Martin's reaction to the tape. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:13 PM Bingo, Spaw... In other words??? Justice, Southern style... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:26 PM Ebbie, I thought he mimed taking it from the side and slightly behind, but I agree with you it does nothing to clear up that issue. If Don had seen it he would have something to say, I think! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:26 PM Sorry, Don T I meant. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:28 PM The aftermath would be funny if it weren't so sad. Just because we are stuck with this verdict, doesn't mean we have to like it or shut up about it. If our roles were reversed; if GZ had been convicted, there would be an equal or greater amount of bitching and whining. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:55 PM And yet more blogohorseshit postarrhoea from BullshitBruce, signifying less than nothing. Stronger remedies than paregoric and/or duct tape obviously in order. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 05:00 PM By the way, BullshitBruce, the Wall Street Journal says "page unavailable" - which meets the standard of your regular horseshit hands down. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: catspaw49 Date: 15 Jul 13 - 05:23 PM Bruce....You're a fuckin' idiot. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 05:40 PM That's twice today that I have to agree with you, Spawz... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 05:56 PM Ditto, Spaw. All best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 06:06 PM ""Most white southerners accept the fact that everyone is equal before the law, in business and government, and should be treated with respect socially as well."" In business and in government? The one percent with lots of money. Try selling that one to those black people who are hassled by Florida law enforcement, or try to get fair hearing in a Florida court. I have several times pointed out that Martin himself had every right to fear Zimmerman and to believe that Zimmerman was likely reaching for a gun, which would give Martin a self defence right. It has been ignored or rejected by all of our racially non prejudiced fans of George Zimmerman, and was never brought up by a prosecution team which rendered a defence almost superfluous. Multiply that by a couple of million and you have a clue about justice for blacks (except for those who are rich) in Florida. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 15 Jul 13 - 06:34 PM Greg F, paid my poll tax in Texas back when. Have you ever been there (the South)- except as a trouble-maker? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 15 Jul 13 - 06:40 PM ""but there were key moments in the trial that appeared to undermine the prosecution's case for conviction. Here are five of them."" Error! The prosecution never presented a case for conviction. They deliberately threw the fight by not exposing the holes in Zimmerman's story. ""But in a surprise, the investigator was asked by Zimmerman's lawyer whether he believed Zimmerman was telling the truth, and the cop answered, "Yes." "" Objection your honour. The question calls for a conclusion by the witness. No objection from the prosecution? Abysmal! Then they gave the jurors till the next day to think about it, before asking that it be stricken. Incompetent! ""Serino testified that when Martin's father, Tracy Martin, first heard the tape he said it was not Trayvon. "He looked away and under his breath said, 'No,'" Serino told the court."" Which could conceivably be the sotto voce expression of a father's grief at hearing his dead son pleading for his life. Given that Serino ddidn't want to prosecute Zimmerman, Hell! He didn't want to investigate him, he just wanrted to release him and forget the whole thing, just how much credence should have been given to pro Zimmerman testimony from this half baked imitation of a cop? Also, what judge worthy of the name would permit such cavalier abuse of the rules of evidential admissibility to go unchallenged by the prosecution. Mind you, the judge also has questions to answer about refusing the balance of admitting the two voice recognition experts, against the admission of the evidence of eight "friends" of Zimmerman. This whole case and everyone involved in it stinks of a pre-judged outcome. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 15 Jul 13 - 06:43 PM Watching the national news. The whites say it wasn't about race. Easy for them to say. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 06:49 PM Have you ever been there (the South)- except as a trouble-maker? Yeah, Q, I've been there. And exactly how long did YOU spend there, and when? And how long have you been gone? Trouble-maker? You mean like those outside agitaters Goodwin, Schwerner & Chaney?? Or Emmett Till? Or Medgar Evers? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 15 Jul 13 - 07:08 PM Outside agitators did little except create resentment against the valid efforts of southerners, black and white, to come to grips with the past, in court, in law and socially. None of this has anything to do with the Zimmerman trial, in which the evidence led to acquittal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 07:17 PM That's right, Q, just another Southern apologist. We didn't know said the congregation, Singing a hymn in a church of white. The Press was full lf lies about us, Preacher told us we were right. The outside agitators came. They burned some churches and put the blame, On decent southern people's names, To set our colored people aflame. And maybe some of our boys got hot, And a couple of niggers and reds got shot, They should have stayed where they belong, And preacher would've told us if we'd done wrong. -Tom Paxton, 1963 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 07:24 PM In injustice that was on display in this case has everything to do with the South's past and how little Southerners have done to correct those problems... They have fought everything in the way of progress tooth and nail and continue to this very day to try to find ways to re-segregate, discriminate and to give white people an unfair advantage... Voter laws requiring voter ID is a prime example... What these states are requiring is a "certified birth certificate" to get one of these ID cards... Does anyone here know what getting a certified birth certificate means??? It means that like in the state of South Carolina some 80,000 elderly black people, most who have voted for decades, have cast their last votes for the crime of being born at home??? Serious business... That's the deal... Anyone who thinks that white Southerners ain't up to playing some seriously bad games on black folks is delusional... Pure and simple delusional... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 15 Jul 13 - 08:21 PM Zimmerman in hiding. Wannabe cop ashamed of himself? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 15 Jul 13 - 08:29 PM So what is this?..a contest of who can justify their hate, and then thinking hate is going to fix it???? The energy you put into a system, tends to CHANGE that system. What energy were you planning to put into it? I'll give you a clue, hatred and resentment, ain't going to be the one that fixes it! That's the one you're alleging that you don't like...isn't it??..the same one you're hoping you're right about??? Think About It, GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 08:45 PM Let's get real here, GfinS... Most of the hate that can be found in this thread is by you and one other person... Always there to defend Zimmerman as if Zimmerman was God himself... Never passed up an opportunity to heap defense on top of defense on Zimmerman... You and your buddy, **, own 90% of the hate here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 15 Jul 13 - 08:58 PM Just to clarify, Bobster, does * = B ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 15 Jul 13 - 09:11 PM Yup... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Wesley S Date: 15 Jul 13 - 09:37 PM So does Zimmerman get his gun back now? Any restrictions? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 15 Jul 13 - 09:47 PM So let's all hate '**' now..it'll be good practice??? Maybe we can get so good at hating, that it never gets better, and that way we can get our 'fix'!......as in an addiction! You get real...if you want to end racial hating, then end it! These IS another way! Both sides have their point..surely 'understanding' the FULL picture isn't limiting, is it? ..I mean it may just encroach on the hate part though..but GOOD! You keep hating, and you prolong any change. Sure, it's a bummer wrought of stupidity...let's wise up, and hate stupidity...or just keep doing it. Which side do you want to fall on? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 15 Jul 13 - 09:56 PM I am really astonished at two things that are being underplayed here. Juicy Brucie fails to see that "What are YOU doing HERE" is a remarkably clear equivalent to "Hey nigger, what are you doing in the white part of town". Second Juicy Brucie can assert that Martin should have been respectful. What should he have said - "Yassah massa boss us jokie folks allus happy to clean yo'shoes"? Brucie's argument rings with racism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 15 Jul 13 - 09:56 PM Reminds me of the following. George Bush apologized for the bad things he did when in office and proceeded with "Thanks for blaming it on the Black guy." Huh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:21 PM U Guest It: "Obama blames it all for the bad things he did when in office and proceeded with "Thanks for blaming it on the White guy." Or something like that! All I'm saying, is if people hate, and promote it, or justify it, nothing gets any better. The 'change' must first start within US, if we want anybody to know what we're talking about!..and offer help. I think the 'Blame Game' is just a thing to do, instead of reconciling within us, to be able to be free of hate, and show them that there is a better way.."Here, Ill show you!" As I used to tell my kids, and musicians I'd play with, "If you want to be different, be excellent!" As contrast: Zimmerman was stupid, Martin was stupid, the trial was stupid, and nobody can agree on anything..and that's stupid! No wonder you're pissed off! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 15 Jul 13 - 10:48 PM Yup GfS: Trayvon was stupid alright. He thought he could smoke a little weed, walk to the store to get rid of the munchies, and walk home without getting blown away by some busybody white guy. Guess he learned his lesson. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 15 Jul 13 - 11:52 PM ..and picked a fight with a guy who he didn't think might be armed...and he had a cell phone in his HAND, and didn't call police! 'Stupid is as stupid does"~~Forrest Gump |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:10 AM Goofball, you are the only one here who is blathering on about hate. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:13 AM Yep, Elmore, you're right. Guess he won't be uppity no more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:48 AM Firth: "Goofball, you are the only one here who is blathering on about hate." You're right!...The rest of you are about doing it!..and positioning yourselves to justify it! Do you think that 'racial profiling' is about 'love'?? ..and so many people are really pissed off and indignant about this being a 'racial hate crime'...right? I mean if Zimmerman, or anyone for that matter, was thinking when they see somebody for the first time, and think, or say, "Nigger", and then confront the guy, I don't imagine the person thinking or saying that is using it as a term of endearment!...So you could WELL imagine(being as that's what everybody is doing)..you could WELL imagine that the person thinking it or saying it, is going to have a hostile chip on their shoulder, once they have to interact with each other, don't you? ...and much has been said about Zimmerman, and the debate is whether he had a racial hostile chip on his shoulder, when he first encountered Martin, that I imagine that the tones of voice would pretty much convey that..right??...I mean racial shit is still racial shit..right?..and if he's thinking 'nigger' I imagine that the air is going to be filled with tension...right?..So escalation is going to go REAL fast...right? The prosecution entered a piece of evidence, that nobody seemed to zero in on....had they have done that, the racial element would have been clear....but there WAS a racial element, and it made it's way into evidence...right before they confronted each other, Martin described Zimmerman as a "creepy-ass cracker" Does THAT count??????????...I mean, it IS a racial slur, isn't it???? I rest my case, on that one! Nonetheless, maybe more focus on loving our fellow man, instead of looking for loopholes to look the other way! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 16 Jul 13 - 03:42 AM Another thing I spotted above. Many Zimmerman apologists argue that a fit 17 year old should have had not trouble beating up Zimmerman who they depict as a waddling obese fat fuck of a little weakling - but who was the member of a mixed martial arts gymn? Zimmerman. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 07:57 AM NEW YORK (Reuters) - George Zimmerman's chief defense lawyer on Monday called Florida prosecutors "a disgrace to my profession" for holding back evidence for months and pledged a new effort to impose sanctions against them. Mark O'Mara and co-counsel Don West argued the self-defense case that helped Zimmerman win an acquittal of second-degree murder and manslaughter charges on Saturday for the 2012 shooting death of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin. The law requires prosecutors to share evidence with defense attorneys, especially if it helps exonerate defendants. The requirement is known as the Brady disclosure. O'Mara accused prosecutors of several Brady violations, which were heard by Judge Debra Nelson before the trial. Nelson postponed some of her decisions on sanctions until after trial, saying the process was time-consuming. "This is not acceptable, and is not going to be tolerated in any case that I'm involved in," O'Mara told Reuters in New York on Monday, accusing special prosecutor Angela Corey and lead trial attorney Bernie de la Rionda of Brady violations. "They are a disgrace to my profession," O'Mara said, referring specifically to de la Rionda and Corey. "They said my client was 'lucky' to have been acquitted. Really?" Corey responded that O'Mara's comments were unprofessional and challenged him to point to any judge's ruling that her office improperly withheld evidence. "Our office adhered to the highest standards of ethical behavior," Corey told Reuters in a telephone interview. "Our rules of professional conduct regulate comments like that. I don't think those are the kind of comments that are appropriate." Her office confirmed last week that it had fired its information technology director, Ben Kruidbos, who had testified in a pre-trial hearing that files he created with text messages and images he retrieved from Martin's phone were not handed to the defense. Kruidbos testified last month that he found embarrassing photos on Martin's phone that included pictures of a clump of jewelry on a bed, underage nude females, marijuana plants and a hand holding a semi-automatic pistol. O'Mara said he intends to amend his request for sanctions against the prosecutors in light of testimony from the trial, calling prosecutors' failure to turn over data from Martin's phone records for months "an undeniable Brady violation." Prosecutors handed over raw data from Martin's phone, but O'Mara accused them of withholding additional data that had been extracted by Kruidbos. Corey countered that the judge determined the defense was in possession. O'Mara has quarreled with the prosecutors since they charged Zimmerman last year and has become increasingly aggressive in his criticism of the prosecution since his client's acquittal. A jury in Sanford, Florida, found Zimmerman not guilty of second-degree murder and manslaughter after a three-week trial in which defense lawyers argued that the neighborhood watch volunteer, shot Martin in self-defense. http://news.yahoo.com/zimmermans-lawyer-calls-prosecutors-disgrace-profession-025529776.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:10 AM I see a lot of hate here- for Zimmerman, anyone who does not think he is 100% responsible for Martin's death, anyone who questions the resident racsts Greggie and Bobert, anyone who questions Don's pronouncements of "fact", ... Lots of hate, and mostly by those who claim to be "liberals". Bunch of haters- anyone who disagrees, all conservatives, anyone stating a fact they do'n like... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:11 AM We are so programmed by our history with race in America that reaction to the acquittal of George Zimmerman on charges of murdering Trayvon Martin depends largely upon one's individual, even group experience. If you are African-American, you might react like former Washington, D.C., homicide detective Rod Wheeler. Appearing on Fox News, Wheeler said many blacks look at quarterback Michael Vick, jailed for taking part in an illegal dog-fighting ring, and wonder why Zimmerman gets away with killing a young black man. If you are white, or Hispanic, you could possibly see the trial as something whipped up by the always racially conscious media and rhetorical bomb-throwers like Rev. Al Sharpton. You might conclude that if the victim had been white and the perpetrator black the media would have shown little or no interest. Your view would be reinforced by a case in Georgia in which four African-American teenagers beat a 36-year-old white man as he emerged from a gas station convenience store. While trying to escape, the man stumbled into the middle lane of a highway where he was struck by a car and killed. The Marietta Daily Journal reported that the four are charged with felony murder, aggravated assault and violation of the Georgia Street Gang Act. The incident occurred two weeks ago, but I have seen no national media coverage. As defense lawyers noted after the Zimmerman verdict, the loss of any life, especially a young one, is a tragedy, but tragedy and race were not on trial in Sanford, Fla. Putting all extraneous considerations aside, the jury of six women was asked if there was sufficient evidence to convict Zimmerman of murder or manslaughter. They found there was not. The Justice Department says it will look into the shooting death of Martin to determine if evidence in the case "reveals a prosecutable violation." That may turn out to be more of a political decision than one based on facts. It would likely perpetuate the media narrative of blacks as victims and whites (one CNN reporter ludicrously called Zimmerman a "white Hispanic") as descendants of slave masters. What helps keep us divided is our propensity for labeling and categorizing. Certain behaviors and language are tolerated, while others are not. Some people can get away with language that others cannot. Some faiths can be disparaged while others are insulated from criticism. What is needed is one standard. One national identity. One America. We're not there yet. Benjamin Crump, an attorney for Trayvon Martin's family, compared Trayvon's death to those of Emmett Till and Medgar Evers. Any attempt to turn Trayvon into a civil rights martyr similar to Till and Evers goes well beyond the apples and oranges analogy. More to the point was a comment by Zimmerman's attorney Don West: "The prosecution of George Zimmerman was disgraceful." The defense believes he should never have been brought to trial. Co-defense counsel Mark O'Mara speculated about "how many lawsuits will be spawned by this fiasco." Probably quite a few, given our never-ending racial double standard. As both sides have noted, there are no winners in this case. Read more here: http://www.sunherald.com/2013/07/15/4797984/cal-thomas-zimmerman-verdict-and.html#storylink=cpy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:17 AM So does Zimmerman get his gun back now? Any restrictions? Yes he does Wes, and no there aren't. In fact his loud-mouted gobshite of a lawyer - see BullshitBruce's post, above - was bragging about a day ago about the fact he would get it back and that Zimmerman needed the gun now 'more than ever', or words to that effect. So get ready for a few more dead Black teenagers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:23 AM You forgot to mention , Beardy, that your latest piece of blogoshit opinion is by Cal Thomas, well known TeaPublican Conservative schill. Oh, and your link doesn't work. As usual. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:27 AM Don T Too bad you can't follow the facts. You are showing your obvious racism here. "Given that Serino ddidn't want to prosecute Zimmerman, Hell! He didn't want to investigate him, he just wanrted to release him and forget the whole thing, just how much credence should have been given to pro Zimmerman testimony from this half baked imitation of a cop?" 1. Serino was the one who recommended that Zimmerman be tried for manslaughter. 2. Serino was a PROSECUTION witness. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:30 AM Fucking asshole! " You forgot to mention , Beardy, that your latest piece of blogoshit opinion is by Cal Thomas, well known TeaPublican Conservative schill. " I did put on my post: Read more here: http://www.sunherald.com/2013/07/15/4797984/cal-thomas-zimmerman-verdict-and.html#storylink=cpy YOU forgot to mention that you call people who are "black, and a Democrat" "dumb ni**ers", And that Bobert supports you in this, you racist lying scumbag. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:34 AM "From: Greg F. - PM Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:55 PM ... Stronger remedies than paregoric and/or duct tape obviously in order." What, you and your racist friends are going to come burn a cross on my lawn?? This sounds a lot like a threat. Too bad you are one of the "protected and privileged Ones" that are exempt from the Mudcat rules. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:40 AM Baltimore police say they are investigating a witness account that a group of black youths beat a Hispanic man near Patterson Park Sunday while saying, "This is for Trayvon." A witness posted the account on a community Facebook page, and police confirmed they are looking into whether the suspects' reaction to the verdict in the Florida trial of George Zimmerman played a part in the incident. A police report on the beating does not mention the alleged comments. Sgt. Eric Kowalczyk, a police spokesman, declined to go into further detail. Related Trayvon Martin a 'symbol' of issues facing blacks in Baltimore, protesters say Zimmerman verdict portends more violence Reactions to the Zimmerman verdict in photos Meet the key figures in the trial of George Zimmerman Batts, ministers call for peaceful reaction to Zimmerman verdict See more stories » Ads by Google Waterfront Beach Homes Golf Community in Fenwick Island. 4 Miles to the Beach, low $300k's! LiveBayside.com Top 10 Golf Swing Killers Take 36 Seconds and Learn How to Hit Longer and Straighter (Free)... www.RevolutionGolf.com In a post that drew nearly 50 comments on Facebook, real estate agent Christina Dudley said she was walking to her car just before 9 p.m. when she saw several young black males and two black females chasing a 37-year-old Hispanic man west on North Linwood Avenue past East Fairmont Avenue. "One of the boys had a handgun out and it was pointed at the back of him," Dudley said in an interview. They caught up to the man at the corner of Fairmount and N. Streeper Street, and the male with the gun beat the victim with what appeared to be his gun while others kicked and stomped him, Dudley said. "They were just yelling and calling him names as they ran after him, but once they were hitting him and after that they started yelling, "This is for Trayvon, [expletive]," said Dudley, who heard the chant repeated multiple times. Dudley and a woman walking her dog across the street told the group to stop and warned that they were calling 911. The group scattered before police arrived. Police have no arrests or named suspects. Using a translator, police spoke to the victim, who knows some English, according to the police report. The victim told officers that he was standing in the intersection of Fairmont and N. Potomac Street when a group of five black males first approached him. He described all of the males as between 16 and 18 and told police a 6-foot suspect with a black "stretchy" shirt and mohawk told him, "What's up, [expletive]." When the victim raised his phone to call 911, the suspect raised his shirt and flashed a silver handgun in his waistband. The victim turned and ran before he was caught in the 2800 block of Fairmont and was beaten, police said. He sustained abrasions to his elbows and forearms but refused medical attention. Police listed all of the suspects involved as black males. Three were "skinny" while one was described as overweight. Dudley, who lives in the neighborhood, said she worries about her Hispanic neighbors and said she and other residents were looking for ways to warn them of the incident beyond Facebook. Patterson Park has one of the city's highest concentration of Latinos and is home to the city's annual Latino Fest. Zimmerman, who is of Hispanic descent, had been charged with killing Trayvon Martin in an altercation that drew national concerns about racial profiling. He was found not guilty of all charges. "Everyone in the neighborhood is well aware of the situation, but my concern is that we have a very large Hispanic population and many of them might not have Internet connection or they aren't on that page," Dudley said. "So my concern is trying to get the word out to them." Read more: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/blog/bs-md-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-monday-20130715,0,5135359.story#ixzz2ZDBPRMed http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/blog/bs-md-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-monday-20130715,0,5135359.story |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 09:13 AM Just more blogoshit, Beardy - even says so in the URL. And Farcebook. Wow- gotta be true. And even if it is, so what? It comes as s surprise to you that this sort of incident might follow? Who ya gonna cut & paste next? Rush? Glenn? Now, of course, had Martin been Jewish or Israeli, we'd be hearing a whole different story from ya, wouldn't we, Beardy? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 16 Jul 13 - 10:39 AM Obvs. Serino was the quisling who set the prosecution up to fail. No? He didn't want Zimmerman the "white Hispanic" prosecuted and he sabotaged the prosecution when his hand was forced. Oh, what sort of name is "Serino"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 10:48 AM Richard, 1. Serino was the one who recommended that Zimmerman be tried for manslaughter. 2. Serino was a PROSECUTION witness. Dershowitz: Zimmerman Special Prosecutor Angela Corey Should Be Disbarred ALAN DERSHOWITZ: Right, it is. She submitted an affidavit that was, if not perjurious, completely misleading. She violated all kinds of rules of the profession, and her conduct bordered on criminal conduct. She, by the way, has a horrible reputation in Florida. She's known for overcharging, she's known for being highly political. And in this case, of course she overcharged. Halfway through the trial she realized she wasn't going to get a second degree murder verdict, so she asked for a compromised verdict, for manslaughter. And then, she went even further and said that she was going to charge him with child abuse and felony murder. That was such a stretch that it goes beyond anything professionally responsible. She was among the most irresponsible prosecutors I've seen in 50 years of litigating cases, and believe me, I've seen good prosecutors, bad prosecutors, but rarely have I seen one as bad as this prosecutor, [Angela] Cory. (Huckabee, July 14, 2013) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 11:09 AM Hey, Berardy, got any quotes from Dershowitz on how fucked up the defense team's antics were -and still are - that you'd care to share? Or didn't anyone ask him about that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 11:11 AM 2. Serino was a PROSECUTION witness. Oh, and Beardy: look up the word "quisling", OK? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 11:53 AM Richard: "He didn't want Zimmerman the "white Hispanic" prosecuted" post : 1. Serino was the one who recommended that Zimmerman be tried for manslaughter. Try looking at the facts. I know they don't give the results you want, but they are a better reflection of reaity than your posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 11:59 AM George Zimmerman immediately went back into hiding after being acquitted of murder in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, his parents told Barbara Walters in an exclusive interview with ABC News, adding that they haven't seen him since he left the courthouse. The Zimmermans said that because of "an enormous amount of death threats," they, too, have remained in hiding and still don't feel safe enough to return to their home in Orlando, Fla. Two days after a Florida jury found their 29-year-old son not guilty of second-degree murder and manslaughter charges in the death of Martin, 17, Zimmerman's parents, Robert Zimmerman Sr. and Gladys Zimmerman, sat down for their first television interview. They opened up about how their son's murder trial has affected their family and how he and they are struggling to cope with the aftermath. "Under the circumstances, we have not been able to talk to him," Gladys Zimmerman told Walters. "To tell you the truth, we don't trust anything, not even the phones." "We have had an enormous amount of death threats. George's legal counsel has had death threats, the police chief of Sanford, many people have had death threats," Robert Zimmerman said."'Everyone with Georgie's DNA should be killed' -- just every kind of horrible thing you can imagine." George Zimmerman was accused of second-degree murder for shooting Martin on Feb. 26, 2012 inside a gated community in Sanford, Fla. While he admitted to shooting the unarmed teenager, Zimmerman maintained that Martin attacked him and he acted in self defense. A jury made up of six women found Zimmerman not guilty of both second-degree murder and manslaughter charges Saturday after deliberating for more than 16 hours over two days. But the family's celebration of George Zimmerman's new freedom has been short-lived. His parents said that their son has no job and no health insurance. Gladys Zimmerman said her son has been living off small monthly stipends from his legal defense fund. "Even for us, we have not been living a normal life for the past months, it is hard," she said. "We have lost everything, everything -- the whole family, not only George. The whole family. We have lost everything." When asked if her son could ever live a normal life again, Gladys Zimmerman said, "Only time will tell." In the wake of Martin's death, the case quickly developed racial overtones when Sanford law enforcement declined to arrest Zimmerman, who is a white Hispanic -- his father is white and his mother is originally from Peru. Trayvon Martin is black. George Zimmerman was arrested nearly two months after the incident when the state appointed Angela Corey as a special prosecutor and she brought second-degree murder charges against him. Outrage and protests have reignited across the country since the not-guilty verdict was announced, something George Zimmerman's mother said was "hurtful." "This is America, and we went through all of this with the judicial system," Gladys Zimmerman said. "They wanted an arrest for my son. They got an arrest. Now lets, you know, find a verdict ... now they have a verdict. ... He went through the whole process they were pushing for, and now they are not happy with the verdict, and I pray. I pray for them, for God to touch their heart." In talking about Zimmerman's character, his parents painted a portrait of a young, outgoing, philanthropic man who looked out for his neighbors, who would buy fast food gift certificates for homeless people, who took care of family members, and as someone who mentored two young black siblings on some weekends. George Zimmerman is "absolutely not" a racist, they said. "He's never been taught to be a racist," Robert Zimmerman said. "Color is the last thing to come to his mind." "When George first saw Trayvon Martin he had no idea what color he was," he added. "He knew he was inside a gated community. He didn't recognize him as living there. It was raining. He was just casually walking very slowly. But George did not initial know what race a person was." Robert Zimmerman said the case brought against his son had "nothing to do with the facts" and that law enforcement didn't want to pursue a case against George Zimmerman until a special prosecutor was appointed and it became "a political decision." "I never thought that we would see so much hatred, and the hatred is not brought on by any racial incident," Robert Zimmerman said. "It was brought on by attorneys being totally untruthful, other people being involved, having a certain narrative, having a certain agenda, and making this situation race-based and a political issue." When asked what they would say to Trayvon Martin's family now, Gladys Zimmerman said, "We are deeply sorry for this tragedy. "We pray for Trayvon Martin to be in a better place," she said. "He is always in our prayers." http://gma.yahoo.com/zimmermans-parents-hiding-enormous-amount-death-threats-abc-001909456--abc-news-topstories.html?vp=1 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 12:30 PM (CNN) -- One of the jurors who acquitted George Zimmerman said she had "no doubt" he feared for his life in the final moments of his struggle with Trayvon Martin, and that was the definitive factor in the verdict. The woman, who was identified just as Juror B37, spoke exclusively to CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360" on Monday night. She is the first juror to speak publicly about the case. She said she believes Zimmerman's "heart was in the right place" the night he shot Martin, but that he didn't use "good judgment" in confronting the Florida teen. "I think George Zimmerman is a man whose heart was in the right place, but just got displaced by the vandalism in the neighborhoods, and wanting to catch these people so badly that he went above and beyond what he really should have done," she said. "But I think his heart was in the right place. It just went terribly wrong." Juror: I felt sorry for Rachel Jeantel Juror: Zimmerman's heart in right place Juror B37: 'It's very emotional' for me If anything, Zimmerman was guilty of not using "good judgment," the juror said. "When he was in the car, and he had called 911, he shouldn't have gotten out of that car," she said. She also said she believes Martin threw the first punch in the confrontation that followed. "I think George got in a little bit too deep, which he shouldn't have been there. But Trayvon decided that he wasn't going to let him scare him ... and I think Trayvon got mad and attacked him," she said. Zimmerman felt his life was in danger before shooting Martin, and it was his voice that was heard screaming for help in 911 calls, the juror said she believes. "He had a right to defend himself," she said. "If he felt threatened that his life was going to be taken away from him, or he was going to have bodily harm, he had a right." Race perhaps simplest disagreement in post-trial CNN interviews An initial vote was divided. Three of the jurors first voted Zimmerman was guilty, while three voted he was not guilty, she said. Juror B37 was among those who believed he was not guilty from the start. "There was a couple of them in there that wanted to find him guilty of something and after hours and hours and hours of deliberating over the law, and reading it over and over and over again, we decided there's just no way, other place to go," she said. Jurors were not identified by name during the trial, which sparked a broad debate about gun laws and race in America. The juror said she did not believe Zimmerman profiled Martin, who was African-American, because of the color of his skin. She believes he thought Martin was suspicious because of the way he acted. "Anybody would think anybody walking down the road, stopping and turning and looking -- if that's exactly what happened -- is suspicious," she said. "I think all of us thought race did not play a role," the juror said . "We never had that discussion." At one point during the interview, she grew emotional and her voice cracked. She said jurors cried after putting in their vote. "It's a tragedy this happened. But it happened," the juror said. "And I think both were responsible for the situation they had gotten themselves into. I think both of them could have walked away. It just didn't happen." http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/15/justice/zimmerman-juror-book |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 12:34 PM Damn, Beardy, you mean that Zimmerman's parents didn't say on National TV that he was a worthless murdering piece of crap? Whyever not? And that we should all feel sorry for poor, persecuted, hiding Zimmerman? This exceeds even your usual level of blogoshit. Try looking at the facts. Which facts are those, Beardy? YOUR personal "facts"? By the way, have you looked up "quisling" yet? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM Editor's note: Abigail Thernstrom is the vice chairwoman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and an adjunct scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. She is the author, most recently, of "Voting Rights -- and Wrongs: The Elusive Quest for Racially Fair Elections." (CNN) -- Every American can make their own judgment about whether justice was served by the verdict in the George Zimmerman murder trial but one thing we should all recognize: President Obama's interference in a local law enforcement matter was unprecedented and inappropriate, and he comes away from the case looking badly tarnished by his poor judgment. "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon," the president said when asked about the case in the Rose Garden on March 23, 2012, after many had called for Zimmerman's arrest but several weeks before he was charged. "When I think about this boy, I think about my own kids." In fact, if the president had a son, he would have been born to extraordinary privilege and raised with all the advantages of two very affluent and highly educated parents. He would have gone to tony private schools. His path in life would have been almost as dissimilar from Trayvon's as one could imagine. Yes, Obama's hypothetical son and Trayvon would have shared the same brown skin color. Would that have made them interchangeable? Not unless all brown-skinned boys are the same. Does the president really believe that? The president's remarks created a clear impression that he was motivated by one of two factors, and we can only guess as to which, or what combination of the two, was at work here. One possibility is that this is merely another manifestation of the president's well-known narcissism: No matter what the situation may be, it's all about him. The other, more troubling possibility is that the president surrendered to his political instincts. He wants disadvantaged Americans to believe that he and his family are one of them -- despite their life of unparalleled privilege -- and he wanted the prosecutors, judge and jury to believe that this was a case about race where justice demanded a guilty verdict. If that was his motivation -- and we cannot know, but reasonable people certainly may suspect -- then Obama should be ashamed of his effort to stir America's turbulent, dangerous racial waters. The president's role is not to be a racial agitator, and the mark of a great civil rights leader has been a determination to reject the temptations of that approach. And not that long ago -- in 2008, in Philadelphia -- candidate Obama distanced himself from such agitators. People such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson see white racism as endemic and elevate what's wrong with America over all that is remarkably right. In his 2008 Philadelphia speech, Obama separated himself from activists of their ilk: the very people who today still hope to punish George Zimmerman. On the campaign trail, Obama understood the sensibilities of the American people on these questions; in office, Obama seems to have lost that touch. On Sunday, the president did once again separate himself from the voices of anger. "We are a nation of laws and the jury has spoken," he said. But if his Justice Department brings civil rights charges against Zimmerman, as the NAACP has urged and which it is reportedly still considering, the ugly racial politics of this prosecution will be undeniable. Let us hope it never comes to that, for at that point a double tragedy will have occurred. Trayvon Martin will be dead, and our hopes for a president whose judgment is unaffected by his race will have been thoroughly and irreparably dashed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 12:44 PM Greggie boy- I did look it up - The same book shows you under Racist and Bobert under Idiot. Both of you are pictured as Damned Liars. Facts are what happened, and NOT what scumsuckers like you and Bobert say could have happened but which are refuted by all the evidence. Too bad you never bothered to present any valid input in this discussion- whatever point you wanted to make has been proven wrong by your continued lack of evidence, and your personal attacks. And the court said Zimmerman was not a murderer- are you calling Obama a liar? That makes you ( again) a proven racist scumbag liar. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 12:57 PM Easy, Beardy, you're hyperventilating & spraying spittle again. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights? The American Enterprise Institute? Oh, please, Beardy - two bought and paid for Koch brothers propaganda mills. Just to review: Blogoshit and BeardedHorseshit rantings are not "facts". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:00 PM In the 20-day period of the George Zimmerman trial, four minors – three teens and a five-year-old boy - were gunned down in Chicago, according to Homicide Watch Chicago, a Chicago Sun-Times publication, which details every murder that takes place in the city. On June 28, five-year-old Sterling Sims was killed in a double murder that also claimed the life of his mother, 31-year-old Chavonne Brown. Both were shot in their apartment, and police believe the motive was robbery. On July 1, 16-year-old Antonio Fenner was gunned down on the sidewalk next to the body of a 32-year-old man who had gang ties. No arrests were made, and no suspects have been named. Fenner's mother believes her son was in the wrong place at the wrong time, because no one in her family knew the other victim or what Fenner's association was to him. On July 3, 14-year-old Damani Henard was murdered outside a high school. His body was found next a bicycle. On July 9, 15-year-old Ed Cooper was shot and killed while spending time with friends at the park. A gunman got out of a black van and began firing as the boys ran away. Cooper was shot in the street and continued running to a vacant lot where he died. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:04 PM Just to review: Greggie boy is the one on Mudcat who stated that "black, and a Democrat" was the same to him as "dumb Ni**er" And Bobert agrees with Greggie in all things... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:12 PM Greggie boy- "U.S. Commission on Civil Rights? The American Enterprise Institute? Oh, please, Beardy - two bought and paid for Koch brothers propaganda mills." The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights is historically a bipartisan, independent commission of the U.S. federal government, created in 1957, that is charged with the responsibility for investigating, reporting on, and making recommendations concerning civil rights issues that face the nation. The Commission is composed of eight Commissioners. Four are appointed by the President of the United States, two by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate and two by the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI) is an American think tank founded in 1938. Its stated mission is "to defend the principles and improve the institutions of American freedom and democratic capitalism—limited government, private enterprise, individual liberty and responsibility, vigilant and effective defense and foreign policies, political accountability, and open debate".[2] AEI is an independent nonprofit organization supported primarily by grants and contributions from foundations, corporations, and individuals. It is headquartered in Washington, D.C. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:14 PM And Chicago murders have fuck-all to do with Martin/Zimmerman, Beardy. The heat gettin' to you? And what's the source for this latest blogoshit? Or is it more BeardedHorseshit you made up yourself? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM Beardy, I don't give to shits about your historical anecdotes. Look up who funds those propaganda mills TODAY. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM Bottom line with this case is that the fact that the cops and prosecutors didn't take this seriously poisoned the jury pool and that had more to do with the final outcome than anything that happened in the court room... Like it has been observed... If a white kid had been offed by the black neighborhood watch volunteer there would have been immediate charges and a much different outcome... Southern justice is what we have witnessed... No different from when the KKK shot the demonstrators in Greensboro and got away with it... Same thing that happened to Emmett Till... But there are folks here at Mudcat that are no better than the KKKers who go out and shoot innocent black people... That's pretty sad but apparently true... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:19 PM Also do a search on Ms. Thernstrom, her antecedents and her other memberships. You might learn something you don't want to admit. By the way, let me ask you again: "Now, of course, had Martin been Jewish or Israeli, we'd be hearing a whole different story from ya, wouldn't we, Beardy? " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:23 PM Greggie boy, The Civil Rights Act of 1957 created the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Since then, Congress has reauthorized or extended the legislation creating the Commission several times; the last reauthorization was in 1994 by the Civil Rights Commission Amendments Act of 1994. Established as an independent, bipartisan, fact-finding federal agency, our mission is to inform the development of national civil rights policy and enhance enforcement of federal civil rights laws. We pursue this mission by studying alleged deprivations of voting rights and alleged discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin, or in the administration of justice. We play a vital role in advancing civil rights through objective and comprehensive investigation, research, and analysis on issues of fundamental concern to the federal government and the public. http://www.usccr.gov/about/index.php Commissioners The United States Commission on Civil Rights is composed of eight Commissioners: four appointed by the President and four by Congress. Not more than four members shall at any one time be of the same political party. The President also designates the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson from among the Commission's members with the concurrence of a majority of the Commission's members. The Commissioners serve 6-year terms. No Senate confirmation is required. The President may remove a member of the Commission only for neglect of duty or malfeasance in office. Six years.... Now Obama has appointed the chair and how many member so far? But then, for you to call Obama the leader of a propaganda mill might be the only true thing you have posted here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:26 PM Bobert, You state: "But there are folks here at Mudcat that are no better than the KKKers who go out and shoot innocent black people... That's pretty sad but apparently true... " Yes, but they are the ones who would let the prosecution violate the law, and who are asking for a lynching now that the trial has found Zimmerman not guilty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:37 PM Too bad the law and justice aren't synonymous. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:37 PM You mean this Jew, or did you have another in mind? Twenty-one years ago a tragic car accident in Crown Heights Brooklyn escalated into a pogrom against the Jewish people, thanks in part to this faux-preacher. The media gives this pogrom a politically correct description, violence between the area's Blacks and Jews. They ignore the fact that the violence was not two-sided. The Crown Heights riot was an attack on the Jews by the neighborhood's Caribbean community. Black Antisemitism in the Summer of 1991 Jews were a key part of the civil rights movement in the 1960s, when the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. made his famous march to Selma Alabama, he walked hand in hand with many Jews including Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel. Along with the Jews was a contingent of Torahs to emphasize that the quest for Civil Rights was a holy mission for the Jewish people. In spite of the strong Jewish participation in the civil rights movement the transformation from the peaceful marches to Black power movement introduced considerable friction into African American-Jewish relations, especially within the "Black Muslim" movement. During the 1970s and 1980s African-Americans stopped looking at Jews as their allies but as their oppressors. The Jews were seen as having the political power that the African-Americans desired. Black leaders such as Louis Farrakhan, and Jesse Jackson went public with anti-Semitic comments. Adding to the hatred were the leaders of the South African anti-Apartheid movement who traveled throughout the United States as conquering heroes, and spreading Jew-hatred. For example, in 1984 Desmond Tutu publicly complained about American Jews having "an arrogance—the arrogance of power because Jews are a powerful lobby in this land and all kinds of people woo their support. Understandably Jewish/Black relations were already rocky as NY City entered the summer of 1991. On July 20, 1991, Leonard Jeffries of City College who had a history of anti-Semitic slurs presented a two-hour long speech claiming "rich Jews" financed the slave trade, Jews control the film industry (together with Italian mafia), and use that control to paint a brutal stereotype of blacks. Jeffries also attacked Diane Ravitch, (Assistant Secretary of Education) calling her a "sophisticated Texas Jew," "a debonair racist" and "Miss Daisy." Jeffries' speech received enormous negative press during the first weeks of August especially from the leaders of the Jewish community who wanted Jeffries fired for the bigotry. With each new criticism of the professor, leaders in the African-American community rushed to Jeffries' defense. NYC's two black newspapers as well as black radio station WLIB; joined activists such Al Sharpton, Colin Moore, C. Vernon Mason, Sonny Carson, and Lenora Fulani to showcase their approval of Jeffries's "scholarship" and to denounce the people who criticized Jeffries Antisemitism as race baiters. Serial race-baiter Al Sharpton is credited with saying, "If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house" as a response the Crown Heights riot. That is a fallacy; he made that threatening comment to the Jewish community about the growing Jeffries controversy on August 18th the day before the riots began. Clearly something bad was coming. Jeffries was fired because of his bigoted speech and pressure from the Jewish community (he was later reinstated and won a court case surrounding his firing) leading to further resentment of the Jews from a Black community already being barraged with anti-Jewish incitement from the African-American media. On Monday 8/19/91 a station wagon driven by Yosef Lifsh, hit another car and bounced onto the sidewalk at 8:21 p.m. The station wagon was part of a 3-car motorcade carrying the Lubavitcher Rebbe Menachem Schneerson. The Rebbe was in a different car. The station wagon struck two black children, 7-year-old cousins Gavin and Angela Cato who were on the sidewalk. Lifsh immediately got out of his car and tried to help the children gathering crowd started to attack him. Within minutes, an ambulance from the Hasidic-run ambulance service, and two from the city's Emergency Medical Service arrived. Also the gathering crowd became unruly. The police who showed up radioed for backup reporting the station wagon's driver and passengers were being assaulted. Police officer Nona Capace ordered the Hasidic ambulance to remove the battered Yosef Lifsh, and his passenger from the scene. The injured children went by separate city ambulances to Kings County Hospital. Gavin Cato was pronounced dead; his cousin survived. A rumor began to spread that the Hasidic ambulance crew had ignored the dying black child in favor of treating the Jewish men. Ignoring the commandment about bearing false witness, Sharpton used this falsehoodto incite the crowd. Other rumors sprang up Lifsh was intoxicated ( breath alcohol test administered by the police proved his sobriety). More falsehoods circulated; Lifsh did not have a valid driver's license; he went through a red light; the police prevented people including Gavin Cato's father, from assisting in the rescue. Charles Price, an area resident who had come to the scene of the accident, incited the masses with claims that, "The Jews get everything they want. They're killing our children." Price later pled guilty for inciting the crowd to murder Yankel Rosenbaum. Ignited by the falsehoods, resentment exploded into violence. Groups of young black men threw rocks, bottles and debris at police, residents and homes. According to the New York Times, more than 250 neighborhood residents went on a rampage that first night, mostly black teenagers, many of whom were shouting "Jews! Jews! Jews!" Three hours after the tragic crash, 29-year-old Australian Jewish scholar Yankel Rosenbaum was attacked by a gang of Black teens. He was stabbed four times. Cops quickly arrested Lemrick Nelson, who was identified by Rosenbaum as his attacker. Rosenbaum's wounds were not fatal he was expected to recover; Mayor Dinkins visited Rosenbaum at the hospital. Yankel died at 2:30am Tuesday because the hospital staff missed one of his knife wounds. The next evening, according to the sworn testimony of Efraim Lipkind, a former Hasidic resident of Crown Heights, Sharpton started agitating the crowd. "Then we had a famous man, Al Sharpton, who came down, and he said Tuesday night, kill the Jews, two times. I heard him, and he started to lead a charge across the street to Utica." With each passing hour the violence worsened, Jewish leaders began to desperately complain about the lack of protection to the authorities. They said, the rioters were being allowed to rampage unchecked, too little force was being brought to bear, and too few arrests were being made. Area Jews felt the police were under orders by the City's first black mayor to hold back, that the police were not allowed to fight against the Black rioters, who continued to grow bolder in their anti-Semitic attack as they sensed the appeasement. The fact is New York City Mayor David Dinkins responded to the riot immediately by deploying 2,000 police officers and making a personal visit to the troubled neighborhood under a hail of rocks and epithets hurled at him by fellow blacks. Dinkins has spoken of his own mishandling of the riots. Admitting he "screwed up Crown Heights" "I regret not saying to the police brass sooner whatever you guys are doing is not working" it was then they altered their behavior and they were able to contained the ravaging young blacks who were attacking Jews … I will forever be accused of holding back the police and permitted blacks to attack Jews, however that did not happen it is just inaccurate" In all, the street violence against the Crown Heights Jews lasted three days/four nights starting with the evening of the accident. On Thursday evening, cops finally restored order, although sporadic violence against Jews continued for weeks after the riot was contained. Yankel Rosenbaum wasn't the only person murdered by the rioters. On September 5th, Italian-American, Anthony Graziosi, was dragged out of his car, brutally beaten and stabbed to death because his full beard and dark clothing caused him to be mistaken for a Hasidic Jew. During the funeral of Gavin Cato on August 26th, Al Sharpton gave an anti-Semitic eulogy, which fueled the fires of hatred. "The world will tell us he was killed by accident. Yes, it was a social accident. … It's an accident to allow an apartheid ambulance service in the middle of Crown Heights. … Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights. The issue is not anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid. … All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffe klatsch, no skinnin' and grinnin'. Pay for your deeds." Regarding the Mayor's call for peace Sharpton pontificated: "They don't want peace, they want quiet." Sharpton and the lawyer representing the Cato family counseled them not to cooperate with authorities in the investigation and demanded a special prosecutor be named. Sharpton was asked about the violence, he justified it, "We must not reprimand our children for outrage, when it is the outrage that was put in them by an oppressive system," he said. The first Sabbath after the Funeral Sharpton tried unsuccessfully to kick up tensions again by marching 400 protesters in front of the Lubavitch of Crown Heights shouting "No Justice, No Peace." Sharpton called for the arrest of Lifsh, the driver of the station wagon. Even though more than twenty similarly accidental vehicular deaths had occurred in Brooklyn since 1989 without a single arrest several involving local Hasidim run down by blacks. The agitator's pressure led Charles Hynes, the Brooklyn district attorney, into convening a grand jury. When the investigation of the accident did not produce a criminal indictment against Yosef Lifsh, Al Sharpton encouraged the Cato family to seek big-bucks damages in a civil suit against Lifsh (who had since fled to Israel for his own safety). Sharpton announced that he would personally serve papers on Yosef Lifsh in Israel. He bought tickets and hopped an El-Al flight on the weekend of Yom Kippur. At Ben Gurion Airport, a woman spotted Sharpton hailing a cab and yelled to him, "Go to hell! "I am in hell already," shot back. "I am in Israel." The Aftermath Sharpton abandoned the Caribbean people of Crown Heights as soon as the anti-Semitic violence had died down. His entire participation in the violence may have been a calculated effort to usurp Jesse Jackson as the leading spokesman for African-Americans. Jackson may have had his "Hymie-town" but Sharpton's incitement against those Jews who he perceived as having the political power that African Americans deserved, went much further than simply words like Jackson. Sadly had Sharpton not exploited the death of Gavin Cato for his own "resume", what was by all accounts, a disorganized group of ruffians on the first night of the riot, might well have dissipated the morning after the accident. The media portrayed the Crown Heights riot as two-sided promoting the myth that both blacks and Jews were equal in their violence. The violence was a one-sided rampage waged by some of the neighborhood's 180,000 strong black majority against a Jewish minority of 20,000. Maybe the media continues to sugarcoat the riot because it was unprecedented in American history. For liberals it's impossible to perceive blacks as purveyors of bigotry they are forever in the role of victims of hate. But that kind of killing is fine , according to Bobert and Greggie boy. It's not like Jews are real people, you know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:40 PM Where does beardedbruce get all the time to read, then copy-and-paste all this stuff? I don't have time to do more than quickly skim what he posts. I do keep up with the news, but I live in the 3-D world and have other things to do. Where, I wonder, does he live? And what might be his motivation? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:43 PM "George Zimmerman haters throughout the media have carped and whined about the fact that there weren't any African-Americans on the jury despite the law requiring the accused NOT the victim be judged by his peers. On CNN Newsroom Tuesday, it was revealed that a potential black juror had been struck by the prosecution for committing the crime of being a Fox News watcher |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:47 PM Don Firth I had not noticed that you even bothered to read the posts before commenting on them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM ""The outside agitators came. They burned some churches and put the blame, On decent southern people's names, To set our colored people aflame. And maybe some of our boys got hot, And a couple of niggers and reds got shot, They should have stayed where they belong, And preacher would've told us if we'd done wrong."" Outside agitators like the WHITE guy in the story that follows: ""On Sunday, 15th September, 1963, a white man was seen getting out of a white and turquoise Chevrolet car and placing a box under the steps of the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church. Soon afterwards, at 10.22 a.m., the bomb exploded killing Denise McNair (11), Addie Mae Collins (14), Carole Robertson (14) and Cynthia Wesley (14). The four girls had been attending Sunday school classes at the church. Twenty-three other people were also hurt by the blast. Civil rights activists blamed George Wallace, the Governor of Alabama, for the killings. Only a week before the bombing he had told the New York Times that to stop integration Alabama needed a "few first-class funerals."" THAT folks is the US Southland that the rest of the WORLD sees, and it hasn't apparently changed a bit. Here's the latest vigilante, with a record of violence including three accusations of assault, one of assaulting a police officer while resisting arrest, one accusation of sustained and persistent child abuse against a member of his family and, because he is getting bolder, being apparently teflon coated, escalation to killing an innocent teenager, and getting away with it with the connivance of white Florida authorities. A shameful and despicable blot upon everything that America is supposed to stand for. TRUTH, JUSTICE AND THE AMERICAN WAY! Tell THAT to Trayvon Martin and his grieving family. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM And I also wonder about Songwronger, who does the same thing, not to mention Goofball, who follows on what Songwronger and beardedbruce post, adding nothing but "Yessir, yessir, three bags full." They're Mudcat's version of Beavis and Butthead, followed around by an obsequious Spongebob Squarepants. Don't these people have anything useful to do? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:52 PM Don Firth, And yet you accept Greggie boy as a self-appointed "Liberal Voice"without any complaint? You are sicker than I thought. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:53 PM ""So does Zimmerman get his gun back now? Any restrictions?"" Of course he does! It's his inalienable right as an innocent man. Whiter than white,.....for the moment at least. Besides the real white Florida might need Teflon George (nothing sticks) to do it again. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:57 PM BTW, more on the potential black juror struck by the PROSECUTION: In case you were wondering, Skolnick is not a Zimmerman supporter or a conservative. Besides being hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons' political director and the co-president of GlobalGrind.com, he's also on the board of directors of the Trayvon Martin Foundation. That said, it appears black jurors were only going to be acceptable to the prosecution if they were liberals getting their "news" from Zimmerman-hating media outlets. Martin supporters should keep that in mind as they complain about the makeup of the jury. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 16 Jul 13 - 01:58 PM ""You get real...if you want to end racial hating, then end it! These IS another way!"" Yep! You can have "Welcome Massa Boss! tattooed across your chest and lay across the Southern Gentleman's doorway. He'll wipe his feet on you and love you for being a Good Boy. Thank Christ I live in the UK where having black friends doesn't scandalise the neighbours or frighten the cattle. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:04 PM "Martin Luther King Jr's niece Alveda King made some comments Monday about the aftermath of the George Zimmerman verdict that people on both sides of the aisle should heed. Appearing on the Steve Malzberg Show on NewsMax TV, King said the NAACP was "race-baiting" and trying to stir up "racial anarchy" by pushing for the justice department to prosecute a civil rights case against Zimmerman. STEVE MALZBERG: There's all kinds of calls from the NAACP and everyone else on that side of the issue for a civil rights case to be brought against George Zimmerman. Do you believe that that would be helpful? ALVEDA KING: It is not helpful to race-bait, NAACP and all of those other organizations who also support abortion, who also support the destruction of natural marriage and family. So we need to wonder why they're doing that, what kind of checks and money they're getting behind the scenes to stir us up into racial anarchy when we should be speaking nonviolence, justice, peace, and love as Trayvon's parents are doing by the way. And so I believe that we need to ask why they're race-baiting, because they are, and therefore I don't defend they're issues. "Oh, this is a race problem. It's all of that." No, this is a human heart problem. We need to approach this in prayer, we need to be nonviolent, we need to learn from this lesson so that Trayvon Martin, many years from now when we remember, will say that's the time in American history when people realized that something was very wrong in America, a young man died, and America went on her knees. That's really what I'm trying to get across." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:08 PM (CNN) -- George Zimmerman gave a scathing review of the Sanford Police Department and accused its chief of engaging in a cover-up during a public meeting in January 2011. Zimmerman's anger stemmed from the case of Sherman Ware, a black homeless man who was beaten by the son of a white police lieutenant. Since Zimmerman shot and killed unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin in February -- in what he insists was self-defense -- Zimmerman's family has pointed to his efforts to "get justice" for Ware in response to people around the country who have accused him of racially profiling the 17-year-old. Zimmerman is Hispanic; Trayvon Martin was black. Trayvon Martin's girlfriend's testimony Audio evidence in Trayvon Martin case New video shows Trayvon Martin Geragos: New documents hurt Martin case Criminal expert: Zimmerman will go free Last images of Trayvon Martin alive 'Stand your ground' plea rejected HLN: Zimmerman wife talks publicly for the first time Last year in September, Zimmerman wrote an e-mail to Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee saying, "In the past, I have not had a positive perspective of Sanford Police Department, due primarily to the Sherman Ware incident." A video from the night of Ware's beating showed Justin Collison hitting the young man. Collison ended up pleading guilty to misdemeanor battery Zimmerman's outrage over the incident was clear at the public meeting the previous January. Attorneys in Zimmerman case want evidence sealed "I would just like to state that the law is written in black and white. It should not and cannot be enforced in the gray for those that are in the thin blue line," he said at the hearing. CNN obtained a recording this week. He mentioned Brian Tooley, who was Sanford's police chief at the time of the Ware incident. "I'd like to know what action the commission intends on making in order to repeal Mr. Tooley's pension. I'm not asking you to repeal his pension. I believe that he's already forfeited his pension by his illegal cover-up and corruption and what happened in his department." While Zimmerman is not heard specifically mentioning Ware in the recording, the official minutes from the hearing state that citizen demands included "a full review of the Sherman Ware cover-ups on behalf of" Sanford police. Public outcries of police misconduct forced Tooley into early retirement. He was not charged with illegal activity. Despite his previous frustration with police, the September e-mail included thanks to Lee and praise for the department's "professionalism." The e-mail, eight months after the public meeting, shows a significant shift in Zimmerman's relationship with police, months before officers responded to the Trayvon Martin shooting. However, a spokesperson for Lee said in a e-mail to CNN that the police chief "has never met Mr. Zimmerman and does not know him." "The email Chief Lee received in 2011 was not unique among the numerous complimentary emails Chief Lee has received from Sanford residents," Sara Brady wrote. "As is his practice, Chief Lee responded to a positive comment from a citizen. Based on comments that Mr. Zimmerman is reported to have made in a public forum before Chief Lee was hired, it is not likely that Mr. Zimmerman would have endeared himself to members of the police department." Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, is charged with second-degree murder in the death, which sparked nationwide protests and inflamed public passions over race relations and gun control. Inconsistencies in Trayvon Martin case Critics of the case have questioned his relationship with police, noting that Zimmerman worked closely with officers as part of his work with the neighborhood watch program he started. The January 8, 2011, recording from the meeting at Sanford's City Hall is a reminder that the relationship wasn't always positive. "I also have had the opportunity to take ride-alongs with the city of Sanford Police Department and what I saw was disgusting," Zimmerman said at the time. "The officer showed me his favorite hiding spots for taking naps. ... He took two lunch breaks and attended a going-away party for one of his fellow officers." Zimmerman prosecutors release evidence list Sanford Police Capt. Robert O'Connor told CNN that the department does not have specific details about when Zimmerman rode with police or whom he rode with, "if in fact he ever did ride with SPD." In the September 18, 2011, e-mail, obtained by CNN after a records request, Zimmerman said he had "a completely new perspective" after working closely with the department's community volunteer coordinator. Donations pour in to Trayvon Martin's killer He praised the volunteer coordinator's quick responses to e-mails and phone calls, saying she went "above and beyond to help launch a neighborhood watch" and calling her "a testament to the highest level of professionalism of (the chief's) administration." "I have high hopes for, and restored faith in your administration and the Sanford Police Department in its entirety," he wrote. Sanford interim Police Chief Richard Myers declined comment to CNN, but told the Miami Herald newspaper in a written statement, "Based upon the questions being posed, it would be inappropriate for any of us to speculate or conclude anything gleaned from the recording or any e-mail documents. "Neither the city manager nor the interim police chief were with the City of Sanford at the time the recording was made, and neither were here during the tenure of the former chief cited in one of the questions," the statement said. "As a police chief I embrace the notion that transparency helps build public trust, but in this case, the need to preserve the sanctity of a criminal prosecution for both the prosecutor and the defense requires us to eschew making any comments that could taint the process." Documents released last week showed a cordial relationship between Zimmerman and the police. New documents shed light on Trayvon Martin killing Beginning in August 2011, Zimmerman exchanged e-mails with the Sanford police department at least three times, the documents show. A rash of burglaries that began in July prompted the watch captain to ask the police department to host a neighborhood watch presentation for members of the community. Zimmerman's e-mails with Sanford police show a pleasant, even friendly, relationship. In an e-mail dated September 19, Sanford police volunteer coordinator Wendy Dorival thanked Zimmerman for his "kind words" sent to the chief. He responded, "It was with great pleasure that I sent that e-mail, you deserve the recognition!" Police records indicate that five burglaries were documented in the neighborhood where Zimmerman lived in less than three months, starting in mid-July. Five months before the Martin shooting, at the neighborhood watch meeting on September 22, Sanford police distributed contact cards and hosted a presentation on crime-prevention and security measures, according to the documents. Some of the fliers distributed read, "Report suspicious persons ... activities ... or vehicles." Another reads, "Know your neighbor" -- going on to issue advice on how to "profile" your neighborhood block. http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/24/justice/florida-teen-shooting |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:15 PM Lot of long stuff above that I have not read - but BRUCIE YOU ARE A FUCKING LIAR - SERINO WAS THE FIRST PERSON TO RECOMMEND THAT Z BE NOT PROSECUTED. GO AND FUCKING CHECK. CUNT. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:20 PM Hey, beardedbruce has posted more interesting posts, whether you agree with them or not, than the rest of the nonsense posted by his attackers COMBINED. Greg, very rarely posts ANYTHING of 'news value', at all... just one liners filled with his resistance to carry on a decent exchange. Bobert is out for blood, regardless of the facts, just so long as it goes with his backwoods southern opinions of 'kill whitey', and Don is just there to keep the momentum going. Don T, foams and froths so much, you can't make sense out of any of it...other that he is an expert froth and foamer! Rarely are the topics posted by Bruce, actually discussed, just dismissed, amidst political vitriol. All I want to know, is, Is your music that discombobulated too?..No thought, no continuity, no sense?? Is the violence spawned by the verdict, justified? Is the violence spawned by the verdict, just? Is the violence spawned by the verdict, justice? Is the violence spawned by the verdict, just more stupid acts? What is the point of fanning hatred, resentment and divisions? The verdict is in, the prosecution lost, because they forced a political agenda, instead of methodically proceeded to prosecute for the crimes, because they were crimes....and now the political crybabies are whining, and planning more violence, because they're all such 'peace loving' haters with an agenda...anything to stir up confusion, just to be able to 'offer' a 'solution' of more oppression, though they will argue otherwise. The verdict is in, get over it!..and whether you agree with it or not, at least TRY to act like a mature adult! The media driven obsession of this case, while ignoring a shitload of other crimes of violence and murder, speaks VOLUMES regarding exploitation of bias, that the media either helps create, or stirs up. YOU can be influenced and controlled by it if you want, and you can be proud that you can't think for yourselves, you can ignore the facts, and replace them with emotionally driven opinions, but you also should never think that people should take you seriously!..and your heightened emotions mixed with anxieties about it, just advertizes, that can't think for yourselves and have control over it! ...and then you act so 'indignant' that people won't take you seriously! ..I mean if you won't listed to a friend telling you that...who will you listen to??..the media???????? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:23 PM Brucie, I don't let anybody make up my mind for me. I read the news and make up my own mind, based on what facts are available. Too bad more people don't do the same thing. Don Firth P. S. And Don T., I live in the Pacific Northwest, up in the upper left-hand corner of the country. It's not that we're free of racism here, but the vast majority of people work and play alongside people of different races with no problems or strife. When I worked at Boeing some years ago, my supervisor was Japanese-American. When I transferred to another division to do engineering drawings for a new airplane (the 747 jumbo-jet), my supervisor was black. At other jobs, I've had co-workers of different races and ethnicities, and there was no srrife or signs of prejudice. In fact, I found the diversity stimulating and educational. Those in other parts of the country who are blinded by racial barriers in their own minds are depriving themselves of a lot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:25 PM Typo:..last sentence should be 'listen' , not 'listed'. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:29 PM Firth: "Brucie, I don't let anybody make up my mind for me. I read the news and make up my own mind, based on what facts are available." PERFECT! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:33 PM Richard, "BRUCIE YOU ARE A FUCKING LIAR - SERINO WAS THE FIRST PERSON TO RECOMMEND THAT Z BE NOT PROSECUTED. GO AND FUCKING CHECK. CUNT." I checked, and you are wrong. "he lead homicide investigator in the shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin recommended that neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter the night of the shooting, multiple sources told ABC News. " What part don't you fucking understand, SFB? Got to hell, you scumbag liar. http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-investigator-wanted-charge-george-zimmerman-manslaughter/story?id=16011674#.UeWQYhZ1CS0 http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-investigator-wanted-charge-george-zimmerman-manslaughter/story?id=16011674#.UeWQYhZ1CS0 z"SANFORD, Fla. March 27, 2012 The lead homicide investigator in the shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin recommended that neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter the night of the shooting, multiple sources told ABC News. But Sanford, Fla., Investigator Chris Serino was instructed to not press charges against Zimmerman because the state attorney's office headed by Norman Wolfinger determined there wasn't enough evidence to lead to a conviction, the sources told ABC News. Police brought Zimmerman into the station for questioning for a few hours on the night of the shooting, said Zimmerman's attorney, despite his request for medical attention first. Ultimately they had to accept Zimmerman's claim of self defense. He was never charged with a crime. Serino filed an affidavit on Feb. 26, the night that Martin was shot and killed by Zimmerman, that stated he was unconvinced Zimmerman's version of events. Zimmerman, 28, claimed he shot Martin, 17, in self defense." Or can you provide some source for your error to make it misinformed rather than being a total shithead? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:37 PM As usual, the Liberal Voices not only lie about what was presented as evidence, they lie about what is posted without regard to the documented facts. Richard "checked" and found that he was wrong- so he lied about it. Typical... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:45 PM And of course, Goofball, you don't think the news is a reliable source of facts. Well, to a large degree, it isn't. But when reading and listening, one must consider the integrity of the sources, compare different reports, and determine what is most probably true and hold the rest in abeyance until further evidence is available. With diligence and thought, one can usually ferret out the truth. I learned to do that on the job. In fact, my job depended on my ability to do this. Your brand of instant assumption and conclusion-jumping just wouldn't have cut it. The station manager would have booted your ass out the door right after your first newscast. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:46 PM Richard, A decent person would apologize, but I don't expect you to even try to qualify as decent- it might damage your "liberal credentials". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 02:56 PM "Zimmerman's brother also stated that the family is worried that the Department of Justice is being pressured by special interest groups to open a federal investigation into the case. "I think Eric Holder is being pressured by some groups who were calling for, initially, just an arrest. These same groups keep moving around the goal posts: the NAACP, Al Sharpton, the Rainbow Push Coalition with Jesse Jackson." Zimmerman noted. "First they wanted just a simple arrest and that's it, have his fair day in court and whatever the verdict is, we'll respect it. Then when the verdict was coming they wanted him to be found guilty. But the verdict isn't what they wanted, so now they're moving the goal post again, and calling on the Department of Justice to investigate him more." the brother added. "I understand the Justice Department's responding to pressure," Zimmerman continued. "But I think that the American people need a little bit of time to digest those two words 'Not Guilty.' It doesn't mean nothing happened. I think most of the people who were upset with that outcome didn't actually pay attention to the trial." " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Jul 13 - 03:22 PM In Chester County, Pennsylvania, police are investigating graffiti on a building before it was set on fire: "KILL ZIMMERMAN." Firefighters were called to the scene of the fire at ProSigns, a company manufacturing commercial signs for business, and found that phrase spray-painted in red on the front of the building. The firefighters put out the fire without significant damage. The fire has been ruled arson. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 16 Jul 13 - 03:49 PM Firth: "Your brand of instant assumption and conclusion-jumping just wouldn't have cut it. The station manager would have booted your ass out the door right after your first newscast." My brand of instant assumption and conclusion-jumping just wouldn't be instant assumption and conclusion-jumping. yours is IF it co-insides with your predisposed biases...isn't that how YOU decide what the 'facts' are??..what you 'decide to believe' or not? but you are right about one thing..." "And of course, Goofball, you don't think the news is a reliable source of facts. Well, to a large degree, it isn't." Right! Give yourself a gold star on your forehead! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 16 Jul 13 - 04:06 PM Goofball, the gold star on your forehead is shining through your belly-button. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 16 Jul 13 - 04:13 PM America cares about power and money. You want the stand your ground law overturned, boycott Florida products. They'll lose the law soon enough. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 16 Jul 13 - 04:43 PM Finally!!..A constructive post! ..but keep in mind, the 'Stand Your ground' statute was NOT entered into this case, by either the prosecution, nor the defense...it was talked about, but not part of the defense's trial evidence, just for your information...nonetheless, it could be done away with, without infringing on anyone's 'rights'. Self defense should be able to cover the necessary defenses, when employed legitimately...that's up to the jury to decide, on each individual case. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 16 Jul 13 - 04:59 PM Here's another part of this injustice that we really haven't talked much about: karma... Yep, Zimmerman may have won the Southern injustice battle but his karma is fucked... I predict that Zimmerman will end up losing the war... Not sure how it will play out but you can take it to the back that it will play out... Got O.J and it will get this creep, too... As for his fan club here??? They got some messed up karma, too, to live with... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 05:01 PM Thanks, Beardy, for your bigoted anti-Black rant of 16 Jul 13-01:37 PM about a quarter-century old irrelevancy. It DOES however clearly illuminate your real opinion of Black folks. And you have the unmitigated chutzpah to call other people racist? Fascinating. As I correctly surmised, had Martin been Jewish, you'd be carrying the noose and leading the mob after Zimmerman yourself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 16 Jul 13 - 05:30 PM ""Too bad you can't follow the facts. You are showing your obvious racism here. "Given that Serino ddidn't want to prosecute Zimmerman, Hell! He didn't want to investigate him, he just wanrted to release him and forget the whole thing, just how much credence should have been given to pro Zimmerman testimony from this half baked imitation of a cop?"" The prosecution of Zimmerman was a farce from start to finish. There was no lawyer present who intended to secure a conviction. And the man who, having not a single idea of his own, has stuffed this thread with cut and pastes of other pewople who share his distaste for convicting a man who, after all, only shot a black. It's not like he killed a human being, is it Bruce. And you have the nerve to call me racist. My attitude would be exactly the same if it were a black vigilante strapping on a gun and looking for an excuse to shoot someone. Can you say the same, given that you won't even discuss the possibility that a black kid might feel afraid when accosted aggressively by a non uniformed stranger, and act in self defence. I think it is obvious who is the racist here, and it's you. Now post another copy of a full page screed that you already posted three days ago. It's all you're good for. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 16 Jul 13 - 05:44 PM ""supported primarily by grants and contributions from foundations, corporations, and individuals."" foundations, corporations and members of the richest one percent. Oh that'll be alright then. No vested interests there............? Sheeesh! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 16 Jul 13 - 05:54 PM Posted by Beardedbruce: "Don Firth, And yet you accept Greggie boy as a self-appointed "Liberal Voice"without any complaint? You are sicker than I thought." Bruce, anyone who spends as much time gleaning the web for the vast volumes of racist propaganda that you cut-and-paste here--well, they don't come much sicker than that! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 05:57 PM Where does beardedbruce get all the time to read, then copy-and-paste all this stuff? He doesn't actually READ it beforehand, Don, if he recognizes a few known keywords he just chucks great gobs of horseshit about whether its relevant or not. Volume is all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 16 Jul 13 - 05:59 PM I predict that Zimmerman will end up losing the war... I wish I could believe & take comfort in that Bobster... but it comes real hard. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 16 Jul 13 - 06:45 PM John Oliver explains Florida gun laws |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 16 Jul 13 - 06:59 PM Greg F: "As I correctly surmised, had Martin been Jewish, you'd be carrying the noose and leading the mob after Zimmerman yourself." As I correctly surmised, had Dylan been Jewish, you'd be carrying the noose and leading the mob after Yoko Ono yourself. GfS P.S. I..I...er,...I...J-just COULDN'T resit it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 16 Jul 13 - 07:02 PM The quality of argument has gone from poor to puerile. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 16 Jul 13 - 07:31 PM There is no argument here... There are two very different ways of looking at the world... Some are fearful they will become a minority and won't be able to rule the others so they are intent on "stand-you-ground" to protect them from an emerging majority... Very narrow thinking... Wouldn't it be smarter to try to get along that to build higher fences??? Guess not... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:00 PM Too bad GfS doesn't know the difference between resit and resist, or worse, between it's and its. (see 16 Jul 13-2:48 AM). His remarks would seem much more cogent. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:11 PM GfinS and cogent??? LOL... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 16 Jul 13 - 10:03 PM I thought you could read typonese... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 16 Jul 13 - 10:58 PM LOL (deja vu). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Songwronger Date: 16 Jul 13 - 11:47 PM We in NEW school now. Don't care about Israel bombing the Russians in Syria. Justice for Trayvon. Bobert's victory celebration |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Songwronger Date: 16 Jul 13 - 11:51 PM Bad link. His party's here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:03 AM The first one might have been a 'bad link', 'cuz the second one is the same one..I couldn't tell the difference... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Songwronger Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:31 AM Just go to Youtube and type in "walmart stormbed by trayvon supporters." Bobert's in there somewhere, or his spirit is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Songwronger Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:44 AM You know, if George W. Bush had used the federal government to go into a community and agitate for protests over the killing of a white man by a black man, and then stepped in front of the cameras and said the white man looked like the son he might have had... Obama's the worst racist I've ever seen in my life. The absolute worst. He even trumped Al Sharpton with that "Could've been my son" stunt. Sharpton gets paid to spew his racist hate (it's his meal ticket), but Obama's supposed to be the president of the United States. The UNITED states. He's an absolute travesty as president. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:56 AM Stoopud! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 17 Jul 13 - 01:01 AM "stormbed"? Didn't find it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:59 AM Chicago Defender - "mere days after the shooting, Det. Serino felt there wasn't enough evidence to arrest, let alone file charges against Zimmerman." Conservative Treehouse.com "Ultimately the FBI interviewed Serino and he told how and who pressured him. We presented that highly revealing interview then and here it is to help you understand: "He listed Sgt. Arthur Barnes, Rebecca Villenova, and Trekelle Perkins as all pressuring him to file charges against Zimmerman after the incident." Law of self defense.com "Well, we already knew from Chris Serino's testimony yesterday that he was under considerable outside pressure to bring charges against Zimmerman: Zimmerman Trial Day 6 – Analysis & Video – State's witness Chris Serino seriously undermines charge We also know from the FBI report of their interview with him that he felt such charges were unwarranted: Zimmerman Trial: Evidentiary Flashback: Investigator Serino Tells FBI He Was Pressured to Bring Charges But did you also know that Investigator Serino, a law enforcement office with 30 years of experience and obviously deemed competent enough by his superiors to lead a cross-departmental investigation of the Trayvon Martin shooting, was demoted to patrolman after he failed to recommend second degree murder charges against George Zimmerman? 120626 Christopher Serino demoted to partrolman – CBS News" Wikipedia "On March 13, 2012, Chris Serino sent a capias request to the state's attorney recommending charges of negligent manslaughter against Zimmerman, though Serino maintains he did not believe they had the evidence to support those charges and that manslaughter was only included in the capias in order for the prosecutor's office to continue with their own investigation." Wikipedia again "On March 16, Serino told the Orlando Sentinel that his investigation had turned up no reliable evidence that cast doubt on Zimmerman's account, that he had acted in self-defense. "The best evidence we have is the testimony of George Zimmerman, and he says the decedent was the primary aggressor in the whole event, everything I have is adding up to what he says."" Orlando Sentinel "Said Serino, "The best evidence we have is the testimony of George Zimmerman. … We did not have enough for an arrest warrant."" There. That didn't take long to check did it, Brucie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 07:54 AM Richard, FROM YOUR POST: Wikipedia "On March 13, 2012, Chris Serino sent a capias request to the state's attorney recommending charges of negligent manslaughter against Zimmerman, ANfd how do you explain away my postings? MY statement is true- He did recommend manslaughter charges, for wjatever reason. YOU are a scum sucking liar. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 08:05 AM The jury made the "right decision" in the George Zimmerman murder trial, former President Jimmy Carter said Tuesday. "I think the jury made the right decision based on the evidence presented, because the prosecution inadvertently set the standard so high that the jury had to be convinced that it was a deliberate act by Zimmerman that he was not at all defending himself, and so forth," Carter told Atlanta news channel WXIA. "It's not a moral question, it's a legal question and the American law requires that the jury listens to the evidence presented." Carter said he agrees with President Barack Obama and accepts the jury's decision. "So President Obama said he thought - it was — he regretted the decision, but he had to accept the results of the jury decision," Carter said. "But we are a nation of laws, and a jury has spoken," the statement said, although it didn't mention anything about Obama regretting the decision as Carter suggested. When asked if the trial says something about the state of racial relations in the United States, Carter said he feels America will put aside the feelings about the past. (PHOTOS: Trayvon Martin rallies) "I've seen outbreaks of this before, in California when a man was beaten up by police and when Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated; there were terrible race riots. And I think eventually no matter how deep the emotional feelings and moral feelings might be, with time passing, we start seeing what we can do about the present and the future and put aside the feelings about the past," Carter said. http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/jimmy-carter-george-zimmerman-verdict-94320.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 08:06 AM 1000 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 08:09 AM The death of Trayvon Martin was a tragedy. Not just for his family, or for any one community, but for America. I know this case has elicited strong passions. And in the wake of the verdict, I know those passions may be running even higher. But we are a nation of laws, and a jury has spoken. I now ask every American to respect the call for calm reflection from two parents who lost their young son. And as we do, we should ask ourselves if we're doing all we can to widen the circle of compassion and understanding in our own communities. We should ask ourselves if we're doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence that claims too many lives across this country on a daily basis. We should ask ourselves, as individuals and as a society, how we can prevent future tragedies like this. As citizens, that's a job for all of us. That's the way to honor Trayvon Martin. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/07/14/statement-presidenthttp://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/07/14/s |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 08:27 AM African Americans benefit from Florida's "Stand Your Ground" self-defense law at a rate far out of proportion to their presence in the state's population, despite an assertion by Attorney General Eric Holder that repealing "Stand Your Ground" would help African Americans. Black Floridians have made about a third of the state's total "Stand Your Ground" claims in homicide cases, a rate nearly double the black percentage of Florida's population. The majority of those claims have been successful, a success rate that exceeds that for Florida whites. Nonetheless, prominent African Americans including Holder and "Ebony and Ivory" singer Stevie Wonder, who has vowed not to perform in the Sunshine State until the law is revoked, have made "Stand Your Ground" a central part of the Trayvon Martin controversy. http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/blacks-benefit-from-florida-stand-your-ground-law-at-disproportionate-rate/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 08:31 AM Who's Joshua Chellew? The fact that you don't know his name is the whole point. But that's not your fault. Marietta Daily Journal, 7/3/13: Four south Cobb teenagers are in custody in connection with the beating death of a 36-year-old Mableton man on Mableton Parkway early Sunday morning… They have been accused in the beating death of Joshua Heath Chellew, 36… According to the warrant, the four teenagers are accused of starting a fight with Chellew at a Chevron gas station in the 6200 block of Mableton Parkway near Community Drive at about 1:20 a.m. Sunday. They repeatedly punched and kicked him, according to police. While attempting to escape, Chellew backed into the center five-lane highway and was pushed to the ground and knocked unconscious, the warrant states. They then walked away from Chellew, "leaving him helpless," and he was eventually hit by a car, the warrant states. A horrible, senseless murder. Why hasn't it received wider attention? Courtesy of Top Conservative News, which notes: If the races had been reversed, this would be the biggest news story in the United States. It would have knocked the Zimmerman trial out of the news. Yep. Or, if Chellew had been able to defend himself against one or all of them, he'd be the new George Zimmerman. We'd be seeing baby pictures of his attackers. Al Sharpton would be marching. Jay Carney would be filibustering away all questions about Obama's latest race-baiting. MSNBC would be on full alert. But Chellew wasn't able to defend himself. He probably deserved it, right? I mean, just look at him. You can't get any whiter than that. Just another creepy-ass cracker. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 08:36 AM http://mdjonline.com/view/full_story/23037003/article-Mableton-teens-linked-to-gang-are-accused-in-beating-death? And the calls here for a Civil Rights investigation??? Obviously racial, obviously a hate crime... and obviously ignored by the "liberals" here that keep promoting lynchings, as long as the victim is non-black. Two weeks after the Martin killing, there were demonstrations- two weeks after the Chellew murder, not a word from anyone.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 08:42 AM ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — Four of the jurors at the George Zimmerman trial distanced themselves late Tuesday from statements that another juror made in a televised interview. The four jurors issued a brief statement on court stationary saying that the opinions expressed by Juror B37 to CNN's Anderson Cooper on Monday night are not representative of their views. "The opinions of Juror B37, expressed on the Anderson Cooper show were her own, and not in any way representative of the jurors listed below," said the statement, signed by Jurors B51, B76, E6 and E40. Juror B37 said the actions of Zimmerman and 17-year-old Trayvon Martin both led to the teenager's fatal shooting last year, but that Zimmerman didn't actually break the law. The four other jurors said in their statement that Martin's death weighed on them. People gather during a rally organized by the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER) coalition … "Serving on this jury has been a highly emotional and physically draining experience for each of us," the statement said. "The death of a teenager weighed heavily on our hearts but in the end we did what the law required us to do." They also made a request for privacy. The court has not released the names of the six-woman jury, which included five whites and one woman who appeared to reporters to be Hispanic. The interview came two days after the jury acquitted Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch volunteer, of second-degree murder in the shooting death of Martin in a gated community in Sanford, Fla. Martin was black, and Zimmerman identifies himself as Hispanic. Zimmerman was not arrested for 44 days, and the delay in charging him led to protests from those who believed race was a factor in the handling of the case. While prosecutors accused Zimmerman of profiling Martin, Zimmerman maintained he acted in self-defense. He claimed Martin was slamming his head into the concrete sidewalk when he fired the gun. In the CNN interview, Juror B37 said she didn't believe that Zimmerman followed Martin because of his race. She said Zimmerman made some mistakes, but that she believed Martin struck Zimmerman first and that the neighborhood watch volunteer had a right to defend himself. Juror B37 said the jurors were initially divided on Zimmerman's guilt, with three jurors believing he was guilty of either manslaughter or second-degree murder, but that the jury agreed to acquit the 29-year-old Zimmerman after more closely reviewing the law. In a part of the interview that aired Tuesday, Juror B37 said it wouldn't have made much difference if Zimmerman had testified at trial since she believes he would have gave the same story he gave investigators in videotaped police interviews that were played at the trial. Juror B37 said at one point it appeared they might be heading to a hung jury as another juror wanted to leave. The other jurors convinced her to stay. Juror B37 said a block of concrete that defense attorney Mark O'Mara placed in front of jurors during closing arguments made an impression, as did photos of Zimmerman's bloodied head. She also believed Martin's actions contributed to his death. "I think George got in a little bit too deep, which he shouldn't have been there, but Trayvon decided that he wasn't going to let him scare him and get the one-over, up on him or something," she said. "I think Trayvon got mad and attacked him. " By not walking away from the confrontation, the juror said of Martin, "I believe he played a huge role in his death." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 17 Jul 13 - 08:59 AM Seems that the KKK wing here at Mudcat is posting furiously over and over and over... Just look at the last 30 or so posts... Do you see a pattern??? Seems that the KKK wing thinks if it posts often and loud enough that that alone will justify the murder of a black teenager armed with a bag of candy... Maybe the KKK wing should quit posting here and go burn some crosses to get all their pent up hate satisfied... No, maybe they'd rather get a gun and shoot another black teenager... Bottom line??? Ya'll can put up 1,000,000 posts before I come back here to this thread but guess what... You are still the KKKers here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 09:09 AM So, Bobert, as a true southerner, what were you doing back in the 50's/ How many blacks did you lynch back in your youth? I have posted facts- You have not, yet you post attacks on all that disagree with you. Your opinion is that- an opinion, not factual or even based on evidence, it seems. You state that liars should not be believed, yet you are the main liar here, with "Bobert Facts" that have been proven false that you continue to insist on. There were more Palestinian refugees in 1948 than the entire population of Palestine of all religion. Gaza has the highest population density in the world- EXCEPT for Hong Kong, Singapore, New York, Mexico City... Everyone in the South is just as racist as Bobert is- And he knows racism better than anyone else. You are a liar, a racist, and a scumbag, like you friend Greggie boy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 17 Jul 13 - 09:16 AM JUROR: No, I think he just profiled him because he was the neighborhood watch, and he profiled anyone who came in acting strange. I think it was just circumstances happened that he saw Trayvon at the exact time that he thought he was suspicious. When exactly was it established that Trayvon Martin was "acting strange"? What's our source for that? And the second statement makes no sense at all. I thought she also said George Zimmerman used poor judgement. Now she seems to be chalking it up to mere fate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 17 Jul 13 - 09:43 AM Bobert, I think your overreaction to Bruce's post are 'maybe just a little over the top'..Bruce is not a wing of the KKK. He is merely pointing out that the FORCED overreactions, are contrived and distorted to the facts of the case. I know he gets criticized for posting 'cut and paste' texts..BUT, his texts are usually without his personal rantings. They are articles from reliable sources, which seem to be overlooked, in the wake of those who are forming EMOTIONAL responses. The trial was FORCED through WITHOUT going to a Grand Jury, to sort out, with investigations, and without suppressed evidence, to be able to charge Zimmerman appropriately. It IS that SAME EMOTIONALISM that caused this case to be rammed through, WITHOUT proper protocol.. Nobody is doubting that there is racial biases in the South..BOTH fucking ways,,and it is that SAME, mindless EMOTIONALISM that is perpetuating the hostile biases!!! Can't you see that??..Maybe if YOU and other people that are out of control, would be in a frame of mind, other than hostility, maybe someone would listen. Hostility doesn't bring harmony. Hostility doesn't bring justice. Hostility doesn't bring dialogue. Hostility doesn't bring anything more than more hostility!!..and yet, you SAY you want the hostility of blacks to end11???!!?? YOU are prolonging it!!! RECONCILIATION comes with UNDERSTANDING...NOT block-headed stonewalling!!..either way. It reminds me of an old sticker I used to have, "Fighting for peace, is like fucking for virginity!" What is your point of the ranting??..to bring it to trial????...it already went there. Perhaps, Trayvon gets a pass, and everybody looks the other way, disregarding that he threw the first punch!! That was racial, and hostile..and you think agitating hostility and more racism is going to stop that?????????? NO, IT MAKES MORE! Did you see the articles about WHY Trayvon was staying with his dad??..It was because he was suspended from school, for tagging lockers, vandalism, and drugs, and having stolen property..AND the article goes on to say, that in school surveillance videos he is seen looking suspicious....but if the Neighborhood Watch guy, says he was looking suspicious, the FIRST thing you guys do, is say that it was because of his race!..Was that the same reason the school spokesman said it too?..MAYBE HE WAS up to something..maybe he wasn't before Zimmerman crossed paths with him....from the re-actions of a lot of stupid people, it is apparent that THEY are the racists, and pretty fucking lame ones at that! Nobody bitches when black on white crimes, and beatings, and death occurs, as Bruce points out..nobody bitches about black on black crimes occur (except Bill Cosby had some stern, honest words)..but you apologetics just keep fanning the fires, as if you were the 'set-up' crew for the KKK!! Hostility breeds more hostility!!! Understanding and acceptance breeds reconciliation!! ARE YOU INTERESTED???????...or out for more blood??. Black and white are skin colors, blood is red...how much more needs to spill, before you get your satisfaction???? Shit, I can't believe I'm having to tell a grown man this! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 17 Jul 13 - 09:56 AM When exactly was it established that Trayvon Martin was "acting strange"? What's our source for that? Before Z had done anything for which he could possibly criticised, still sitting in his car, he called the police and said,"Hey we've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there's a real suspicious guy, uh, it's Retreat View Circle, um, the best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle. This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 17 Jul 13 - 10:14 AM Yo, GfinS... I am not reacting to bb, who BTW I do not so much as look at, as much as I am commenting on the number of posts by you and the other KKKers here... That's all... Seems that ya'll think that you can win this debate by just posting and posting and posting and posting... Just looking at the shear numbers of posts tells ya' which side looks to be trying to drown out discussion... Reminds me of immature guitar players who try to cover up their lack of talent by playing loud and too many notes... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 11:45 AM Some facts on the special prosecutor... JULY 17, 2013 4:00 AM Angela Corey's Checkered Past Her peers describe an M.O. of retaliation and overcharging. By Ian Tuttle Shortly after Dershowitz's criticisms, Harvard Law School's dean's office received a phone call. When the dean refused to pick up, Angela Corey spent a half hour demanding of an office-of-communications employee that Dershowitz be fired. According to Dershowitz, Corey threatened to sue Harvard, to try to get him disbarred, and also to sue him for slander and libel. Corey also told the communications employee that she had assigned a state investigator — an employee of the State of Florida, that is — to investigate Dershowitz. "That's an abuse of office right there," Dershowitz says. What happened in the weeks and months that followed was instructive. Dershowitz says that he was flooded with correspondence from people telling him that this is Corey's well-known M.O. He says numerous sources — lawyers who had sparred with Corey in the courtroom, lawyers who had worked with and for her, and even multiple judges — informed him that Corey has a history of vigorously attacking any and all who criticize her. But it's worse than that: Correspondents told him that Corey has a history of overcharging and withholding evidence. The Zimmerman trial is a clear case of the former and a probable case of the latter. Zimmerman was charged with second-degree murder, also known as "depraved mind" murder. The case law for that charge, an attorney who has worked in criminal prosecution outside Florida tells me, is near-unanimous: It almost never applies to one-on-one encounters. Second-degree murder is the madman who fires indiscriminately into a crowd or unlocks the lions' cage at the zoo. "Nothing in the facts of this case approaches that." Which Angela Corey, a veteran prosecutor, should have known, and a grand jury would have told her. In fact, both the initial police investigation and the original state attorney in charge of the case had determined exactly that: There was no evidence of any crime, much less second-degree murder But that did not stop Corey from zealously overcharging and — the facts suggest — withholding evidence to ensure that that charge stuck. Still, by the end of the case it was clear that the jury was unlikely to convict Zimmerman of second-degree murder; hence the prosecution's addition of a manslaughter charge — as well as its attempt to add a charge for third-degree murder by way of child abuse — after the trial had closed. "In 50 years of practice I've never seen anything like it," says Dershowitz. It's a permissible maneuver, but as a matter of professional ethics it's a low blow. Corey's post-trial performance has been less than admirable as well. Asked in a prime-time interview with HLN how she would describe George Zimmerman, Corey responded, "Murderer." Attorneys who spoke with me called her refusal to acknowledge the validity of the jury's verdict everything from "disgusting" to "disgraceful." But will Corey ever be disciplined for prosecutorial abuses? It's unlikely. State attorneys cannot be brought before the bar while they remain in office. Complaints can be filed against Corey, but they will be deferred until she is no longer state attorney. The governor can remove her from office, but otherwise her position — and her license — are safe. Meanwhile, those who speak out against her continue to be mistreated. Ben Kruidbos (pronounced CRIED-boss), the IT director at Corey's state-attorney office, was fired last week — one month after testifying during the Zimmerman trial that Corey had withheld from defense attorneys evidence obtained from Trayvon Martin's cell phone. Corey's office contends that Kruidbos was fired for poor job performance and for leaking personnel records. The termination notice delivered to Kruidbos last Friday read: "You have proven to be completely untrustworthy. Because of your deliberate, wilful and unscrupulous actions, you can never again be trusted to step foot in this office." Less than two months before this letter, Kruidbos had received a raise for "meritorious performance." The records in question — Kruidbos maintains he had nothing to do with leaking them — revealed that Corey used $235,000 in taxpayer money to upgrade her pension and that of her co-prosecutor in the Zimmerman case, Bernie de la Rionda. The upgrade was legal, but Harry Shorstein, Corey's predecessor, had said previously that using taxpayer funds to upgrade pensions was not "proper." Meanwhile, while Kruidbos has been forced out of the state attorney's office, the managing director who wrote his termination letter — one Cheryl Peek — remains. In 1990 Peek was fired from the same state attorney's office by Harry Shorstein's predecessor, Ed Austin, for jury manipulation. Now, as managing director for that office, she trains lawyers in professional ethics. Since her election, Corey seems to be determinedly purging from the ranks any who cross her and surrounding herself with inferiors whose ethical scruples appear to mirror her own. Meanwhile, those she chooses to victimize — most recently, George Zimmerman — far too often have little recourse. "Make crime pay," Will Rogers once quipped: "Become a lawyer." Angela Corey seems to be less interested in making crime pay than in making her critics pay. http://nationalreview.com/article/353633/angela-coreys-checkered-past-ian-tuttle/page/0/1?splash |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 11:54 AM The principal takeaway from the Zimmerman trial and verdict is that the greatness of America and its people still vastly exceeds the corruption and in many respects, the outright evil of its justice system. More important by far were the dignity and stoicism of the defendant and the eloquence and simply hewn moral strength of his counsel, than the mealy-mouthed pieties of the egregious state attorney general and the sanctimony of the defeated prosecutors. More eloquent than all, perhaps, was the silence of the jury after each had confirmed the verdict: "Not guilty." It was an inexpressible relief to find anyone associated with an American trial, in particular those most importantly involved in it apart from the defendant, whose chief purpose did not appear to be garrulously to inflict upon the parched and biased media their vapid expatiations on everything. In this case, the judge, like most American judges in criminal cases, was an ex-prosecutor and acted effectively as part of the prosecution. She was biased in her rulings and abusive and injudiciously rude in her manner, and she did her best to salvage something for the prosecution by giving the jury the right to find guilty on a lesser charge at the very end of the trial. Prosecutors win 99.5 percent of their cases in the United States, an unheard of figure in the democratic world (about 60 percent in Canada and just over 50 percent in Great Britain are convicted, and in both countries the procedural rules are equal, the media are discouraged from poisoning the wells of the jury pools and lynching the defendants before the trial begins, and the defense speaks last to the jury). Of these 99.5 percent, 97 percent are without trial, after prosecution manipulation of the plea bargain so that everyone who has ever met the target can be given immunity from perjury prosecution and told that if their memories do not produce something useful to the government they will be charged as co-conspirators with the defendant. In the countries mentioned, and many others, prosecutors would be disbarred for what is routine in the United States. So those who go to trial in the U.S. have about a one in six chance of not being convicted: grim, but not hopeless odds. In the Zimmerman case, there were no witnesses to the fatal and tragic encounter between the defendant and the deceased, Trayvon Martin, so the abuse of the plea bargain could not thicken and serry the ranks of prosecution stooges repeating their rehearsed lines like parrots reciting the catechism extracted from them by prosecutors as the condition for not prosecuting them, the lugubrious farce featured in most American criminal trials. The Sanford police did not want to charge Zimmerman, because there was no evidence, from witnesses or forensic analysis, to contradict his story that it was a case of self-defense. So there would be no men in blue testifying under oath to his guilt and no chance for a cops-are-tops Manichaean bout between the Society of Laws and the Forces of Darkness. (The problem with American justice is not and never was that the country is a police state. If anything, it is still under-policed, and though there are many imperfections in the constabulary, the police in general are competent if given the right orders. The problem is the prosecutors, who are out of control policemen in suits performing in front of judges who are prosecutors in robes, for the benefit of jurors an inordinate number of whom are the dregs of society.) Deprived of the usual stacked deck, the prosecution, roused to action by that ineffable pillar of popular theology and racial harmony, the Reverend Al Sharpton, relied not just on playing the race card and, as Johnnie Cochrane's co-counsel said of him in the O. J. Simpson case, dealing it "off the bottom of the deck." It emulated the opening of My Little Chickadee, where W. C. Fields, faced with a hand of four aces, put down five aces and claimed the pot. The attorney general, Eric Holder, urged pro-Trayvon demonstrations, presumably because he prejudged Zimmerman to be guilty, and the president, in the most distressingly novel aspect of the case, averred that if he had had a son, he would look like the deceased. No previous U.S. president had so prejudicially inserted himself in a criminal proceeding. And the national media, showing again why they are distrusted by most and why the following of the main traditional television networks and periodicals has shriveled for decades, joined the liberal political establishment in trying to make the case a watershed against racial profiling and the full panoply of minority grievances. George Zimmerman was to be a symbol, a metaphor turned on the spit over the fire of racial bigotry. The New York Times invented the term "white Hispanic" to deprive the target of minority sympathy, but at least that newspaper, whose controlling shareholders would probably not like to be described as "Anglo-Saxonoid Jews," stopped short of inciting the inference, as some of the African-American media allegedly did, that he was a Jew. The CNN legal correspondent, an attractive and articulate ex-prosecutor, Sunny Hostin, was rabidly partisan and commented at the merciful end that "Justice has taken a holiday." I think not, but any sense of professionalism she may have, did. Every informed person in the Western world knows that African Americans and other minorities have many grievances, and no reasonable person would make light of them. But acting on them to demand a murder trial of someone against whom there is no evidence, and attempting to compensate for the absence of evidence with a hysterical smear campaign to which most of the traditional media subscribed, and for which the great offices of president and attorney general of the United States were willfully degraded by their occupants is, as defense co-counsel Don West said, "disgraceful." When pressed, Mr. West expressed the wish to retain his license to practice law, indicating how disrespectful his candid comments on the Florida prosecutorial establishment and the local bench would be. Withal, the deliberate decision of the jury, delivered without elaboration, the unpretentious and very dignified remarks of the defense counsel, and the sober operation of the system of justice as it is supposed to operate, made it a great hour for America. The hour is made more gratifying and majestic, not sullied, by the hyena-calls for a civil-rights prosecution, and the inevitable fatuities and fictions of the humiliated prosecutors that America, despite the verdict, has "the best justice system in the world," meaning the one that allows them to conduct such a mockery as they did in this case. President Obama's concluding comments were unexceptionable: "The jury has spoken . . . " etc. It has, against him. Apart from the outrage of his intervention in the case, the whole misconceived and over-heated drama highlights the danger of the Obama policy. It need not be so, but there is some truth to the familiar concern that once voters realize that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury, democracy is on the skids. Politicians pander to the redistributive instinct. Franklin D. Roosevelt is unjustly reviled by enemies of the present welfare state, but he opposed the dole and would not pay able-bodied people to be idle. On everything he said that is recorded, he would be appalled at the abuses of the system that now exist in most Western countries for taking money from those who have earned it and giving it out on an unrigorous basis to those who have not, in presumed exchange for the votes of the recipients. The exact figures are disputed, but there is no doubt that the president's section of the voters in last year's election has a lower standard of living, higher unemployment, crime, and welfare-dependency rates, and the great majority of public-sector employees. It was a fair election. A candidate has to pitch to his base; Mr. Obama was better organized, and the winning candidate, unless it is a landslide, always to some degree games the system. There is nothing wrong with any of that. But this administration has aggravated the divisions in the country, not only as an electoral tactic; there is plenty of precedent for that, including from some distinguished presidents; but as premeditated policy. This is unnecessary, dangerous, and bad. The optimists will hope that the president has burned his fingers in the Zimmerman case and will try, for the balance of his term, to maintain the dignity of the highest office within the gift of the American people. If it happens, to quote Dr. Johnson, I would not only be surprised, I would be astonished. By Conrad Black |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 11:58 AM Former O.J. Simpson prosecutor Marcia Clark told Newsmax TV that the George Zimmerman murder trial was never going to be a "slam dunk" for Florida prosecutors. "I came into this case thinking it was a tough case for the prosecution," said Clark in an exclusive interview on Tuesday. "I was open about that from day one. Never thought this was a slam dunk because it's difficult in all self-defense cases when there are only two witnesses — and one is dead." Clark said juries often have difficulty getting at the truth in cases such as Zimmerman's. She believes that the Zimmerman case hinged largely on the state's key witness — Rachel Jeantel, who was on the phone with Trayvon Martin in his final minutes of life. "They did a good job. They had a tough uphill battle; there is no doubt about it," she said of Florida prosecutors in the case. "They had to rely on putting together a very circumstantial case — much of it based on inconsistent statements by George Zimmerman . . . It's up to the jury to decide how important they think the inconsistency is." While the Zimmerman case was "very different factually" from the "trial of the century" nearly 18 years ago, both cases had at least one similarity that may have played into the not guilty verdicts. "The jury in the Zimmerman case had their life view and the jury in the Simpson case had theirs," she said. It's part of our jury system, that we want people to bring their life experience into the mix. "We want them to bring their commonsense based on their life experience into the evaluation of evidence, but the problem is that all of their experiences come in — not just the ones you think are most helpful — to an objective view of the facts." For example, she said, some jurors may be less trusting of police, or have an opinion about neighborhood watch groups in the case of Zimmerman, who was a neighborhood watch volunteer. She pointed to one apparent inconsistency in Zimmerman's account of his encounter with the 17-year-old Martin. "George Zimmerman thought Trayvon Martin jumped out of the bushes, and then the next day was unable to find any bushes he could have jumped out of," Clark explained. "One person looks at that and says, 'wow evidence that he lied.' Another person looks at that and says, 'so, he made a mistake.' That's always a difficult case. So they did the best they could with the case they had." Simpson, a former NFL star, actor, and sports commentator, was acquitted by a Los Angeles jury in October 1995 in connection with the grisly stabbing murders of his ex-wife and her friend after one of the most publicized and racially charged criminal trials in U.S. history. Clark believes the media can have unintended consequences in such cases. "Witnesses who are afraid of the spotlight and don't want that kind of scrutiny, don't want to come forward, minimize their testimony, and sometimes never get found because they don't want to be found," she said. "Some witnesses who want — for whatever reason — the spotlight, love it, and are not really witnesses — what I call faux-witnesses — make up stuff or exaggerate what little information they have so that they can get the spotlight," according to Clark, who recently authored, "Killer Ambition," about a female prosecutor, who takes on the case of a Hollywood power player that puts her in the middle of the media spotlight. "Some judges really don't get affected by it at all, as we've seen Judge Nelson in the Zimmerman trial as well as Judge Perry in the Casey Anthony trial did a brilliant job of just being excellent jurists not affected by the media — held everybody's feet to the fire, and enforced the rules of evidence fairly across the board," Clark observed. "On the other hand, not all judges can resist the allure of instant fame and then things go crazy and the courtroom is out of control," she said, adding that she's not sure she approves of cameras in the courtroom. "To that extent, that's a bad thing. Lawyers pander to the camera — some do. Some don't. But the effect is not necessarily in the service of justice." Although Simpson was found guilty in a civil court and ordered to pay a multi-million dollar judgment to the families of his late wife and her friend, he has yet to pay up, she said. Martin's family has yet to say whether they will file a civil suit against the 29-year-old Zimmerman. "They're enforceable to a point but it doesn't really take that much to avoid them," she explained. "So while the Martin family may well sue — and may well prevail in civil court as did the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against Simpson — but whether that is of any benefit, I'm just not sure about that." Editor's Note: Should Obama Use Zimmerman Verdict to Ban Guns? Unlike criminal cases, where juries must find someone guilty beyond a "reasonable doubt," they need only find some culpable beyond a "preponderance of evidence" in a civil case. "I don't think anybody ever really collects money on these judgments and I don't think that is ultimately really the point either," she said. "It is possible they (Martin's family) will prevail in civil court." She said the double-jeopardy rule would not apply if the U.S. Department of Justice decides to bring federal civil rights charges against Zimmerman. "Just because you're acquitted in state court doesn't mean a federal court can't take the case," she said. "So the U.S. attorney can certainly do it. Whether they will or not is a different matter." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: redhorse Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:12 PM "By Conrad Black " Is that Conrad Black the convicted criminal? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: catspaw49 Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM The undisputed KING of cut and paste as well as the biggest asshole in any three states strikes again. The dumbfuck cannot stick to any point but issues a blitzkrieg from his own collection racist bullshit............ Blow Me Bruce........ Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:18 PM Spaw, Glad to see you uphold the "Liberal View" with the best set of facts you have- that you need to be blown. Go off with Greggie and Bobert and burn some more crosses. Or lynch someone who disagrees with you- that is more your speed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:26 PM MIAMI (AP) — The Justice Department will sift through trial testimony, interviews and other evidence during what is likely to be a months-long investigation into whether George Zimmerman violated Trayvon Martin's civil rights when he shot the black teenager. The key to charging Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch volunteer, lies in whether evidence exists that he was motivated by racial animosity to kill Martin, who was 17 when he was shot during a fight with Zimmerman in February 2012. And while Martin's family has said the teen was racially profiled, no evidence surfaced during the state trial that Zimmerman had a racial bias. Former Miami federal prosecutor David S. Weinstein says it will likely be months before a decision is made on whether to bring charges. Zimmerman, 29, was acquitted of second-degree murder and manslaughter charges after claiming he fired his weapon in self-defense only after Martin attacked him. His friends and family have repeatedly denied he harbored racial animosity toward blacks. Florida did not use its own hate crime laws against Zimmerman. Legal experts say the FBI and prosecutors will go back through the interviews done before the state case began; look at all the forensics such as crime scene records and medical reports; and review the state's witnesses to see if any who did not testify might have important information. However, investigators are not limited to existing evidence; they can pursue new evidence and conduct new interviews as they see fit. For instance, federal investigators could look more closely at Zimmerman's past for any evidence of racial bias. "They are going to need to do a thorough vetting of the facts. It takes time," said Lauren Resnick, a former prosecutor who obtained a guilty verdict in a 1991 New York hate crime case involving the stabbing death of an Orthodox Jew. Those defendants had been acquitted in state court. In a speech Tuesday to an NAACP convention in Orlando, Attorney General Eric Holder said "I am concerned" about the Zimmerman case and pledged the Justice Department will conduct a thorough review. "While that inquiry is ongoing, I can promise that the Department of Justice will consider all available information before determining what action to take," he said. The lone juror in the case who has spoken publicly — known only as Juror B37 because their identities have not been released — said Monday that she did not believe Zimmerman followed Martin because the teen was black. Still, supporters of the Justice Department filing civil rights charges say additional evidence could exist in the federal investigation that didn't come up in the state prosecution of Zimmerman, possibly even witnesses who have not previously been interviewed or did not come up in the state case. "They have a separate set of evidence they're looking at," said Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. "They might have additional witnesses that were never called upon by the state. I think they will make the best decision that is possible in this case and they will pursue what they think is legally possible." Several civil rights groups, including the NAACP, are demanding that the Justice Department bring federal charges against Zimmerman, and there have been numerous protests around the country about the outcome of the Florida trial. During a news conference Tuesday, the Rev. Al Sharpton acknowledged there are hurdles. But he said there remains a fundamental question of "does Trayvon Martin and the Trayvon Martins of this country have the civil right to go home?" He added: "... we have some experience on how to deal with hurdles and we see that as part of our strategy." Beyond the exact language of the law itself, the federal probe must navigate between sensitive racial and political issues that arose when Zimmerman initially wasn't charged in Martin's killing. "Many people simply cannot process how an unarmed teenager is killed, and yet no one is held criminally accountable for his death," said Marcellus McRae, a former federal prosecutor in Los Angeles. Resnick said a federal jury would have to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman had a racial motive when he began following Martin and that he did not act in self-defense when he fired his gun. "There remains the serious challenge that prosecutors still have to prove the racial motive," she said. Zimmerman could get life in prison if charged and convicted under federal hate crime laws. Generally, the Justice Department is reluctant to get involved in cases that have already been tried before a state jury, in part because of concerns about double jeopardy. Perhaps the best-known example where federal prosecutors did intervene was the case of four police officers acquitted after a California state trial in the beating of motorist Rodney King, which triggered deadly riots in the Los Angeles area in 1992. Two of the four officers were convicted in federal court of violating King's rights, but that case differs from Zimmerman's because they were acting as sworn law enforcement officials, not as a private citizen claiming self-defense. In contrast, the Justice Department declined to prosecute New York Police Department officers after they were acquitted in the 2006 shootings of three men including Sean Bell, who was fatally wounded the morning of his planned wedding. The short Justice Department statement — issued in 2010, four years after the shooting — simply said there was insufficient evidence to proceed. "Neither accident, mistake, fear, negligence nor bad judgment is sufficient to establish a federal criminal civil rights violation," the department said in the Bell case. http://news.yahoo.com/feds-sift-evidence-zimmerman-case-170642843.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,saulgoldie Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:45 PM Not commenting on the OP here. Just a stylistic comment. In many/most conversations, unless the "speaker" is making some scintillating point, I usually turn off my interest after probably 'bout 150 - 200 words or so. (Note that that is not 140 CHARACTERS, which is a whole 'nother matter.) If the point is that long and the speaker doesn't let me catch my breath or interject my own comments or questions, I am leaving. Just a stylistic point; not a comment on the subject matter. Saul |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:58 PM Thank you, Saul... You, of course, are a rational adult who understands the art of having a discussion where you say something and then the other party says something... Unfortunately, we have irrational adult wantabees who think that if they SHOUT or post lots and lots of blogs that that makes their point of view more important than anyone else's... The problem with this irrational thinking is that they are doing a disservice to their position because people will just pass these long winded, truth challenged blogs and go on to the next poster who... ...may be another rational adult... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:58 PM beardedbruce: you sure do get yourself in a pile of shit from time to time. That's an observation, not a criticism. "The first one might have been a 'bad link', 'cuz the second one is the same one..I couldn't tell the difference... GfS" It's great to see your sense of humor returning at last. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 12:59 PM "ORLANDO, Fla. -- A court employee who retrieved photos and deleted text messages from Trayvon Martin's cellphone has been placed on administrative leave after an attorney testified that prosecutors didn't properly turn over the evidence to the defense, an attorney said Wednesday. Former prosecutor Wesley White said he was ethically obligated to reveal that Fourth Judicial Circuit Information Technology Director Ben Kruidbos retrieved the data that weren't turned over. Kruidbos was placed on leave shortly after White testified during a hearing in George Zimmerman's second-degree murder case on Tuesday. White said Kruidbos was interviewed by state attorney investigators twice before the action was taken. White said he wasn't surprised of possible evidence violations by Zimmerman prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda. "I was saddened by it, but I'm not surprised," he said. White first learned about the evidence through Kruidbos more than a month ago, he said. Phone and email messages left at the Yep. Sure tells the whole story, and presents all the facts. I note that the ones here that object to the discussion are determined to attack anyone who disagrees, and have not discussed the facts, the evidence presented, or even the law- They demand "Justice", ( lynching the one they decided before the trial was guilty) regardless of the legal outcome. They are the ones who are acting as if they were KKK members- they decided guilt based on race, and ignore all facts that are presented, attacking any dissenting comment as racist when in fact it is there determination to lynch someone because of his race that is racist. To lynch someone because he is "white" is as racist as to lynch them because they are "black" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 01:24 PM (Reuters) - A former employee of Florida State Attorney Angela Corey's office plans to file a whistleblower lawsuit against George Zimmerman's prosecutors, his attorney told Reuters on Tuesday. The action will put pressure on Corey, who already faces criticism from some legal experts for the unsuccessful prosecution of the case, which led to the acquittal of Zimmerman for shooting unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman's defense has also called for sanctions against her and her prosecution team. Ben Kruidbos, Corey's former director of information technology, was fired after testifying at a pre-trial hearing on June 6 that prosecutors failed to turn over potentially embarrassing evidence extracted from Martin's cell phone to the defense, as required by evidence-sharing laws. "We will be filing a whistleblower action in (Florida's Fourth Judicial District) Circuit Court," said Kruidbos' attorney Wesley White, himself a former prosecutor who was hired by Corey but resigned in December because he disagreed with her prosecutorial priorities. He said the suit will be filed within the next 30 days. Corey and lead prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda declined to comment. A spokeswoman for Corey referred Reuters to Kruidbos' termination letter, previously made public, in which Corey's office accused him of hacking confidential information from state computers. The six-page letter, dated July 11, charges Kruidbos with "deliberate, willful and unscrupulous actions" that make him untrustworthy and calls his questioning of de la Rionda's actions regarding the cell phone evidence "a shallow, but obvious, attempt to cloak yourself in the protection of the whistleblower law." Zimmerman was acquitted on Saturday following a five-week trial that riveted America and relaunched debates on race and guns. The verdict sparked demonstrations in some cities by those angered by the decision. On Monday, Corey told Reuters, "Our office adhered to the highest standards of ethical behavior." Trial law requires prosecutors to share evidence with defense attorneys, especially if it helps exonerate defendants. The requirement is known as the Brady disclosure. Kruidbos testified last month in a pre-trial hearing that he found photos on Martin's phone that included pictures of a pile of jewelry on a bed, underage nude females, marijuana plants and a hand holding a semi-automatic pistol. The Martin family lawyer, Benjamin Crump, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Kruidbos had emailed de la Rionda in late January and attached a report containing the text messages and images he had retrieved from Martin's cell phone, his lawyer said. Zimmerman's chief defense attorney Mark O'Mara has said he didn't receive the material until June, shortly before the murder trial began. Judge Debra Nelson ruled that pictures and texts from Martin's cell phone were inadmissible, after prosecutors argued that it couldn't be proven Martin actually took the pictures and wrote the texts on his phone. The judge has yet to rule on whether the prosecution committed any Brady violations by not handing over evidence, as alleged by Zimmerman's defense team. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/16/us-usa-florida-shooting-lawsuit-idUSBRE96F1EL20130716 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 01:27 PM Shitwringer again, misquoting Obama! "Could've been my son" wasn't what he said, was it? So what did he say then?........""If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon"" So, exactly what is your objection? The statement is succinct, respectful of the dead boy and his parents, and factually correct. Oh, I SEE! It was true! That's what you can't stand. You don't relate to the truth in any form, DO YOU Shitflinger? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 17 Jul 13 - 01:27 PM Justice and law are often two different things. I catch a kid breaking my windows with a slingshot and I kick his ass for him, that's justice. When I'm arrested for assault, that's law. I don't see that justice has been served in this case. YMMVNMAI (NoMayAboutIt). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 17 Jul 13 - 01:46 PM Guest: "It's great to see your sense of humor returning at last." Never left...it's all in the delivery..or something like that! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 02:34 PM ""no evidence surfaced during the state trial that Zimmerman had a racial bias."" It might though, with a new investigation by people who actually want to find out the truth. Every filmed interview and court record shows Zimmerman with that smug half smile of a man who knows the fix is well and truly in. Richard Bridge showed quite conclusively that Serino had to be forced to make that recommendation that a manslaughter charge be brought, and there is no doubt that he scuppered the case, IMO deliberately. Zimmerman's attitude from the night of the murder through to the pre-judged acquittal has been what you would see on a hunter who has bagged his quota. He went after that N***er, and he got him, and then he got away with it. He evn said that it was God's work! Killing a human being for buying candy! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 02:40 PM ""The principal takeaway from the Zimmerman trial and verdict is that the greatness of America and its people still vastly exceeds the corruption and in many respects, the outright evil of its justice system."" With the exception of Florida, where that evil and corruption seems to be based. Talk about the "BIG LIE". Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 02:48 PM ""Seems that the KKK wing thinks if it posts often and loud enough that that alone will justify the murder of a black teenager armed with a bag of candy..."" Yes Bobz! And Grand Wizard Beardie surely admires the way that the murderer smiled his way through the whole farce without ever expressing any genuine regret, any twinge of guilt, any sign of genuine empathy for the feelings of Martin's family. He even implied that God approved. A Mafia hitman might have killed with that kind of calm equanimity. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 02:55 PM NAACP president Benjamin Jealous said that the verdict in the George Zimmerman case is a sign that African-Americans face "times of great peril." However, if there is a peril, Mr. Jealous should look to his own community for the cause. Most of the time when a murder victim is black, the perpetrator is not a "creepy ass cracker." Mr. Jealous wants people to believe that the isolated incident in Sanford, Florida proves there is an epidemic of white (or white-Hispanic) -on-black violence. He said blacks "feel it every time we see one of our young sons … walk out the door and pull his hoodie up." But black parents should not primarily be worried about white people gunning down their kids. According to the most recent (2011) FBI statistics, of the 2,695 murders in which the victim was black, 91% were committed by people of the same race. Whites and white-Hispanics were the perpetrator in only 193 (7%) cases. Odds are if the victim was wearing a hoodie, the perp was too. The same pattern of intra-racial violence holds for whites. Eighty-three percent of white murders in 2011 were within-race killings, and only 14% were black on white. These data tell us that murder in America is decidedly not a matter of racial hatred. Explicitly racially motivated murders can and do occur. SiriusXM radio host Joe Madison called the killing of Trayvon Martin "nothing more than a modern day lynching." But racial hate killings are exceedingly rare in this country. According to FBI hate crime statistics, there was only one murder or negligent manslaughter in 2011 that could be traced to anti-black sentiment. Just one. This is not exactly the wave of racial animus some commentators and social activists have warned us about. But these same activists are spurring a wave of racially-charged violence, justifying it by the Zimmerman verdict. Blacks beat an innocent Hispanic man in Balitmore saying it is "for Trayvon." Protestors in Los Angeles and Oakland blocked major thoroughfares. Twitter has been buzzing for weeks with people threatening to start riots over the verdict if it didn't go the way they wanted. If Americans are in great peril it will be because of these hooligans, and the irresponsible race-baiters who cheer them on. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 02:55 PM Martin Luther King Jr. is rolling over in his grave that he sacrificed his life for the cause of judging people by the content of their character instead of the color of their skin, as so many of his own race carry in in self-destructive behavior while professional race mongers blame everything on racism. It is painful and heartbreaking to say and write this, but horrifically it is true. Blacks kill more blacks in a weekend in Chicago than the evil, vile Ku Klux Klan idiots did in 50 years. Truly earth shattering insane. And not a peep from Obama or Holder. Tragic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 02:58 PM Don is obviously projecting his own feelings again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:00 PM Brucie - FUCKING CHECK IT. Serino ONLY filed the capias after he had been pressured. Can you not read, can you not understand, or do you just long for the glorious 12th when you can open fire on all black kids in white neighbourhoods? Or is it all three? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:04 PM Dickie boy, I stated that he recommended manslaughter charges- True or false? TRUE He did, for whatever reason. FACT You have abused me for a true statement- this makes you scum. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:06 PM So, Don T, how long has it been since your last Nazi rally? You still miss the old gang? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:06 PM ""Bobert, I think your overreaction to Bruce's post are 'maybe just a little over the top'..Bruce is not a wing of the KKK. He is merely pointing out that the FORCED overreactions, are contrived and distorted to the facts of the case. I know he gets criticized for posting 'cut and paste' texts..BUT, his texts are usually without his personal rantings. They are articles from reliable sources, which seem to be overlooked, in the wake of those who are forming EMOTIONAL responses."" Maybe that's the trouble Goofus. I asked him several times to respond to the points I made about the likelihood of Martin being scared for his life when being stalked by a stranger in street clothes, who (by Zimmerman's own demands to know what he is doing there and then without further discussion reaches for his pocket. I asked whether he could deny that this would be grounds for Martin to claim that he attempted to prevent what he feared would be an attack with a weapon, acting in self defence. Bruce showed who is the real racist here by ignoring the request. He hadn't the guts to discuss it, because he knows that if Trayvon were white and Zimmerman black, that would have been the side of the story highlighted by Racist Florida. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:13 PM Don T So, YOU are a racist as well, for being too cowardly to answer when I asked who threw the first punch. Or do the rules you place on me not ap[ply to one of the Master Race, like yourself and Bobert? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:15 PM With an obvious racist chip on his shoulder, referencing the neighborhood watch guy as a "creepy ass cracker" to his fellow racist female friend who admitted under oath that that is how non-blacks are referred to normally in their circles, Trayvon had no reason not to attack, because it was the standard thug thing to do. See Chicago any day of the week. With nearly 700 examples of this truism played out in Chicago in 2012 alone, no one can possibly dispute the recent surge in black racism increasing throughout Barack Obama's presidency. To attempt to claim otherwise is a laughable lie. The jury got it right, and non-racist America rejoices that there is still common sense, honesty and decency aware of identifying justice in this country. America also believes that the entire prosecutorial team should be ashamed of themselves and disbarred for ignoring the obvious and kowtowing to the pure racism that forced the politically correct lie that only black lives killed by non-blacks matter, which is why there are no headlines, no protests, no prosecutions and no Barak Obama or Eric Holder meddling in the nonstop black-on-black slaughter in their gun-free zone of Chicago. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:15 PM My goodness there is more than enough animosity on this thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:18 PM Yeah , I know...it's always the same characters, too...I call it 'racial civil rights nostalgia'...they think if they keep it alive long enough they'll get eternal life!!.. Maybe even a second adolescence! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,olddude Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:18 PM Knock it off. Bruce is NO racist. He is a conservative republican and he is allowed to be. Lots of people had valid questions about this case me included. I accept the verdict because I am an American and the court system made a determination not me. I don't have to agree with it but I accept it. None of us were there so everyone is wrong. Anyone on this fucking forum that doesn't agree with someone else is a racist .. NOT for fuck sake |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:21 PM ""Explicitly racially motivated murders can and do occur. SiriusXM radio host Joe Madison called the killing of Trayvon Martin "nothing more than a modern day lynching." But racial hate killings are exceedingly rare in this country."" NOW I see where you're coming from Bruce........As long as it's a rare occurrence, the killing of a black teenager doesn't matter. What about the fact that George Zimmerman has established a precedent that you can kill anyone you find on the street as long as he's black, and even if the public force the police to act, you'll be acquitted. But be careful...White kids aren't on the menu. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:25 PM " the fact that George Zimmerman has established a precedent that you can kill anyone you find on the street as long as he's black," NOT what the case determined, and an honest person would admit that. If someone jumps on you, after conversation, and your life is in danger, you have the right to defend yourself WHETHER the assailant is black, white, red, or green. But then, a "liberal " would have to know what the skin color was before he could decide if it was self-defense. And THAT IS RACISM. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:33 PM ""Judge Debra Nelson ruled that pictures and texts from Martin's cell phone were inadmissible, after prosecutors argued that it couldn't be proven Martin actually took the pictures and wrote the texts on his phone."" And yet those "inadmissible" photos have been, and are still being used by the defence with the connivance of the prosecution, to blacken Trayvon Martin's character to make Zimmerman look less like a cold blooded racist killer. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:36 PM The COURT determined that Zmmerman was not a "cold-blooded killer". Or are you still pushing for the hemp rope and tall tree, like Bobert and Greggie boy? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:41 PM ""Don is obviously projecting his own feelings again."" Not feelings Bruce. Merely unblinkered observation of body language and attitude and that shit kicking half smile on Zimmerman. And your wish to see the "white" man win, innocent or guilty, is blatantly documented, both in the blogs you chose to cut and paste, and in your refusal to etertain the possibility that Martin also might have believed he was in imminent danger of harm. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:44 PM And your racism is demonstrated by your lack of concern for all those blacks killed by other blacks- THEY don't matter, it only is important to get a white convicted even when the evidence does not support the case. But then, to a "liberal", blacks are a sure vote and don't need to be cared about. Let a few get killed, and the rest will still support the "liberals" who keep them killing each other. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:46 PM ""Dickie boy, I stated that he recommended manslaughter charges- True or false? TRUE He did, for whatever reason. FACT You have abused me for a true statement- this makes you scum."" No, you twat! He has pointed out that Serino only did tht under pressure. And not ""for whatever reason"". His reasons have a significant bearing on whether he destroyed the case by accident, or corruptly, which is what he did! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: number 6 Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:55 PM olddude ... Well said, I agree with your statement ... and I'm not an American btw ... once the mainstream news media drops all their headlines about this case which is just fuel for all this animosity you'll see the activity on this thread slow down considerably. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:55 PM Don T, Did I state that Serino called for a manslaughter charge? YES Did he, for whatever reason, under whatever duress? YES Did Dickie attack me and call me a liar for this? " BRUCIE YOU ARE A FUCKING LIAR - SERINO WAS THE FIRST PERSON TO RECOMMEND THAT Z BE NOT PROSECUTED. GO AND FUCKING CHECK. CUNT." Seems a little abusive, as well. He says that my statement THAT IS TRUE is a lie. If that is the "liberal" standard, I guess you have to support it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 03:57 PM ""Don T So, YOU are a racist as well, for being too cowardly to answer when I asked who threw the first punch. Or do the rules you place on me not ap[ply to one of the Master Race, like yourself and Bobert?"" Bruce you scumbag, read the definition of what constitutes self defence in the US of A, and try to comprehend what it actually says about reaction to fear of harm, even when it turns out that there was no real danger, then come back an answer the point I raised with some actual knowledge, rather than asinine adherence to the output of some long winded blogger. Sometimes, throwing the first punch can be self defence, and sometimes lawyers understand, but choose to ignore that when something colours thir opinons, particularly Southern lawyers. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:13 PM The right idea!!!!!! .......it's the first picture..... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:14 PM I will repeat that anyone that is a 100% supporter of Zimmerman and clogs up a music website with truth challenged racist blogs is indeed a racist... Don't take a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows... Having been thru the civil rights struggles of the 60s I've seen and heard enough racist to last me ten life times... I can smell racism in the behavior of others... It's become instinctual... Yes, there are a couple folks here who are eat up with racism... They know who they are... I don't need to talk with them... Like Jesus said, "Shake the dust off your robes"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:17 PM ""If someone jumps on you, after conversation, and your life is in danger, you have the right to defend yourself WHETHER the assailant is black, white, red, or green."" You have a really odd idea of what constitutes conversation Bruce. Maybe that explains why you can only debate in massive cut and pastes of others who echo your point of view and can't answer a simple question or formulate one of your own. I'm fortunate enough to live in a country where if some rude ignorant bastard walks up to me in the street and demands to know what I'm doing there, I can say "None of your fucking business" and go on my way without fear of being shot. Trayvon Martin wasn't that fortunate. As to my being a Nazi, that is simply risible! I don't give two fucks about race and have genuine friends from Asia, Africa, and Australia. I even have French friends. What I do object to is seeing people of different races being denied justice by not being properly and competently represented by those whose job it is to act without fear or favour treating all citizens equally. Namely the police, the judge and the corrupt legal system of an institutionally racist state. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:19 PM Well, the kid's still dead and Zimmerman walks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:25 PM ""And your racism is demonstrated by your lack of concern for all those blacks killed by other blacks- THEY don't matter, it only is important to get a white convicted even when the evidence does not support the case."" Start another thread and we can see who it is that doesn't give a damn about dead black kids. Most of your country for a start. This thread is about one dead kid, and you don't get to change the topic when you want to weasel out of any discussion. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:31 PM ""Seems a little abusive, as well. He says that my statement THAT IS TRUE is a lie. If that is the "liberal" standard, I guess you have to support it."" And I guess you really don't want to acknowledge that his statement: ""SERINO WAS THE FIRST PERSON TO RECOMMEND THAT Z BE NOT PROSECUTED."" WAS ALSO TRUE! Inconvenient ain't it? For the conservative standard YOU have to support. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:36 PM ""The right idea!!!!!! .......it's the first picture..... GfS"" Yeah! A nice idea. Now try to sell it to the Florida law enforcement authorities. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:44 PM Just by the way Bruce. Richard Bridge is no doubt laughing his head off at your constant attempts to paunt me as a liberal. He believes I'm somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun, which isn't really true. I am however a Conservative (with a big C), though very much on the left of that party. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 17 Jul 13 - 04:57 PM First point - don't tell me "liberal" is a term of abuse. Only to right wing loonies is that so. And even then that is right wing loonies in the USA which is further to the right an loonier than pretty much the whole of the rest of the developed world. Oh, and Juicy Brucie - the judge ruled the phone stuff inadmissible. Go back to whre I told you it was NOT EVIDENCE - and weep. Looking forward to the glorious 12th? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:03 PM Oh, and PS - yes, I regard DonT as unacceptably right-wing and not in any sense "liberal". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:19 PM Bruce is NO racist. Evidence please. I've seen nothing that disproves the allegation and plenty to confirm it in his selection of mindless cut-and-pastes and his comments thereon. He is a conservative republican and he is allowed to be. He's also allowed to be a jackass and an asshole and a foul-mouthed bigot, liar and idiot. Absolutely. No question. Constitutional protections apply. But he shouldn't whine quite so long or so loudly when people call him out for being one, and can PROVE that he's being one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:20 PM I'm with you, Bobert. And as to supposed insults like "so-called liberal," damned straight I'm a Liberal. A classic Liberal, a la John Locke. Liberalism first became a distinct political movement during the Age of Enlightenment, when it became popular among philosophers and economists in the Western world. Liberalism rejected the notions, common at the time, of hereditary privilege, state religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings. The 17th century philosopher John Locke is often credited with founding liberalism as a distinct philosophical tradition. Locke argued that each man has a natural right to life, liberty and property, and according to the social contract, governments must not violate these rights. Liberals opposed traditional conservatism and seek to replace absolutism (be it the Divine Right of Kings, the aristocracy, Wall Street, or influence wielded by great wealth) in government with democracy and the rule of law (but obviously not "law" as it is practiced in the American South). The revolutionaries of the American Revolution, segments of the French Revolution, and other liberal revolutionaries from that time used liberal philosophy to justify the armed overthrow of what they saw as tyrannical rule. The nineteenth century saw liberal governments established in nations across Europe, Spanish America, and North America. The dominant ideological opponent of liberalism is classical Conservatism. That is, return to the older forms of governmeny, such as aristocracy (whatever form it took) and absolute authority. Yes, I am a Liberal. Nothing "so-called" about it. Take a good, long look at the alternatives!! ======== Anyone who spends as much time and effort as Beardedbruce does gleaning blogs and cutting-and-pasting material into this website in order to defend a killer (and no matter what the jury said, no matter how you slice it, George Zimmerman is a killer) has got to have something pathologically wrong with him. Looks like rabid racial hatred to me. This whole Sanford, Florida incident is pure racism at its worst. And Beardedbruce and a couple of others such as Songwronger (whose hatred of President Obama verges on the rabid) and Goofball (who is just a nasty little twerp looking for attention) are displaying their true colors. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:35 PM Anyone who has ever read Morris Dees "A Lawyer's Journey" knows just how rampant racism is and how it afflicts entire communities... I've spoken about the Greensboro Massacre of 1979... That's exactly what happened there... White cops... White prosecutors... White anyone with any authority... You know, perfect Southern town... Sanford ain't much different... Have you ever heard that coffin sound Have you ever heard that coffin sound Another poor boy dead and in the ground... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 17 Jul 13 - 06:05 PM That's true, Bobert. Justice miscarried in this case as it has so often before when it comes to Blacks in America's south. However, how anyone here can perceive beardedbruce to be a racist is beyond my imagination. It would be like branding you a cracker. Yes, on occasion you talk like one and sometimes are a dumb as an ox, but you ain't a cracker. Don T is a good man although I often disagree with his political views and Greg F is right up there with the good guys. I think y'all would do much better by being nice. If someone is an asshole s/he'll show it soon enough without anyone having to draw attention to it. In other words, assholes will speak for themselves. It has always been thus. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 06:37 PM Breaking one of my rules! Well, if Bruce can do it umpteen times in every thread, I reckon I have a right to one cut and paste! Extract from article in "The Nation". ""In Zimmerman's case, two pieces of character evidence never made it to the trial. First, a recorded statement from Witness No. 9, Zimmerman's female cousin, in which she said that he molested her for ten years when they were both children, beginning when she just 6 years old. Second, a report filed in August 2005, when Zimmerman's former fiancé sought a restraining order against him because of domestic violence. The latter accusation is especially important because it provided the blueprint for Zimmerman's own claim of self-defense again Trayvon Martin. According to the Miami Herald, Zimmerman was also involved in a domestic dispute with his ex-fiancée, hair salon employee Veronica Zauzo. Zauzo claimed Zimmerman was trolling her neighborhood to check on her. At her apartment, they spoke for about an hour when she asked him to leave. He asked for some photos and paperwork and she refused. A pushing match ensued and her dog jumped up and bit him on the cheek, Zauzo claimed. Zimmerman, in a petition filed the next day, painted her as the aggressor, wanting him to stay the night. In her petition, Zauzo alleged that Zimmerman has previously slapped her in her mouth as well. According to court records, the Orange County circuit judge ordered them to stay away from each other for more than a year, but no charges were filed. During the bond hearing, Zimmerman's wife, Shelley Nicole Zimmerman, used the fact that that he filed an injunction against Zauzo as proof of his innocence. Zimmerman's pattern for violence had already been established: trolling a neighborhood for his victim, pushing her when confronted, attacking her character, and arguing that she was the aggressor when charges were filed against him. While the Assistant State Attorney Bernardo de la Rionda brought up both testimonies in bond hearing in April 2012, they were not presented as evidence during the trial. In contrast, the judge did rule that evidence of marijuana that was found in Martin's system was admissible. Such differences led many (including myself) to conclude, as Mychal Denzel Smith wrote, that "Trayvon Martin and Black Manhood Were on Trial." But they also reveal a system of power that dismisses the experiences and voices of survivors of sexual assault and domestic violence as invisible and untrustworthy. Unfortunately, these gender and racial disparities are even further exacerbated by Zimmerman's non-guilty verdict and the conviction of domestic violence victim, Marissa Alexander, an African-American mother who was sentenced to twenty years in prison for firing a warning shot in 2010 to scare off her husband when she felt he was threatening her. Like Zimmerman, she claimed self-defense and tried to invoke Florida's "stand your ground" law. The result: a Florida jury found her guilty of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. In our current moment of post-verdict protests, we should reflect on several moments in which the legal system failed Trayvon Martin. But, as his cousin's and former fiance's disclosures suggests, the system fell apart long before the fateful night that Zimmerman profiled and murdered this innocent teenage boy. And I cannot help but wonder if Zimmerman had been held accountable for the violence he had already inflicted on girls and women, that Trayvon Martin might be with us here today."" From another source and posted without comment: ""Zimmerman's cousin also stated in her law suit that the Zimmerman family was very racist against african americans, especially his hispanic mother. Zimmerman not only profiled and murdered Trayvon Martin,but he also stalked him!!! His acquittal will only encourage the mentally unstable man that Zimmerman is to act in patterns associated with sociopaths."" So Teflon George has used the same "blame the victim" excuse for his violence in the past and practice, as we know, makes perfect. Add to that the fact that Zimmerman was the one who was a member of a mixed Martial Arts group, and much more likely to know about "ground and pound" than Martin. In my experience, those youths who join martial arts groups and learn about martial arts tend to lose their thuggish inclinations and become engaged in the philosophy of the art. It is often wannabe cops (failed, unsuitable) and neighbourhood vigilantes who learn a smattering and use it offensively. That experience comes from six years membership in my youth and a black belt in Karate. That was a long time ago admittedly and things have changed. I hope they haven't changed that much. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,olddude Date: 17 Jul 13 - 06:37 PM by the way as far as the south being completely racist. One guy on CNN said the south has more minority mayors, senators, and congressmen and other elected officials than any other area of the country. Racism still exists but it ain't the 60's anymore. People have changed for the better. It can always be better yet but careful how you label people. This situation was awful in so many ways. By the way all watch groups that I know of never work alone, they are two or more doing crime watch not a lone ranger type. Sadly, it is what it is the jury heard it all, I didn't so I accept it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 17 Jul 13 - 06:46 PM Bobert: "Yes, there are a couple folks here who are eat up with racism... They know who they are... I don't need to talk with them... Like Jesus said, "Shake the dust off your robes"..." He also said, (Matt.7:5)"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye." Also(but I'm not going to post all of them, but you'll get the drift),..forgive, love, laying down your life for your brother, providing for you family,..and great works profit NOTHING! AND OF COURSE>>.......>>>..Dah dah dah da-a-a-h....drum roll..... "1 Timothy 1:5-7 King James Version (KJV) 5 Now the end of the commandment is Love out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of genuine faith : 6 From which some having swerved, have turned aside unto vain babbling; 7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm." Thank you thank you thank you.......... Elvis has left the building.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 17 Jul 13 - 07:03 PM Stand up for Judas. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 17 Jul 13 - 07:16 PM Goofball is like a parrot, reciting what he has heard (or in this case, read) without understand the meaning of a single word. Goofy want a cracker? SQUAWK!! "Even the Devil quotes Scripture." --Rev. J. Paul Gregg Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 17 Jul 13 - 07:24 PM ""7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.""" No need to be so hard on yourself Goofus. But aren't you in the wrong thread. The religious ones went thataway ---------------> Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 17 Jul 13 - 08:35 PM One guy on CNN said the south has more minority mayors, senators, and congressmen and other elected officials than any other area of the country. Yup- some of their best Negroes are their friends. See Phil Ochs: Phil Ochs - Talking Birmingham Jam Walkin' down to Birmingham Way down south in Dixie Land I thought that I would stop awhile Take a vacation southern style Got some southern hospitality Down there in a southern hospital Oh, all the signs said welcome in Signed by Governor Wallace and Rin-Tin-Tin They said come along and watch the fights While we feed our dogs on civil rights Now, don't get us wrong Some of our best Negroes are our friends Well I've seen travelin' many ways I've traveled in cars and old subways But in Birmingham some people chose To fly down the street from a fire hose Doin' some hard travelin' From hydrants of plenty Well, a pack of dogs was standin' by I walked up to them and I said, "Hi" I asked one dog what they all were doin' He walked up to me and started chewin' I said, "Hold it, I'm from the A.S.P.C.A. Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Agitators" I said, "There must be some men around There can't be only you dogs in town" They said, sure, we have old Bull Conner There he goes walkin' yonder Throwin' some raw meat to the Mayor Feedin' bones to the city council You know Governor Wallace doesn't mean no harm Can't you see he's got a lot of charm? He's protectin' us whites, both the rich and poor Standin' in the schoolhouse door Crackin' jokes, talkin' to Huntley Brinkley Servin' jury duty, gettin' re-elected So, I asked them why they spent their time With segregation on their mind They said, "If you don't like to live this way Get out of here, go back to the U.S.A Live with all them Russians and New York folksingers" Some say they're past their darkest hour Those moderates are back in power Oh, they listen close with open ears They'll help us out in a couple of hundred years But don't push 'em whatever you do Or else you'll get those extremists back in You see, Alabama is a sovereign state With sovereign dogs and sovereign hate They stand for the Bible and Constitution They stand against communist revolution They say "It's Pinkoes like you that freed the slaves" And they're right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 17 Jul 13 - 08:51 PM Racism still exists but it ain't the 60's anymore. People have changed for the better. Dan, give this a read when you get the chance & let me know what you think: Michelle Alexander - The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 17 Jul 13 - 10:39 PM GfinS, Matthew also wrote "There is nothing hidden that one day won't be found, no secrets kept that one day won't be common knowledge"... That's what I'm talking about here... George Zimmerman's story, like O.J.'s, won't age well... As for people changing for the better??? Nah... Seems that here in the South we are going the wrong way and losing ground... Schools are being re-segregated at an alarming rate... That's not progress... That's regress... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 17 Jul 13 - 11:12 PM Bobert: "Matthew also wrote "There is nothing hidden that one day won't be found, no secrets kept that one day won't be common knowledge"..." Speaking of which, He expounds on secrets..like you are, let's see what it says.... "But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, you shall not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Truly I say to you, They have their reward. 6But you, when you pray, enter into your closet, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father which is in secret; and your Father which sees in secret shall reward you openly. But when you pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking." You wouldn't mean THAT, would you?? Once the bell is rung, you can't take away the ring! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 18 Jul 13 - 04:16 AM Good finds Don - more evidence of trial bias. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Red Queen Date: 18 Jul 13 - 05:16 AM GfS, you had a sticker that read "Fighting for peace, is like fucking for virginity!" ? What are you, some kind of hippie? Are you going to make us listen to Biff? :-) Look, some of us want George Zimmerman to be held accountable for what he did, do you really equate that with wanting blood? The info about Angela Correy was enlightening. I think she had a lot to do with messing up this trial. She should be fired. Off with her head! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jul 13 - 05:57 AM ""They have their reward. 6But you, when you pray, enter into your closet, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father which is in secret; and your Father which sees in secret shall reward you openly"" I must remember that one for the religion threads, where they rubbish people who don't need religionsNice to know that at least one of their revered gospel makers agrees with me. Thanks Goofus! But it still has sod all to do with this thread. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jul 13 - 06:06 AM ""Good finds Don - more evidence of trial bias."" Irrefutable evidence Richard. As I have said all along, the whole farce was about hiding Zimmerman's real character and portraying his black teenage victim as a drug using thug. If the jury had been aware of the patterns of behaviour shown in that record, there would have been NO reasonable doubt that he profiled, stalked and murdered a complete stranger. As to racial profiling, which again was brushed aside at trial, he was well aware that the man he was stalking was black, because he described him as such when asked for a description during his phone call to police. His family background doesn't invite belief in his claims on that subject. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jul 13 - 06:09 AM ""The info about Angela Correy was enlightening. I think she had a lot to do with messing up this trial. She should be fired. Off with her head!"" It's my belief that she got the job BECAUSE she could be relied upon to turn it into a clusterfuck, and she responded according to plan. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 18 Jul 13 - 09:13 AM GfinS, Your verses don't seem to have any relevance here but it's a good thing that you are fishing around the Bible... Keep fishing and maybe you'll figure out that God and Jesus ain't too happy with the Florida system of injustice... BTW, folks who try too hard to use Biblical verses to justify bad behavior are called fundamentalists and these are the same people who use the Bible as justifications to kill abortion doctors and tear down social safety nets... In other words??? The Christian Taliban... But keep hunting... Maybe something good will get to you... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 09:31 AM Don T, "As to my being a Nazi, that is simply risible! I don't give two fucks about race and have genuine friends from Asia, Africa, and Australia. I even have French friends." But you call me a Klan member without thought or evidence. YOU are being a real asshole. "What I do object to is seeing people of different races being denied justice by not being properly and competently represented by those whose job it is to act without fear or favour treating all citizens equally. " So you agree with my OP that the Prosecution in this case needed to follow the law, and did not? That makes this trail unfair, based on the race of the individuals involved. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 09:43 AM Hundreds of demonstrators took to the streets in Houston on Monday to protest against the acquittal of George Zimmerman, but what started as a peaceful rally turned terrifying for one woman who claims she was assaulted while trying to get her daughter to the hospital. "I looked up and I see all the protesters, they're everywhere," said Georgia, who asked Click 2 Houston that her last name not be used. "So, we got into the traffic and they're stopping us and not letting us go." Police told the station that protesters spilled into the road, blocking traffic for about 15 minutes during rush hour. Georgia was trying to get her younger daughter to Texas Children's Hospital, because she was having an emergency allergic reaction to some medication. "My mom rolled down the window," said Georgia's older daughter. "She said, 'We're trying to get my granddaughter to the hospital,' and a guy just started hitting her." A Click 2 Houston video shows Georgia sitting in the front seat of the vehicle with her window down, and you can see a man reach in and grab her chest. Georgia said she was hit. "When we got on the road I told her, 'Let's call 911," and I could feel I had been hit," she said, adding that she has filed a police report documenting the indicent. Quanell X, an activist who planned the event, told Click 2 Houston that he thought the protest was peaceful. "It wasn't peaceful," Georgia added. "It was terrifying." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 10:03 AM And the point of this latest bucket of un-sourced blogoshit is what, Beardy? To demonstrate your undying love of the Negro race? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jul 13 - 10:33 AM ""So you agree with my OP that the Prosecution in this case needed to follow the law, and did not? That makes this trail unfair, based on the race of the individuals involved."" Not in any way Bruce. What better way for the prosecution to throw the game and give YOU the result you were ooting for all along. The prosecution in this case didn't exist. There was only defence and stealth defence. The authorities acquitted Zimmerman on the night of the murder. How else explain the imbalance beteen what was permitted, or not permitted to come to the attention of the jury, not to mention what was leaked to the media by the defence with the assistance of that cleverly constructed and oh so convenient staged witholding and whistle blowing farce. The fair trial you have bleated about all over this thread with massive irrelevant cut and pastes, was never going to happen. It was done and dusted a year ago, and your continued support for Zimmerman in the face of irrefutable proof of the kind of scumbag he is, doesn't incline me toward recanting my Klan comment. Lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM "What better way for the prosecution to throw the game and give YOU the result you were ooting for all along." Wrong, you cocksucking racist scumbag. ++I++ stated I wanted to see a fair trial with the law being respected, and you scumsucking racists claimed the only fair trail had to end in a conviction, regardless of the facts. "The fair trial you have bleated about all over this thread with massive irrelevant cut and pastes, was never going to happen." Of course not. A fair trial would have the risk of showing the weakness of the case against Zimmerman. But even the attempt to force a "correct" verdict failed due to lack of evidence. "It was done and dusted a year ago, and your continued support for Zimmerman in the face of irrefutable proof of the kind of scumbag he is, doesn't incline me toward recanting my Klan comment." The irrefutable proof that I have seen is of the scumbag racists like you, Greggie, and Bobert, who pass judgement baed on the color of the victim's and accused skin. I have as much proof of you being a Nazi as you have of any Klan association by me. - So if I am Klan, you are definitely a Nazi. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 18 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM Bobert: "Your verses don't seem to have any relevance here.." Hey, this whole thread is permeated with bigotry, hatred, violence, shooting assault and battery, injustice, unforgiveness, miscarriages of justice and divisions, not to mention a few other things that has NO political solution, nor any amount of legislation, can fix!! ..and YOU brought up a quote Jesus said. So you start on a premise and can't follow through on it???? Either get your shit together, or find another avenue to resolve what you're bitching about. Now take a look at my first scriptural response to you, and tell me, that it doesn't apply...and I'll think you need glasses!! "Now the end of the commandment is Love out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of genuine faith, From which some having swerved, have turned aside unto vain babbling; Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm." Now, THAT IS a solution. More screaming, bitching, whining for the sake of being divided is NOT... let me see.. 'divided'.. 'segregation' .. hmmm, any similarities there? Yeah, certain Southerners never learn a fucking thing! ..no matter how they ignore applying it!!!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 10:49 AM Greggie boy, You are showing your racism again. MY post does not mention race of anyone, not the protestors or the attacked person. YOU are the one making it about race, you lying scumbag. But them, as Bobert well knows, you have stated that "black, and a Democrat" is the same to you as "dumb ni**er" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jul 13 - 11:27 AM ""++I++ stated I wanted to see a fair trial with the law being respected, and you scumsucking racists claimed the only fair trail had to end in a conviction, regardless of the facts."" Stop putting words in my mouth you devious ratbag. I didn't want a conviction right or wrong, I wanted a properly conducted trial where due diligence was paid to the fact that a dead child cannot speak for himself. Nobody even attempted to give fair and honest balance to the proceedings. Not the judge who ruled all character evidence on Zimmerman inadmissible except statements from his cronies, and all evidence such as Trayvon Martin's school playground tussles and his use of Pot, admissible. Not the same judge who allowed eight of Zimmerman's cronies to testify that it was his voice calling help, and ruled the contrary evidence from two qualified voice recognition experts (surprise surprise) inadmissible. Not the prosecution, which made the biggest balls up of their responsibilities that I've ever seen in a major trial. Whether they were simply incompetent, or whether (as I honestly believe) they took a dive, they failed Trayvon Martin on every level. Not the police or the law enforcement authorities, who would have preferred the whole case to just go away, and in fact acquitted Zimmerman on the night of the murder. Specifically not Serino, who didn't want to prosecute at all, and when forced by public opinion to act, with the utmost reluctance, recommended a charge of manslaughter, then, when that didn't work deliberately sabotaged the prosecution. Back to the judge, who repeatedly allowed Serino to express opinions about the honesty of Zimmerman's story. He may be an experienced cop, but he isn't a two legged lie detector and his conclusions should have been stricken. THEY WEREN'T in time to do any good. The defence team were the only ones present in that court who did their jobs properly, although everybody else made it very easy for them. I sincerely believe that if this trial had not been riddled with corruption, Zimmerman would be stsrting a well deserved life sentence. I haven't the slightest doubt that a murderer has been deliberately freed. I can see no other reason for this travesty than the fact that Trayvon Martin was black. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 11:31 AM Local family's emergency trip to hospital interrupted by protestors HOUSTON - Hundreds of people marched in protest to the George Zimmerman verdict on Monday. "No justice, no peace," they yelled as they walked from the Byrd Funeral Home in the 2500 block of Wheeler to the Southmore Street overpass bridge near Highway 288. Just after 7p.m. Monday, the demonstrators spilled out onto the road and blocked traffic for about 15 minutes. "I looked up and I see all the protesters, they're everywhere," said Georgia, who asked that her last name not be used. "So, we got into the traffic and they're stopping us and not letting us go." Georgia was on her way to Texas Children's Hospital in the Medical Center because her 7-year-old granddaughter was having an allergic reaction to some medication. Georgia's daughter was driving and tried to go around the demonstrators by driving on the grassy shoulder. "One of them was hitting the windshield and I was just screaming, 'We've got to get to the hospital,' and they were screaming and chanting," she said. "All I could think of was, I got to get my granddaughter to the hospital." "My mom rolled down the window," said Georgia's daughter. "She said, 'We're trying to get my granddaughter to the hospital,' and a guy just started hitting her." A Local 2 camera covering the protest recorded the entire incident. On the video you could see Georgia sitting in the front seat of an SUV, she had her window down and you can see a man reach in and grab her. Georgia said she was hit. "When we got on the road I told her, 'Let's call 911," and I could feel I had been hit," she said. The family is upset by the whole incident and thinks the demonstrators took things too far. Georgia filed a police report and hopes that things will quiet down. "It wasn't peaceful," she said. "It was terrifying." Quanell X, the community activist who planned the event, told Local 2 he thought the protest was peaceful. He also said he gave specific instructions to participants not to break any laws and not to touch or harm anyone. The Houston Police Department did have a few officers on scene and told Local 2 it's unclear how the demonstrators were able to get onto the freeway, but the officers were working to remove them. http://www.click2houston.com/news/local-familys-emergency-trip-to-hospital-interrupted-by-protestors/-/1735978/21009282/-/xa44gh |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 11:43 AM Easy on the rats, Don. Rats are quite charming little critters most of the time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 11:44 AM "Stop putting words in my mouth you devious ratbag." Again, the Master Race Nazis want to apply rules to others that they refuse to post by themselves. As long as YOU keep telling others what I think, and why I think it, I will do the same for you. You obviously watched a different trail than I did- There was testimony that the time on the tape ( according to the FBI Standards) did not allow a professional determination of the caller for help, but that a family member or close acquaintance MIGHT be able to tell. The prosecution called the family of Martin to testify about the voices, and the defense called Zimmerman's parents and close friends. The jury decided who to believe. As fro the lack of prosecution earlier, ever consider that those who had access to the evidence did not see that there was a case they could convince a jury of? You know, like what occurred? Is reality so far away from where you are? ++I++ brought up early in this thread that had Martin been a white skinhead and Zimmerman a black preacher I would not change my opinion about it, and decide based on the evidence presented. I was chastised for this- it seems that the racists such as Bobert , Greggie, and their friends WANT to base judgement on race, and not facts. I have been proven right by this thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 11:48 AM Thanks for the source of the blogoshit, Beardy, and to my surprise, it appears to be a bklog. But I can't be sure, since your link brings up "Page Not Found - also as usual. Sure you didn't make this up? Got any documentation that the woman's story is even true? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 11:54 AM MY post does not mention race of anyone, Did you not watch the video, or are you just pretending you didn't watch it, BullshitBruce? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 11:54 AM http://www.click2houston.com/news/local-familys-emergency-trip-to-hospital-interrupted-by-protestors/-/1735978/21009282/-/xa44gh/-/index.html http://www.click2houston.com/news/local-familys-emergency-trip-to-hospital-interrupted-by-protestors/-/1735978/21009282/-/xa44gh Not a blog, but a news report. And stop abusing those rats- they are certainly a lot more agreeable than you are. Go back to the dead hamsters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 11:57 AM Note the blue clicky is cutting off the end of the link. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:09 PM So did you watch the video or not, Bullshit Bruce? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM No, Beardy, the "blue clicky" isn't doing anything. Its inanimate. YOU are not using it correctly. Always someone or someone else to blame for you, isn't there? And once again: Have you got any evidence that the woman's story of "being hit" is true? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM ""You obviously watched a different trail than I did- There was testimony that the time on the tape ( according to the FBI Standards) did not allow a professional determination of the caller for help, but that a family member or close acquaintance MIGHT be able to tell."" The same trial I'm afraid, and another example of judicial bias. The one expert who wasn't able to tell, was allowed to testify. The two who gave the opinion that it was Trayvon Martin's voice, were mysteriously inadmissible. You can wriggle all you like, but you just look more foolish. Each time you post you make it more obvious that the only outcome you would ever accept as fair, whatever the evidence that was wrongly excluded, is acquittal. ""a family member or close acquaintance MIGHT be able to tell."" Or might lie! With a factor of eight to one in Zimmerman's favour. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:20 PM ""As fro the lack of prosecution earlier, ever consider that those who had access to the evidence did not see that there was a case they could convince a jury of? You know, like what occurred? Is reality so far away from where you are?"" Good point! The question is why? There was no doubt he shot a teenager dead after ignoring advice to let the police deal with it. Are you seriously claiming that didn't merit arrest and interrogation plus bail to return when necessary? Standard procedure in the civilised UK! If he'd left it to the police, Martin might have got off with just a severe beating for walking through a gated community where he had every right to be. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:26 PM The standards referred to were those of the FBI- take it up with them "Or might lie! With a factor of eight to one in Zimmerman's favour." How do you get those numbers? How many testified? Than you cannot count- there were BOTH of Martin's parents, both of Zimmerman's and you claim 14 of his close friends ( the number you need to get 8:1) I saw only three- making it 5:2. Why do you need to lie even when the numbers favor you? Is your point so weak it will not stand without an exaggeration? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:31 PM "If he'd left it to the police, Martin might have got off with just a severe beating for walking through a gated community where he had every right to be. " If he had left it to the police, Martin could have chosen NOT to attack the policemen and nothing would have happened. If Martin had chosen not to throw the first punch, there might not have been a shooting at all. If you were a decent person, you might not accuse people who disagree with you of being Klan members. But IF didn't happen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:32 PM And, no, Greggie, I have not watched the video- I read the transcript that I posted the link to. Did you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM ""++I++ brought up early in this thread that had Martin been a white skinhead and Zimmerman a black preacher I would not change my opinion about it, and decide based on the evidence presented. I was chastised for this- it seems that the racists such as Bobert , Greggie, and their friends WANT to base judgement on race, and not facts."" If you ever bothered to read and understand the whole of what others post, which you obviously do not, you would have noticed that way back in this thread I supported your call for a fair trial and several times strongly suggested that the judge is the only one who should be allowed to rule on admissibility. Bobert claimed that the judge had already failed to act competently and I disagreed with him. At the time I believed that you honestly and impartially desired a fair trial. As the debate progressed I began to see your attitude change from wanting a fair trial to wanting acquittal, and nothing you have said since has altered that impression. I have posted a raft of evidence other than Martin's phone, which has been cynically witheld from the jury, and all of a sudden your attitude to fair disclosure reverses. The fact that the judge biases the proceedings doesn't bother you in the least, since it is in Zimmerman's favour that this evidence be excluded. Your integrity is in tatters, as you ignore all evidence of Zimmerman's violent nature, and come to the conclusion that this outcome can be called "Justice". Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM What I cut& pasted into the link maker: http://www.click2houston.com/news/local-familys-emergency-trip-to-hospital-interrupted-by-protestors/-/1735978/21009282/-/xa44gh/-/index.html What comes out when I create link: http://www.click2houston.com/news/local-familys-emergency-trip-to-hospital-interrupted-by-protestors/-/1735978/21009282/-/xa44gh Even a scumsucking racist like Greggie can see there is a truncation- Trust a "liberal" to not bother to try it himself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:41 PM ""The standards referred to were those of the FBI- take it up with them"" The FBI didn't rule them out! THE JUDGE DID! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:45 PM Yup- I read it and its only a PARTIAL story posted on a Blog. A ten second web search would supply you with the complete story, but apparently you've no interest in being factual or accurate. Or just can't spare the time. An again: do you have any proof that the woman's story is true? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,saulgoldie Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:47 PM Just for argument's sake... http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/ Saul |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:50 PM Based on the trial, an the evidence presented, I have made a conclusion- Others here are making their conclusions based on what they think could have happened, without regard to the presented evidence. Was the evidence false? The prosecution did not make an effort to prove that. Was there racial profiling- Not according to the presented transcripts of 911 call, interviews, or testimony. The presumption of innocence is a part of our system of justice- there was nothing presented that would lead a reasonable person to think that Zimmerman was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. SHOULD he have been convicted of manslaughter? I suspect the prosecution COULD have made a good case for that, but the POLITICAL decision was made to go for 2nd degree murder. THAT is why Zimmerman got off without punishment. And wWHY did they go for murder when manslaughter would have given as long or longer a sentence? BECAUSE the racists and "liberals" were demanding it- so it becomes their fault Zimmerman walks. If it had been done according to the law, with full disclosure, and a Grand Jury, the charge would have been manslaughter at worst, and the jury may well have decided for that, if the prosecution had presented the evidence for it. But in the attempt to meet the "court of public opinion" the state threw that away. And every young black male being arrested and charged in these "demonstrations " is bearing the price of the "liberal" media and the racists that demanded a murder charge. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:51 PM I think by now that even Helen Keller can see from her grave that the judge badly bungled the trial... The prosecution didn't do much better... Bottom line here was the fix was in from the jump... Throw in the terrible Florida self-defense and stand-your-ground laws then it comes down to this: murder anyone you want... Just don't have any witnesses and you'll get away with it, right??? Whoa, not so fast... Wait until the exact same kind of case comes up where a black man shoots a white man... Hmmmmmmm??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:54 PM Interesting interpretation, Beardy. Demented and fanciful, but interesting none the less. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:56 PM Greggie, "its only a PARTIAL story posted on a Blog. " 1. Not a blog, a news report. "A ten second web search would supply you with the complete story," 2. THEN SHOW ME A REFERENCE TO MORE- you lying racist scum. I not YOU cannot be bothered to back up your own claim, but have to lie about my post http://www.click2houston.com is a media station Channal 2 in Housto, where the demonstration occurred. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 01:01 PM Saul, I commented on that in the other thread. How about: http://news.yahoo.com/wis-man-76-guilty-fatal-shooting-teen-185219975.html http://news.yahoo.com/wis-man-76-guilty-fatal-shooting-teen-185219975.html Evidence tells me he is guilty- so I guess you all will argue and say he should have gotten off. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 01:04 PM THEN SHOW ME A REFERENCE TO MORE So you're incapable of verifying your horseshit yourself before posting it? Or just too lazy? Or you don't know how to use a search engine? Or you know that if its posted on the internet it must be true? Which is it? And have you any proof that the woman's story is true? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 01:08 PM so I guess you all will argue and say he should have gotten off. Uh, no BullshitBruce, I doubt anybody will. At any rate, bringing up this irrelevant Wisconsin case is even more demented and idiotic than your usual horseshit. Congratulations! You've outdone yourself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 01:08 PM Greggie, scumsucker, I verified by going to the media outlet that presented the original story, I have posted it. You have made claims, but supported none of them. If YOU can't bother to show me to be wrong, I must be right. Until you provide some evidence otherwise You made claims this is a blog, and false: So you're incapable of verifying your horseshit yourself before posting it? Or just too lazy? Or you don't know how to use a search engine? Or you know that if its posted on the internet it must be true? Which is it? And have you any proof that the woman's story is NOT true? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 01:10 PM White male kills young black male and is convicted of murder- Greggie says it doesn't matter. After all, he was just a 13 year old black boy. No reason for Greggie to give a damn. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 01:21 PM Greggie scunsucker, "A Local 2 camera covering the protest recorded the entire incident. On the video you could see Georgia sitting in the front seat of an SUV, she had her window down and you can see a man reach in and grab her. Georgia said she was hit. "When we got on the road I told her, 'Let's call 911," and I could feel I had been hit," she said. " YOU claim to see the video- Therefore you KNOW this is not a blog. You are intentionally lyng here. I guess you just have to take after Bobert. But I doubt if we will call your lies "Greggie Facts" You need to at least pretend that you believe your own lies for that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 02:32 PM Easy, BullshitBruce, easy. You'll hurt yourself. You off your meds again? Nice load of additional horseshit, but you STILL haven't answered the several questions. As expected. Just more name-calling and more bushels of horseshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 02:43 PM So, Greggie, You find the video, claim to watch it, then say it is a blog and not true- You are lying to all of us, without even trying to make up a story. I answered your questions - YOU should answer for your lies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Jul 13 - 02:44 PM Of course, the "liberals" here will support you, since none of you have any more respect for the truth than you do for the law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 03:00 PM Take your meds, Beardy, you're even more incoherent than usual. By the way, you STILL haven't answered my questions, just more spittle & horseshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 05:44 PM I just hope this racist, wannabe cop doesn't walk on a technicality Too late, he's already walked,cheered on by BullshitBruce. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 18 Jul 13 - 05:58 PM When I read this article (link below), the juror's comments struck me as having that familiar spin, you know, that one you hear whenever someone wants to steer the conversation away from real accountability. "B37" goes on as if this tragedy unfolded on its own; as if it were mainly due to unfortunate circumstances. Just bad luck. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/07/16/2306901/7-mind-blowing-moments-from She doesn't mention what lesson "George" supposedly learned. This juror blows my mind but what really blows my mind is that a few of you seem to agree with her. I say that it could have been my son but I know that's not the case. My son is white. I don't believe that someone like George Zimmerman would have profiled my son- even with a hoodie. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 18 Jul 13 - 06:31 PM Don't try to confuse these clowns with facts, SJL - they're impervious. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 18 Jul 13 - 07:36 PM No, SJL, your son would still be fine... The problem here is that "r" stands for "red states" and also "racist"... BTW, the Republican party has promoted as much racism as it can get away with... It uses PR firms and control groups to exploit people's fears with the hope of keeping racism alive and well within its base of voters... The entire Tea wing is nothing but KKK holdovers... These people are so eat up with Republican sponsored racism that these people are lost... And so are their kids... And the beat goes on... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 18 Jul 13 - 09:33 PM Red Queen: "Are you going to make us listen to Biff? :-)" Going to 'Make' you listen to Biff'????..What do you think I am, a bureaucrat working for the government?? Red Queen: "What are you, some kind of hippie?" Huh??..Oh you mean that last group of young people who the Democrat Party used and co-opted, when they needed to get people to believe that they were actually 'AGAINST' the Vietnam war...then discarded them, because they had to mature anyway? Well, at least a lot of them liked folk music...The way you asked that, appears that you look down on them..you know, they were useful to the 'Party' for a while, but that's over..now they're 'lower class'....like the Party's 'niggers'?..Is that what you meant? 'Make you listen to Biff'....did you like George Carlin?? Biff was his writer...bet ya' didn't know that... AS TO THE OTHER POSTS: To some people, the actual series of events, are facts..to other people, opinions based on emotions, are facts. Did it ever occur to anyone, that maybe the prosecution WANTED their case to fail, for political reasons and mileage?? That maybe their marching orders came from the 'higher ups'? ....designed to fail?? ..and the divisions that it has caused, was deliberate? ..and that the stirred up emotions about it WAS the DESIRED effect?? ...and that you're all a bunch of unwitting dupes?? Now why would they want to do that?? Why would they freak about a guy shooting another, then making it a race issue, and getting people to take to the streets, so they can punch each other out, and hopefully shoot a few more??..of either race?....Sounds too agenda driven, but makes more sense, than a bunch of government lawyers making so many basic blunders of incompetence, on a simple trial... Just a thought.............. GfS GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 19 Jul 13 - 05:08 AM ""http://news.yahoo.com/wis-man-76-guilty-fatal-shooting-teen-185219975.html http://news.yahoo.com/wis-man-76-guilty-fatal-shooting-teen-185219975.html Evidence tells me he is guilty- so I guess you all will argue and say he should have gotten off."" Now you've really lost the bloody plot BB. WTF has an open and shut case of premeditated murder, caught on the murderer's own security camera, have to do with the Zimmerman fiasco. In the Zimmerman case, the State didn't want to prosecute and when they were forced to do so, they set the trisl up to acquit. Zimmerman was acquitted within one hour of murdering Trayvon Martin, following the same pattern of activity he had previously used on his ex girlfriend, by the law enforcement officers who weren't inclined to get too interested in the death of a n***er. That's Sanford law for you. And why do you keep hammering the word evidence as excusing the acquittal, when you have been shown a mass of evidence which was deliberately kept from the jury. The juror who was interviewed said that initially they were three to two for conviction. Had they been allowed to hear ALL the evidence, it's just about certain that the verdict would have been guilty. The State wasn't incompetent. It got exactly the result it wanted. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 19 Jul 13 - 05:16 AM ""After all, he was just a 13 year old black boy. No reason for Greggie to give a damn."" Are you a complete idiot? The boy you are trying to get us worked up about will at least get justice, because his killer is convicted and going down fo life. So apart from the fact that all of us are appalled by the awful waste of a young life, what precisely would you like us to protest about? Perhaps the fact that a rather nasty prick is cynically using his death to make points, but really doesn't give two fucks for the boy or his family. The same lack of concern that he has for Trayvon Martin. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 19 Jul 13 - 05:28 AM ""Did it ever occur to anyone, that maybe the prosecution WANTED their case to fail, for political reasons and mileage?? That maybe their marching orders came from the 'higher ups'? ....designed to fail??"" Have you been asleep for the whole of this thread, or do you post without bothering with what others have to say? I have been saying throughout that the fix was in and Teflon George was always going to walk. the trial was a carefully staged FARCE! But not for political reasons! It was a horse of a different colour! Don T. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 19 Jul 13 - 06:14 AM No Don - he is just a total fucking idiot. Horse, water, etc! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Red Queen Date: 19 Jul 13 - 08:13 AM STOP IT, ALL OF YOU! I am your Queen. If there's any yelling to be done, I'LL do it! And I'LL decide when we should listen to Biff. Hmmm, now is a good time. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_-A9rGLaYs&sns=em |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 19 Jul 13 - 08:51 AM Sorry, Red Queen, but your little sideshow disrespects the life of Trayvon Martin... Guess better, next time... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 08:52 AM Don, You really need to work on your math. "The juror who was interviewed said that initially they were three to two for conviction." 1. There were 6 jurors 2. The juror stated that three thought Z was innocent, two thought he was guilty of manslaughter, and 1 thought he was guilty of 2nd degree murder initially. Why do you need to keep lying about easily seen facts? Are you so devouted to your viewpoint that you ignore simple reality to make a case? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 08:58 AM "By the way, you STILL haven't answered my questions, just more spittle & horseshit." What questions have I not answered? How far up your ass you have your head? How many time you claim others are racists after your stating that "balck, and a Democrat" was the same to you as "dumb ni**er"? How many times that Bobert supports you in your racist attacks? Which one???? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 09:20 AM When Holder delivered his 2009 "nation-of-cowards" speech blaming racism for racial separation, Manhattan Institute's Heather Mac Donald suggested that our attorney general study his crime statistics. In New York from January to June 2008, 83 percent of all gun assailants were black, according to witnesses and victims, though blacks were only 24 percent of the population. Blacks and Hispanics together accounted for 98 percent of all gun assailants. Forty-nine of every 50 muggings and murders in the Big Apple were the work of black or Hispanic criminals. New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly confirms Mac Donald's facts. Blacks and Hispanics commit 96 percent of all crimes in the city, he says, but only 85 percent of the stop-and-frisks are of blacks and Hispanics. And these may involve the kind of pat-downs all of us have had at the airport. Is stop-and-frisk the work of racist cops in New York, where the crime rate has been driven down to levels unseen in decades? According to Kelly, a majority of his police force, which he has been able to cut from 41,000 officers to 35,000, is now made up of minorities. But blacks are also, per capita, the principal victims of crime. Would black fathers prefer their sons to grow up in Chicago, rather than low-crime New York City, with its stop-and-frisk policy? Fernando Mateo, head of the New York taxicab union, urges his drivers to profile blacks and Hispanics for their own safety: "The God's honest truth is that 99 percent of the people that are robbing, stealing, killing these drivers are blacks and Hispanics." Mateo is what The New York Times would describe as "a black Hispanic" Yet he may be closer to the 'hood than Holder, who says he was stopped by police when running to a movie — in Georgetown. Which raises a relevant question. Georgetown is an elitist enclave of a national capital that has been ruled by black mayors for half a century. It's never had a white mayor. Is Holder saying we've got racist cops in the district where Obama carried 86 percent of the white vote and 97 percent of the black vote? And his son should fear the white cops in Washington, D.C.? What about interracial crime, white-on-black attacks and the reverse? After researching the FBI numbers for "Suicide of a Superpower," this writer concluded: "An analysis of 'single offender victimization figures' from the FBI for 2007 finds blacks committed 433,934 crimes against whites, eight times the 55,685 whites committed against blacks. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white — with 14,000 assaults on white women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study." Though blacks are outnumbered 5-to-1 in the population by whites, they commit eight times as many crimes against whites as the reverse. By those 2007 numbers, a black male was 40 times as likely to assault a white person as the reverse. If interracial crime is the ugliest manifestation of racism, what does this tell us about where racism really resides — in America? And if the FBI stats for 2007 represent an average year since the Tawana Brawley rape-hoax of 1987, over one-third of a million white women have been sexually assaulted by black males since 1987 — with no visible protest from the civil rights leadership. Today, 73 percent of all black kids are born out of wedlock. Growing up, these kids drop out, use drugs, are unemployed, commit crimes and are incarcerated at many times the rate of Asians and whites — or Hispanics, who are taking the jobs that used to go to young black Americans. Are white vigilantes or white cops really Black America's problem? Obama seems not to think so. The Rev. Sharpton notwithstanding, he is touting Ray Kelly as a possible chief of homeland security. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jul 13 - 09:21 AM Are you [BullshitBruce] a complete idiot? Don, I'm surprised you had to pose that question; the answer has been staring us all in the face for quite some time now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 09:51 AM CHARLES BARKLEY: Well, I agreed with the verdict. I feel sorry that young kid got killed. But they didn't have enough evidence to charge him. Something clearly went wrong that night. Clearly something went wrong. I feel bad for anybody who loses a kid, but if you looked at the case and you don't make it -- there was some racial profiling, no question about it. But something happened that changed the dynamic of that night, and I know -- that's probably not a popular opinion among most people but just looking at the evidence I agreed with the verdict. I just feel bad because I don't like when race gets out in the media because I don't think the media has a pure heart, as I call it. There are very few people have a pure heart when it comes to race. Racism is wrong in any, shape, form -- a lot of black people are racist too. I think sometimes when people talk about racism, they say only white people are racist. There are a lot of black people who are racist. I don't like when it gets out there in the media because I don't think the media has clean hands. MARIA BARTIROMO, CNBC: I'm glad you made that point. BARKLEY: Obviously I feel sorry that young kid got killed but just judging by the evidence, I don't think that guy should have went to jail the rest of his life. Something happened bad that night, obviously. BARTIROMO: I like what the juror said, they both should have walked away. And if there is a shadow of a doubt, there is a shadow of a doubt. BARKLEY: And let me tell you, Mr. Zimmerman was wrong to pursue -- he was racial profiling. I think Trayvon Martin, God rest his soul, I think he did flip the switch and started beating the hell out of Mr. Zimmerman. But it was just a bad situation. And like I said, the main thing I feel bad for, it gives every black and white person who is racist a platform to vent their ignorance. That's the thing that bothers me the most because I watched this trial closely and I watch all these people are television talking about it. A lot of people have a hidden agenda. You know, they want their racist views, whether they are white or black -- BARTIROMO: The bias comes out. BARKLEY: The bias, it definitely comes out. It was a bad situation, we all lost. And I feel bad for his parents. You don't ever want to see anybody lose a kid. (CNBC Closing Bell, July 18, 2013) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 19 Jul 13 - 09:54 AM OK, Don T...the big question is, WHY do YOU think it was designed to fail?...and, How far up do you think it went? Here's your shot, go for it! Red Queen, 'Molly' was one of my brother's very favorite songs, before he died in a car accident, in central Florida, I might add. Are you into Biff? Personally, I thought/think he's a fucking genius, in his lyrics, his piano chops, and his ability to go where he goes to grab it...and thought so since I first heard him in the '60's. When music, or any art holds up in time, and still works, you KNOW!! His stuff is as relevant today, as it was 46 years ago, when he wrote it!...in fact, MOST of the ideologues, should have such a clue!! To bad they're blocked...constipation of the brain!....and what makes it worse....they figured out how to type!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:00 AM Comedian Bill Cosby says the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the death of Florida teen isn't about racism. Cosby, an outspoken voice on cultural issues, says the recent trial did not prove that Zimmerman had racist motives at any point during his confrontation with Martin. That means race shouldn't be a part of the conversation regarding the case. "Let's not go into a racial discussion unless we really have something there," he told radio hosts Domenick Nati and Nate Foutz. Cosby also blasted the news media and said that he had stopped paying attention to "high-profile" court cases after the Casey Anthony murder trial because journalists were so convinced she would be found guilty and yet she was not.... Regarding the Zimmerman trial, Cosby said that he did not think the state of Florida was able to prove its case against him. "I found that the prosecution did not tell the story well. And they lost," Cosby said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:01 AM Barkley has it right! The BIG question, is WHY???....Why was the prosecution purposely fucking up the case???...because they were racists???...OR...using the race issue, to stir shit up?? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:10 AM Got to do something to get out the vote in 2014- Obama might well have a Republican Senate and House the last two year of his presidency. Better race riots and martial law than that! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:23 AM ""Juror B37 said the jurors were initially divided on Zimmerman's guilt, with three jurors believing he was guilty of either manslaughter or second-degree murder, but that the jury agreed to acquit the 29-year-old Zimmerman after more closely reviewing the law. In a part of the interview that aired Tuesday, Juror B37 said it wouldn't have made much difference if Zimmerman had testified at trial since she believes he would have gave the same story he gave investigators in videotaped police interviews that were played at the trial. Juror B37 said at one point it appeared they might be heading to a hung jury as another juror wanted to leave. The other jurors convinced her to stay. Juror B37 said a block of concrete that defense attorney Mark O'Mara placed in front of jurors during closing arguments made an impression, as did photos of Zimmerman's bloodied head. She also believed Martin's actions contributed to his death."" 1. Firstly Bruce, you owe me an apology for calling me a liar, and I have highlighted the reason in the first paragraph above. You also owe yourself a kick in the pants for not reading and comprehending this passage,which was posted by you in one of your interminable cut 'n pastes. 2. Juror B37 is also rather dumb, in that she reckons Zimmerman taking the stand would have made no difference. Obviously she has never heard of cross examination, which would have highlighted Zimmerman's smugly dismissive attitude to the killing of a human being. Zimmerman, throughout, has shown no more concern or regret than one might expect had he stepped on a cockroach. This might well have swayed the only honest participants in this farce, the jury, and resulted in a different verdict. Finally, unless the defence was claiming that Trayvon Martin carried and/or used that block of concrete as a weapon, it should not have been allowed to make an impression on the jury. Another abysmal failure of the judge to nullify a cheap lawyer's trick. I'm also not surprised that one juror wanted to leave. The law might force an acquittal based on the incomplete evidence permitted to be heard by the jury. But I would have strong feelings of being contaminated had I been party to the result. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:27 AM ""CHARLES BARKLEY: Well, I agreed with the verdict."" Oh well! If CHARLES BARKLEY agrees, that puts a whole new complexion on it..............NOT! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jeri Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:31 AM Trolling is popular everywhere. I supposed stimulating each other is why people keep at it in this type of thread. But the media has figured out if they can continue to keep people pissed off, people will join their club and shout the appropriate things when cued. They've learned how to mobilize mobs. If you're shouting along with people you don't know about something of which you have absolutely no personal knowledge, condemning those whose personal business it IS, you're a tool. Yes, I think we need to speak out against injustice, but if you think it's injustice just because your favorite cheerleaders tell you it is, you're a tool. If you just want to be a part of that movement, you're a tool. If you think you know better than jury members after the media feeds you selected bits of evidence and opinion, you're a tool. If you're surprised by WHO believes your team is wrong, you might be a tool. Don't just question authority--question every fucking thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:33 AM BB, why do you keep posting other peoples' opinions. I don't give a fuck what Bill Cosby believes. His opinion carries no more certainty of being right than mine. All your postings serve to prove that you either have no opinions of your own, or that the ones you do have are so shaky that you need a cuple of celebs to give the credibility. Don T. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:34 AM "with three jurors believing he was guilty of either manslaughter or second-degree murder, " WHICH IS WHAT I SAID< YOU LYING NAZI SCUNSUCKER!!!! 2. The juror stated that three thought Z was innocent, two thought he was guilty of manslaughter, and 1 thought he was guilty of 2nd degree murder initially. 3 + 2 + 1 = 6 with three jurors believing he was guilty of either manslaughter or second-degree murder, " 2+ 1 = 3 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:40 AM Don, Your posts prove that you pay little attention to facts, have already decided before the evidence is presented what you are willing to think, and NOT think, and that you are willing to lie even when it is not needed to say something, just to make you look right. I think that the number of OPINIONS presented here by those YOU agree with exceed those I have posted- are you going UberMensch Bobert in making different rules for those you disagree with than those you apply to your racist "friends"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:41 AM Cosby...says the recent trial did not prove that Zimmerman had racist motives But that doesn't mean that there WEREN'T racist motives, does it BullshitBruce? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM " 1. Firstly Bruce, you owe me an apology for calling me a liar, and I have highlighted the reason in the first paragraph above. " No apology required, since your LIE is obvious. YOU STATED: " The juror who was interviewed said that initially they were three to two for conviction" THERE WERE 6 JURORS. Three to Three, NOT Three to Two, WHICH IS WHAT I POINTED OUT. So you owe me that apology, twice over. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:45 AM ""OK, Don T...the big question is, WHY do YOU think it was designed to fail?...and, How far up do you think it went? Here's your shot, go for it!"" Notwithstanding the presence of locally elected black officials, Florida is a state which is condoning, if not actively encouraging, a creeping return to the days of segregated schooling, and other aspects of the old Jim Crow culture. Now I have a question for you, and I have absolutely no idea of what the answer will be (just to show that I am willing to be proved wrong). In the Zimmerman case, how many black people, and how many white, were involved in the investigation and in the trial? We already know that Florida's take on twelve good men and true, leaves men out of the equation, halves the number to six, and balances one black with five white. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:48 AM Greggie, " Cosby...says the recent trial did not prove that Zimmerman had racist motives But that doesn't mean that there WEREN'T racist motives, does it BullshitBruce?" And I don't KNOW that you and Bobert didn't string up blacks back in the 50's and 60's- but that does not mean I should accuse you of it...YET. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:58 AM "and balances one black with five white." The Prosecution removed a black from the jury, because he watched FOX TV- MARK NEJAME, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: And that's what we were saying from the beginning. You know, sometimes I've been criticized by some who don't understand that a legal opinion is very different than a personal, a social, or a philosophical opinion. When you look at the composition of Seminole County, it's eleven percent African-American. And when you look at Sanford, it's 30 percent African-American. So when you subtract Sanford from the overall Seminole County, you have, you know, a very, very small minority, specifically African-American representation within Seminole County. So when in fact you condense that down to a jury, the odds of getting an African-American on the jury are very slim when you're in Seminole County. COSTELLO: Although if I remember correctly one of the prosecutors struck a black, a potential black juror from the jury. MICHAEL SKOLNICK, POLITICAL DIRECTOR TO RUSSELL SIMMONS, CO-PRESIDENT GLOBALGRIND.COM: Yeah, he was also, I was just, he was also a Fox News watcher. So that was, you know, problematic for the prosecution. In case you were wondering, Skolnick is not a Zimmerman supporter or a conservative. Besides being hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons' political director and the co-president of GlobalGrind.com, he's also on the board of directors of the Trayvon Martin Foundation. That said, it appears black jurors were only going to be acceptable to the prosecution if they were liberals getting their "news" from Zimmerman-hating media outlets. Martin supporters should keep that in mind as they complain about the makeup of the jury. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 11:05 AM " The woman was part of a six-person, all-female jury that found Zimmerman not guilty. As the first juror to speak about the case, she offered insight into what happened behind closed doors. The jury was initially split -- three and three along the line of guilt -- she said. Juror B37 was among those who believed Zimmerman was not guilty from the start. There was one holdout, the juror said. "She wanted to find him guilty of something, but couldn't because of the way the law is written. He wasn't responsible for negligible things that he had done leading up to that point," she said, stressing that she and the other jurors took their responsibility seriously." http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/16/us/zimmerman-juror |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 19 Jul 13 - 11:13 AM ""YOU STATED: " The juror who was interviewed said that initially they were three to two for conviction""" From your own post 3 for conviction, and one who wanted to quit. So you are counting the wish to leave as a "not guilty". I don't think it says that anywhere in your post so the impression YOU gave was three to two and that's what I said. I've been through the interviews from end to end and seen no 3,2,1 mentioned. Also it is reported that the vote on the verdict in the end was four to two, so not everybody thought as you do, that Zimmerman is innocent. This case takes one back to the days in the nineteenth century when killing Chinese, Mexicans and especially Indians was not considered a crime, and even free black men couldn't by a drink in a saloon. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: number 6 Date: 19 Jul 13 - 11:14 AM Well said Jeri !!! biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 19 Jul 13 - 11:19 AM Ahhh guys while you are name calling , the trial is over, he cannot be re-tried not in America .. Italy yes but not America. So it is what it is. If you want to blame someone blame the proscution. Murder two was never going to win .. manslaughter he would have won (I think) There was never a defined winning strategy for Murder Two unless there were other witnesses. The justice system sometime doesn't do its job well and other times it does. Example, a big gun doctor in Buffalo. Golfing at his country club slamming down his scotch. Races home in his BMW , hits and kills a young girl on a skateboard. Never stops. He got off hired the most expensive big gun lawyer ... said he never knew he hit her yet his car is F'd up and the girl was torn to pieces. He gets off, the teenage girl should not have been on the highway one juror said ... What the F is that about. Justice is sometimes, completely blind but it is what it is |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 19 Jul 13 - 11:21 AM Oh and the doctor example, they did find him guilt of DWI ... Wow what punishment for killing a young teenage girl and leaving the scene huh .. all the picking, talk shows, bullshit commentators ain't going to change the Zimmerman outcome its over |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 11:21 AM What one who wanted to quit? There were 6 jurors. The one who spoke out stated that originally, there were two that thought Zimmerman was guilty of manslaughter and one who thought Zimmerman was guilty of 2nd degree murder. 2 + 1 -=3 , "three jurors believing he was guilty of either manslaughter or second-degree murder, " The REMAINING THREE thought Zimmerman was innocent. Thus "The jury was initially split -- three and three along the line of guilt -- she said" YOUR claim that "The juror who was interviewed said that initially they were three to two for conviction." IS FALSE and a lie. Are you pretending to be stupid, or are you really that dense??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 11:36 AM At least six people were arrested Thursday night in San Bernardino after rocks and bottles were thrown and officers and pedestrians were attacked in a protest against the George Zimmerman trial verdict. The incident began about 8 p.m. as marchers moved south along Highland Avenue and were joined by others not initially involved with what was a peaceful protest at that point, according to police. Protesters ended up at a Jack in the Box restaurant near Waterman Avenue and Baseline Street and began hurling rocks and bottles at passing vehicles and officers who arrived at the scene, said Lt. Mike Madden of the San Bernardino Police Department. "They just saw the opportunity for civil unrest," Madden told the Los Angeles Times. Officers gave orders to disperse. At that point, groups of people took off running and began attacking and robbing pedestrians, according to police. Two of the six people arrested were taken into custody on suspicion of strong-arm robbery, Madden said. Police late Thursday were still monitoring roving groups of people in the streets. "It's been a relatively active evening," Madden said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jeri Date: 19 Jul 13 - 11:39 AM Thanks, biLL. Dan, for these... ... people, Mudcat = hate. This is where they come to spew, and that's all they care about. That's why the fighting lasts past any attempted discussion of subjects. I wish we could quarantine them, but about all I can do is be grateful I don't have to be around them in Real Life and can not read most of their posts here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Red Queen Date: 19 Jul 13 - 11:41 AM GfS, I never heard of Biff until you posted a link here. Then I listened to all his songs on youtube and Molly is my favorite. It's so bittersweet. Coincidentally, my sister died in a car accident 23 years ago this July 29th. Even though I was 28 at the time, I look back on that event as the real end of my childhood. So there you go. Now we can both cry :-( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 11:47 AM "Also it is reported that the vote on the verdict in the end was four to two, so not everybody thought as you do, that Zimmerman is innocent. " Where is this reported? I have not seen this- please ( politly requesting- you may have seen something I did not) provide a link, as all the reports I have seen indicate that the jury had to agree on a verdict, and all 6 did so- not guilty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Lighter Date: 19 Jul 13 - 12:11 PM The verdict was indeed unanimous. Which means that the three jurors who initially *wanted* to convict were finally persuaded by the testimony and the forensic evidence that they were wrong. That's how jury deliberations work. I've been on a jury. By the way, Jimmy Carter has come out in support of the verdict on the basis of precisely that testimony and evidence. Case closed. I wish. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 19 Jul 13 - 12:14 PM Red Queen...I met Biff in Venice, California back in '68.. Truly a gifted man! He still is alive, living in Louisiana, I believe. I'm glad you listened to the songs!!..Mudcat could learn a fer things from them!! He saw right through the 'left/right' illusion WAY back then! BTW, I have another expression about that, but I didn't get it from 'Biff'(Paul),,"Right wing and left wing are on the same bird!" Also, Bruce posted a comment, any comments on that?? Bruce: "Got to do something to get out the vote in 2014- Obama might well have a Republican Senate and House the last two year of his presidency. Better race riots and martial law than that!" Don Firth, in a post posted previously said that Obama would still be president in 2017.... Well, at least there is some common ground between the two sides...and NO comments????????????? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jul 13 - 12:27 PM The Prosecution removed a black from the jury, because he watched FOX TV- In the light of several studies, BullshitBruce, that confirm that people who watch Faux "News" are considerably more ignorant, uninformed, misinformed and confused than people who watch no news at all, I think the removal was entirely appropriate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jul 13 - 12:29 PM the three jurors who initially *wanted* to convict were finally persuaded by the testimony and the forensic evidence that they were wrong. OR they just wanted to get it over with, already, and go home. That's ALSO how juries work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 19 Jul 13 - 12:34 PM Greg, you're stretching so far, that you've re-confirmed that you are completely irrelevant...so much, that you are really 'hurting' the others who hold your position. Just thought I'd tell you. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jul 13 - 12:45 PM Thanks, GeistInsanity. Now bugger off home, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 12:46 PM The Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, president of the Brotherhood Organization of A New Destiny (BOND), a conservative nonprofit, made some contentious statements on CNN's "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Thursday. In addition to lambasting Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson for inserting race into Trayvon Martin's death and George Zimmerman's subsequent trial, he called the 17-year-old shooting victim a "thug." The exchange began with Peterson claiming that race played no role in the highly-publicized tragedy. "This case was not about race at all and what happened - you have the race-hustlers and poverty pimps like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and others who turned it into a race issue in order to gain power and wealth," he charged. Peterson also targeted President Barack Obama, calling his past comment about Martin ("You know, if I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon") "insane." These statements, he said, were intended to "incite the anger of black Americans and others." Morgan, clearly in disagreement with Peterson throughout the interview, asked if Zimmerman would have taken the same deadly action had Martin been, say, a white individual in a hoodie -- someone like Facebook billionaire Mark Zuckerberg. Peterson, not willing to back down, said that he believes the situation would have ended in the same manner. "If the situation that happened with Trayvin and George had been the same, yes ... I imagine that the same outcome would have been the same," he said. "George Zimmerman would have done whatever it took to protect himself. It didn't matter to George Zimmerman the color of the man." The interview became contentious when Peterson proclaimed that "Trayvon Martin was a thug." Morgan fervently disagreed and took exception to the fact that the faith leader said that everyone, including the television host and Martin's parents, knew this assertion to be true. Morgan said, "Don't you speak for me," noting that "there's very little evidence that Trayvon Martin was a thug." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: pdq Date: 19 Jul 13 - 01:02 PM Overposter known by "the F word" has posted 243 times in the month of July. I have posted 10 times, before this one. Perhaps Jeri and the gang can put a limit on the number of posts for some of the "usual suspects". That will not improve the quality of their posts, just the quantity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM Greg F has posted some 5 times since I asked him what questions these are, that I have not addressed. If even the UberMensch can't tell me, maybe his claim is ... another scumsucking lie? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 19 Jul 13 - 02:07 PM PDQ: "I have posted 10 times, before this one." Please post more often, you have good input! Regards! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jul 13 - 02:27 PM So PeeDee- you want to censor free speech? No surprise coming from a Fellow Traveller of BullshitBruce. How many postings of irrelevant horseshit has HE made? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 19 Jul 13 - 02:29 PM Here, look it up yourselves!! CNN.com - Transcripts transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1203/28/ijvm.01.html Cached No justice, no peace. TRACY MARTIN, TRAYVON`S FATHER: ... and Trayvon`s mother is very upset that ... saying this had nothing to do with race, and of ..." transcript of interview So what is it the 'pundits' know more about this??????????? THAT BEING SAID: It is being used by VERY evil people to promote violence, discord, bigotry, divisions, and hatred! If it WAS about race, I'm sure the mother would weigh in that it was...she didn't, she is directly contradicting the assholes trying to manipulate it..READ IT YOURSELVES! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jul 13 - 02:34 PM BullshitBruce, The Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson is a certified right-wing fundagelcal "christian"[sic]lunatic, as anyone who is able to use the internet search engine of their choice can discover in about 5 seconds. Please let us know why you think any sentient being should give a fart in a high wind about what he has to say? Just another BullshitBruce barrell of horseshit, signifying less than nothing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 02:45 PM Please let us know why you think any sentient being should give a fart in a high wind about what UberMensch Bobert or you, Greggie boy, have to say? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 02:47 PM And then, tell me why you don't think it worthwhile to listen to what blacks have to say unless they agree with you? Sounds like you are admitting your racism, doesn't it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 02:49 PM Or is it that you and UberMensch Bobert don't bother to listen to anyone who presents a viewpoint you do not agree with, regardless of race? What a perfect example of the "Liberal Attitude'. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Red Queen Date: 19 Jul 13 - 03:00 PM Hmmm...more Florida justice... http://sdvoice.info/black-woman-gets-20-years-for-firing-shot-at-wall-white-man- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 19 Jul 13 - 03:01 PM The FBI has ordered the Sanford, Florida Police Department not to return George Zimmerman's gun to him while a federal civil case against him is still pending. According to the Orlando Sentinel, the request is a clear indication that the U.S. Department of Justice is moving forward with its investigation as to whether Zimmerman violated the civil rights of teenager Trayvon Martin on February 26, 2012, the night of Martin's death. The Raw Story |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jul 13 - 03:04 PM Please let us know why you think any sentient being should give a fart in a high wind about what UberMensch Bobert or you, Greggie boy, have to say? Nice collection of horseshit & spittle, BullshitBruce, but you didn't answer the question. Is that because you know that the Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson is even more full of shit than you are? - hard to believe tho that may be.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Jul 13 - 03:15 PM It is because I respect the opinions of others, when they can support their opinions with factual reasons. Especially when they are black ( in cases of suposed "racil" rpofiling)- which it seems you do not |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 19 Jul 13 - 03:34 PM President Obama on the trial: "You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago. And when you think about why, in the African- American community at least, there's a lot of pain around what happened here, I think it's important to recognize that the African- American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that -- that doesn't go away. There are very few African-American men in this country who haven't had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me. And there are very few African-American men who haven't had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me, at least before I was a senator. There are very few African-Americans who haven't had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off. That happens often. And you know, I don't want to exaggerate this, but those sets of experiences inform how the African-American community interprets what happened one night in Florida. And it's inescapable for people to bring those experiences to bear." Full remarks here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jul 13 - 03:49 PM Thanks for the latest truckload of horseshit, BullshitBruce, but you STILL haven't answered the question. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 19 Jul 13 - 04:08 PM Thanks for posting that, bodad. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 19 Jul 13 - 04:52 PM I just read the full text of Obama's remarks and they were right on... His views of hold-your-ground laws are consistent with my own... They do not make people safer... They make people engage in hostile, violent acts who normally wouldn't think to do so... It puts murder on the list of options for conflict resolution and a major step backwards for our society... Of course the NRA will blast out their usual phoney statistics as if they are based on reality but just remember who it was that used it's political clout to stop the CDC from accumulating stats on gun violence... That alone should tell you that the NRA's stats are bald-faced lies... But back to Obama... Very nice speech and thank you for laying it out the way it is... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 19 Jul 13 - 05:05 PM "Stand your ground." Wasn't that the Dodge City ethic back in the "good ole days?' Lets all practice our fast draw. (Careful you don't shoot yourself in the foot. . . .) Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 19 Jul 13 - 05:36 PM Wasn't that the Dodge City ethic back in the "good ole days? Naw, that was Tombstone, Arizona. vide Paladin - have gun, will travel.. Welcome to the 1880's - Disneyesque living "history"[sic] is all the rage. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 19 Jul 13 - 06:10 PM Wyatt Earp and Bat Masterson inhabited Dodge City, Kansas circa 1886. Then they moved west when things got too quiet there. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 19 Jul 13 - 06:38 PM Dear Greg and Bruce. I have done a lot for both of you and I have called both of you friends. Now I am putting my EX Cop, EX government hat on and say if you don't stop calling each other names, I am going to kick the shit out of both of you .. and trust me I can do it .. knock it off, shake hands and behave. Nobody was there, it is what it is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 19 Jul 13 - 06:47 PM Bruce, Greg knows a lot about pocket watches, You want to learn more about them and are interested, he can also help you. Greg help Bruce with learning more about Hamilton's and their history. a heck of a lot better then beating each other up |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 19 Jul 13 - 06:58 PM Make music, not war! gfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 19 Jul 13 - 07:02 PM Yeah, I thought that was a really honest speech Obama gave. I thought I posted this AM but it didn't through. Good news feature. http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2013/07/19/203306999/How-To-Fight-Racial-Bia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 19 Jul 13 - 08:20 PM 20 years after graduating one of my former black students still sends me a fathers day card every year "to my other dad". One of my best friends is a conservative Amish guy .. you don't have be part of any culture or belief or whatever to be friends. agree to disagree .. that is fine. Lots of conservative republicans don't buy into my somewhat independent way of thinking, nor do my democratic friends and family .. but does it really matter no. People can disagree and that is fine but fighting when it changes nothing is silly. If you were members of the jury yes ... but it is over |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 19 Jul 13 - 08:37 PM No, Ol'ster, it ain't over... It wasn't over when O.J. got away with murder... It's never over when justice isn't served... Never... We don't get over injustice... We suffer with it until it is righted... Here in North Carolina there is a military doctor who has been in prison for the last 30 plus years... He was convicted of killing his wife and two young daughters... Problem is that he didn't do it... But he's still in prison... He's lost his entire family and over 30 years of his life... No, injustice is never over... BTW, this doctor is about to get a new trial... BTW, Part 2... How many men have been exonerated of crimes they were convicted of 20, 30, 40 years ago and now DNA says they were innocent??? It's been hundreds... No, injustice is never over... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 19 Jul 13 - 08:40 PM we fight in this community, we call names (me too) and I am sorry I lose it sometimes. We gotta be better people. Ya know what, in the Amish community English are really not welcome, they do business with English but keep a large distance between them. Ya know what else, a Catholic is like Satan the worst of the lot. Ya know happens when I stop by their Bishop's home, a smile, you must take some tomatoes and beans home to your family. Always a pleasure to see you come back soon we miss you. Why ? cause they got to know me and don't care about the other stuff. They no longer see an English Catholic only Dan if we all do that to each other, imagine how great mudcat could be with all of the smart people and gifted talent we have here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 19 Jul 13 - 08:50 PM Yes, becoming more civilized is always the goal of intelligent people... So is real justice... No justice = no liberty = no freedom = oppression... We gotta get it right... Florida didn't get it right and that is not acceptable... Not now and not tomorrow... This must get fixed... This is something we can't walk away from like watching a bar fight where both guys are going to wake up tomorrow... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 19 Jul 13 - 08:51 PM Make music, not war! Will this do? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCWZDgy7XAE&sns=em |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 19 Jul 13 - 09:02 PM What we need Bobster is to write our Congressmen and push for a federal law on handgun carry. it will go a long way I think. Too many states have such screwed up laws. Florida is one, if you can breathe and have no record sure here is a carry permit. Like some people should not own a car, some people should never be allowed a firearm. All it would have taken is "I am from the neighborhood watch what are you doing here" I bet everything would have been fine but sadly that didn't happen. This situation is over but we can try to prevent another from occurring if we try our best to push for federal control |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 19 Jul 13 - 09:10 PM That's a big 10/4, Ol'ster... No one should have a gun if they are a nut, a criminal or don't have a clue how to use it safely... The NRA says that can't happen... BS... It won't happen if we don't put in the hard work against the NRA to make it happen... BTW, GUEST... There's time for music and time for standing up for what is right... We knew that in the 60s and it still stands today... Your youtubes won't bring Trayvon Martin back... It won't stop the 100,000 Americans who will be shot this year... Get off this little head-in-the-sand games... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 19 Jul 13 - 09:54 PM I think myself that things can always change for the better. I should have also added I am an ex computer science full professor. ya know I am everything the Amish shun and detest but yet they accept me as one of them. If they can do it and it is 180 degrees against everything they stand for. maybe just maybe black and while people can take some time to look at each other and say, this hasn't been working well over the last 150 years. How are your kids doing ... wanna go for a beer .. I mean when you know someone then everything changes. Now lets fix the darn gun laws. Take that power from the states that cannot get it right and put it in the Federal hands with some sense perhaps. I can only pray |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 19 Jul 13 - 10:03 PM 10/4, part B... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 12:16 AM I watched the music video, and it was really cool. Legend played well on it...BTW, Bobert, if you watched the music video at all, you might have noticed the expression on the faces of the singers, in the background..both white and black..and yet you posted: Bobert: "BTW, GUEST... There's time for music and time for standing up for what is right..." I thought black and white singing together IS what is standing up for right!!!...Now just sharing your hate, has NOTHING to do with DOING 'what is right'!!..or 'left'... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 20 Jul 13 - 07:56 AM ""The one who spoke out stated that originally, there were two that thought Zimmerman was guilty of manslaughter and one who thought Zimmerman was guilty of 2nd degree murder. 2 + 1 -=3 , "three jurors believing he was guilty of either manslaughter or second-degree murder, " The REMAINING THREE thought Zimmerman was innocent. Thus "The jury was initially split -- three and three along the line of guilt -- she said" YOUR claim that "The juror who was interviewed said that initially they were three to two for conviction." IS FALSE and a lie. Are you pretending to be stupid, or are you really that dense???"" Look mate, my comment was based in, and responding to YOUR post about three to four days ago, in which none of what you have said above appeared. If you didn't post it, how could my response to what you DID POST be a lie, or stupid? You have a remarkable capacity for dishonest goal post shifting. Don T. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Lighter Date: 20 Jul 13 - 08:41 AM Has anyone noticed, as I have, that not *one* of emotional TV talking heads has explained exactly *why*, based on evidence in the trial itself, they're so sure the verdict was wrong? All they do is talk about race, an "innocent child" etc., etc. The details you most likely to heard before the trial were mostly *false.* The time-line between calls, the distance to Martin's house from the site of the fight, the testimony of the only eyewitness to get close (who saw Martin "grinding and pounding" Zimmerman's head on the concrete), the reluctance - at first - of even Martin's brother and father to identify his voice on the tape, Zimmerman's waiving of his Miranda rights, the clear photos of his injuries (not released till many months later), the lack of any injury to Martin except the gunshot (and a skinned knuckle), the testimony of one of the country's most distinguished forensic pathologists, the fact that it took Zimmerman 45 seconds of crying for help before he shot (whether or not Martin had grabbed for his gun), all combined to create *more* than reasonable doubt that he'd committed the crimes he was charged with. The evidence showed *beyond a reasonable doubt* that Martin didn't go home when he could have, came back to confront Zimmerman, broke his nose, then kept pounding his head on the concrete even after a neighbor came within twenty feet and yelled at them to stop because he was calling 911! And the prosecution - and now others - now describe the 17-year-old Martin as "an innocent child." (Florida prosecutes plenty of 17-year-olds as adults for violent crimes.) The photos of Martin that are usually shown were taken when he was about fourteen years old. Now why would that be? In 2012 he was 5' 11" and taller than Zimmerman. You don't have to believe me. You don't even have to believe the jury, which deliberated for 16 long hours after hearing many long days of testimony. But if you're going to protest, you'd better know what came out in court, in the presence of a vigorous and dedicated prosecution, rather than falling for the hyped-up media version with its predictable and pre-selected victim and villain. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 20 Jul 13 - 08:42 AM GfinS, I remember well the 60s... We wore a lot of hats... Anti-war... Civil & human rights... But we also had our music and our weed... We understood there was a time to reap and a time to sew... But that took a consciousness that respected both... There were people back then who didn't have that consciousness and were clueless as to why the folks who did didn't want to be around them... It's kinda like a band-mate who either isn't in tune or can't hold the beat... If the music video had been "For What Its Worth" then, yeah, maybe it would have been appropriate... But the video detracted from the discussion and added nothing at all to the discussion... But you won't get this because I fear that you were one of the folks in the 60s who thought it was all about sex, drugs and rock & roll and missed the real important stuff... Timing is everything... Like I said, "A time to reap, a time to sew"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 20 Jul 13 - 08:47 AM ""Don't just question authority--question every fucking thing."" All very wel Jeri! But when you point up all the inconsistencies in the way that evidence was permitted or debarred, and every single piece is slanted to disadvantage one side of the contest, that is not opinion, neither is it Media misdirection. It is reported court record, and it is redolent of corruption. If it is not based upon racial prejudice, what possible other reason makes any logical sense. Especially when you see where, and under what authorities it took place. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 20 Jul 13 - 09:20 AM ""But if you're going to protest, you'd better know what came out in court, in the presence of a vigorous and dedicated prosecution, rather than falling for the hyped-up media version with its predictable and pre-selected victim and villain."" The major problem is that your cleverly constructed apologia for Zimmerman's actions, fails to take into account the evidence which was deliberately kept from the jury, such as the fact: 1. That it was Zimmerman who had the martial arts experience. 2. That Zimmerman outweighed Martin by three and a stone. 3. That at 29, Zimmerman was nothing like the weak older man posited by the defence. 4. That Zimmerman had a history of violence which included stalking an ex girlfriend and assaulting her when confronted. 5. That Zimmerman had previously assaulted a police officer, while resistin arrest. 5. That two qualified voice recognition experts who gave the opinion that the voice crying help was more likely to be Trayvon Martin, were not allowed to testify. 6. That eight of Zimmerman's friends WERE allowed to testify that it was his voice. This whole trial was conducted in a manner completely unsatisfactory, except of course to those determined to acquit. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 20 Jul 13 - 09:28 AM There are folks who are for just letting this pass because, they say, the jury has spoken... Fine for them... That takes care of the Florida justice side of the deal... But it does nothing to address the injustice side of the deal and that's why we're not just letting it pass... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 20 Jul 13 - 09:28 AM That should read three and a half stone. DT |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 20 Jul 13 - 09:39 AM What Bobert said!! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 20 Jul 13 - 09:45 AM The "jury had spoken" in the Captain Alfred Dreyfus case too, and the verdict had huge public support. Plenty more similar examples down to the present day. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 20 Jul 13 - 09:46 AM On second thought, wonder how Beardy views the Dreyfus affair? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 10:59 AM Part of the 'withheld evidence'......... maybe the real reason Trayvon punched Zimmerman.... I think the 'so-called' liberals might just get split into the 'so-called liberals' and even 'lefter so-called liberals'....with egg on their faces. GfS P.S. Homophobia, anyone?? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 20 Jul 13 - 11:07 AM Yeah, GeistInsanity, you and Limbaugh make a good pair of total fucking idiots. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 11:16 AM Follow-up.... ...and more of Trayvon's remarks on phone to follow...which I heard on the radio, but there is nothing online, as of yet...but shall be coming. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 11:19 AM Greg F, I KNEW you'd be bitching(along with a couple of others), but I did NOT quote Limbaugh. Is right from the mouth of JEANTEL, on the Piers Morgan Show! Don't blame me, I didn't say it! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 11:24 AM Oh, and when I said I heard it on the radio, it WASN'T the Rush Limbaugh Show, either. It was on the news out of Albuquerque. LMAO!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 11:57 AM And NOW it's starting to make a LOT more SENSE now!!! Remember I posted this, at the beginning, when i first got on..: From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 10 Jul 13 - 11:01 AM Dream on. You guys are ignoring the circumstances that led to him being shot, and trying to make it solely a case of him being shot, because Martin was black. Do you think Zimmerman would have shot him, if Martin wasn't on top of him, beating him up??? Yes, I agree that it was a lack of good judgement..on both of their parts. Yes, it would have never happened, if Zimmerman had remained in his car, against the advice of the officer who advised him to stay in his car, BUT, Zimmerman getting out of his car, against that advice, was in itself NOT breaking a law. It was dumb, yes, and he followed Martin, which eventually led to him being assaulted by Martin, according to the evidence...but following a person, does NOT give permission, common sense, or reason, for that person to turn around and accost the guy following you...and technically, and legally, Martin was the first to break the law, by doing so. It was a stupid act of bravado, as was Zimmerman trying to take the law in his own hands. IT WAS ALL STUPID!" As it is turning out, Martin called Zimmerman a 'Cracker', which is a racial term, and a few other names, which I heard on the news, which is slang for a homosexual, who he was thinking was going to rape him...so he figured he wasn't armed, just a 'faggot'(Trayvon's words) who needed to 'get his fuckin' ass whooped'(Trayvon's words). Do you think that might just explain WHY Trayvon didn't call 911?????? WHY Trayvon elected to assault Zimmerman???? So is it that Trayvon was the homophobic racist who attacked Zimmerman? Sound like it to me...BUT.... ..as I POSTED BEFORE: IT was ALL acts of stupidity, all the way around, and BOTH of them, misreading the moment and circumstances!! ..and I posted that, before the trial was even over! guest from SANITY! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: number 6 Date: 20 Jul 13 - 12:04 PM "cracker" .... I thought it referred to poor southern farmers. "The President say, "Little fat man isn't it a shame what the river has done To this poor crackers land." ... exerpt from Louisiana by Randy Newman. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 20 Jul 13 - 12:16 PM I think Newman's "Sail Away" might be more relevant to the discussion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 12:20 PM "Usage of the term "cracker" generally differs from "hick" and "hillbilly" because crackers reject or resist assimilation into the dominant culture, while hicks and hillbillies theoretically are isolated from the dominant culture. In this way, the cracker is similar to the redneck.[citation needed] In the African American community, "cracker" is a racist term for whites. Since 1900 "cracker" has also been used as a proud or jocular self-description. With the huge influx of new residents from the North, "cracker" is now used informally by some white residents of Florida and Georgia ("Florida cracker" or "Georgia cracker") to indicate that their family has lived there for many generations. However, the term "white cracker" is not always used self-referentially and remains a racist term to many in the region." GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 12:23 PM "Dumb-ass cracker" was Trayvon's context, and words. Personally, I liked the video with blacks and whites singing together, and smiling! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 20 Jul 13 - 01:02 PM So calling a white guy who is following you a creepy ass cracker is a capital offense??? Murder is murder, folks, and any effort to sanitize what Zimmerman got away with is wrong... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 20 Jul 13 - 01:05 PM BTW, the video of blacks and whites singing together does not make up for this murder either and is, quite frankly, disgustingly disrespectful to Trayvon Martin... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 01:26 PM Give it up, Bobert...that's NOT the reason! No wonder evidence was withheld!! Also it could explain the President's demeanor during his speech. Sooner or later this was going to come out!..and sooner or later all the 'so-called liberal' agitators, would have a lot of 'Jim Crow' to eat!!! This had to do with a over zealot wannabe cop, being assaulted by a kid, who happened to be black, who wanted to teach, what he perceived as a would be homosexual rapist, a lessen by beating the shit out of him, and the wannabe cop shooting him out of self defense, as he was getting the crap kicked out of him, on the ground. Makes sense to me...but STILL does NOT justify the whole stupid chain of events..but at least explains it!!.. ...and by the way, this SHOULD have come out in the trial! Shame shame on the prosecution and idiots trying to politicize this into merely a racial profiling! Now, the way it is, the 'so-called liberals' need to decide about whose 'rights' were being violated, homosexuals?..Blacks?? Hispanics?? Licensed gun owners? and have to choke on their own bullshit!! In other words, you've been exploited and used...AGAIN....just like them there 'hippies' in the '60s!! Good night, Gracie! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM Just in case you didn't understand the lyrics.....read carefully! Ballad of a Thin Man You walk into the room With your pencil in your hand You see somebody naked And you say, "Who is that man?" You try so hard But you don't understand Just what you'll say When you get home Because something is happening here But you don't know what it is Do you, Mister Jones? You raise up your head And you ask, "Is this where it is?" And somebody points to you and says "It's his" And you say, "What's mine?" And somebody else says, "Where what is?" And you say, "Oh my God Am I here all alone?" Because something is happening here But you don't know what it is Do you, Mister Jones? You hand in your ticket And you go watch the geek Who immediately walks up to you When he hears you speak And says, "How does it feel To be such a freak?" And you say, "Impossible" As he hands you a bone Because something is happening here But you don't know what it is Do you, Mister Jones? You have many contacts Among the lumberjacks To get you facts When someone attacks your imagination But nobody has any respect Anyway they already expect you To just give a check To tax-deductible charity organizations You've been with the professors And they've all liked your looks With great lawyers you have Discussed lepers and crooks You've been through all of F. Scott Fitzgerald's books You're very well read It's well known Because something is happening here But you don't know what it is Do you, Mister Jones? Well, the sword swallower, he comes up to you And then he kneels He crosses himself And then he clicks his high heels And without further notice He asks you how it feels And he says, "Here is your throat back Thanks for the loan" Because something is happening here But you don't know what it is Do you, Mister Jones? Now you see this one-eyed midget Shouting the word "NOW" And you say, "For what reason?" And he says, "How?" And you say, "What does this mean?" And he screams back, "You're a cow Give me some milk Or else go home" Because something is happening here But you don't know what it is Do you, Mister Jones? Well, you walk into the room Like a camel and then you frown You put your eyes in your pocket And your nose on the ground There ought to be a law Against you comin' around You should be made To wear earphones Because something is happening here But you don't know what it is Do you, Mister Jones? Copyright © 1965 by Warner Bros. Inc.; renewed 1993 by Special Rider Music Rather both prophetic and apropos!...on several levels! gfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 20 Jul 13 - 03:51 PM And that posting of an intirely irrelevent Dylan tune has what to do witth anything, GeistInsanity? Dogshit-R-Us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: olddude Date: 20 Jul 13 - 04:02 PM a better question to ask, is how can this be avoided in the future to any black, or white, or purple or any other person right. I can only strongly suggest a federal hand gun carry law. I talked to a cop from Florida that I know. He said the stand your ground stuff occurred because people got mad at the high number of drug related break in's and subsequent homicides. The state then passed that law. The downside to "no good deed goes unpunished" is that they laid a good foundation for murderers to get off. Now stand your ground was not part of this case but it will be again in the future sadly. A federal carry law would be a good step I think. but who knows maybe the feds won't get it right either but maybe they will at least talk to people who know about such things unlike NY before making laws. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 20 Jul 13 - 04:35 PM Two irrefutable things: #1: Had Zimmerman- a Night WATCHman - stayed in his vehicle after reporting a 'suspicious' character, it would not have happened. #2: Had Zimmerman been wearing a uniform that indicated his standing, it would most probably not have happened. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Lighter Date: 20 Jul 13 - 04:57 PM Had Martin kept walking home, it wouldn't have happened either. (He could have been there in between 30 and 60 seconds.) Nor if he hadn't gone back, broken Zimmerman's nose, and "pounded" his head on the sidewalk. Zimmerman didn't chase him, at least according to the phone-call timeline, and didn't strike him, at least according to the autopsy. Not every tragedy is a crime. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 05:12 PM ..and if the 'so-called liberals' weren't deceived, and betrayed, and used, by the banksters/multinational/political indoctrinators, who are also doing the 'so-called conservatives', it would have been just another, needless, stupid crime, that nobody would have been hating each other over, too...and/or..is being manipulated, so more of it can/will happen..... ....and you 'thought' folk music had no more place??? IF EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Cheers! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 20 Jul 13 - 05:54 PM 1 2 3 4 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Ebbie Date: 20 Jul 13 - 05:59 PM Your "if's", GfS, are dumb, imo. Should I say that IF the sun had not shone today, it would have been cloudy? One expects a 29-year-old to have and exercise better judgment than someone who has just turned 17. That is what we call the difference between a boy and a man. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 20 Jul 13 - 06:04 PM Nor if he hadn't gone back, Please supply evidence that Martin "went back" - other than the self-serving testimony of documented multiple liar Zimmerman. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 20 Jul 13 - 06:39 PM If Trayvon was a white man wearing a suit he'd still be alive. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 20 Jul 13 - 07:00 PM Vehement posters here have invented their own scenario, repetitively posted, which is at odds with the witness statement and Zimmerman's injuries. Acquittal was the logical outcome. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 20 Jul 13 - 07:31 PM Yo, Lighter, Were you there??? Funny, I don't recall you being called to the stand... But you seem so sure of exactly what happened... You are coming off as a racist who devalues the life of a black teenager just trying to walk home from the store... I mean, your assertions are mythology... Tell us where you got these so-called facts... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 20 Jul 13 - 07:34 PM Yo, GfinS, You are spinning faster than a top on crack... Your guesses suck as bad as your spin... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 08:20 PM Snap now, and avoid the rush....it'll all come out! Remember when the message in the music was AHEAD of the curve??? How long did it take you to flash before?? Did you run out of your mojo?? The Girlfriend was purposely abridged in her testimony. Those 'lawyers' should be disbarred! They deceived the whole fucking nation, and got the suckers to champion the lie! Protest music, anyone? Me, I only compose instrumentals, anymore. I try to say it without words, like I used to...besides, when the takeover is done, don't you think they'd like some good music???? Funny, we haven't heard from Firth, yet....the ramrod distractor is hiding?? (That should flush him out!) GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 08:30 PM ..along with the, beardedbruce might have a few things to post, as well! Not guessing, Bobert...heard it!..and posted links to support it....it's just that your corporate owned media hasn't got it up yet, how to spin this one, and keep the deception going. Do you think the president didn't know this information, when he gave his speech?? what else AREN'T you being told?? How bad the economy is?? Race riots?? Gun issues??..all converging together??? You might know this...written in similar times..for similar reasons Did you forget?? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 20 Jul 13 - 08:38 PM You, GfinS, at least have the right song for the occasion... Just seeing black and white singers together singing the wrong song sends the wrong message... The economy??? Your Republicans have stymied one jobs bill after another... The non-flat-earth economists said it would take $1.3T in stimulus to get US out of the rut... Your buddies said no... Even Europe now gets it that your Republican austerity is stupid... Now back the issues at hand... Stick with the real issues, GfinS, and leave the oberta dictum alone... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 09:32 PM I am...it's all one big mess....even orchestrated! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 20 Jul 13 - 11:03 PM Here, bobert..Here's a ditty for ya'.......... Hey, Red Queen, you out there??? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 21 Jul 13 - 02:16 AM Damn Hippies!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Bill Kennedy Date: 21 Jul 13 - 04:41 AM The verdict was indeed the correct one. I am pleased with the outcome, I was never in any doubt of his innocence. One has to ask themselves how they would react when confronted with this type snooping about their property. When this type comes into an area such as this, you can be sure criminal damage or robbery in their motivation and intent. We all expected this shower would hit the streets running to play the old race card after the verdict was read, even the boy in the White House threw his threepence worth in. I wouldn't worry too much about it, they will go on their usual burning and wrecking spree for a few days, the police are more than capable of dealing with it if left alone to do so. It will soon blow over. My only hope is that British courts would take a similar approach in such cases, this is very unlikely due to political intervention by a government that has proven it has failed to serve it's own people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,TIA Date: 21 Jul 13 - 07:55 AM "even the boy in the White House" You are a despicable pig Mr. Kennedy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 21 Jul 13 - 09:55 AM Ditto on the despicable pig comment... Sorry, GfinS, but that little ditty didn't do ditty for me... Too schmaltzy for my tastes... BTW, there's a major difference between "old hippies" and "old radicals"... Folks who weren't either really wouldn't understand that part because "old radicals" and "old hippies" did kinda look alike back then... Martin Luther King was very puzzled about "hippies" because they were pretty much apolitical and just wanted to be left alone... B~ (old radical) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 21 Jul 13 - 10:12 AM ""Makes sense to me...but STILL does NOT justify the whole stupid chain of events..but at least explains it!!.."" The fact that it makes sense to you doesn't actually improve its credibility. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 21 Jul 13 - 10:22 AM ""Nor if he hadn't gone back, broken Zimmerman's nose, and "pounded" his head on the sidewalk."" A claim for which we have only Zimmerman's word, and the next day the fairies had taken away the bush from which he claimed Martin ambushed him. In fact it was one of a number of lies told by Zimmerman. ""Zimmerman didn't chase him, at least according to the phone-call timeline, and didn't strike him, at least according to the autopsy."" No, he didn't, because Martin wasn't running. He said on the phone he was being followed. Zimmerman did hit him! With a 9mm slug! After that fists were superfluous. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 21 Jul 13 - 12:20 PM Bobert: "Martin Luther King was very puzzled about "hippies" because they were pretty much apolitical and just wanted to be left alone..." Damn hippies!....(hey, maybe they were onto something...or maybe just on something) Does being an old radical and bragging about it, make you block-headed and proud of it, or just block-headed for a long time?...because you ARE a bit extreme, when trying not to deal with either facts or reality. Don T obviously didn't watch the trial...he made up his own mind without one..who needs evidence?? or witnesses??..NOT Don! Look guys, the whole thing was a sham, from even before they held it, and the politicizing it, by your buddies, even fucked it up more. It was designed to fail, and play to YOU, the audience. Legally, the verdict WAS the correct one, so no real damage there, but idiots are still trying to get mileage out of it, all this while keeping the truth of the assault by Trayvon, out of the light. You can believe or disbelieve any fucking thing you want, and you have shown that you do. more of the real story is breaking, but you don't care....matter of fact, the FACT that you don't care about the circumstances, as fucked up as they be, just shows that people with big mouths, and no care, really don't matter, at all...just mall people with big mouths hoping to be heard...with nothing to say of any substance! So, get over it(you didn't give a shit anyway)...and blather on. Oh, and keep ignoring the truth of the whole story...it makes for better blather! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 21 Jul 13 - 02:06 PM OMG. I've been busy being ill. Can't believe this back and forth is continuing, despite the fact that I participated in it earlier on. Legalities aside, Trayvon will be considered a martyr, someone convicted of his own murder. Zimmerman, at best, will be thought a fool. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 21 Jul 13 - 02:41 PM Hi, Elmore...welcome back to the mental ward! I happen to agree with you on the legal front...and I still maintain it was a chain of stupidity, and over-hyped bullshit, promoted by the wannabe zealots of civil rights nostalgia!...besides, it's now come out that Trayvon instigated the actual ILLEGAL assault on Zimmerman, thinking he was going to pound the shit out of what he was convinced, by his girlfriend, that the guy following him maybe a homosexual rapist! The wannabe 'so-called liberals' are in a tailspin over it..who do they support?..the Homosexual community from homophobes?..the black community, because they're used to beating that drum??...Hispanics?? because it's a new drum, they don't like as much, but it's still a drum that makes noise, ..unfair trial??..but it was THEIR guys who withheld evidence and fucked it up for political controversy..'stand your ground' laws, that were not even used in the trial..the rule of law?? which didn't fall their way, so it must be a Tea Party plot,...stricter gun laws?...because Zimmerman had one, but Trayvon's picture with one doesn't count...after all, he's a black homophobic wannabe gang member, who just didn't take it with him that night, notwithstanding a minor...yeppers, them there liberal stereo whiners are whining out of both sides of their mouths. A don't have a pig in the race..just tried to point it out to them that they are in the position of a political used rubber...fucked over AGAIN! Personally I just wish they'd contain themselves...and everything in it!....but if you do spread it around, the male hormone in it DOES get rid of cellulite on women! Until the next bit of nonsensical indigestion...(and maybe not).. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 21 Jul 13 - 02:50 PM Jayzuz!!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 21 Jul 13 - 03:04 PM Well, as the NRA always points out, if Trayvon Martin had had a gun he'd be alive today. Lapierre has said that in this case, hasn't he? No? Oh, I wonder why. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Lighter Date: 21 Jul 13 - 03:08 PM And if Zimmerman hadn't, he might not be. Most complicated. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 21 Jul 13 - 03:10 PM Well, that's a start if you're trying to pray for a way out of this bullshit!! Welcome back..I knew as soon as the waters were tepid enough you'd worm your way back......you really do have a mess on your hands...(see the 'Rupture' thread!) GfS P.S. Oh, by the way, "Jayzuz!!!" is not really a salient argument, it's just another feigned knee-jerk re-action, as if there is something to object about...but you don't know what it is...Do you, Mr Jones? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 21 Jul 13 - 04:06 PM And if Zimmerman hadn't, he might not be. Most complicated. Actually I think that if Zimmerman had not had a gun he would likely have stayed in his truck like the dispatcher told him to and none of us would have ever heard of either of them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 21 Jul 13 - 04:44 PM Hey, I agree with KB on that one....just like I agree with the FACT that after Rachel Jeantel told Trayvon, after she told him that Zimmerman was probably a 'homosexual rapist'(her words), that he should run, run away....either one of those things could have avoided this sordid ordeal! By the way, the DoJ is not going to bring more charges on Zimmerman, they're just placating the left, until things die down, and people's attention spam(about that of a mayfly), wanders to 'other things'. That being said, Zimmerman's 'karma' is going o punish him far worse than a prison sentence! Happy now? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 22 Jul 13 - 11:16 AM http://www.npr.org/2013/07/19/203342650/double-take-toons-lessons-from-zimmerman |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 22 Jul 13 - 12:40 PM Zimmerman's 'karma' is going o punish him far worse than a prison sentence! Fatuous nonsense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 22 Jul 13 - 12:49 PM ""people with big mouths, and no care, really don't matter, at all...just small people with big mouths hoping to be heard...with nothing to say of any substance!"" As a piece of spot on accurate self assessment, that is bloody brilliant. I couldn't possibly have found a better description of you. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 22 Jul 13 - 01:40 PM http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/for-the-aclu-george-zimmerman-case-is-awkward-deja-vu-94518.html The American Civil Liberties Union is experiencing some uncomfortable déjà vu. George Zimmerman's acquittal in the shooting death of black teenager Trayvon Martin has triggered the specter of an awkward and often raucous debate the group thought it had put behind itself two decades ago. After the 1992 acquittal of Los Angeles police officers in the videotaped beating of African-American Rodney King, ACLU leaders split sharply over the possibility of a federal trial for the officers. The group eventually suspended its policy opposing double jeopardy — only to reverse itself the following year. A New York Times editorial back then called the ACLU "torn by internal disagreement." A Boston Globe column described the organization as "twisting itself up in knots." The heated debate highlighted one of the ACLU's challenges: It is perhaps the nation's foremost advocate for civil liberties — but it also has a long history advocating for civil rights. More than 20 years later, President Barack Obama's comments reacting to the Zimmerman verdict dwelled on race while calling for respect for the trial process and the jury verdict. "The judge conducted the trial in a professional manner," he said Friday. "The juries [sic] were properly instructed that in a case such as this reasonable doubt was relevant, and they rendered a verdict. And once the jury has spoken, that's how our system works." Meanwhile, the ACLU's first public reaction drew notice in some quarters for leaning heavily toward racial justice — while staying silent on civil liberties and due process in the Florida case. "Last night's verdict casts serious doubt on whether the legal system truly provides equal protection of the laws to everyone regardless of race or ethnicity," ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero said in a statement on July 14, the day after the Florida jury's verdict. "This case reminds us that it is imperative that the Department of Justice thoroughly examine whether the Martin shooting was a federal civil rights violation or hate crime." The statement went on to call for additional federal guidance on the use of race in law enforcement and for a new federal law aimed at ending racial profiling. But it was the specific reference to an "imperative" for DOJ to investigate under criminal statutes — an apparent endorsement of the calls of many civil rights activists and groups for a federal prosecution of Zimmerman — that threatened to reopen old wounds. That call came even though the ACLU's long-standing policy, restored in 1993 after the King debate, explicitly rejects such an option. "There should be no exception to double jeopardy principles simply because the same offense may be prosecuted by two different sovereigns," the policy says. (Also on POLITICO: 'Justice for Trayvon' rallies continue) Romero's statement stirred concern among some civil libertarians that in a rush to join the chorus of outrage over the Zimmerman verdict, the group had turned its back on the policy it settled on two decades ago. In an apparent attempt to stem the controversy, a top ACLU official wrote to Attorney General Eric Holder on Thursday to make clear that the group does not favor a second prosecution of Zimmerman in federal court. "We are writing to clearly state the ACLU's position on whether or not the Department of Justice (DOJ) should consider bringing federal civil rights or hate crimes charges as a result of the state court acquittal in the George Zimmerman case," Laura Murphy, director of the ACLU's Washington office, wrote. (WATCH: President Obama's full remarks on Trayvon Martin) "The ACLU believes the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Constitution protects someone from being prosecuted in another court for charges arising from the same transaction. A jury found Zimmerman not guilty, and that should be the end of the criminal case," she wrote. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 22 Jul 13 - 01:58 PM Thanks Jack The Sailor for keeping this thread alive. It's a fitting memorial to Trayvon, and his wonderful family. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 22 Jul 13 - 02:37 PM Don T.: "I couldn't possibly have found a better description of you." Something to reflect upon. (He won't get it!) GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 22 Jul 13 - 07:47 PM On the other thread Lighter - who speaks as if he witnessed the entire murder - says he heard the entire testimony... Here's the obvious question: 1. Did Martin rain MMA down on Zimmerman as one witness says or... ...2, Did Martin slam Zimmerman's head into the concrete??? You can't do both, people... One motion require you to punch down and the other grab the head (no punch down) and use the head and concrete as much different??? Hmmmmmm??? Seems like Lighter doesn't have a clue what happened... BTW, as a former martial arts enthusiast with an ex who was also a sensei if I had 10 seconds on top of Zimmerman the damage that was shown in the pics ain't squat... I would have turned his head into hamburger... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 23 Jul 13 - 12:50 AM Give it a rest, will ya'? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 08:28 AM Obviously BOTH (emphasis) ,Bobert. Martin initially was punching, then started pounding- at which point Zimmerman, in fear of being killed, pulled out the gun and fired one time. That is in accord with all testimony. YOUR (emphasis) capabilities in causing bodily harm are not in question- but you CANNOT ( emphasis) claim that Martin was un-trained AND (emphasis) capable of the damage YOU (emphasis), a trained person, could do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 08:42 AM http://gma.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-emerged-hiding-truck-crash-rescue-174553647--abc-news-topstories.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 23 Jul 13 - 09:08 AM Was he packing heat? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 23 Jul 13 - 09:12 AM Sorry, please ignore the above childish stupid post. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 23 Jul 13 - 09:16 AM george-zimmerman-emerged-hiding-truck-crash-rescue You bet Beardy, the post-trial white-washing campaign has begun. Pretty soon they'll start a campaign to canonize him. This whole incident couldn't possibly have been stage-managed by the County Sheriff, who wouldn't arrest Zimmerman in the first place, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 23 Jul 13 - 09:19 AM Yes, of course Mud-KKK would rather just move on... This was the case after lynchings in the South back then... "Move along, people... Nothing to see here", they say... Problem is that there is something to see here and millions of people ain't going to just let the KKK have its way in 2013... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 10:36 AM Seems like Bobert doesn't have a clue what happened... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 10:56 AM by Megan Gannon, News Editor 3 hours ago SocietyShooting of Trayvon Martin . View gallery George Zimmerman claimed he was acting in self-defense when he shot Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black … The American public is divided, largely along racial and political lines, over George Zimmerman's acquittal and the conversation it has sparked about race, according to a new poll. The survey by the Pew Research Center drew from phone interviews with 1,480 adults across the nation conducted July 17-21. Overall, 42 percent of respondents said they are dissatisfied with Zimmerman's not-guilty verdict in the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, compared with 39 percent who said they are satisfied, and 19 percent who offered no opinion. About half (52 percent) said the issue of race is getting too much attention in the aftermath of the trial, while 36 percent think the case is generating a necessary discussion about race. http://news.yahoo.com/wide-racial-gap-reaction-zimmerman-verdict-112952910.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 11:18 AM So, before we flagellate ourselves over the Zimmerman case, let's take an objective look at how we compare – racially – to the rest of the world. Big surprise here – there is no comparison! And, to my doubting liberal friends and others, I ask you to – as I have done – go live (not just travel) outside our country for a while, in the East or the West. See how other nations around the world have dealt with racial issues. In short, most of them 1) haven't and 2) don't. Some examples: Japan, just for example, is probably the most racist "modern" society in the world, yet we never hear a word about it. Don't believe me? Go there and see, Jesse and Al. Most minority races in Europe still live mostly in racially and ethnically segregated ghettos; and there is very little assimilation/integration of the races. Jesse and Al: Go to Germany, just for example, and see. There is no such thing as "affirmative action" anywhere but here. Religious and gender oppression/persecution is the rule in most Middle Eastern countries following strict Muslim religious rules. So, I would urge Jesse and Al to go there and see – just for example – how the Christian minorities are doing, whatever their race or ethnicity. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2013/07/22/trayvon-martin-and-racism-at-home-and-abroad |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 11:23 AM http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-the-justice-department-pursue-a-civil-rights-case-against-george-zimmerman Several reasonable discussions- being reasonable, I am sure that Bobert and Greggie will use their usual tactics ( approved by liberal everywhere!) of attacking me or the writers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 11:35 AM "A federal prosecution against George Zimmerman would violate civil rights under the guise of enforcing them, a betrayal of the justice system that is supposed to be our refuge from politicized law-enforcement. The state trial in Florida elucidated that concocting a murder case out of the tragic shooting death of Trayvon Martin, in the face of compelling evidence that Zimmerman acted in justifiable self-defense, substituted demagogic racial politics for proof. The jury properly rejected the prosecution's shoddy case, which was bereft of the requisite demonstration of intent to commit murder and had no answer for Zimmerman's well-corroborated claim that Martin attacked and severely beat him. Though it is hard to imagine, a federal civil rights indictment would be even more frivolous than the state murder charge. It would suffer from all the same insufficiencies: Zimmerman's lack of intent to harm Martin physically and the inability to refute compelling self-defense evidence. But that would only be the start of the Justice Department's problems. [See a collection of editorial cartoons on the Trayvon Martin tragedy.] In the criminal context, federal civil rights law imposes even tougher burdens for prosecutors when it comes to mens rea – i.e., proof of criminal intent. The government would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt not only that Zimmerman intended to inflict physical harm on Martin but that he also did so out of racial bias. There is not a scintilla of evidence that Zimmerman has ever been a racist, much less that racism played any part in the shooting. After hearing all the prosecution's evidence, the Florida jury concluded that race was irrelevant to the case. And reportedly, the FBI has been unable to uncover any indications of racism, despite an extensive investigation of Zimmerman. Racism is the prism through which the Left would convert this tragedy into a morality play. It defies reality." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 11:36 AM Justice Department lawyers should not attempt to prosecute George Zimmerman for the death of Trayvon Martin.They likely won't succeed, and would probably compound the awful precedent set by the state of Florida in pursuing this case over objections from the lead criminal investigator, police chief and the community's prosecutor. These missteps were followed with a decision to bypass a grand jury. All the safeguards protecting Americans from political or unwarranted prosecution were missing, allowing this train-wreck of a case to proceed. If the feds follow suit, they will head down the same path of an unjustified prosecution – re-establishing, nationally, a practice not seen since Woodrow Wilson pursued his political goals through abusing federal prosecutorial authority. Wilson's use of the Espionage and Sedition Acts to arrest and silence critics as well as the media rolled back the clock on constitutional rights. Like Wilson era abuses, today's Justice Department must distort the meaning of hate crime statutes to charge Zimmerman. First, prosecutors lack a definitive finding that Zimmerman is, in fact, a racist. After interviewing 35 people – including co-workers, neighbors and even an ex-girlfriend – an FBI investigation failed to find proof that Zimmerman's actions were racially motivated on the night Martin died. [See a collection of editorial cartoons on the Trayvon Martin tragedy.] Even the so-called profiling issue disintegrates upon closer review. The lead detective in the case told the FBI that Zimmerman was suspicious of Martin because of his clothing and the time of day – not Martin's ethnicity. With its own investigatory arm already doubting any racial animosity, it makes prosecuting the matter as a hate crime extremely hard. But it gets harder. The next hurdle requires finding Zimmerman's specific intent to kill Martin. The jury in Sanford established Zimmerman was acting in self-defense when his gun discharged. Zimmerman intended to protect himself from death or great bodily harm. With murder in the second degree and manslaughter on the table, jurors found Zimmerman not guilty of both. While not dispositive, it creates a difficult hurdle to overcome. Finally, unlike the judge who all but embraced the prosecution of Zimmerman, a federal judge is likely to be truly neutral. Recognizing the importance of protecting all citizens, federal courts will review any new charge with a jaundiced eye. Evidentiary rulings and a host of procedural hurdles would likely make the case stillborn at the earliest stages. Issues from Martin's use of the term "cracker," testimony from unreliable witnesses and Martin's drug impairment at the time of the incident will be far more relevant in federal court. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 23 Jul 13 - 11:52 AM ""Martin initially was punching, then started pounding- at which point Zimmerman, in fear of being killed, pulled out the gun and fired one time. That is in accord with all testimony."" 1. Not Zimmerman's testimony on the night of the murder, when memory was fresh. IF Zimmerman mentioned the change from bashing his head against the concrete, to MMA pounding, it wasn't until after the witness made that statement to police, which the defence would have known. 2. If that were the case, Zimmerman who was a mixed martial artist would have known just how to counter and would no longer have had reason to fear serious harm or death. 3. Bruce seems to think that Rodney King's attackers should hhave got off scot free. What does that tell you about Bruce? Don T. Domn T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 12:06 PM "Zimmerman who was a mixed martial artist would have known" Your evidence of this? The testimony of the person that Zimmerman went to to be evaluted for said training said he was a 0.5 on a scale of 1 to 10. He was never trained. What does this say about Don? Liberals lie even when there is no need- they must like to do it. I have to judge all liberals by the ones here, since no "liberal" ever disagrees with them or holds them to account for their lies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 12:06 PM "Zimmerman who was a mixed martial artist would have known" Your evidence of this? The testimony of the person that Zimmerman went to to be evaluted for said training said he was a 0.5 on a scale of 1 to 10. He was never trained. What does this say about Don? Liberals lie even when there is no need- they must like to do it. I have to judge all liberals by the ones here, since no "liberal" ever disagrees with them or holds them to account for their lies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 23 Jul 13 - 12:08 PM Just another episode of Beardy Blogarrhoea, Don. He apparently can't help spreading irrelevant horseshit by the truckload. Dont let it bother ya. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 12:12 PM A mixed-martial arts (MMA) trainer testified for the defense on Monday that George Zimmerman "didn't know how to really effectively punch" even though he had trained the former neighborhood watchmen for over a year. "He was just physically soft," Adam Pollock told the court. "He was an overweight, large man when he came to us, and very pleasant — a very nice man, but physically soft. He was predominately fat, not a lot of muscle, not a lot of strength." Under cross-examination, Pollock admitted that Zimmerman could have lost as much as 80 pounds and had a body mass index as low as 16 percent at the time that he shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/07/08/zimmermans-mixed-martial-arts-trainer-testifies-he-was-physically-soft/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 12:16 PM Don, YOU state: 3. Bruce seems to think that Rodney King's attackers should hhave got off scot free. Care to back that up? Or are you too much of a scumbag to justify your lies? Should I give details on how much support you have given to the Nazis?, and how you support their actions against Moslims and foreign nationals? I have as much evidence as you do of your accusation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 23 Jul 13 - 12:33 PM Another outpouring of specious bollocks from the champion of white supremacist cut and paste. The Zimmerman trial ended in acquittal under the legal system current in the US, and under that system, the jury had no option but to acknowledge reasonable doubt, and acquit. The legal system works fine when that jury is cognisant of ALL EVIDENCE RELEVANT TO THEIR DELIBERATIONS! In the Zimmerman trial, this was emphatically not the case. Evidence of Martin's prior character and attitudes was allowed without hesitation by the judge, to be presented to the jury. Similar evidence about Zimmerman's antecedents was, with equal alacrity, hidden from them. Such evidence, of his previous violent nature and record of domestic violence and assault on police, could not fail to have given pause to the jury's belief in his sincerity and honesty. Both were pertinent to the jury's perception of events, but they were not permitted to know. While a defendant's previous criminal convictions cannot (rightly) be permitted to influence juries and so is inadmissible, evidence of character and attitude cannot be justly excluded, unless such evidence about the victim is also excluded. This was not the case. Trayvon Martin was the victim, not only of an overambitious vigilante, but also of the hangover of the Jim Crow society which would never allow a white man to be punished for killing a black. There is no other possible reason for the skewing of the case put before the jury, by excluding anything that would cast doubt on Zimmerman's unsupported version of events, while painting his victim as a drug using thug. The degree of bias in that is too obvious to ignore, as is the fact that Zimmerman chose not to testify in court, being either terrified of being cross examined, or terrified of showing his real self to the jury. An honest man would not have feared testifying. A murderer walks free by special dispensation from White America, and Bruce can cut and paste all the thinly veiled anti black propaganda he likes. It will not alter the truth. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 23 Jul 13 - 12:38 PM ""Should I give details on how much support you have given to the Nazis?, and how you support their actions against Moslims and foreign nationals?"" Well Doctor Goebbels, you post one anti Muslim comment of mine or shut the fuck up. I have supported Muslims throughout this forum against the anti Muslim Keith A, and that is a FACT you prick! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 12:53 PM "Well Doctor Goebbels, you post one anti Muslim comment of mine or shut the fuck up." Waiting on you to shut up first- show me one thing I have posted to justify "3. Bruce seems to think that Rodney King's attackers should hhave got off scot free." Or continue to wear that swastika. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 23 Jul 13 - 12:54 PM Look Bobert, (and other wannabe -'so-calleds', calling people on here the 'MudcatKKK' is about as absolutely stupid and childish as calling you a Pol Pot devotee. You think, or claim, or something like that, that white on black crimes are the epidemic of the age. Well guess what?...93..got that?..93% of murders of blacks are black on black crimes....but you don't give a shit!..NOR are you crusading to stop, or stem that tide...nor do you give a rat's ass about Chicanos killing other Chicanos...or gang violence, or thefts, or the disproportionate number of fatherless black children, and abortions to blacks..where is YOUR crusade about ANY of that???...and none of that shit is caused by whites, reds, yellows, browns or even pinks..(but they all dig da' blues), oops, drifting here.....surely there is something REAL you could be doing for them, besides trying to generate hate, bias, bigotry or any other name you want to call it, in the geriatrics ward of the internet! You'd think, that in our time on the planet, that wisdom, whatever we let settle, like dust on our head and shoulders, would be able to cause better, than bitching at each other..just to get some sort of deranged satisfaction of proving a pointless point. So what??(as Hillary Bush said)...so, as everybody jumps up and agrees with you, and you feel GREAT that you proved your point..then everybody goes to another topic to bitch about something else..meanwhile DOING NOTHING, about something that they had nothing to do with, in the first place!!! Personally, I don't think there is a person in here, that 'hates', discriminates or is in any way fucking with blacks at all...nor any other race or ethnic group. It just ain't happening. Bruce does his cut and paste bit, from sources that a lot of you would be to lazy to even look up, and you guys just bash the shit out of him, for NO fucking reason. You ought to read the posts, and check out what he is saying..OR at least research parts you have questions about, or disagree with....other than the inane crap that comes from the likes of Greg. How come his ignorance doesn't bother you??? You guys agree with each other, he never posts an intelligent post countering anything, just calls stupid and bigoted names at Bruce, including anti Semitic remarks, and you agree with him...you sure don't admonish him for exhibiting the bigotry that you say, that blacks are dealing with..and Greg's the poster boy for making the 'so-called' left look like a bunch of stupid fucking Obamanoid idiots! ..Speaking of which, you jump all over Zimmerman for 'lying'..but when Obama does it, you get wet dreams! So is it 'lying' that really bothers you? It doesn't bother Don T...he just hides behind a cloak of stupidity..you can't get mad at him...only feel sorry for his condition!...along with that other iconic heap of crap on wheels..people who just stir up anything that gnaws away at the fabric of a civilized people, just to ram some notion of aligning themselves with the wondrous deeds of Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, and Rockefeller! Now if you want to claim real stupidity, just froth and foam, that you can't make sense of all this...it will show your lack of an ability to connect the dots. Maybe instead of scanning through something, just to see if there is something to blather about, to make no point, try getting inside it...it might make sense in a way that might seem 'new' to you...it might be a breath of fresh air! ..and by the way, you think I'm being 'weird' about this? You guys are the ones that people are calling 'the usual suspects'.. and the 'usual bunch of name callers'...give it a thought.(Greg and Don T excluded, I don't want them to get a head ache and suffer a brain hemorrhage. The doctors would never be able to find the damage... GfS P.S. ..at least it was 'pithy'.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 12:55 PM Or do you join Bobert and greggie in demanding a private set of rules that apply to others, and not yourself. You can pretend to be an Ubermensch, like Bobert, but that does not mean others will listen to your demands for special rules. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 01:17 PM http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/07/busted-left-wing-plant-at-houston-pro-zimmerman-rally-is-far-left-activist/ About waht we can expect from Bobert and friends... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: pdq Date: 23 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM "Japan, just for example, is probably the most racist "modern" society in the world, yet we never hear a word about it. ~ bb Actually, a recent study showed Bangledesh, Hong Kong, Malasia, Singapore and Indonesia as the most xenophobic countries in the world. Note: like Japan, all are Asian. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 23 Jul 13 - 01:50 PM Thjat's right, PeeDee its them dam eastern yellow-devil slanty-eyed wogs. No good whasoever. Les than human, right? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 23 Jul 13 - 01:55 PM REFRESH: Date: 20 Jul 13 - 09:45 AM The "jury had spoken" in the Captain Alfred Dreyfus case too, and the verdict had huge public support. Wonder how Beardy views the Dreyfus affair? So, BullshitBruce: What say you? You also never responded to how you would view the case had Martin been Jewish. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 02:04 PM 1. I do not claim to be an expert about Dreyfus- but that is not under US law. Should I ask where you comment on the laws against Jews in Germany? ALL of them were legal- but morally wrong. What is wrong with US law as presented in this case? Did the prosecution prove that Zimmerman stalked Martin? NO Did the prosecution prove that Zimmerman was not in fear of his life? NO 2. Had Martin been Jewish, and thrown the first punch, I would feel the same as I do about Martin. Zimmerman , by a reasonble standard, was not proven to have done anything illegal. As the jury determined, the prosecution never proved anything beyond self defense. Had Zimmerman been black, and Martin a white Jew, given the evidence I would feel the same as I do now. I judge by the actions of a man, not the color of his skin, as you and Bobert obviously do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 23 Jul 13 - 02:12 PM ""3. Bruce seems to think that Rodney King's attackers should hhave got off scot free."" It was I believe your post which linked the Rodney King acquittal with the Zimmerman case, in a clear indication that no further investigation is justified. Since you linked the cases by posting that cut and paste, it seems clear enough that you sre not bothered by EITHER result. If that is not the case, then show what you claim to be the real purpose of posting it! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 23 Jul 13 - 02:16 PM ""It doesn't bother Don T...he just hides behind a cloak of stupidity..you can't get mad at him...only feel sorry for his condition!. Being thought stupid by you is almost a guarantee of being correct, you egregious ass. Kindly go forth and raffle yourself! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 23 Jul 13 - 02:21 PM ""Actually, a recent study showed Bangledesh, Hong Kong, Malasia, Singapore and Indonesia as the most xenophobic countries in the world."" There's a world of difference between xenophobia (fear of foreigners) and internal racism involving those who share your nationality from birth and ancestry, but have skin of a different colour. In that the only countries worse than the Southern US are Rwanda and Darfur. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 02:21 PM Is THIS what you are talking about??? "Generally, the Justice Department is reluctant to get involved in cases that have already been tried before a state jury, in part because of concerns about double jeopardy. Perhaps the best-known example where federal prosecutors did intervene was the case of four police officers acquitted after a California state trial in the beating of motorist Rodney King, which triggered deadly riots in the Los Angeles area in 1992. Two of the four officers were convicted in federal court of violating King's rights, but that case differs from Zimmerman's because they were acting as sworn law enforcement officials, not as a private citizen claiming self-defense. In contrast, the Justice Department declined to prosecute New York Police Department officers after they were acquitted in the 2006 shootings of three men including Sean Bell, who was fatally wounded the morning of his planned wedding. The short Justice Department statement — issued in 2010, four years after the shooting — simply said there was insufficient evidence to proceed. "Neither accident, mistake, fear, negligence nor bad judgment is sufficient to establish a federal criminal civil rights violation," the department said in the Bell case." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 23 Jul 13 - 02:22 PM In fairness I should allow that there are others as bad. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 23 Jul 13 - 02:22 PM Now, correct me if I'm wrong but her allegations ring true, his do not- at all! Looks like he's been at this game a long time. Posing as a victim when he's really the aggressor. Bogus tales of self-defense have worked for George everytime apparently: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-21/news/os-george-zimmerman-domestic So this woman attacked him with a baseball bat and bit him on the cheek? Sure George, keep 'em coming! Btw, I'd like to give that doggie a treat and a nice little pat on the head. Good dog! Smarter than the six women they had on that jury. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 23 Jul 13 - 02:34 PM Don, And you have brought up Dr. Goebbels and supporting Muslims, like he did... so my statement about your Nazi tendencies is as valid as your about what I think. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 23 Jul 13 - 02:56 PM Bruce, that has been a tactic for a long time...making asinine protest claims and pretending to be from the 'other side'. It is common in campaigns as well...and then you have the ones who are on the 'left', pretending to be on the 'right'..who are really ON the 'right'! ..AND VICE VERSE!...and think they do the 'nation' or their 'cause' service. The problem is that they CANNOT make statements, or take stands that stand up on their own merit..and so resort to 'trickery'...and the most ironic thing is, after pulling that off, the people who believed their bullshit, don't think that the same people are actually working on behalf of THEIR(the dumbfucks who believed them) true interests..and not shills for the banksters, who have an vested interest in causing all the unrest in the first place!!! Problem is, government laws, or ideological extremes, and radicals, seem to disregard that they CANNOT regulate the minds, hearts, thoughts and motives of the individuals, who they all want to 'control'...they just want control...and ARE LYING ABOUT IT ALL THE WAY!!!...and then want to be TRUSTED!!!! OK..I''m convinced, you got a better way...(rolls eyes)! Whip me..beat me..do a tap dance on my face with high heels..lie to me..make me write bad checks...but love me!! Good fucking grief! You listening wannabe activists???? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 23 Jul 13 - 05:05 PM Dodge and weave & weasel as much as you want, BullshitBruce- but you haven't answered or enen tried to address the questions. As per usual. Just more horseshit, piled higher and deeper. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 23 Jul 13 - 05:10 PM More nothing..as usual...sign me up, I'm all for nothing..let's call it a political view!..Maybe we can get members by getting people to hate each other...let's vote on it! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 23 Jul 13 - 05:17 PM I find absolutely fascinating the amount of time, energy, and obvious emotional investment that Beardedbruce puts into supporting a racist bias in this highly controversial matter. And the puerile but mindless "me too"-ism of people like GUST from Insanity. It certainly gives you the measure of their minds and character. In the meantime, Bobert and I are a couple of those "So-Called Liberals" who is working for change in the real, 3-D world, not just cutting-and-pasting from racist blogs. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 23 Jul 13 - 05:26 PM Don Firth: " In the meantime, Bobert and I are a couple of those "So-Called Liberals" who is working for change in the real, 3-D world, not just cutting-and-pasting from racist blogs." Oh Good!..I'm impressed....run along now...and work on making things from bad to worse, with your bankster sponsors in control! GfS P.S. Crackpot! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 23 Jul 13 - 05:33 PM Oh, and take Don T and Greggie F with you...maybe they can hold the clothespins...and collect milk money...just don't let them speak, or you'll blow your whole cover! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 23 Jul 13 - 05:42 PM Like I said, "puerile". Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 23 Jul 13 - 07:52 PM Another day has passed... I went to Charlotte to hunt a used refrigerator and take in a good movie, "20 feet from Stardom"... Then come back to the usual... I see that the usual Grand Wizard has posted 2 or 3 hundred more posts??? Pathetic and insane... My buddy, GfinS, posted one too long to read... You know, the usual... BTW, how many of you experts have any martial arts training??? Seems that your spin doesn't jive with the real world... In other words??? Ya'll are guessin' and guessin' badly... Please guess better in the future... Ya'll sound beyond ignorant on real fighting... Now back to the Grand Wizard's back to back to back to back posting as if that will make him correct??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 23 Jul 13 - 07:53 PM Firth: "Like I said, "puerile". "Puerile"?? Of course you would say that..how perfect! Anything to justify sewing seeds of discontent, to satisfy your hormonal level, and not taking the responsibility, for how those seeds grow!..what they do...who it hurts...and to what end? My, how art imitates life! "Puerile"?? How "Puerile" can you be?? Maybe you don't get it, and don't know why...let me help you out, okay? You have this way of justifying irresponsible selfish things you've do/done in your life, and you somehow latch onto whatever 'cause' to parade around in, oblivious to the bullshit you promote, to justify 'other' serious irresponsibilities, without even stopping to consider, what VERY valid reason other people may see, that cause them to think you're full of shit...AND...not only that, you can't seem to fathom why that others can see those traits lasting you a fucking lifetime, and you just keep making excuses, and disregard or consider the priorities of others who WERE responsible...you live on another planet... You live in "Puerile"! "Puerile"?? You hide behind being well read, as if you have a need to impress people by how 'wise' you are......which, by the way, does not even rival that many a father who responsibly and successfully cared and raised their own children, and the 'hands on' affirmation THAT brings, as opposed to 'looking up what some other 'great' mind had to say..about something else...instead of hands on, ...To your closest... and using it!...And, as I told you before, I'm very skeptical of people who have never done the very above, trying to 'organize' political control, over people who KNOW what it is to take care of 'first things first'...for themselves AND the community at large. They know what the NEED. "Puerile"?? Some people grow up, and mature, past grabbing every opportunity for instant gratification, you know, like a child.... accomplishing a way to seem important, by throwing tantrums, and pretending to not respond, in a positive way, to common sense, while sewing hatred, unforgiveness, or any permissive bullshit, as a motive to hide your 'light weightiness'. Man, like you've peddled this lie to yourself, for so long, you've lost control over it..and can't distinguish between your political charade, and common sense!!! "Puerile"?? You cannot separate 'legal', 'emotional', 'exploitation', street theater, and common sense, can you? Here, I'll repeat it: "Anything to justify sewing seeds of discontent, to satisfy your hormonal level, and not taking the responsibility, for how they grow!..what they do...who it hurts...and to what end? My, how art imitates life!" Certain masses of people just don't trust those people, nor their agenda, who have that track record...and still justifies it, especially when they see their tactics. That wasn't so hard was it? You know what else you got fucked up along the way? You can't tell who your friends are...those who you try to impress, don't care. ...and this is the short version. Give my regards to the crickets and frogs. Or send in the hand puppet. Others...you're out of you depth. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 23 Jul 13 - 08:26 PM Don't know the meaning of the word, eh, Goofball? That IS puerile! Try looking it up in a dictionary. You know. A dictionary is that thick book that tells you what words mean. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 23 Jul 13 - 08:36 PM Sure I do..I was describing your mindset, that has guiding you through life...with complete disregard for anyone but you. I thought it was perfect!!...and what's even more proof of it, is, you don't fucking get it! 'Lesser' minds can...and do.......what happened? the chrome fell off? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 23 Jul 13 - 08:44 PM That's your fiction, Goofball. You're just pissed because I know your dirty little secret. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 23 Jul 13 - 08:47 PM Brevity, GfinS... You have become a real rambler... Reminds me of old folks who can go on and on about nothin' for hours at a time... Geriatric issues??? Your 8:36 post was an improvement... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 23 Jul 13 - 09:06 PM That, plus the fact that he's in the closet, even to himself. That's really got him messed up mentally. Him, a family counselor? What a joke!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 23 Jul 13 - 09:21 PM Guess I missed the "closet thing"... Come on out, dude... I don't give a rat's ass about that stuff... Heck, I grew up next door to "Jim and Gene"... You ain't got nuthin' on them... Okay, maybe you got somethin' on Jim... He was a drunk... He'd walk over to my parents house a little past 7 two or three nights a week, get drunk and then try to make it 100 feet next door to his house... This 100 foot walk was always an adventure... There were a couple trees that he'd have to negotiate and it was dark and Jim was drunk... "Ruthie!!! The bats are getting me!!! Ruthie" he'd scream and then my mom (Ruthie) would go out and get him out of the tree limbs and safe home where the bats wouldn't get him.... Never mind... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 23 Jul 13 - 10:59 PM Looks like I hit a nerve again, and you're up to your usual tactics. Just as I said...making up new excuses, while trying to justify your bullshit agenda. Oh, and Bobert, there is no 'dirty little secret'. he's referring to a post, not sent by me, about saying my dad was a homosexual, which is patently untrue. he had six kids, and died loyal to his wife, my mother, at age 60, due to a stroke. Now Don, can you justify YOUR trip without sewing more seeds of discontent??...or have a 'political' idea, that doesn't rely on and depends on inspiring hate and discontent, Whether it be one on one, or to exhuming racial civil rights nostalgia...and easy old hat trick? NOOOOO! Well try it. It's your unexplored, new frontier. ..and how dare either one of you, of accusing ANYONE on here, of being of KKK mentality!!...What a couple of jerk-offs! Come on, Bobert, you're bigger than that....and WE don't live in the South!..If you're so concerned, fix it down there..and if you can't find anyone to fix (except 'in general'), I'm sure they'd appreciate to hear of your observations of them!...That ought to do it, huh??? ....and don't be surprised if your 'base' is just getting tired of hearing about it, and having to 'care' about it, after having their noses rubbed in it, 24/7. I don't think ANY Mudcatters have a prejudice against blacks, or against having it decided in a court of law...and all this ballyhoo, is over YOUR guys fucking up the case, in the first place, just wanting to stir up the racial issue. Up to a point, I thought you may have been smarter than to fall for that, or those political manipulations. Why should anybody take stock in that kind of simple-mindedness. You've been listening for far too long to dickhead, over there. You want to make a difference??..go to the people who need help..you don't want to??.. then shut up about it on here, and accusing others of being the people you're too chicken to confront! Hey, I'm on your side..quit embarrassing yourself! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 23 Jul 13 - 11:19 PM The message came from YOUR computer, Goofball. Your IP number is like caller ID on a telephone, and one of the Mudelves identified it. That's why you're scared spitless of your own genes and refuse to acknowledge scientific evidence regarding the genetic origins of sexual orientation. All of which, including your lie about me, has nothing to do with the subject of this thread. YOU introduced it, Goofball, so (tsk) don't be such a little bitch. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 24 Jul 13 - 01:50 AM First of all: I'm not scared at all of another one of you attempted blackmails..especially, when all you got is nothing! Oh, and by the way, you're an asshole! Second: that has been gone over a bazillion times, and you only bring it up when your back is to the wall...and that post was not sent by me. Thirdly: It's not genetic..and even the 'studies' you introduced, only make a passing remark that there are three 'markers'...but not enough to define it..AND they all allude to what I was saying about the hormonal changes during gestation.(Receptors transmit those changes)..not that you care, or can absorb it... Fourthly: We've been over this shit too many times, and you still can't get it through your thick skull, with all the evidence against your position! Fifth: You want to blather about it, take it to another thread! Sixth: I am pointing out to you, that you and your ilk feed off of other people's negative biases, and reinforce them, even when they are NOT there, and sycophant that negative energy, to make you appear relevant..(Fuckhead!) Seventh:..This thread is about Zimmerman's trial, and how you psychic vampires insist that the whole thing was racially motivated, and some sort of 'revenge' needs to be extracted, because whites owe it to the blacks, or some crazy shit like that, when, the FBI interview 36 of Zimmerman's acquaintances, and found no trace of bigotry, but you and Bobert's magic crystal ball insists that it was; Trayvon Martin's mother, said it she didn't believe it was racially motivated, but once again, the biases IN YOU and Bobert, just can't believe it; Trayvon was the only one HEARD to make a racial slur; but your guy's ASSumptions know better, of course; Rachel told Trayvon that she thought Zimmerman was a homosexual rapist, which certainly was said so Trayvon would be more 'friendly'..right before Trayvon confronted him...but to you idiots, it was solely about race.....and there is NO,...got that?..NO evidence to support that assumption!..Just shit in your own heads. Eighth, You guys accuse others here in Mudcat of being KKK, or White Supremacist sympathizers..well OKAY..let's find out... Will all the Mudcatters who sympathize with the KKK OR White Supremacy please weigh in....I know they are proud of their position, so step forward sign in and tell us that you agree with those groups. Ninth, how come you mentioned only you and Bobert?..I noticed that you didn't include Greg F, or Don T...what's the matter?...are they too stupid for you???..or just beyond your total control?? Tenth, If you want to create good racial relations, just go out and do it. Less people on here, are buying into your crap of promoting, and agitating negative feelings and racial biases, and trying to create them, where there isn't any..just so you can try to manipulate them...and look 'important', 'wise', and 'all knowing' about all things 'political'..and what YOU see that MUST be adhered to by all....when you never raised your own family, just knocked the chick up an booked it, to enhance your own career, and still can't understand why people who have raised their families aren't buying into your crap...oh, have we said that before?? What the fuck do you know about the priorities of ANY of it??? NOTHING!!! Now go get some followers and make yourself feel better, but pardon me if I think you're an impotent fraud. Thank you! Have a nice evening... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 24 Jul 13 - 04:01 AM Wow, FFS! That's a load of rubbish, but the way you laid it out makes you look almost literate. Keep practising. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 24 Jul 13 - 04:50 AM ""You listening wannabe activists????"" Could you manage a translation Goofus, for those of us whose first language is English. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 24 Jul 13 - 10:28 AM Sure Don...it is a question. Try asking the question 'ARE you listening wannabe activists?'... Now drop the ARE, and ask the question again "___ you listening wannabe activists?" I'm glad you didn't have any questions about the rest of the texts, assuming you read them..take them in, you might learn something about how political parties, along with the media, can make up shit to exploit, when there was no issue at all, then exploit the emotions, from the expected re-actions. When they don't get those re-actions, they keep pounding it, ad nauseum, and then put forth then 'put forth' their agendas, and pretend it is a 'solution'..........to a problem that never existed in the first place! These two have been doing it for some time, steering the dialogues, and usually, right off course! They have exacerbated the racial tension bit, and distorted it, as what part it played into this trial. The media, who has been playing it up, have been whipping up the emotions of BOTH sides, creating a hostile environment...not for 'justice', but for civil unrest. The racial bit, is just a ruse. Now, you may or not believe that, BUT you should consider it, and THINK. THINK for yourself, and filter out the propaganda tactics. You are an individual, not owned or controlled by any political party, whose method of operation consists of lying through their teeth, at every turn!..then making up new lies to cover themselves, when they get busted for it...and it takes people who are independent THINKERS, who don't go along with their mind control herding of 'sheeple', as in a flock of sheep, that they can steer from bullshit to bullshit. Our country, and the world is fucked up due to liars, covering the lies of politicians who are bought and paid for, and NOT representing the people or serving them..or even upholding the basic laws on which the whole structure was based. They have corrupted it with their bullshit agendas, which are only doorways to the next 'set-up'. Do you have racial bias??..I don't...and I resent being accused of it, by a couple of wannabe political bullies, whose track records consist of VERY faulty, and questionable tactics, reliability and motives.....and they suck people into it, with their lying, jive-ass accusations, and skirting of real questions posed to them!...AND..their abuse of those who post posts, such as Bruce, Akenaton and others, whose FACTUAL posts fly in the face of their absolutely unbelievable horse-crap! Then they proceed to smear their characters, when the can't post any FACTS, and only have their unsupported 'opinions' to fall back on. Now you and I have had exchanges before, and I'm answering you now, because you asked. Do both of us a favor, mostly of benefit to you, to just go over this post, THINK about what I've laid down, see if it matches the truth. All I'm asking for, is for Mudcatters to THINK about stuff before they fire off more hostility. They are NOT answerable to neither the Republican or Democrat parties of disgraceful corruption. Something clean may emerge! Ok...I was cool to you, just slow down, take the time...you'll see. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 24 Jul 13 - 12:56 PM Proverbs 10:18, "He that hideth hatred with lying lips, and he that uttereth a slander, is a fool." Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 24 Jul 13 - 01:28 PM ""Sure Don...it is a question. Try asking the question 'ARE you listening wannabe activists?'... Now drop the ARE, and ask the question again "___ you listening wannabe activists?"" You sad pillock, that line was a clue to which of your diatribes in fluent gibberish I was referring. That last line was the only moderately comprehensible part of the whole, so how about translating the rest into the closest you can manage to coherent text, in English if possible? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 24 Jul 13 - 01:42 PM And since you are trying this entirely new technique of decent manners, I'll respond in kind. I would be most interested to see your take on all the evidence that the jury was prevented from seeing, to ensure Zimmerman's acquittal. The jury HAD no choice, on the slanted evidence presented. Why is this judge's obvious bias simply accepted? Why is there no attempt to bring the prosecution before a jury on a charge of collusion in that bias? And why, in a civilised society is there no provision to waive "double jeopardy" in the event of a pre-fixed result? In the modern context with its advancing technologies, double jeopardy would prevent any cold case which had gone to trial and failed, being reopened when conclusive new evidence points to injustice. That is, I believe, why it has been revoked in the UK, where DNA advances have resulted in a large number of serious criminals (murderers, rapists etc) now deservedly languishing in jail for a very long time. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Jul 13 - 01:44 PM "Proverbs 10:18, "He that hideth hatred with lying lips, and he that uttereth a slander, is a fool." " So perhaps Bobert, GregF, and DonT need to pay attention to this, and cease their slanders and lies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Jul 13 - 01:50 PM Don T "In the modern context with its advancing technologies, double jeopardy would prevent any cold case which had gone to trial and failed, being reopened when conclusive new evidence points to injustice." I believe that in the US, NEW evidence is a valid reason for a retrial. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 24 Jul 13 - 01:50 PM Don T, I am surprised you are unable to understand some posts. They are quite clear to me and, apparently, everyone else. It is just you. (unless you are just unable to challenge about anything actually said) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Jul 13 - 01:55 PM "On the other hand, a retrial may be treated like a brand new trial, as new evidence may be presented. Indeed, sometimes the reason a retrial is necessary is that there is new evidence that was not available before. Also, sometimes new lawyers will be working on the retrial. A new jury will be selected and oftentimes a new judge will be presiding over case. Therefore, a retrial will always be much different from the original trial. " http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/criminal-retrial-lawyers.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Lighter Date: 24 Jul 13 - 01:56 PM Nor did the judge admit phone and text evidence that showed Martin had tried to sell an illegal firearm, school evidence that he was once suspended for having unexplained women's gold jewelry in his bookbag, or that he'd texted a friend that a recent fight had been no fun because "the dude didn't bleed enough for me." How would that information have affected a jury? None of these statements were directly relevant to the shooting. The judge ruled without bias. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Jack the Sailor Date: 24 Jul 13 - 01:59 PM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_jeopardy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 24 Jul 13 - 02:07 PM The presumption of innocence, sometimes referred to by the Latin expression Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof lies with who declares, not who denies), is the principle that one is considered innocent until proven guilty. Application of this principle is a legal right of the accused in a criminal trial, recognised in many nations. The burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which has to collect and present enough compelling evidence to convince the trier of fact, who is restrained and ordered by law to consider only actual evidence and testimony that is legally admissible, and in most cases lawfully obtained, that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If reasonable doubt remains, the accused is to be acquitted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 24 Jul 13 - 02:22 PM So, now you are resorting to Scriptures??.....let these apply to what you guys are doing, and why your whole rap is in question...: "16There are six things which the LORD hates, Yes, seven which are an abomination to Him: 17 (1)Haughty eyes, (2)a lying tongue, (3)And hands that shed innocent blood, 18A(4) heart that devises wicked plans, (5) Feet that run rapidly to evil, 19(6)A false witness who utters lies, (7..and get this one..the 7th, which you just read is an abomination to Him!)And one who spreads strife among brothers....." And continuing toward the bottom.... "32The one who commits adultery with a woman is lacking sense; He who would destroy himself does it. 33Wounds and disgrace he will find, And his reproach will not be blotted out." Now in context, without my 'numbering'... 16There are six things which the LORD hates, Yes, seven which are an abomination to Him: "17Haughty eyes, a lying tongue, And hands that shed innocent blood, 18A heart that devises wicked plans, Feet that run rapidly to evil, 19A false witness who utters lies, And one who spreads strife among brothers." 32The one who commits adultery with a woman is lacking sense; He who would destroy himself does it. 33Wounds and disgrace he will find, And his reproach will not be blotted out." Wise words, Sane words...Words that have seen civilizations rise and fall, for lack of using that wisdom. Oh, and the Scripture that you posted, just a hopeful innuendo, a cloaked accusation....that doesn't apply at this at this end. I have no 'hatred', nor am I saying anything less that the truth, that you seem to have a problem with.... The Scripture you posted, may indeed, apply to you. ............................. Thanks, Keith A of Hertford. It's nice to know that what is communicated is clear enough, that the tactics employed by liars, are just more tactics...and not a sign, with any intention, of cleaning up their act! Don T...This has been a clear invitation to THINK!... not just to wallow around in the swill of 'talking points'. ..unless you still insist on pretending you are unable to 'understand'. Firth thrives on that kind of stupidity!..he uses it all the time! Bruce, Glad to see you picked up on the correct application of that Scripture, as well....Firth tends to accuse others of his own bullshit!....and people are getting tired of it! Regards... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 24 Jul 13 - 02:57 PM Antonio in "The Merchant of Venice:") Mark you this, Bassanio,It does not surprise me that Goofball tries to throw the Bible back at me, considering that he started this slanderous exchange with a lie. He knows nothing about me, yet he continues to lie. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 24 Jul 13 - 03:07 PM Oh shit FFS. I thought you were starting to learn. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 24 Jul 13 - 03:58 PM That's bullshit, Don, and you know it. As far as your 'history' with the chick..you posted the story about it....unless that was a lie, too, which I doubt..you just don't like being called on it..and by a 'higher' source than me, I might add!...and now you are quoting Shakespeare????...another diversion??..Why don't you just do some soul searching(if you have one left), and get your shit together. Maybe even quit trying to drive fraudulent agendas, and stringing out your dupes with ya'! Oh, and as far as the Scripture I quoted you, 'If the shoe fits, wear it!'....problem is, you won't be able to tap dance! You're getting nowhere fast!...or, as my dad used to say, "Going somewhere?..or just traveling?" Richard, you and Greg F should get married, you'd have the same dialogue over the kitchen table...for years! OH...and by the way, nobody has yet to show up and claim their sympathetic stand to the KKK or the White Supremacists.....you mean you guys were preaching to an empty choir loft???? ....or maybe nobody is buying your baloney?...one or the other. Get a clue! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 24 Jul 13 - 04:25 PM Goofball, as I've said repeatedly, you interpret MY behavior in terms of what YOU would do under similar circumstances. That's an indication of the nature of YOUR character, but it has nothing to do with MINE. You have no concept of ethical behavior--or matters of self-sacrifice for the greater good. Go pee on a fire hydrant. That's about all those of your species are good for. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 24 Jul 13 - 04:58 PM That ain't all this complicated here... Grown man with a gun stalks boy... Grown man with a gun murders boy... Anywhere else this would be an open and shut case with grown man being locked up for 20 years to life... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 24 Jul 13 - 05:19 PM Let's skip the premise for new excuses, and cut to the bottom line: Zimmerman went to trial and was acquitted, which, by review of the evidence brought forward in that trial, by the jury, and review of the case by legal scholars, was the correct verdict. The issue of race was verified, NOT a factor. The race issue has been stirred up by the media, and carried forth by those of little or no LEGAL understanding, and has been blown out of proportion, by those who manipulate the emotions, of those same people, with little or no knowledge of the law. I pointed this out during the end of the trial, right after I heard John Guy's(prosecution) final closing arguments. After the acquittal, there has been talk of the DoJ bringing another trial, on civil rights charges, if they thought there was cause, based on race. However, the FBI thoroughly investigated Zimmerman's past, and acquaintances, and found NO indication, or evidence to base the Federal government to bring charges. The media and political 'activists' have tried to keep the race factor up in everyone's face, still accusing, projecting, manipulating and exploiting the emotions, that they are trying to prolong, even making stuff up. I doubt, that on LEGAL grounds, that the DoJ, will charge him, but if they do, you can expect the same verdict. Get over it...as the evidence showed, it was a case of self defense. I may add, one more time, that there were circumstances that led up to it, that in reality, were stupid miscalculations on both of their parts, and a death could have been avoided...as to who was more at fault, maybe we'll never know...but there were mutual mistakes made on both, on their parts. Anybody who tries to stir up emotions, based on race, in this matter, should be consummately ignored!~...because, it has been proven to be bullshit!...By the FBI, Travon's mother, eyewitnesses to self defense, and phone transcripts. You don't like it?..Tough beans. The 'Stand Your Ground' law, had nothing to do with the case, race had nothing to do with the case, and the 'pundit activists', Jackson, Sharpton, and all the 'little wannabes have even less to do with the case. Have a Wonderful Day! GfS P.S. Don you want to 'duke it out' take it to another thread. You've been blown out of the water on this one! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 24 Jul 13 - 05:23 PM KKK injustice... O.J. beat the rap on bro-injustice... Both wrong... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 24 Jul 13 - 05:27 PM "You've been blown out of the water on this one!" I don't think so, Goofball. When others here read your screeds, they can make their own judgments. End of communication with sub-species. Now, back to the specified wrangle. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 24 Jul 13 - 06:38 PM Perfect! GfS P.S... and........................... "Puerile" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 24 Jul 13 - 07:03 PM (Can't even think up his own insults. Pathetic!!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 25 Jul 13 - 08:14 AM "(Can't even think up his own insults. Pathetic!!)" Oh, WE ALL know better, but this thread is about the Zimmerman trial. There IS an 'insult thread'...take it there. You'd love me to get into your diversions of 'insults', because when you have nothing of substance, you attack the person, instead of addressing the issues, distracting people from the subject matter, and into YOUR personal world. Not interested. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 25 Jul 13 - 08:43 AM For the record, when I accuse Zimmerman apologist/worshiper/defenders of being the modern day KKK is not meant to be an insult... It's the way I see it... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Jul 13 - 11:15 AM For the record, when I accuse Bobert of being a bigoted Ubermensch who would take the law into his own hands to get the results he wants ( Just like the KKK) , that is not meant to be an insult... It's the way I see it, based on his own postings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 25 Jul 13 - 11:28 AM ""Proverbs 10:18, "He that hideth hatred with lying lips, and he that uttereth a slander, is a fool." " So perhaps Bobert, GregF, and DonT need to pay attention to this, and cease their slanders and lies."" No hidden hatred here Bruce. I don't like you, but you are not important enough to hate you. What I do hate, and make no attempt to hide the fact, is the kind of corrupt, racist distortion of justice which is rife in certain parts of this world including parts of the US. And I have neither liking nor respect for those who promote and applaud the indefensible discrimination of a system of law as untrustworthy as the criminals it sets free. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 25 Jul 13 - 11:35 AM ""Don T, I am surprised you are unable to understand some posts. They are quite clear to me and, apparently, everyone else. It is just you. (unless you are just unable to challenge about anything actually said)"" If you can make any sense out of Goofus' disjointed, rambling outpourings of gibberish on a host of subjects he knows nothing about, what does that say about your level of cognitive ability. I've always thought that your xenophobia doesn't interfere with your ability to form cogent and intelligible posts. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 25 Jul 13 - 11:40 AM Perhaps if you took the trouble to actually read the post I complained of? I know that isn't usually part of your method of discussion. Please don't bother with supplying a translation. Goofus' posts, when they are comprehensible, tend toward the terminally boring, being mostly repetitions of what he said yesterday,....and the day before,.....and on and on......... Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 25 Jul 13 - 11:52 AM ""Nor did the judge admit phone and text evidence that showed Martin had tried to sell an illegal firearm, school evidence that he was once suspended for having unexplained women's gold jewelry in his bookbag, or that he'd texted a friend that a recent fight had been no fun because "the dude didn't bleed enough for me."" The judge did allow evidence of Martin's use of marijuana, but not of Zimmerman's domestic and the fact that he had used this self defence thing before in similsr circumstances when faced with prosecution. Either both should have been allowed, or neither. Eight of Zimmerman's friends were allowed to state that the voice calling for help was Zimmerman's. Although Martin's parents did testify, two professional voice recognition experts who gave their opinion that the voice belonged to the younger man, were not allowed to do so. You see that as perfect balance. I see it as a black and white example of discrimination. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Jul 13 - 12:13 PM "Eight of Zimmerman's friends were allowed to state that the voice calling for help was Zimmerman's." And how many did the prosecution call? Mother, half-brother Eight TOTAL testified to it being Zimmerman screaming- and the defense also called Martin's father. ( Zimmerman's mother, father, uncle, and 5 friends or co-workers) http://www.hlntv.com/slideshow/2013/06/25/george-zimmerman-trial-witnesses And the reason the " two professional voice recognition experts who gave their opinion that the voice belonged to the younger man, were not allowed to do so.": Prosecution Witness No. 23: Dr. Hirotaka Nakasone -- A senior voice recognition expert with the FBI. He received multiple voice samples in this case to analyze. One of the samples was the 911 call from the night of the shooting that has screams in the background. Who stated that the FBI standards required a longer period of recording to be valid. NOTE this was a prosecution witness. Prosecution called 38 witnesses total,, Defense called 18 total. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 25 Jul 13 - 12:24 PM And again, BeardedBullshit - more horseshit. At least you're consistent. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 25 Jul 13 - 01:11 PM National columnist, Leonard Pitts, who is a rather moderate black writer, has an interesting op-ed in today's :Charlotte Observer" entitled "I am - and we are - Trayvon Martin" which is well worth a read... Of course, the folks here who most need to read it won't read it because it doesn't jive with the BS narrative that the NRA/KKK has stuffed into their defective brains... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Jul 13 - 02:22 PM As are you, greggie boy. Consistent as any KKK member, or Nazi. So, facts are shit to you? No wonder- you represent the "best" that "Liberal Mudcat" has to offer, it seems. Facts are all shit. Personel attack are fine against any minority here. Any lies are acceptable to support the "liberal" view. Nothing is acceptable that does not meet your pre-concieved standards of "validity- ie, that does not agree with your narrow, bigoted viewpoint. Any rule can be used against people who disagree with you, even if you do not accept that rule being applied to you. Anything that supports you has to be accepted without any reference or support: Anything you disagree with can be denigrated even when reference and supporting proof is provided. What a bunch of bigoted, hypocritical, lying pieces of shit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Jul 13 - 02:40 PM http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-the-justice-department-pursue-a-civil-rights-case-against-george-zimmerman/a-civil-righ ustice Department lawyers should not attempt to prosecute George Zimmerman for the death of Trayvon Martin.They likely won't succeed, and would probably compound the awful precedent set by the state of Florida in pursuing this case over objections from the lead criminal investigator, police chief and the community's prosecutor. These missteps were followed with a decision to bypass a grand jury. All the safeguards protecting Americans from political or unwarranted prosecution were missing, allowing this train-wreck of a case to proceed. If the feds follow suit, they will head down the same path of an unjustified prosecution – re-establishing, nationally, a practice not seen since Woodrow Wilson pursued his political goals through abusing federal prosecutorial authority. Wilson's use of the Espionage and Sedition Acts to arrest and silence critics as well as the media rolled back the clock on constitutional rights. Like Wilson era abuses, today's Justice Department must distort the meaning of hate crime statutes to charge Zimmerman. First, prosecutors lack a definitive finding that Zimmerman is, in fact, a racist. After interviewing 35 people – including co-workers, neighbors and even an ex-girlfriend – an FBI investigation failed to find proof that Zimmerman's actions were racially motivated on the night Martin died. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Jul 13 - 02:41 PM Jim Crow created a caste system in America that lasted for generations. In 2003, power-driven, pandering politicians want to make sure it remains in place. As long as blacks refuse to hold themselves accountable for failure and continue to perceive themselves as victims entitled to special categories, black liberal politicians will always have a constituency keeping them in office... and we will forever remain "in our place." http://www.project21.org/P21NVBarberFlorida903.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Jul 13 - 02:55 PM Pitts, the one who wrote: "It seems that in January, a young white couple, Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom, were victims of a brutal crime. They were carjacked, kidnapped and raped. Cleaning fluid was sprayed into Christian's mouth. She was stuffed in a trash can and apparently suffocated. Newsom was shot and set afire. His body was dumped. Five blacks, one a woman, have been arrested. The story made headlines around Knoxville. It was unnoticed nationally. That has changed. A constellation of white supremacists and conservative bloggers has pushed the story into the national limelight as illustration of their argument that news media, constrained by political correctness, refuse to report black on white crime while pulling out all the stops when crime is white on black as in the Duke lacrosse debacle. Me, I would see their Duke case and raise them a Central Park jogger, but what do I know? Anyway, bloggers like Michael Oliver have chastised the "liberal, biased, Mainstream Media" for missing the Knoxville story. He asked, "Had the roles been reversed, would the media ignore such a horrific crime?" Truth is, media ignore horrific crimes all the time. Space is limited and growing more so. Which means the story that catches fire usually has some element beyond gruesomeness to sell it. In the Duke case, it was class, privilege, sex and race that did it. Not that I expect Oliver or any other "oppressed" white person to pay attention to something so trivial as fact. They're too busy demanding that this case be tried as a hate crime — even though police say there's no evidence the couple was targeted for any other reason than that they were there. And last weekend, white supremacists held — I kid you not — a "rally against genocide" in Knoxville." even though police say there's no evidence the couple was targeted for any other reason than that they were there. Just as in the Zimmerman case....... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 25 Jul 13 - 03:39 PM So, facts are shit to you? No, BullshitBruce, SHIT is shit to me. Please get the help you so desperately need. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Jul 13 - 03:47 PM The only minority on the all-female jury that voted to acquit George Zimmerman said today that Zimmerman "got away with murder" for killing Trayvon Martin and feels she owes an apology Martin's parents. "You can't put the man in jail even though in our hearts we felt he was guilty," said the woman who was identified only as Juror B29 during the trial. "But we had to grab our hearts and put it aside and look at the evidence." She said the jury was following Florida law and the evidence, she said, did not prove murder. The court had sealed the jurors' identities during the trial and still hasn't lifted the order, but Juror B29 edged out of the shadows in an exclusive interview with "Good Morning America" anchor Robin Roberts. She allowed her face to be shown, but -- concerned for her safety -- used only a first name of Maddy. The nursing assistant and mother of eight children was selected as a juror five months after she had moved to Seminole County, Fla., from Chicago. All six of the jurors were women and Maddy, 36, who is Puerto Rican, was the only minority to deliberate in the racially charged case. Zimmerman, 29, was a white Hispanic and Martin, 17, was black. Despite the prosecution's claim the Zimmerman profiled Martin because he was black, Maddy said the case was never about race to her, although she didn't want to speak for her fellow jurors. But her feelings about Zimmerman's actions are clear. "George Zimmerman got away with murder, but you can't get away from God. And at the end of the day, he's going to have a lot of questions and answers he has to deal with," Maddy said. "[But] the law couldn't prove it." See reaction to the George Zimmerman Verdict When the jury of six women—five of them mothers—began deliberations, Maddy said she favored convicting Zimmerman of second degree murder, which could have put him in prison for the rest of his life. The jury was also allowed to consider manslaughter, a lesser charge. "I was the juror that was going to give them the hung jury. I fought to the end," she said. However, on the second day of deliberations, after spending nine hours discussing the evidence, Maddy said she realized there wasn't enough proof to convict Zimmerman of murder or manslaughter under Florida law. Zimmerman concedes he shot and killed Martin in Sanford on Feb. 26, 2012, but maintains he fired in self-defense. "That's where I felt confused, where if a person kills someone, then you get charged for it," Maddy said. "But as the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you can't say he's guilty." When asked by Roberts whether the case should have gone to trial, Maddy said, "I don't think so." "I felt like this was a publicity stunt. This whole court service thing to me was publicity," she said. As a mother, Maddy said she has had trouble adjusting to life after the verdict, and has wrestled with whether she made the right decision. "I felt like I let a lot of people down, and I'm thinking to myself, 'Did I go the right way? Did I go the wrong way?'" she said. "As much as we were trying to find this man guilty…they give you a booklet that basically tells you the truth, and the truth is that there was nothing that we could do about it," she said. "I feel the verdict was already told." Maddy said she has sympathy for Martin's parents and believes she, too, would continue the crusade for justice if this had happened to her son. She said she believes she owes Trayvon Martin's parents an apology because she feels "like I let them down." "It's hard for me to sleep, it's hard for me to eat because I feel I was forcefully included in Trayvon Martin's death. And as I carry him on my back, I'm hurting as much [as] Trayvon's Martin's mother because there's no way that any mother should feel that pain," she said. Maddy is the second juror to speak in a televised interview, and the first to show her face. Juror B37, whose face and body were hidden, appeared last week on Anderson Cooper's CNN show, and said that she believes Zimmerman's "heart was in the right place" when he became suspicious of Martin and that the teenager probably threw the first punch. Since then, four other jurors distanced themselves from B37's remarks and released a statement saying B37's opinions were "not in any way representative" of their own. http://gma.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-juror-says-got-away-murder-180513862--abc-news-topstories.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Jul 13 - 03:51 PM The only SHIT around here is you, greggie boy. I present facts, and support them. YOU present attacks and insults, with no basis but animosity- the HATE that Bobert sees everywhere but in his own postings. If I were Bobert I would be ashamed to even have you pretending to agree with me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Lighter Date: 25 Jul 13 - 04:10 PM Obviously her personal definition of murder is different from the law's, and she honorably chose to uphold the law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Lighter Date: 25 Jul 13 - 05:38 PM While respecting the evidence. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 25 Jul 13 - 05:41 PM On the other hand, juror B29 says Georgie got away with murder. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 25 Jul 13 - 07:58 PM Zimmerman very much got away with murder... He disobeyed the police dispatcher in getting out of his vehicle and stalking Trayvon Martin with a gun... And he shot and killed Trayvon Martin... The MudKKK doesn't give a flying fuck about the basic case... They just want their white boy to get off and don't give rat's ass about "nutha nigga" dead and gone... These people here who defend Zimmerman are no better than the folks who used to lynch "nutha niggas"... They are KKK thru and thru... No KKK-lite here... Grand wizard level KKK... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 25 Jul 13 - 08:45 PM Juror B29 says "It's hard for me to eat,It's hard for me to sleep, because I feel like I was forcefully included in Trayvon Martin's death". (Washington Post) RIP Trayvon. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 25 Jul 13 - 09:00 PM Yes, this is they way it used to work, Elmore... The lynching would occur and then if charges were brought the same thing happened... This kind of Southern justice has been around a long time... I've written about the murders of 5 black non-violent civil rights demonstrators in Greensboro, North Carolina... The KKK gunned them down from their pickup tucks along the march route... This was a legal demonstration... The gunning down happened in plain daylight... No charges... This wasn't 1959... This wasn't 1969... This was 1979!!! No arrests... No nothing... This is the South, ya'll and it hasn't come that far in the last 150 years... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 25 Jul 13 - 09:39 PM Bobert, You talk about lynching in a knowledgeable,reality based way, whereas BB continually uses the term, "lynching" metaphorically which tends to piss me off. Goodnight, Elmore |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Gibb Sahib Date: 25 Jul 13 - 09:40 PM I didn't realize there were so many drama queens on the Mudcat. Mainly I thought it was a lot of Brits who want to take back the U.S. as their colony and a lot of kind, well-meaning old farts whose idea of 'spicy' food is a saltine cracker. Granted, the nostalgia for the 1960s, too, has always been there—"simpler times," as they say, and presumably the time when a lot of the old farts found their purpose in life. What I didn't know was that there were some real bat-shit locos. I warned you before about what happens when you gratuitously use the word "KKK" (and the same goes for "Nazi," only with a German accent): Some sweet, adorable puppy, who has had barely enough time to splash in rain puddles or feel the tickle of grass on its face, dies....somewhere...each time. Can you live with that on your conscience? Fucking puppy-killers... Oh, also— besides the dead pups, the other thing that happens when you use those phrases/concepts is that you lose an amount of credibility as someone who can hold a rational discussion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 25 Jul 13 - 09:53 PM Beardedbruce: "So, facts are shit to you? No wonder- you represent the "best" that "Liberal Mudcat" has to offer, it seems. Facts are all shit. Personal attack are fine against any minority here. Any lies are acceptable to support the "liberal" view." Yes, Bruce...they whine like babies whose thumb has been pulled out of their mouths.....they call 'you' names, and spit anger...but will NOT address the FACT, that they think they need to be sucking their thumbs. Don T is still pretending he can't understand my posts...oh, he understands them, but nothing can compare with that thumb....even if it isn't really 'nourishing'....it just 'feels' better...as long as they are content, and spouting 'concern' over something that they are too self absorbed, to actually go out, and 'take one under their wing', so to speak, and give them the time of day, to meet THEIR(others) needs. Reminds me of this..You remember..Biff writes for this guy.. , maybe even this one..... ..and this..being as I've been known for pointing out hypocrisy..both sides! Some how, they both work together. GfD |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Jul 13 - 08:29 AM There's nothing to understanding your posts, GfinS... You hate Obama, you talk 2000 Nader but your politics are 100% Tea Party... How difficult is it to figure that out??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 08:39 AM Bobert, The only one here ( besides Greggie, your pet racist scumbag) who is pushing hate is you. What was it you did as a young man that makes you so eager to prove you are "better" than everyone else? When did God die, and leave you in charge? I disagree with you: that no more makes me a KKKr than your lies about Israel make you a Nazi. You keep spreading hate like you do, and the threefold rule will return it to you... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 08:54 AM ""I was the juror that was going to give them the hung jury. I fought to the end," she said. However, on the second day of deliberations, after spending nine hours discussing the evidence, Maddy said she realized there wasn't enough proof to convict Zimmerman of murder or manslaughter under Florida law. Zimmerman concedes he shot and killed Martin in Sanford on Feb. 26, 2012, but maintains he fired in self-defense. "That's where I felt confused, where if a person kills someone, then you get charged for it," Maddy said. "But as the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you can't say he's guilty." When asked by Roberts whether the case should have gone to trial, Maddy said, "I don't think so." "I felt like this was a publicity stunt. This whole court service thing to me was publicity," she said." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 09:27 AM ""As much as we were trying to find this man guilty…they give you a booklet that basically tells you the truth, and the truth is that there was nothing that we could do about it," she said. "I feel the verdict was already told."" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Jul 13 - 09:49 AM Bobert: "You hate Obama, you talk 2000 Nader but your politics are 100% Tea Party..." Your back to the Tea Party stuff, again??? ..and I 'hate' Obama??? Whatever you say..(rolls eyes. thrusts hands my pockets, and walks away in disgust...), mutters, "Jeez, either Bobert doesn't get it, or maybe he's retarded'" GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 26 Jul 13 - 09:54 AM "And as I carry him on my back,I'm hurting as much as Trayvon Martin's mother, because there's no way that any mother should feel that pain," she said. (Washington Post) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Jul 13 - 10:01 AM Bobert: ""You hate Obama, you talk 2000 Nader......." " GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 26 Jul 13 - 10:05 AM Maddy said she believed she owed Trayvon Martin's parents an apology because she felt "like I let them down." (Washington Post) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 10:13 AM " When asked by Roberts whether the case should have gone to trial, Maddy said, "I don't think so." "I felt like this was a publicity stunt. This whole court service thing to me was publicity," she said."" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Jul 13 - 10:14 AM ....but your politics are 100% Tea Party..." GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 10:15 AM ""That's where I felt confused, where if a person kills someone, then you get charged for it," Maddy said. "But as the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you can't say he's guilty."" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 10:16 AM "However, on the second day of deliberations, after spending nine hours discussing the evidence, Maddy said she realized there wasn't enough proof to convict Zimmerman of murder or manslaughter under Florida law." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 26 Jul 13 - 10:21 AM "George Zimmerman got away with murder" she said, "but you can't get away from God." (Huffington Post) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 10:29 AM And since Bobert thinks he is God, I guess his lynching of Zimmerman will be just fine and dandy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 10:32 AM ""You can't put the man in jail even though in our hearts we felt he was guilty," said the woman who was identified only as Juror B29 during the trial. "But we had to grab our hearts and put it aside and look at the evidence." She said the jury was following Florida law and the evidence, she said, did not prove murder." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 26 Jul 13 - 10:47 AM Despite what it was, it was a mistake to try Z for murder. At least one of the manslaughters would have given him jail time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 10:55 AM As I have pointed out, several times- and been called a racist KKKr by "SS Leader" Bobert for. But then, he has always had a real problem with truth and facts. He does not recognize them. He does not bother to check if what he states is true. He does not realize that to continue to state a falsehood after being informed, with references that it is false is a deliberate lie, and tells a lot more about him than any accusations he makes about others. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Jul 13 - 11:30 AM Zimmerman wouldn't have survived jail time... He'll be lucky if he survives at all... He is a marked man... Of course he can always look to white supremacists to protect him but he may grow tired of having to spend his life surrounded redneck body guards... Sorry, GfinS, but I didn't watch your YouTubes because right from the jump it it was obvious that whoever made them is another Obama hater just like you... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 11:31 AM As I said, a real problem with truth and facts... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Jul 13 - 12:01 PM Yeah, the videos point that out. Bobert, you really ought to watch them..they present your arguments...to a Tea...or is that Tee?...or maybe just 'T'. You might look at what you've been saying, through a different perspective....I mean you might get a clue, as to how you are perceived. might be helpful....and they are totally non-emotional! ....and 'spot on' as one poster commented. Bobert: "Sorry, GfinS, but I didn't watch your YouTubes because right from the jump it it was obvious that whoever made them is another Obama hater just like you..." How would you know????...if you didn't watch them????? Are you afraid your indoctrinations might be at risk??? Shit, I wouldn't worry about that....they are only indoctrinations, it's not like someone is trying to deprive you of 'life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness!' GfS P.S. ..and by Pete's sakes DON'T learn anything...that way you have more to share!....or something like that! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: gnu Date: 26 Jul 13 - 12:50 PM I just searched again and I cannot fine the trial transcript. Can one of you please provide a link to the trial transcript on accounta I really wanna read it. Thanks in advance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 12:57 PM http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ijvm.html In multiple parts, you have to find them... But then, just ask Bobert- HE was there at the killing, and knows better than any witnesses what happened. After all, he knows what HE wuld have done, so that makes Zimerman guilty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Jul 13 - 01:17 PM I opened the links up, GfinS, and saw enough to know that they were just more - yawn - Obama bashing... As for learning stuff... There are better ways to learn stuff than watching cartoons and/or reading right wing blogs... I read the "Charlotte Observer" every morning and then go to the WaPo and read lots of the articles and op-eds... Yes, I even read the righties there... I wrestle around with Chuckie K and Jennifer Rubin quite a bit in the discussions... I even wrestler around with Eugene Robinson on occasion... So not to worry... I am very well informed of what is going on out there in the real world without the cartoons and cartoonish right winged bloggers... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 01:20 PM "I am very well informed of what is going on out there in the real world " Your posts show nothing of that, Bobert. Maybe you should work on your reading comprehension.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: gnu Date: 26 Jul 13 - 01:33 PM beardedbruce... nope. Those are not even close to portions of the trial transcript. There are NONE at that link. ZERO. NADA. Next time, read before you waste my time. Please PM me if you find the trial transcript, anyone. I am anxious to read it. I find the conjecture in media and even in Mudcat, especially conjecture which is blatantly in error given only what evidence is publically avaiable, disturbing at best. Such crap does not serve either Zimmerman or Martin... or anyone else. And, it abases justice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 01:53 PM http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1307/02/ijvm.01.html Didn't mean to waste your time. That site contains partial transcripts as above... http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130715154757AA8x0ZS How much are you willing to pay? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: gnu Date: 26 Jul 13 - 02:02 PM bb... knock that shit off. No more a transcript to be had than the asswipe on the roll in the Mudcat outhouse. I will not open any more of your links so don't bother. gnightgnu |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 02:13 PM So go pay for it... http://crimeandcourtsnews.blogspot.com/p/watch-george-zimmerman-trial-full.html#.UfK5rhZ1CS0 supposedly gives the videos. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jul 13 - 02:14 PM 1400 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 26 Jul 13 - 03:40 PM It's been a whole fucking thread of whine and bitch. About time you guys took a step up behaved like five-year-olds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: gnu Date: 26 Jul 13 - 04:05 PM Guest... I have only read 100 posts, TOPS. I could not agree more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 26 Jul 13 - 04:05 PM Nah. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 26 Jul 13 - 04:48 PM ""Personel attack are fine against any minority here."".....Bearded Bruce ""What a bunch of bigoted, hypocritical, lying pieces of shit."".....Bearded Bruce in the same post! What was that pompous comment he uses every couple of days about setting standards for others that we don't follow ourselves? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Jul 13 - 05:46 PM Like they say, Don, "He who smelt it dealt it"... BB has a very bad habit of calling normal people "bigots"??? Funny??? He's the biggest bigot here in Mudcat, bar none... That's why I ignore 100% of his posts... If I want to read bigotry I'll go to KKK.com... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Jul 13 - 07:49 PM The only cartoon characters around here are Beardedbruce, and that wart he has on his butt, Goofball. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Jul 13 - 07:59 PM I still find the wart amusing, Don... The butt the wart lives on and everything else attached to that butt, not so... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Jul 13 - 12:13 AM From the interview with juror 'B29'. Note her emotions verses the legal aspect...which I was trying to tell you all along! "Catch Up on all the Details From the George Zimmerman Murder Trial. Maddy, a nursing assistant and mother of eight children, was the only minority member of the all-female panel. Maddy said she favored convicting Zimmerman of second-degree murder when deliberations began. "I was the juror that was going to give them the hung jury. I fought to the end," she said. Her FEELINGS were eventually swayed by the second day of deliberations after she realized there wasn't enough proof to convict Zimmerman of murder or manslaughter under Florida law. See Reaction to the George Zimmerman Verdict "You can't put the man in jail even though in our hearts we felt he was guilty," Maddy said. "But we had to grab our hearts and put it aside and look at the evidence." But her feelings about Zimmerman's actions are clear. "George Zimmerman got away with murder, but you can't get away from God. And at the end of the day, he's going to have a lot of questions and answers he has to deal with," Maddy said. "[But] the law couldn't prove it." Sound familiar???????????? Now my two cents worth, AGAIN: It was a series of misreading the moments by BOTH of them, and that led to a chain of stupid actions. Somebody was attacked, and somebody was shot and killed. Quit fanning it into a racial hate thing. It had NOTHING to do with it!..Says the FBI, Trayvon's mother, and the eyewitness, who saw Zimmerman on the bottom and heard the gunshot. The juror had to deal with it, but under the law she couldn't convict him, with the evidence. SHE SAID IT! Now stop being so boneheaded about it, and making it something it wasn't! Here's the link: Juror 'B29' interview...with other links. So if you want to form idiotic 'alliances' and base it on something other than the law, from which the case was tried, go ahead....you can suck each others warts and butts!..then you can earn your just reward of being butt-hurt! And if you are trying to politicize it, you're really a stupid jerk off!..So knock it off, and be rational. If the political activists, who are into the business of capitalization(as in making money) of being professional race-baiters, and making a 'living' of this, to whom you listen to, didn't rush the trial, to be relevant, and make a buck, it WOULD have gone to the Grand Jury, and he would have been charged appropriately! YOUR GUYS FUCKED IT UP ALL THE WAY AROUND! Stop paying attention to them....they're making money of you dimwits! And that's the way it is! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Jul 13 - 04:53 AM On a serous note, and a caring note, Bobert, it may seem to you that there is a bunch of people on here, who are all telling you pretty much the same thing, which, just so happens to be, the same truth you see, as it unfolds. I mean, like the irrefutable truth, borne out as the events unfold, and the people who took part in them are verifying...I've been one of those people. I am NOT a Tea Party, KKK, or in any way biased against blacks..matter of fact I've played, and made a lot of music with 'them'. I say 'them' in quotes, because there was no 'them'...it was an 'US'. WE made the music together....nobody was dealing with skin color...just sound...nobody cared...(and by the way, some of it was REAL fucking HOT, but that's another story, for another time)...what I'm trying to tell you, is that there is some truth, in the 'land of the center'..which to you, may seem FAR right....but it's not....you've been programmed to interpret, those truths as FAR right...but they're not. Honestly, man....and in your interpretations, I think you're thinking that those people are 'enemies'...the 'other side'. We're not, man...we're all in this together....and it serves NO practical reason, for others who have that point of view, which many times is really in the center....shit, I'll even go as far, as to say, apolitical, much of the time. Your beating yourself up, over your viewpoint...and it's a bummer, for those of us who love ya, to see you 'losing it'. The majority..no...the overwhelming majority, of those here in Mudcat-Land, are just not haters of any of their fellow man....maybe different opinions about stuff...but not to the point of hating anybody. So, step back...take a breath..know that you are amongst friends....and just consider..just for a clear moment...there is another side, that will NOT be politicized, and won't be manipulated, no matter how 'noble' the 'cause'...and that is an objective view, coupled with love...and being as love really is the focus, a certain objectivity, stays intact....it has to...because that same objectivity, sees when the need for compassion is needed, to know how to best love our fellow man...and that is best done, by keeping the filter clean of all the negative. It affects, among other things, your music, and every emotion you put into it. There really isn't any time to be wasted, on that negative shit...even politics. Music unites people, being as all those same people can interpret emotions. To quote you, "It sounded delicious!" Now would it?...if we were thinking about all these partisan resentments..caused by artificial agitations, by political agitator/activists...from either fucking side???? Our music is aimed at the center..the center of the listeners heart........not their fucked up thoughts, in an up-tight mind....I,..I'll speak for myself, am aiming at the heart. My suggestion....(for free, too)...is to take all those injustices you've seen, from years back, roll it into the music...and deliver it, in love, and for love You too, may begin to wave good-bye to the divisions.....'and they will follow'...... Isn't what this is all about? Regards, man... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 27 Jul 13 - 06:43 AM "Quit fanning it into a racial hate thing. It had NOTHING to do with it!" So you honestly think that events would have played out the same had Trayvon been a white dude wearing a suit. I don't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 27 Jul 13 - 09:52 AM Lotta KKKers back in their heyday denied being racists, too... That's why they hid their faces and did their dirty work at night... No, GfinS, you fall squarely into TeaKKK-Nation when it comes down to policies... That's not meant to be an insult... It's just an observation... A one million word response from you won't change that... You spread your hate for Obama before you even knew who he was or what he stood for and now have become Zimmerman worshiper... I rest my case... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Jul 13 - 11:32 AM ""You can't put the man in jail even though in our hearts we felt he was guilty," Maddy said. "But we had to grab our hearts and put it aside and look at the evidence." But her feelings about Zimmerman's actions are clear. "George Zimmerman got away with murder, but you can't get away from God. And at the end of the day, he's going to have a lot of questions and answers he has to deal with," Maddy said. "[But] the law couldn't prove it."" This was the only par of two posts by you that was actually pertinent to the topic. The juror was right up to a point!! When she said ""[But] the law couldn't prove it"", she was wrong. Whether she knew it or not, and whether it was about race or not, the law never intended to prove it. Quite the opposite in fact. Zimmerman is feeling smug and happy now, and when the dust has settled, he'll be on the prowl again. It's worked in his favour twice already and he must be feeling pretty invulnerable. I just hope that the next time he picks on a stranger, the stranger too will be armed, and willing to use a weapon. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Jul 13 - 11:33 AM ~~~sigh~~~ Robot: "No, GfinS, you fall squarely into TeaKKK-Nation when it comes down to policies... That's not meant to be an insult... It's just an observation... A one million word response from you won't change that... You spread your hate for Obama before you even knew who he was or what he stood for and now have become Zimmerman worshiper.." Is this what you get when you cross a robot with a parrot? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Jul 13 - 11:56 AM Don T: "When she said ""[But] the law couldn't prove it"", she was wrong. Whether she knew it or not, and whether it was about race or not, the law never intended to prove it." It sounds like you are agreeing with the original officers, who weren't going to charge him at all!! The glitch that screwed it up, was the eagerness to turn this into a racial issue, pressured by Sharpton and Jackson, and the other professional promoters and exploiters. Don, the FACT is this case should have been reviewed by the Grand Jury First!!...as NORMALLY done, in cases of this nature. Had the pressure, NOT been applied, to DO SOMETHING RIGHT NOW, the prosecution would have charged him correctly, and probably won the case. The politics of race, is what lost this case. Now before your head explodes, THINK about what I just said. The prosecution's case, boiled down to pleading to the jurors to look at it EMOTIONALLY, NOT legally...and THAT is exactly why they lost the case. They COULD have had him....but they blew it. ..and that is the legal opinion from legal scholars as well, who have called for the prosecutors to be disbarred. What I just said to you, is without bias, one way or another. It is, in fact, THE fact! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 27 Jul 13 - 12:08 PM Gnu, if you get the transcript and reach your judgement on the basis of the evidence and court direction contained in it, you will be alone among all the opinionated shit-stirrers who post to this thread. Good luck, but you may have to visit the County court archives to find it. In this thread, not one who has shouted "Foul" has any basis for their remarks- no trial evidence is presented by them, only opinions based on their preconceived notions. Trial transcripts are public, but because of the expense of checking them for publication, usually the only copies are available at the trial court of county archives. Perhaps a qualified person will eventually write a book on the trial, evaluating the evidence, but usually such tomes are written for the purpose of attracting readers and not the presentation of facts. Also beware of remarks by jurors given to the press after the trial. Usually the remarks are conditioned by the interviewer, and are sieved out to make an attention-catching story. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 27 Jul 13 - 12:51 PM "trial court OR county archives" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Lighter Date: 27 Jul 13 - 01:16 PM What's more, Q, despite someone's recent post, the prosecution had over a year to decide precisely what charges to bring. At the very last moment - after the trial had been on for days! - they tried to add a charge of ... "felony murder resulting from child abuse"! Under the circumstances shown at trial, no charge, real or proposed, could have trumped Z's right to self-defense. The evidence showed that M attacked Z (at least twice, if you count the broken nose and the head thumping separately, which the prosecution undoubtedly would have tried to do if M had been the defendant: after all, he could have run away); and Z in the opinion of the jurors, "acted reasonably" when he fired "in self-defense." In other words, the jury believed that any reasonable person in that situation might be expected to do the same. All Z knew (even if M wasn't grabbing for his gun) was that he was being attacked by a 5' 11" guy whom he *already* suspected of being a criminal (based on his actions), and that this young man (not "child") had already broken his nose and was "pounding" his head on concrete. The eyewitness used the word "pound" and the pathologist concurred that Z's injuries were consistent with that. Z had no reason to believe that the pounding would stop. To repeat what few want to hear: the stand-your-ground law never came up in trial. It was irrelevant. Z's alternative was to risk hematoma or death in the hope that the police would show up in time to drag M away. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Jul 13 - 05:04 PM The mug photos of Zimmerman show no signs of a broken nose. And I've seen about three different photos of the back of Zimmerman's head and they've all been badly Photoshopped. One of the first ones to appear depicted him as covered with blood--and obviously Photoshopped. I also read the Zimmerman was a good 47 pounds heavier that Martin. Who attacked whom? And once again, lest anyone forget: Zimmerman got out of his car and approached Martin after the police told him NOT to. Something is rotten in the State of Florida. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 27 Jul 13 - 05:54 PM The mug shots are suspect, at best, Don... Anyone who has been around martial arts knows that if Martin had been on top and been able to do the things that Zimmerman said Martin had done then Zimmerman's head would have looked like hamburger meat... I mean, these so called injuries looked to me like Zimmerman went out and pounded his own head to break a little skin to support his made up version of the murder... I mean, the doctor who checked him out said the injuries were superficial and not in need of an stitches... Anyone who believes Zimmerman here probably is the kind of person I'd like to sell a bridge to... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Jul 13 - 05:56 PM Grasp any straw you can, and if you can't find one..just make one up, huh? Here,.. Is this link 'guilty' or 'innocent', 'right' or what's 'left'? Be careful, listening to this link could cause brain damage, to robots and parrots! Let me know...by the way, we're still waiting for those KKK'ers, and White Supremacists to show up! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Jul 13 - 06:58 PM Those are not "straws," Goofball, that's what, in a sane, just world, is called Even if the court ignored it. I know it's hard for you, but DO try to keep up. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Jul 13 - 07:06 PM Oh! And those KKK'ers and White Supremecists you're asking about? You're following right on their coat tails (In fact, I recognize you there under your sheet and pointy hood). By the way, the reason the KKK wear those pointy hoods is because they fit their pointy heads. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 27 Jul 13 - 07:19 PM Yeah, the modern day KKKers don't see themselves as the new Klan but they very much are... They still support the murder of innocent black people... Martin went to the fucking store for candy and ended up stalked and murdered by an older, larger and armed man... Only a KKKer would defend the killer... Only KKK... GfinS may see himself differently but those of us who grew up in the South know his type... Ain't no robot here, GfinS, but good try... You need to check out your values, dude, 'cause you don't have a clue just how you are seen when you write this crap... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Jul 13 - 07:29 PM Really, Goofball, you're in grave danger of committing suicide with the same weapon that Samson used to kill a thousand Philistines. Think about it! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: gnu Date: 27 Jul 13 - 08:00 PM Q... trust you to be a voice of reason... "Gnu, if you get the transcript and reach your judgement on the basis of the evidence and court direction contained in it, you will be alone among all the opinionated shit-stirrers who post to this thread." I am gonna leave this thread for good until I get that full transcript but I have to say something before I leave. How dare you! How dare you interpret the meager evidence you have to make ANY judgement about either of these men? WTF is wrong with you? I am absolutely appalled by your behaviour. Any true and honest man would shun you. Shame on you. Shame! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 28 Jul 13 - 12:59 AM Yell all you want...you guys are nuts! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 28 Jul 13 - 05:40 AM Dork First: "Those are not "straws," Goofball, that's what, in a sane, just world, is called EVIDENCE Even if the court ignored it." They are straws, just like your whole bullshit argument based solely on your fucked up opinions...which happen to be detached from reality. What do you need 'EVIDENCE' for??..Going to court??? It already went to court...and there wasn't enough 'EVIDENCE' that you approve of, to convict him...mostly because what you consider 'EVIDENCE' is just your wannabe political conjecture! You really are fucked up...and you seriously should seek professional help..even though it would be a waste of time and money! The two of you guys come off like Abbott and Costello. I'm sure you can't see it...but you sprinkle your 'seed', and knock this chick up..split..the chick goes on welfare....and Robot is a welfare worker!..Perfect!..You NEED somebody to pick up your slack!..Only thing is, it ain't washin' here, and you ain't fooling anybody, but your welfare worker!..who is already predisposed to think everyone is a KKK nutcase!!.......Good grief!! Froth: "EVIDENCE Even if the court ignored it." They didn't ignore it. They ignored idiotic opinions, such as yours, and acquitted Zimmerman of grounds of self defense..not race...not getting out of his car...not profiling...self defense. He was on the ground, (eyewitness testified), getting hit...and shot the fucking punk! Tragic? Yes. Stupid? Yes. Fucked up trial? Only because it was rushed through to appease political asshole big mouths like you! Ignored 'EVIDENCE'?? That's why they NORMALLY convene a Grand Jury FIRST! So stuff one thumb in your mouth and the other in your ass..maybe it will keep the odor of your opinions where they should be. We're done...You and Robot, are too blocked, and fucked up, to digest reality!..and so you make up your own....but lack common sense....Wait a minute...where did I just read that?...Oh yeah... Proverbs 6:8 "A young man devoid of understanding, 8 Passing along the street near her corner; And he took the path to her house 9 In the twilight, in the evening, In the black and dark night." Proverbs 6:14 "with perverted heart devises evil, continually sowing discord;" ,,and here, pick a translation..English Standard Version (© 2001) He who commits adultery lacks sense; he who does it destroys himself. King James Bible But whoso committeth adultery with a woman lacketh understanding: he that doeth it destroyeth his own soul. American Standard Version He that commits adultery with a woman is void of understanding: and lacks common sense. He who does it who would destroy his own soul." In other words, you've been nuts and fucked up for a LONG time. That's why you NEED a lackey...to validate yourself to your self. In reality, you are not taken, or to be taken seriously. Good Night, Gracie! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 28 Jul 13 - 12:16 PM "Only KKK" You have no respect for the jury system. You have no respect for North Carolinians. You condemn anyone who does not share your hate of the South and Southerners. Why should anyone listen to you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 28 Jul 13 - 12:28 PM Self hatred??? He lives in the South. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Jul 13 - 12:49 PM Goofball, "Judge not, lest YE be judged!" And remember: You are judged for the judgments YOU make. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Jul 13 - 01:20 PM Goofball, your above post is a real outpouring of ignorance and hatred. You tell ME to seek professional help when YOU are spitting vitriol like that? Despite your tenuous command of the English language, that's one of the most eloquent of your posts so far. But it tells us more about YOU than what you apparently think you're talking about. YOU ARE REALLY ONE SICK PUPPY! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 28 Jul 13 - 01:50 PM Are you capable having a discussion, that doesn't rely on your inane name-calling?? Though you 'claim' to have a command of the language, how come you say virtually nothing? You fuck up facts, you refuse them when they are presented, you insist on defending your stance on decadence, you interject your thoughts, as to what people post..then, argue with the words you interjected, that was NEVER said by the poster, to whom you attribute it to. Somehow, you think Zimmerman getting out of his car, is a crime, even if the cops ADVISED him not to..and then disregard that Martin assaulted him, had him on the ground beating him, when the shot was fired. You insist that it was all racial, when the FBI, his mother, witnesses, the jury, all are saying otherwise...but to LOOK like a 'concerned'(?) wannabe activist, you insist that it was all racial...and REFUSE to consider that the jury only acquitted Zimmerman, because they didn't get to hear your stupid, fucking, ignorant opinions!!! Not only that, your 'teaming up' with Robot, has completely minimized any 'opinions' he has, and made him sound like a complete moron! Both of you, are LITERALLY beyond belief!! You've turned your political, nonsensical rantings, and believe them as actual facts!..(but then you're known for that--see above). You'd lynch Zimmerman for getting out of his car, and forget the rest of what happened!!?!! Frankly, your and Robot's rants have just about bored people to tears, so much, that if they never heard the names Martin and Zimmerman again, for the rest of their lives, it wouldn't be too soon! Here, you and the Robot, sniffle because Trayvon was an innocent kid, just on his way back from the store with Skittles and innocently got shot....and turned it into a interracial crusade, because this poor little sweet black kid was shot by a 'white/Hispanic' bigot, RIGHT??? It didn't matter that self defensed is how the jury called it, and the state couldn't proof otherwise...YOU GUYS want to champion the poor little kid from being killed because of race????? COOL ....CHAMPION THIS...YOU HYPOCRITES!!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 28 Jul 13 - 01:51 PM I looked into it gnu and the kind of document you are looking for must be obtained from the court. You cannot find it online. The video is available all over the web. Btw, GfS, I listened to your piece on the tavern thread. Very nice bit of keyboard wizardry. Now, shut the hell up :-) This is not rocket science here. In any violent encounter, there is a primary aggressor. Stalking and confronting is aggression. There's no question that George Zimmerman was the primary aggressor. In order to acquit George Zimmerman, you'd have to believe that Trayvon Martin attacked him. You would only be willing to accept something like that as a given means that you harbor deep seated notions about the criminality of young black men. Otherwise you would realize that the absence of Zimmerman DNA logically indicates that Zimmerman injuries were the direct result of him trying to subdue someone who was fighting being subdued. A good head butting would have caused a bump on the nose. It was no aggressive punch. If you are trying to take down somebody who is fighting it and you are not up to the task, you're going to get hurt. Period. And then of course, because you fancy yourself a cop, you shoot. And I'm not convinced that the gun wasn't already out prior to the final moments. He was Joe cop. You gotta remember that. Everything that sociopathic son of a bitch said is a lie. He is a liar. I don't know how that business of lying to the court about the donation money escaped everybody. I would never lie to a court, would you? It speaks to his character. Anybody who would lie to a court over money, is certainly going to lie to save his life! Get a grip all of you who say it was a worthy verdict. I think the first juror, the wife of the lawyer who answered all the questions correctly (but dishonestly) because she wanted on that jury dazzled the rest of them with her legalese and led them in that direction. You can any small group like that together and the most dominant personality surfaces. She was solidly in Zimmerman's corner from the start. If the second juror really felt that way, then she should have held the jury up instead of allowing the other members to bully her into the wrong verdict. I would have sat there until hell froze over and and shook my head and said, "Uh-uh, manslaughter." I do think it was murder with a depraved mind, however, the evidence supports manslaughter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Jul 13 - 03:23 PM Guest,SJL has the right of it. Goofball, everybody who reads your stuff knows that you are a hopeless moron. Why don't you stop embarrassing yourself and just go away!?? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Jul 13 - 03:30 PM Sorry, Q, Bobert doesn't hate the South or Southerners.(nor do I, for that matter) Bobert IS a Southerner, born and bred. What he hates is the persistent racism in this country and the legacy, still very much with us, of Slavery and Jim Crow. More to the point, why should anyone listen to YOU denying these issues exist and brushing them aside as "hate for the South and Southerners"??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 28 Jul 13 - 03:39 PM SJL, I do not think Zimmerman is blameless in all this. What I've been trying to point out, repeatedly, is that because there was a rush to turn this into a racially charged motivated issue, so much, that they screwed up the legal process, circumvented the Grand Jury, instead of doing it correctly...THEN they want to bitch, and blame everybody for being racists, when in reality that was NOT the issue at all. THEY were the ones, in their eagerness to turn it into one, that sabotaged the whole thing! I've said, previously, that Zimmerman could, and should have been charged and tried appropriately, but it was the race baiting, for profit, bigots that derailed it all. Now they are trying to shift the focus, when in fact it was them who caused it to happen, Fair enough? BTW, glad you liked the piece. Every note was played 'live' with no pre-programming of sequencers or parts. ...and just a little over 86,000 notes! Ok..you get to shut up, now....(wink) GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 28 Jul 13 - 04:11 PM I do not deny that the racist issues exist. But the blanket application of the KKK brush and denial that justice for Blacks in the South is possible, is stupid and sickening. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Jul 13 - 04:39 PM No-one is saying that justice for Blacks in the South isn't POSSIBLE, Q - It is. But its certainly, shall we say, a great deal less than universal. And as for the Klan and the Klan mentality - absent the robes and rigmarol e- it is very much alive and well, if in fewer numbers than heretofore. That someone would deny both of these facts is ALSO stupid and sickening. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 28 Jul 13 - 04:44 PM Your posts over a long period of time are the evidence of your reverse bigotry. I will say no more. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 28 Jul 13 - 04:50 PM Greg, yes, you are correct...the numbers thank God, are really down. What I strongly object to, is wannabe activists, are accusing people on here, in Mudcat-land, of being KKK, so on and so forth, and then proceed to trash them out, based on their completely erroneous accusations...and when that happens, you bet I'll get in their faces about it! Frankly, the Zimmerman/Martin case has taken on the role of beating a dead horse. BTW, nice to see a post from you that goes beyond your 'normal fare'. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Jul 13 - 04:56 PM There are some solidly established facts here. The town of Sanford, Florida has historically been a hotbed of KKK activity, including the town's refusal to let Jackie Robinson, the first black baseball player hired by the Brooklyn Dodgers, to participate in spring training in Sanford. The line between Jackie Robinson and Trayvon Martin points to how institutional and systemic racism has actually always been in Sanford. Institutions change only when they are confronted and challenged. In Sanford, racist institutions took root and stayed. Those are provable, indisputable facts. Zimmerman was the aggressor in the confrontation with Trayvon Martin. He disobeyed police, who told him to stay in his car and NOT try to confront him. But he was a wannabe cop, he had a gun, and he wanted to use it. A black teenager wearing a hoodie was a perfect target! Who, in a town with a history--and set of attitudes--like Sanford's, would question him? I am not in favor of capital punishment. BUT absolving Zimmerman and releasing him back onto the streets again—and giving him his gun back!—is just giving this trigger-happy thug permission to do it again! But that's the way it is. In Sanford, Florida. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Jul 13 - 05:04 PM Quoth Q: I will say no more. You WILL say no more, or you've been caaught out and CAN'T say any more in substantiation of your ridiculous charge? And yes, I know, "Some of your best friends are Negroes." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Jul 13 - 05:07 PM Your posts over a long period of time are the evidence of your reverse bigotry. And by the way, Q, its a shame we can't have Azizi's commentary on that statement or the commentary of other Black folks.. Gotta remember, MudCat is an all-White forum. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 28 Jul 13 - 06:31 PM Dork: "...town's refusal to let Jackie Robinson, the first black baseball player hired by the Brooklyn Dodgers, to participate in spring training in Sanford." IN 1945!!..About 70 YEARS ago!!...I think the South has made 'some' strides since then, don't you think?...ooops, maybe you don't. Dork: "The line between Jackie Robinson and Trayvon Martin points to how institutional and systemic racism has actually always been in Sanford. Institutions change only when they are confronted and challenged. In Sanford, racist institutions took root and stayed." You've asked them?? That part of your post is an opinionated ASSumption, or something you gathered from Robot, who thinks we're KKKers, too. Not really super reliable, there. Dork: "Zimmerman was the aggressor in the confrontation with Trayvon Martin. He disobeyed police, who told him to stay in his car and NOT try to confront him." Do you think that the police may have had suspicions of Martin, as well?...being as they ADVISED Zim, not to confront him?..AND, getting out of his car, and following him, is not quite exactly 'aggression'. Maybe 'curiosity' or wanting the unfamiliar face, to know somebody has an eye on him, but your JUMP to being 'the aggressor' is a bit of an overreach, don't ya' think???......Maybe not(it's easier for some people to speak BEFORE they think it through... Dork: "But he was a wannabe cop, he had a gun, and he wanted to use it." Oh???...HE WANTED to use it???...That's quite a JUMP there..and who told you that???...were you in his brain??....(maybe so, he did do some stupid things) Dork: "A black teenager wearing a hoodie was a perfect target!" A 'perfect target'?? For who?? You?? Robot?? a neighborhood watch guy with NO history od racial bias...in fact, if you would have done your homework beforehand, you'd know that Zim, worked with 'minorities' long before this stupid shit took place...look it up...but that might require some thinking, and harder yet, some reasoning! Dork: "BUT absolving Zimmerman and releasing him back onto the streets again—and giving him his gun back!—is just giving this trigger-happy thug permission to do it again!" The jury found him 'not guilty' AS CHARGED, so releasing him is usually what they do...especially if he was out on bail in the first place...and being 'not guilty' AS CHARGED, they have to release his propert back to him..but don't worry, the DoJ held it up, and now they still have the gun. Think Holder will sell it to a drug cartel?? Dork: "...is just giving this trigger-happy thug permission to do it again!". Trigger happy?? Thug?..If he was either of those, he would have shot him, before he was on the ground, with nowhere to go but being punched out. THESE are trigger happy thugs, which you quietly skipped over, not a peep! Why don't you and the Robot, actually go into your local ghettos, and DO something to make life better, all the way around?? Answer: Because other than on here, trying to be the spokesman for the black community, I don't think either of you give a shit, except on here, to try to impress the other wannabe 'so-called liberals' that you're 'more deeply concerned about them'...just so long as it doesn't mean you have to get down WITH them! Phil Ochs nailed you lightweights, years ago!..Maybe if you wave your arms and frantically stomp around and make a fuss, nobody will suspect you of not giving a shit, anyway! ...I mean, you didn't give a shit about your kid, now you want us to believe that you've wrapped yourself in blankets of deep concern for your fellow man???? Give me a fucking break! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Jul 13 - 07:00 PM What I wrote are not MY assumptions about Sanford, Florida, the information was culled and distilled from a number of news stories and histories of both Sanford, Florida, the attitude prevalent in Sanford since the Jackie Robinson incident, and Zimmerman's personal history. There was much more there that I did NOT include, that's just as indicative of the kind of place Sanford is and the kind of person Zimmerman is. Goofup, the foul-mouthed and ill-conceived nature of your post reveals your own racism, prejudice, and general lack of intelligence. I've heard smarter things from a Southern-born schizophrenic with Tourette's Syndrome. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Jul 13 - 07:14 PM As for the KKK??? Hey, they hated black people and mu7rdered them... Zimmerman made a statement to the dispatcher about "these people always get away"... These people??? Then Zimmerman murdered Martin... And folks here worship Zimmerman and defend his actions... What exactly am I missing here??? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 28 Jul 13 - 07:59 PM GUEST, here's what I think. We have to argue or there would be no point to any of this. Then it would be like facebook where you post a pic of a cute kitty and everyone says "Awww." On the other hand, when you have argued your position 12 x's over, and you have still failed to persuade your adversary, the only sensible thing to do is agree to disagree. So I concede, and I like hanging out with you. Don, he really is a goofus, isn't he? And Greg, it really is a shame that we don't have the kind of diversity that would lead to a better discussion all around. I agree. So now there's three of you. Q must be the wizard :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 28 Jul 13 - 11:03 PM Well, like Heinlein said, "When I'm done writing, I wash my hands"... Robot: "Zimmerman made a statement to the dispatcher about "these people always get away"... These people???" Your ASSumption is that he meant black people. He could have meant prowlers, taggers, burglars or any number of would be crooks. Robot: "What exactly am I missing here??? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck..." Try substituting ANY of the above aforementioned for the word 'duck'...you can add a 'stranger in the neighborhood, walking close to the apartments', as well...now couldn't you?? You fault Zimmerman for profiling, but you've profiled Zimmerman as a racist 'nigger killer', just itching for the moment to pull it off...aren't you?...aren't you?? Let's be fair here, and make the same mistake that Zim, Martin, the professional race baiters, and the prosecution made..and that is jumping to conclusions, without the correct information. Hey, Rachel was telling Trayvon, that the guy following him, was a 'homosexual rapist'..and guess what?? NOBODY WAS RIGHT!...and someone died that night because of it...and of course, as I've had to say several times on here, 'History teaches us that man never learns from history!'..We can, without bias, allow for the 'benefit of the doubt'...BECAUSE NOBODY on the Forum, nor news media, was actually there that night, now were they?..and MY, I'm floored at how many cocksure 'expert witnesses' have showed up since!..and of course, bringing their personal biases with them!! SJL: "And Greg, it really is a shame that we don't have the kind of diversity that would lead to a better discussion all around. I agree." A great backhanded compliment!..Well done! SJL: "GUEST, here's what I think. We have to argue or there would be no point to any of this." Sometimes when people have unreasonable ASSumptions, and FAIL to persuade, the 'less than gullible', maybe they, the promoters of divisions and hostilities, might just catch themselves running out of bullshit to spread...then maybe, it might just cause them to re-examine themselves, and where there coming from..and maybe even 'why?'. Then maybe, they can discipline themselves to think first, before the sew discord, based on their personal problems. We, as musicians SHOULD be taking a higher stance with us, and give it to those who listen to us play. Music can inspire...why just regurgitate the crap on the news, reinforcing the biases that have been especially prepared to deceive people??? Oh, and that's 'Mister Goofus' to you, ma'am. Wink! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 29 Jul 13 - 01:56 AM That goofus remark was just a joke. GfS I was just kidding. You know what, I'm thinking that George Zimmerman is a true sociopath who just wanted to kill somebody and he chose the right victim. Am I right Don? Am I right Greg? You guys know it. There are throwaway people. And there is something wrong with that man. Am I right or am I right? We don't need him. We have police who do not normally want to play cop, so to speak, and shoot somebody. They just check things out, and once everything checks out, everybody goes their way. No problemo. Something wrong with that man. Don, you know it and Greg, you know it too. We're hoping he won't hurt anybody else. At the same time, we know that he is entirely capable. He got away with murder once. He'll stay quiet. In a way, that's the hard part. Sociopaths are smart. He won't try the same thing twice. So perhaps we won't have the satisfaction of seeing him punished as he deserved. But I don't think that was our objective in the first place. We just wanted to right and wrong ackowledged. We already have that in ourselves. We need no confirmation from the outside world. Let's make a pact to go on our merry way, make our singular contribution in the world and forget that poor excuse for a human being. Not worth our time. But let's keep our eyes open. Cuz if he ever fucks up and we are around to see it? We'll celebrate amongst ourselves. What goes around comes around. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Jul 13 - 02:47 AM Yikes!! I guess it's like a matter of 'free will'.... Speaking of which, I was asked one time if I believed in 'free will'... ..to which I answered, "Do we have a choice?" But one thing I do know..as we press on to finish our existence here: 'As we get older we should also be getting wiser...because the end product of anyone of us being here, is to make the place better. Therefore your wisest decisions come from when we are happy. Happiness is not a 'goal' and never should be...it is a state of being, from where we exist and operate.. Therefore, the wisest decisions, to raise the level of the collective happiness, must come from a place that sees us as one. If a brother has fallen, lend a hand up...if you see them going in a wrong direction, point the way home...because that is where the place is, where there is Love....and that points the way to, our greatest, wisest decisions, that create a peaceful, happy existence. Your wisdom rests in always making those decisions, in Love, to promote Love, and in doing so, we are all raised together. Now that can't be THAT hard, can it? I guess it's like a matter of 'free will'.... Speaking of which, I was asked one time if I believed in 'free will'... .. "Do we have a choice?" Now, off for a late night/early morning practice session. G'Night, GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Jul 13 - 08:48 AM Metropolitan Police are investigating a Saturday morning assault and robbery as a hate crime. Police said a 28-year-old man from Bethesda, Md., was attacked in the 1700 block of Euclid Street NW in D.C.'s Adams Morgan neighborhood. The victim said he was approached by three black men who kicked and punched him to the ground around 1:20 a.m. According the victim, one of the attackers yelled, "This is for Trayvon," during the assault. The victim suffered lacerations to the face from the attack. Police said the suspects took the man's wallet and iPhone. The police report lists the incident as "robbery force violence, hate bias incident." Trayvon Martin was shot and killed by George Zimmerman in February 2012 in Sanford, Fla. The verdict in the George Zimmerman trial sparked mixed reactions around the world after a jury of six women acquitted the former neighborhood watch volunteer in the shooting death of the unarmed black teenager. http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Police-Assault-Robbery-Investigated-as-Hate-Bias-217299901.html "The victim said he was approached by three black men who kicked and punched him to the ground around 1:20 a.m." Well, according to "SS"Bobert, this is normal greetings, and nothing to get upset about. Why are they even trying to charge the assailants????? After all, the victim was white- he must have been a racist, like Bobert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 29 Jul 13 - 09:12 AM ""It sounds like you are agreeing with the original officers, who weren't going to charge him at all!!"" That is a pretty vile misrepresentation, when what I said was that, not only the officers, but the prosecution and the judge, in fact all the law agencies concerned were actively seeking acquittal. If they weren't protecting the "white"(ish) man from punishment for kllng a n****r, what, would you suppose, was the logical basis for the general reluctance to try to convict, and why was Trayvon Martin's character not given the degree of protection so quickly and rigidly applied to Zimmerman's. If you were to tell me that the jury were given ALL relevant evidence in this case, I would have to call you a liar. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 29 Jul 13 - 09:59 AM So, GfinS, your new argument is that we should just move on because we are musicians??? Pathetic reasoning... No, that's where your are wronger than your usual wrong... As musicians we are charged to not move on... It is our job to tell the truth against bigotry, racism and hate... You can write sticky sweet love songs all you want but most musicians I know are trying to think a little deeper and use their music to speak to injustice... "I Shall Not Be Moved"... Oh, that's right... You don't do no justice music... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 29 Jul 13 - 10:17 AM 29 Jul 13 - 08:48 AM And your point, BeardedBullshit? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Jul 13 - 10:22 AM GregF, You are the one woith the point- right under you pointy hatted sheet. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 29 Jul 13 - 10:28 AM As I thought, Beardy - just more of your usual horseshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Jul 13 - 10:38 AM Unlike Ubermensch Bobert, I do not accept calling people who are "Black, and Democrat" "a dumb ni**er", as you, greggie boy, have done. I guess Bobert only sees the KKK when someone disagrees with him,. Maybe his own sheet is hiding the truth and reality from him. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 29 Jul 13 - 11:06 AM Z got out of a car and followed M. Why? Because M looked like "one of them". Young, black, in a hoodie, in a white neighbourhood. Fact. Whatever the judge admitted. Z then initiated a confrontation. "What are you doing here". He could have said "Neighbourhood watch, can I help you". But he didn't. At that point M reasonably apprehended an assault. He became entitled to use reasonable force to defend himself. He did. There is no evidence at all that he intended to do more than incapacitate Z in order to prevent the reasonably feared assault. Z shot M while M was exercising his right to self defence. Z's assault, under Florida law, was a misdemeanour not a felony. It looked to me VERY like the usual definition (I have not got to the bottom of the Florida law here) of "unlawful-act-manslaughter". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 29 Jul 13 - 12:07 PM Repetitive name-calling. Please discontinue thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 29 Jul 13 - 12:22 PM Repetitive? Who me? Yikes! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Jul 13 - 12:28 PM THIS must be why Ubermensch Bobert says I am KKK: From: beardedbruce - PM Date: 18 Jul 13 - 12:50 PM Based on the trial, an the evidence presented, I have made a conclusion- Others here are making their conclusions based on what they think could have happened, without regard to the presented evidence. Was the evidence false? The prosecution did not make an effort to prove that. Was there racial profiling- Not according to the presented transcripts of 911 call, interviews, or testimony. The presumption of innocence is a part of our system of justice- there was nothing presented that would lead a reasonable person to think that Zimmerman was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. SHOULD he have been convicted of manslaughter? I suspect the prosecution COULD have made a good case for that, but the POLITICAL decision was made to go for 2nd degree murder. THAT is why Zimmerman got off without punishment. And wWHY did they go for murder when manslaughter would have given as long or longer a sentence? BECAUSE the racists and "liberals" were demanding it- so it becomes their fault Zimmerman walks. If it had been done according to the law, with full disclosure, and a Grand Jury, the charge would have been manslaughter at worst, and the jury may well have decided for that, if the prosecution had presented the evidence for it. But in the attempt to meet the "court of public opinion" the state threw that away. And every young black male being arrested and charged in these "demonstrations " is bearing the price of the "liberal" media and the racists that demanded a murder charge. A pity that Bobert cannot even take responsibility for the harm that his hate-mongering contributes to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 29 Jul 13 - 01:07 PM Richrad, Getting to the bottom of stand-your-ground laws ain't going to be all that pretty... Think of them as "night soil"... The absolute worst of what mankind has to offer written to appease the NRA and Redneck Nation... This is all politics... The Republicans don't give a flying fuck about guns and abortion but they need votes so they gin up these emotional issues to rile up their base... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 29 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM GfS, that was really, really beautiful. You're a good dude man. The best. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 29 Jul 13 - 03:27 PM Things are pretty cool around here now, but in my neighborhood a few years ago there was a rash of break-ins and car-prowls, plus a couple of muggings. One day I was going down the street of the local business district and coming the other way were two young people, one a young woman, and the other, a young black man. They both wore yellow T-shirts with a logo on them. "Neighborhood Watch." I was hardly doing anything of a suspicious nature—in fact, I was tooling off to a local drug store in my electric wheelchair. As we were about to pass each other, we greeted each other, then stopped and chatted for a few minutes. They just wanted to introduce themselves. There was nothing threatening about them. No challenges, like, "What are you doing here!?" We talked for a few minutes quite pleasantly. They mentioned that, due to the epidemic of car-prowls and muggings, several people in the neighborhood had gotten together and started a neighborhood watch program, calling for volunteers who would be willing to patrol the neighborhood at any time of the day or night. They were to travel in pairs, and each pair had an assigned time and area. And they would be easily identified by the yellow T-shirts. And they were not to go armed! Although as voluteers, the group that initiated the neighborhood watch had called for relatively young, fit people who, preferably, had some knowledge of martial arts. As I say, we chatted amicably, they just wanted to introduce themselves, and we parted with a smile and a wave. They continued their rounds and I went on to do my errand at the local pharmacy. This is a fairly civilized area of the country. Don Firth P. S. Considering the misinformation and bigotry that Beardedbruce and Songwronger spread, they have a lot to answer for. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 29 Jul 13 - 04:09 PM Southern folks are good at two things, Don: 1. What the late Son House referred to as "grinnin' in your face" which is a phony baloney way of acting as if they like you when they'd rather kill you... And... ...2. Short tempers... Not a good combination... Of course, I am not saying that "all Southerners" are like that but these two traits do seem to be part of the Southern culture... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 29 Jul 13 - 04:09 PM And by the way, at least one of the pair had to have a cell phone, with which to call the police if they saw something suspicious. And they were told not to confront anyone unless they came upon a mugging in progress. Hence, in the event of the latter, the preference for people with some knowledge of martial arts. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 30 Jul 13 - 07:56 AM "P. S. Considering the misinformation and bigotry that Beardedbruce and Songwronger spread, they have a lot to answer for." WHAT misinformation? Please give some example of what you call misinformation- i have posted facts, unlike most here. If you don't like the logical result of those facts, that is YOUR problem, that YOU have to answer for. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 30 Jul 13 - 08:02 AM Oh, you mean the bigotry of saying that the prosecution should have to obey the law in a trial? Or that the evidence presented at the trial has to prove guilt to get a guilty verdict? Or that the evidence presented BY THE PROSECUTION would lead a reasonable person to believe that Martin threw the first punch? Or that the only racism shown has been that of Ubermensch Bobert and his group of sycophants, who judge guilt solely on the basis of skin color? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 30 Jul 13 - 10:46 AM You know what Bruce? I'm just going to ignore you. Bobert, Don and Greg: So we are people with common sense and we know what happened. George Zimmerman stalked, pursued and tried to take down Trayvon Martin. It didn't work out as GZ planned. So he took his life. Bobert, I completely understand what you saud about that Southern grinning. Did you see that shit eating grin on John Good's face as he basically lied on the stand? I sure did. The question is, what are we going to do about it now? In light of that terrible trial and verdict which put Trayvon Martin in a negative light instead of the defendant? Here's what I have done and you should do this too. Send an email to your Attorney General. Make it as compelling as possible. Make it short and sweet, it's the voices that count. Tell him that just because he is part Afro-American himself is not a reason to retreat. Tell him this is a Abraham Lincoln moment, an LBJ moment, a time in history for a great man to show himself. And pay not attention to bearded bullshit. He's a troll. He's just here to upset you. You know you're right- and so does he. Trust me on this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 30 Jul 13 - 11:09 AM And please excuse the typos. I am not a proof reader. I am a writer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 30 Jul 13 - 11:26 AM Q - visit the real world some time. You don't have to be black to see how racism works. You only have to open your eyes. I see it all the time with my girlfriend. If we go, say, to a North African restaurant people expect her to pick the menu. But she was born and bred in England, and raised in South London by her mother who is of Irish/Cockney background and heritage. She got so fed up with the assumptions about who she was that she has "Made in England" tattooed on the back of her neck. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 30 Jul 13 - 11:50 AM THE LIBERAL VIEW: "You know what Bruce? I'm just going to ignore you. ... So we are people with common sense and we know what happened." Sounds just like the KKK after they lynch someone- THEY know what happened, too, regardless of any inconvenient facts or evidence, and were willing to insure "justice" regardless of the courts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 30 Jul 13 - 12:05 PM Well, SJL... I already write a ton of letters and will continue to do so... There is going to be a national protest - I believe on August 28th - in every major city... Just as I did during the Occupy movement I'll be there with my 5 gallon paint pail, drumstick and appropriate sign on my back... This ain't over by a long shot... The KKK used say, "Nothing to see here, move along" after one of their lynching parties... To me that is exactly what we are hearing from the usual white suspects here when they say, "The trial is over. Zimmerman is innocent. Time to move on."... No, it's not time to move on... It's time to get this thing right... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 30 Jul 13 - 01:09 PM I said I would no longer post below the line. but allegations about what I believe were made that are defamatory. I do not support nor believe that racism should be a factor in society. Of course racism exists. It exists in all cultures. Murder based on race is killing many in Uganda, Congo, Kenya and elsewhere. People in all many societies cleave to "their own," those who share their values if not the racial-cultural pattern they were raised with. The killing in Mali, Nigeria, etc. is based on religion but race is a factor. Anyone who knows the history of Ireland cannot ignore the social separation of the Catholics and the Protestant segments of the population in Northern Ireland. Race is an un-admitted element here too. The UK has received immigrants of many races, and a good deal of integration has taken place. But social integration is still limited, and will remain so for some time to come. In Japan, mixed race, Korean and southeast Asians are not accepted socially and suffer discrimination in the workplace. Mixed white-Japanese families are not accepted by many Japanese. South Africa is a great experiment, attempting to achieve equality of opportunity. This throws the different groups together, and social acceptance is developing. Divides remain. Here in Calgary, there is little social acceptance of the Indians whose reservation borders the city. Calgary has over 20 percent visible minorities. Acceptance socially is growing, but many prefer their own neighborhoods, with cultures they have brought with them. Calgary has an excellent mayor, who happens to be a Muslim; he and others in the business, professional and political fields are building bridges socially. I have been accused of racism because of opinions I have expressed. What did I say? I believe that the result of the Zimmerman trial was the only one possible, given the evidence presented in the trial and the laws of the state of Florida. Nowhere did I say that I approve of the system or that white is right. But it is up to the people of the state of Florida to change the system and its perception, which is unlikely at present because of the great wave of resentment build up because of decreased income and insurance changes which are blamed on the federal administration and Obama (not deserved but perceived). The acceptance of Tea principles, hare-brained as they are, is based on resentment of many kinds. I commented on the fight for equality carried on by King, his predecessors, and the Black people of the South. I am glad of the progress that has been made, and hope for more. The federal government and the courts made changes in law, and sent marshals to see that the changes were carried out. These advances affected much of the country, not just the South. The accusation of racism perhaps stems mostly from my remark that outsiders, the white Freedom Riders especially, created resentment in the South. This many years later it is still resented. The sit-ins, marches and efforts of the Black community and progressive southern whites towards equality generated opposition but not resentment. Many white citizens in the South agreed that the move to equality was necessary, and gave their support. Many Blacks have been accepted in business and the political and policing fields. Discrimination remains, but is cannot be overcome overnight. Nowhere did I say that I am or was against the moves to equality; I agree that they were absolutely necessary. The sacrifices made by members of the Black community and their southern supporters were important and must be remembered. I did question the influence of outsiders in achieving the advances that have been made. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 30 Jul 13 - 02:28 PM but allegations about what I believe were made that are defamatory. Just as you did to me, Q, and now YOU'RE whining? Gimmie a fuckin' break, will ya? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 30 Jul 13 - 02:30 PM What Bobert considers fair rules: "Also, when people make up stuff that they claim other people have said and then argue with the made up stuff it gets pretty old fast... Plus, it is dishonest... Also, if I present an position and you challenge me on it, fine... If in my response I ask direct questions to someone who has challenged me and they refuse to answer them then that is also dishonest..." Yet he does not follow them himself- another example of the Ubermensch . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 30 Jul 13 - 02:32 PM I did question the influence of outsiders in achieving the advances that have been made. Dam right, Q! Its them infernal OUTSIDE AGITATORS who screwed things up, as Tom Paxton reminded us: We didn't know", said the congregation, singing a hymn in their church of White "Press was full of lies about us, preacher told us we were right." "The outside agitators came, they burned some churches and put the blame "On decent southern people's names to set our Colored people aflame" "And maybe some of our boys got hot and a couple of Nigras and Reds got shot" "They should have stayed where they belonged!""The preacher would have told us if we'd done wrong." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 30 Jul 13 - 02:43 PM Speaking of outsiders... A lot of the laws that states are implementing are being pushed by: 1. Candidates whose campaigns were financed by outside money 2. Ad campaigns for or against policies by outside money Why have the Koch brothers and the buddies poured so much of their money into North Carolina??? They don't live here or own businesses here... Talk about outsiders... These rich people are pouring tens of million$$$ into buying up other folks statehouses... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 30 Jul 13 - 10:17 PM That's great Bobert that you plan to demonstrate on the 28th. I should find out if anything is planned in my area. This is rather unfortunate: http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/07/22/204595068/polls-show-wide-rac I have a couple of ideas on this: 1.) The poll reflects a general lack of community. In our society it's every man for himself. It makes it very easy for those who are less affected by what happened to Trayvon Martin to be in denial. If they are not directly impacted, then oh well. Sad. 2.) The percentage of white people who feel that this has been a travesty of justice most likely includes many young people. My son's generation is not racist (N.Y.) So race relations are bound to improve in the future. It's just a matter of time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 31 Jul 13 - 02:06 AM SJL: "1.) The poll reflects a general lack of community. In our society it's every man for himself. It makes it very easy for those who are less affected by what happened to Trayvon Martin to be in denial.." The lack of community comes from so many people who have latched on to this, not because of genuine concern for their fellow man, but a political NOTION, which is being fed by whatever slant of the story they wish to believe, or even MAKE UP, and the FACTS they persevere to ignore, and then fan their need to feel relevant, on the wandering weak! All one has to do, is scroll back through this thread, and see that what I just said is absolutely true. This isn't about justice, this isn't about 'righting a wrong', this isn't about ending racism or bigotry....it's about opportunists, needing to FEEL important, taking a stand, based on the exploitation of feelings, pumped up by ignorance, and lies.After reviewing a LOT of this thread, there is no other rational conclusion. It seems to go straight down 'party' lines...and from what I've seen, BOTH the parties have more to do with corruption, justifying it, and rallying people emotionally to 'their cause'. Truth is, there is no 'cause'... ...as for me, I'm not with either party..frankly I'm ashamed at both of them! Both the parties are just trying to suck people into their bullshit. Only racists and bigots relate to any of this contrived bullshit...I'm clear. ...or as I've said before, 'I'm not with the party..I'm with the band!' You guys NEED hate, whether it be in yourselves, or what you can stir up in others....as for me, you've FAILED to stir any of it up in me. The bullshit is to easy to see, and to see that this is all where it's coming from. Absolutely pathetic....you've proudly shown what it is to be small! GfS P.S. My prior post was going to be my last on this thread...maybe altogether...'common sense' has no place in your politics! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 31 Jul 13 - 05:23 AM Oh, FFS, please go back wherever you came from. Planet Zog was it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 13 - 08:10 AM No wonder Ubermensch Bobert hates the NRA so much... "The National Rifle Association was started, founded by religious leaders who wanted to protect free slaves from the Ku Klux Klan," said Alford. "They would raise money, buy arms, show the free slaves how to use those arms and protect their families. God bless you. Many of us probably wouldn't be here today if it wasn't for the NRA" he said. http://www.nationalbcc.org/index.php?view=article&id=1681%3Apresidentceo-harry-c-alford-praises-the-national-rifle-association&o |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 Jul 13 - 08:38 AM There is no dispute that an armed Zimmerman stalked and killed Martin... So what do we have??? Loopholes, i.e. stupid laws that allow people to get away with murder... In "stand your ground" states I can murder you and get away with it... I just need to do it where there are no witnesses... I shoot you and then claim that I was fearful that you might harm me... Bang, bang, you're dead... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 13 - 08:42 AM "There is no dispute that an armed Zimmerman stalked and killed Martin..." Except by everyone that disagrees with Ubermensch Bobert. Another Bobert "fact"- ( restated lie) The "stalking" is in the minds of the bigot and racists, who project what THEY would do onto Zimmerman. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Huest from Sanity Date: 31 Jul 13 - 08:52 AM Robot: "So what do we have??? Loopholes, i.e. stupid laws that allow people to get away with murder..." So what do we have??? Loopholes, i.e. stupid people that allow laws to get away with murder... So either change them, or shut the fuck up! ...and by the way, is it 'murder' if it is 'within the law'? THAT is what the jury had to decide. Stupid law??..maybe...but GZ thought that he was within the law..the jury thought the same thing....and maybe we ALL think that the trigger shouldn't have been pulled...maybe we all should think that Martin had no right to be beating him up, either. Like I said, a chain of stupid decisions...and failure to see that, is just still more stupidity! So go beat your pail and march around...as long as you don't open your mouth, you won't sound as stupid as you'll look! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jul 13 - 09:02 AM "The National Rifle Association was started, founded by religious leaders who wanted to protect free slaves from the Ku Klux Klan," Absolute, total, and utter bullshit. As would be expected from BullshitBruce. See: http://www.nrahq.org/history.asp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 13 - 09:13 AM So, GregF believes that blacks are liars, since this is a quote" from one, as the supporting clicky says. Nothing in the NRA site says this is NOT true- but it was more important to the blacks affected than to the NRA- ONE aspect of 2nd amendment rights is to provide for the self-defense of all citizens. But GregF is one of those that Ubermensch Bobert would complain about- if he did not support Bobert's "World View" that everyone who disagrees with him is a racist, and everyone who agrees with him is above criticism. GregF distorts postings, and makes unsupported comments, calling things shit when the shit is in his own understanding of reality. Yet most "liberals" here have no problem with that, and support him and his attacks on people rather than the discuss the facts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 Jul 13 - 09:25 AM You are so ignorant of the real world, GfinS, that it is pathetic... We progressives have done what we can to bring about saner policies and laws... I've been arrested... I've been harassed... I've been assaulted... I've even been fired from a job because... ...unlike folks like you who sit on their lazy asses and tell real people who have walked the walk to "shut the fuck up" I'm doing what I can... You are approaching a point where - like the other irrational person here - where I will just ignore your moronic postings... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 13 - 09:38 AM And Ubermensch Bobert demonstrates his perfection of the "Liberal Method" Ignore anything that you disagree with, and then "everyone" agrees with you and you can claim to be right. Far better than looking at the facts and trying to understand what really happened. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jul 13 - 10:29 AM So, GregF believes that blacks are liars, Even more idiotic than usual, BullshBruce. What I KNOW ( not believe ) is that the gentleman is ignorant of the facts, misinformed, or lying. You, on the other hand, are either ignorantly or intentionally (with the probability favoring the latter) repeating a falsehood. Bottom line is the statement is simply not true. Plenty more evidence, and at some length is available, about the truth of the formation of the NRA. Lets see you post something- other than the gent's statement - that supports his assertion. As for YOUR assertions, they are, as per usual, pure horseshit. (Suggestion: look up the second form of the ignorance fallacy) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 31 Jul 13 - 10:30 AM Glad to see the Trayvon Martin Memorial Thread is still extant. Of course, I don't read it anymore. Bad for my blood pressure. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 31 Jul 13 - 12:07 PM GfS, I share your distaste for the divisive and exploitative nature of politics, however this case is about more than that. To say that it is only about politics distances one from very real pain surrounding this case. I think the difference between you and me is that you seem to be able to use your mode of reasoning to insulate yourself from that pain whereas it's my nature to feel it. My boyfriend is the same way. His oft repeated phrase: "You can't let it eat you up, hon." Not everything bothers me this much, but I've lost a lot of blood over this one. What has really hurt me about this case is what I perceive to be, in the pro-Zimmerman camp, an utter disregard for Trayvon Martin's humanity, that of his family and for Afro-American people in general. Zimmerman himself has shown no remorse whatsoever. That's the sign of a calculating, manipulative liar with no real conscience, and if you asked me, it betrays his ill intent. All the inconvenient facts about Zimmerman's history: his sexual abuse of a cousin, his domestic abuse, his assault on a police officer, his constant 911 calls over trivia, his lying to the court about his finances, his self-appointed status as Neighborhood Watch captain and obsession with doing police work, his instigation and escalation of the incident - of these things were essentially swept under the rug in favor of making the point that there was no racism involved. Trayvon Martin was put on trial to accomplish this and just below the surface of all that, is the very real and very racist assumption that Trayvon Martin deserved to die. It's that grinning in your face thing. Let's just pretend, shall we? I look at the people in the pro-Zimmerman camp as people without an appropriate sense of decency. I feel like saying to them, "It's painfully obvious to me that it is more important to you to promote the lie that none of this has been about race and to establish that with an acquittal than it is for you to feel for your fellow man. In fact, in order to avoid feeling for your fellow man, you have made him less than human. Before I become anything like you, I'll take more pain." Human beings have emotions. We are designed that way. The idea that emotions necessarily blind one to facts and truth is a very white idea that I have never ascribed to. Many times emotion is what allows you to cut through flimsy and far flung rationalizations, to interpret facts correctly and arrive at the truth. When slavery was in place, there were rational arguments galore as to why the status quo should proceed unimpeded, but in the final analysis it was human empathy that finally put an end to it. All that emotion. That said GfS, I would not relegate you to the pro-Zimmerman camp. I have heard you rant against what you perceive as a dogmatic adherence to an emotionally charged and highly politicized viewpoint. I have not heard you say that you believe what George Zimmerman did was right. On the other hand, I think your philosophical take on things is a bit of a distancing mechanism. You could stand to feel a little of this pain. Are you sure you won't have some? There's plenty to go around. Help yourself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 31 Jul 13 - 12:35 PM I don't think this needs much comment. It speaks for itself. Florida Cops Shoot Unarmed Black Man in His Mother's DrivewayPolicemen with their guns out and aimed at Middleton claiming they opened fire on Middleton because they thought he was "attacking them." Sound familiar? (Great shooting, by the way!) Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 13 - 12:36 PM "NRA History The NRA was founded shortly after the American Civil War by Union Army officers who were appalled by the lack of shooting skills among the Union soldiers during the war and determined to correct this problem by encouraging the shooting sports and marksmanship among the general population, including former slaves in the former slave states. This made the NRA very unpopular in the former slaves states and the NRA was considered an enemy by the Ku Klux Klan. Union Army Col. William C. Church and Gen. George Wingate are the officially listed founders of the NRA. They were granted a charter from the state of New York on November 17, 1871. The first NRA president was Ambrose E. Burnside, a commander of the Army of the Potomac. Former US President Ulysses S. Grant, who had enacted the 1871 law declaring the Ku Klux Klan to be an illegal terrorist organisation, was elected president of the National Rifle Association in 1883. Nine of the NRA's first ten presidents had fought against slavery during the Civil War. Including: Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock, Gen. Phillip Sheridan. During Reconstruction, Gen. Sheridan removed hundreds of local officials from office in Louisiana and Texas for violating the rights of former slaves and for failing to enforce laws for their protection." http://www.fact-index.com/n/na/national_rifle_association.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 31 Jul 13 - 12:42 PM Guest at 10:30 a.m. was me, sans cookie. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 Jul 13 - 01:03 PM Nice post, SJL... I agree that the pro-Zimmerman camp comes off as not only racist but not capable of empathy toward Trayvon and his family... I don't know where you live or how old you are but I came up the 50s in the South... I have witnessed first hand the hate that way too many white people had and continue to have of black people... Unfortunately, this hatred goes way back and has been passed down from generation to generation... I'm old enough to remember the civil rights workers who were murdered back then... More recently 5 civil rights demonstrators were gunned down in Greensboro, NC in 1979 and no arrests were made... These people had mothers and fathers... Sisters, brothers, kids of their own... That is the real tragedy here that we still have pockets of rampant racism here in America... No, its not just the South but seems the South has more than its share... This idea that the jury has spoken and we need to get over it is unAmerican... It's not what our country should be about because if we allow anyone to be oppressed then we are all in danger of being oppressed... This needs to get solved... We either value life or we don't... It's that simple... If we don't value the lives of black people than why should we value the life of anyone??? That's the issue here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jul 13 - 01:37 PM ... the NRA was considered an enemy by the Ku Klux Klan. Please supply evidence of the truth of this statement, BlogoShit Bruce. Your "source" is a condensed article from Blog-O-Pedia, so is not a source at all. AND it doesn't address the original BullshitBruce posting that The National Rifle Association was started, founded by religious leaders who wanted to protect free slaves from the Ku Klux Klan. except between the lines where it tends to DISPROVE your bullshit. As usual, another steaming load of 14-karat horseshit. But thanks for playing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 13 - 02:03 PM "Please supply evidence of the truth of this statement, BlogoShit Bruce." I have no need to further prove it- You claim it is BS, please prove that of shut the fuck up. Y"our "source" is a condensed article from Blog-O-Pedia, so is not a source at all." So I can disallow all uses of such by you and those you support? That leaves you exactly --- NOTHING to back up your claims. "AND it doesn't address the original BullshitBruce posting that A quote I posted- take it up with the black who wrote it. It is HIS opinion-which I consider as valid ( or more so ) as your. "The National Rifle Association was started, founded by religious leaders who wanted to protect free slaves from the Ku Klux Klan." That is what the posted section says- the people who founded the NRA had fought to end slavery, had acted to protect free slaves, and were hated by your friends the KKK because they supported arming blacks. Not their primary purpose, but part of the mindset of those founders. "except between the lines where it tends to DISPROVE your bullshit." How so, SFB? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 31 Jul 13 - 02:08 PM Not only is the hatred, but in some cases the level of the hatred is downright appalling. I live in the Pacific Northwest (the opposite corner of the country from the South), not particularly known for its racial prejudice. A substantial percentage of Seattle's population, and of cities in the surrounding area, is a patchwork quilt of Asian and Black, along with a fair number of Native Americans. And we all live together and work together. But every now and then. . . . When I was going shooting with the fellow I've mentioned (the one who turned out to be a bit more trigger-happy than I felt it was safe to be around), another guy showed up at some of our "powder-burning" sessions. He favored a Ruger Super-Blackhawk .44 magnum, the most powerful handgun made—looks like an old fashioned six-shooter, but a real handful (he let me shoot a few rounds with it, and it was like firing a hand-held volcano!). He was from the South (I don't know which state) and he had a real "corn pone and chittlin's" accent. He also had a dog, a black Labrador, which he had named "Jigaboo," a disparaging Southern racial epithet for Blacks. One time when about four of us were plinking in an area with a good backstop (good place for it), a middle-age black man showed up to a little shooting, and this guy from the South was suddenly on edge. The only thing different about this man from the other people who were there was that he was Black. But the Southerner left off his target shooting and spent all of his time staring at the Black man and fondling his Ruger. It was patently obvious what was on his mind! There was absolutely nothing untoward about the Black man, he was quite polite and friendly. What he inspired in the Southerner was not fear, but unadulterated hatred, and what had all the symptoms of an urge to kill. In the Fifties, I knew several Black jazz musicians who hung out in The Chalet, a University District coffee house and sometimes had jam sessions in the evenings. The jazz combos were generally racially mixed, and although I was just getting into folk singing at the time, music was our common bond. I also worked at Boeing for a number of years, and one of my supervisors was Black. In fact, he and I often car-pooled to work. And at the telephone company, one of the supervisors there was a young Black man (he had a bit of an accent, and he told me that he was actually from Tonga). And one of the most beautiful women I have ever seen, in addition to being highly intelligent and a generally very nice person, was Rosetta, another co-worker with the phone company, who I often had coffee with And she was Black. When I encounter some people who hate other people for no good reason other than the melanin level in their skin, even to the extent sometimes that they want to kill them, I really wonder what in the hell is wrong with them!! Sick!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 Jul 13 - 02:08 PM I don't read his stuff anymore, Greg, but there was a time when the NRA was upstanding and not at all political... I remember those days... I was not only a member but part of a shoot club that competed against other clubs... Today, however, they both tend to attract the same kinds of people: white, pissed off and with poor-me-victim complexes... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jul 13 - 02:29 PM So, BeardedBullshit, you ADMIT that your posting was utter bullshit unsupported by fact, source, or reference. Thanks for your honesty. And you still haven't addressed the bullshit statement "The National Rifle Association was started, founded by religious leaders who wanted to protect free slaves from the Ku Klux Klan." As for your That is what the posted section ...[thru]...the mindset of those founders. is concerned, you really do need to take a course in logical fallacies. Comparing that to the original postings or the Blogoshit "article" falls into the class of "Therefore, Socrates is a fish." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jul 13 - 02:33 PM Hullo, Bobert- Me too. I'm fairly well up on NRA history; was a life member myself, joined circa 1963/4, shot in matches, all that jive. Sent my membership card back in & told them to shove it about the same time George H.W. Bush did [ but I did it first ;>) ]- one of the few decent things he did as President. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 31 Jul 13 - 02:36 PM Yeah, Bobert, I too was a member of the NRA for a few years. But after awhile, some of their articles in "The American Rifleman" and the various "alert" type bulletins they sent me got so far out that I let my membership lapse. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 13 - 02:38 PM "So, BeardedBullshit, you ADMIT that your posting was utter bullshit unsupported by fact, source, or reference. Thanks for your honesty." Not at all, Greggie boy. I have stated the absolute truth- you are shit. You are a proven racist, by your own posts. You and the Ubermensch attack people rather than discuss facts. The NRA was founded by people who DID help arm freed slaves, as my post said- The BLACK gentleman stated that " The National Rifle Association was started, founded by religious leaders who wanted to protect free slaves from the Ku Klux Klan. I do not know about the religious part, but they did want to arm freed slaves, and acted to demonstrate it. What part is BS, other than the bigotry you have in your own heart? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jul 13 - 03:03 PM No, sorry, BeardyBruceShit, The NRA as had nothing to do with the arming of freed slaves. Now, perhaps some of the individuals in the organization did, which would not be at all surprising, since they were Union Army veterans and Yankees. Duh. Go back to that logic course again: Correlation does not imply causation. And as Bill Nye reatedly admonished: Extroadinary claims (like yours) require extraordinary proof. I'm waiting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jul 13 - 03:05 PM Oh, and BullshitBruce: I'll be happy to engage in a discussion of facts just so soon as you post one or more, instead of the usual horseshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 13 - 03:30 PM The NRA was founded shortly after the American Civil War by Union Army officers who were appalled by the lack of shooting skills among the Union soldiers during the war and determined to correct this problem by encouraging the shooting sports and marksmanship among the general population, including former slaves in the former slave states. This made the NRA very unpopular in the former slaves states and the NRA was considered an enemy by the Ku Klux Klan. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 13 - 03:34 PM "Oh, and BullshitBruce: I'll be happy to engage in a discussion of facts just so soon as you post one or more, instead of the usual horseshit." Since you state what I post is shit, without any backup, proof, or even hint of why other than you don't agree with it, I fail to see how you could engage in a discussion of facts- you have not presented ANY, either in support of your viewpoint, or in opposition to mine. That is YOUR usual horseshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 31 Jul 13 - 03:38 PM Founding and purpose of the National Rifle Association: The National Rifle Association was first chartered in the state of New York on November 17, 1871 by Army and Navy Journal editor William Conant Church and General George Wood Wingate. Its first president was Civil War General Ambrose Burnside, who had worked as a Rhode Island gunsmith, and Wingate was the original secretary of the organization. Church succeeded Burnside as president in the following year.Further, The NRA formed a legislative affairs division in response to debate concerning passage of the 1934 National Firearms Act, some of the earliest federal gun control legislation in the United States. The NRA supported the act, along with the Gun Control Act of 1968. The two acts collectively created a system to license gun dealers and prohibit criminals and those with mental impairments from owning firearms.Which they are now, apparently, trying to gut! As to the protection of Black citizens against the KKK: While African Americans were being terrorized by the Ku Klux Klan, where the Klan were sometimes aided by local law enforcement, the NRA setup charters to help train local African American communities to be able to protect themselves. The most prominent case being in 1960 in Monroe, N.C. where the local National Association for the Advancement of Colored People head, Robert Williams, also chartered an NRA Rifle Club that successully defended an assault on one of their leader's homes by the KKK without casualties.Nowhere in the history of the organization do I find anything about the NRA being formed to protect Black citizens from the KKK. The only relationship I found was referred to in the last paragraph above, in which a chapter of the NRA was initiated for the purpose by the head of the NAACP. Long, long after the initial organization of the NRA in 1871, inspired by the poor marksmanship of the vast majority of Union soldiers. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jul 13 - 03:39 PM Yeah, so what, BlogoshitBruce? It was crap from a blog first time round & now you're repeating yourself and going around in circles, and its still unsubstantiated horseshit. Sez nothing whatsoever about the NRA "arming freed slaves". You can't verify horsseshit with yet more horseshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 31 Jul 13 - 04:04 PM AS I STATED, for those with reading comprehension problems: The NRA was FORMED for various reasons. The effect was The NRA was founded shortly after the American Civil War by Union Army officers who were appalled by the lack of shooting skills among the Union soldiers during the war and determined to correct this problem by encouraging the shooting sports and marksmanship among the general population, including former slaves in the former slave states. This made the NRA very unpopular in the former slaves states and the NRA was considered an enemy by the Ku Klux Klan. The Black gentleman said: "The National Rifle Association was started, founded by religious leaders who wanted to protect free slaves from the Ku Klux Klan," said Alford. "They would raise money, buy arms, show the free slaves how to use those arms and protect their families. God bless you. Many of us probably wouldn't be here today if it wasn't for the NRA" he said. I don't know the religious views of those founders, but what he said was correct- they wanted to protect free slaves, as witness their actions post-war. ** I ** never claimed it was their primary or only reason. They probaly wanted to eat fresh meat and not waste ammunition, as well- but the Black gentleman seems to think it was a significant improvement over the previous situation. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 31 Jul 13 - 04:24 PM My my!! Did you teach Fred Astaire how to tap-dance, Beardedbruce? That was pretty spectacular!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: KB in Iowa Date: 31 Jul 13 - 04:58 PM The Black gentleman said How can any of you question evidence like this? If the Black gentleman said it then I believe it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jul 13 - 05:01 PM And yet more horseshit from SquirmingBullshitBruce. As usual. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 31 Jul 13 - 05:11 PM George Zimmerman armed with gun during traffic stop in Texas By Eric W. Dolan Wednesday, July 31, 2013 16:25 EDT George Zimmerman was stopped in Forney, Texas over the weekend for speeding and told police he was armed, according to CBS 11 News. Zimmerman, who was recently acquitted after killing Florida teenager Trayvon Martin, was pulled over on July 28 around noon. He said he was heading "nowhere in particular." He told officers that he was armed. The officer instructed him to put his gun in the glove compartment. The officer gave Zimmerman a warning after running a background check. Zimmerman reportedly asked the officer if he recognized him, but the officer did not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 Jul 13 - 05:21 PM It doesn't surprise me that Zimmerman asked if the officer recognized him... Zimmerman sees himself as some super-hero to Redneck Nation and, unfortunately, a lot of cops relate well with Redneck Nation... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jul 13 - 05:23 PM "asked the officer if he recognized him"???? Zimmerman apparently thinks he's some sort of freakin' Hollywood celebrity hero instead of a murdering racist piece of crap. Imagine my surprise. Tic-Tock, Zimmerman......... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 31 Jul 13 - 05:25 PM Ooops - we cross-posted, Bobert. But I think the point deserves repeating. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 Jul 13 - 07:22 PM Yeah, Greg... Zimmerman has no remorse for murdering Trayvon Martin... Quite the contrary... He probably would love to put a notch on 9 mm... He is a creepy person and I can't wait for his bad karma to kick his smug ass... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 31 Jul 13 - 07:29 PM This latest incident of the black man who was shot by deputies in his mother's driveway certainly does sound familiar. Now the deputies say they told him "multiple times" to show his hands but he "spun around and lunged toward them." So, if everything goes according to script, here is what will happen next: The police report will prevail as the official report of the incident. They will find some way to discredit this black man, find something to destroy his credibility with in order to insure that the police report stands. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 Jul 13 - 07:58 PM Normal, SJL... This has been going on ever since the end of Reconstruction in 1876... It's called the Jim Crow era and, unfortunately, it isn't over... Not only that but with the rise of the Tea Klux Klan it is on the rise... The Southern Poverty Law Center tracks white supremacists groups and reports an increase of 800% of them since Obama was elected in 2008... That's a lot of very pissed off white people... The murder of Trayvon Martin may be a symbol but his killing is just the tip of the iceberg... Here's my wish... I wish that every white person had to live as an African-American for just one month... That's all it would take and we'd move past all this... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 01 Aug 13 - 03:26 AM http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/07/29/2372931/florida-police-shot-unarmed-man-shot-in-driveway-of-his-mothers-home-it-was- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Richard Bridge Date: 01 Aug 13 - 03:32 AM More on the dangers of being black: - http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/07/30/2384751/court-clerk-fired-for-helping-secure-dna-test-that-proved-a-mans-innocence/ http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/07/29/2370971/new-york-mayoral-candidate-stop-and-frisks-institutionalized-zimmerman-like- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 01 Aug 13 - 03:34 AM That would definitely work Bobert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: gnu Date: 24 Aug 13 - 01:31 PM Search complete, no record matches your search for File Number : 592012CF001083A CNN doesn't list the trial transcript either. Is this odd or standard practice in FLA? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 24 Aug 13 - 02:28 PM Bobert: "The murder of Trayvon Martin may be a symbol but his killing is just the tip of the iceberg..." On the north or south poles?? We can carry this on, in this thread, too. What did Zimmerman, Martin, the three murderers, who shot the Australian, and the two murderers of the 88 year old guy in Spokane have in common...more than race, being as there were a combination of different races or ethnicity. Take a 'wild' guess, all you 'smart guys'. Then we'll see who is making sense!..or even accurate.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 24 Aug 13 - 05:20 PM Wrong yet again, GfinS>>> There is no connection, other than murder itself... Try as you may, your reasoning is badly flawed and you are yet again trying to make chicken salad out of chicken shit... Give up... You really do sound racist, foolish, mentally challenged and/or all of the above... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 24 Aug 13 - 06:08 PM The murder of the 88 year-old man in Spokane was a robbery, not necessarily racially motivated. The black youths murdering the Australian jogger in Oklahoma was, apparently, racially motivated. The murder—yes, murder of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman was motivated by racism, because of Martin's color, and the fact that Zimmerman was simply trigger-happy and thought he could get away with it. The DIFFERENCE between these three cases is that the murderers of the man in Spokane and the man in Oklahoma will be made to pay for their crimes. They are black and the victims were white. George Zimmerman was exonerated, given his gun back, and set loose on the world again. His victim was black. He was white. Really, Goofball, you shouldn't let your mind wander like that. It's much too small to be let out on its own. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 24 Aug 13 - 06:41 PM Is this odd or standard practice in FLA? Is WHAT odd, gnu? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 24 Aug 13 - 07:39 PM One of you two: "George Zimmerman was exonerated, given his gun back, and set loose on the world again.." Blah blah blah.. You guys were ready to lynch Zimmerman even before the trial was over, so don't give me THAT shit...What did they all have in common?? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 24 Aug 13 - 07:55 PM No, GfinS... We were expecting a murderer to be convicted... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 24 Aug 13 - 08:13 PM What did they all have in common? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 24 Aug 13 - 08:20 PM Someone was murdered... That's is... No eye-for-an-eye that your rightie buds and you have tried to make this out to be... Get off this line of defense... It is repulsive... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 25 Aug 13 - 12:09 AM Two separate incidents in which black men murder a white man. The black men are tried and convicted, and have to pay the penalty. A white man murders a black teenager. The white man goes free. Simple enough for you, Goofball? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 25 Aug 13 - 09:49 AM Exactly... This right wing blog-o-poo that we now should get over the injustice of Zimmerman getting away with murdering an unarmed Trayvon Martin because three kids shot a white man has no logic whats so ever... But very little that come from these right wingers does... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: gnu Date: 25 Aug 13 - 05:02 PM I guess I have my answer. Nobody cares. Maybe that is part of the "problems" which are cited subsequently. Oh, and as for the post asking me what I was asking... if you can't understand it, no sense in me trying to explain it on accounta it was plain and simple. Sigh... yet again... gnightgnu. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Aug 13 - 02:57 AM Bobert and Firth's answers are wrong!..as posted on the other thread, dealing with this topic, all of these people had something in common, BEFORE the crimes went down....and these guys just can't figure it out, and if they were told, they'd be arguing about that, too!.. ....oh, and Bobert, EVERYBODY compared to you is a right winger...not because they actually are, but because you're so far out in left field, you ain't even in the park!....I think that you're across the parking lot standing alone on a pile of dog turds! Get some sense about you, man. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 26 Aug 13 - 08:48 AM on accounta it was plain and simple. GNOT, gnu. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Aug 13 - 09:01 AM Armed white adult stalks and shoots unarmed black teenager... Becomes hero to racists everywhere... The End B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Aug 13 - 09:06 AM Wrong again,Bobert. The court has ruled- it is OK to shoot someone who is trying to kill you, regardless of the color of their skin. But it seems like you judge everyone else by yourself- YOU seem to think it ok to kill someone JUST because of the color of their skin, regardless of their guilt or innocence. You have some memories of when you were a little cracker? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 12:43 PM There is no doubt that Zimmerman was stalking Martin, who had good reason to feel threatened. It's NOT okay for a black teenager to try to defend himself? And what a jury says in a community that has a long and lurid record of racism is not something I would accept as necessarily reflecting justice. ======= And apparently Goofball's thesis is that we have three incidents in which blacks attacked whites. Not true. In the Zimmerman/Martin incident, the white man initiated the confrontation, and the black teenager wound up dead. Is he confused? Just stupid? Or bigoted!? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Aug 13 - 01:21 PM Armed white guy stalks and murders unarmed black teenager and gets away with it... The End... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Aug 13 - 01:45 PM Wrong again,Bobert. The court has ruled- it is OK to shoot someone who is trying to kill you, regardless of the color of their skin. If I ask what you are doing in an area near my home, and you attack me and pound my head against the cement, I WILL TRY TO KILL OR DISABLE YOU. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 26 Aug 13 - 01:59 PM Armed white adult stalks and murders unarmed black teenager... Gets away with it and becomes hero to racists everywhere... The End... SSP~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 02:07 PM Tryvon Martin was in an area where he was staying and had as much right to be there as Zimmerman had. What right did Zimmerman have to challenge him, other than the fact that Martin was black? And AGAIN, I point out that the police told Zimmerman NOT to approach Martin, but he disobeyed and did it anyway. Zimmerman WANTED to shoot someone, a black teenager in a hoodie was an ideal target, and no one, he figured, would question him for it. After all, his target was a black teenager wearing a hoodie. Walking home from a convenience store armed a package of candy and a paper cup full of iced tea, he was obviously "up to no good!" Knowing the spirit of his racist community, he was right, and he got away with it. Okay, who's next!?? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Aug 13 - 02:19 PM Don F, Ever heard of a "Neighborhood Watch"?? Ever try to find out ANY facts before you post your "opinion" ( as told to you by whom?- you are not in agreement with the facts as presented in court) SSP, So you agree that knocking you down if you talked to me, and beating your head against concrete would just be a friendly greeting????? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 03:24 PM Beardedbruce, there is a Neighborhood Watch in many areas of Seattle, including my neighborhood. They wear sweatshirts or tee-shirts identifying them as such, they travel in pairs. And they don't go armed. The Seattle Police insist that they don't, and a Neighborhood Watch person carrying any kind of weapon is, ipso facto, in deep doo-doo with the police! Volunteers for the Neighborhood Watch teams are requested to have some knowledge of unarmed combat (judo, kung-fu, etc.). But--if there is any possible danger of such a confrontation, they are instructed to cell-phone the police, keep watch, and stay away from the suspicious person or persons. Yes, I know quite a bit about Neighborhood Watch. By the way, as to Zimmerman's question to Martin of "What are you doing here?", Martin was on his way back to where he was staying with his father, and was less than half a block from the house. The question could more appropriately be asked of Zimmerman, "What are you doing here?" Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 03:31 PM P. S. It is obvious that on the evening of Trayvon Martin's murder, George Zimmerman was on a hunting expedition. By the way, Zimmerman just bought himself what is called a "tactical shotgun." (Recent news story). Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Aug 13 - 03:37 PM Firth: "And apparently Goofball's thesis is that we have three incidents in which blacks attacked whites. Not true. In the Zimmerman/Martin incident, the white man initiated the confrontation, and the black teenager wound up dead." According to Don Firth, that is what I said, patently untrue AGAIN. That is NOT what I ever said!!! Knock it off! I said there is something that ALL those people had in common....that YOU can figure out, because of your 'higher intelligence'! Try again!..What did they all have in common, that contributed to their behavior??? ...and try not to twist the question, to something else not even related! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Aug 13 - 04:05 PM Don F: "What right did Zimmerman have to challenge him, other than the fact that Martin was black?" And Zimmerman stated that he saw "someone acting suspicious, WHEN HE CALLED IN ON HIS CELL PHONE. The OPERATOR asked whether the person was white or black, and Zimmerman hesitated, and then said he thought he was black. NOT the reason he was watching him. NOT the reason he stopped him and asked what he was doing there. YOU are making it about him being black- that makes YOU the racist. "Yes, I know quite a bit about Neighborhood Watch." Than you really are a scumbag, for not even trying to get to the truth. I am glad Seattle has those rules- BUT FLORIDA DOES NOT. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Aug 13 - 04:24 PM How many racists does it take to have a Klan rally here in the Catbox??? Looks like just the two usual suspects... Wonder if the dynamic duo are trying out how to burn a cross here to defend their hero, George "The Teen Murderer" Zimmerman??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 26 Aug 13 - 05:17 PM Welcome Back BlogoshitBruce. I see you're still vomiting the same gargage, though. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Aug 13 - 05:19 PM Some things never change, Greg... That's why I ignore him... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 05:20 PM "Scumbag?" Really, beardedbruce? You do have a way with words (you silver-tongued devil, you!). Feeling backed into a wall? Seattle is a quite civilized city. Too bad Florida seems to still be in the antebellum South. What Zimmerman said to the police dispatcher is not all that relevant. What Zimmerman saw (a black teenager in a hoodie) IS relevant. Spin it the way you want, BB, but it doesn't alter the fact that Zimmerman had gone hunting that night. ======= And Goofball, what do they all have in common? Aggression of one sort or another. A couple of black kids rob an 88 year-old white man. Robbery was the motive. A couple more black kids shoot a white jogger "for the fun of it." Simple wanton murder was the motive. And a white vigilante goes hunting, comes upon his quarry (a black teenager) and kills him. Wanting to shoot someone was the motive. All three were wanton murder. What the last two had in common was simple racism and a wanton disregard for human life. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Aug 13 - 05:40 PM Sorry guys, but the account BeardedBruce gave to you was indeed correct, court record, from the actual police report, and recorded phone messages. I know that some of you would LOVE to make it solely about race, because that's consistent with your political dispositions, even if the actual chain of events DON'T support your political predispositions....and I KNOW Don has problems with re-writing history to suit his fancy...but as I've told you Don before...'Go with the facts, and let the chips fall where they may'..if it supports your politics, fine, if not, take another look at your political stance..but don't go trying to re-write history to fit your politics....THERE IS a medical/psychological condition that develops from doing that habitually, and actually believing it as reality, you know..... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 06:13 PM Your major flaw (one of your major flaws) Goofball, is that you assume that others think the way you do. But not that many people are that badly confused. And as far as the "Court Record" from the Zimmerman trial reflecting the facts is concerned, from that court, the record isn't worth the toilet paper it's written on. The whole trial was a put-up job. A White-wash! That was the day Justice died in the State of Florida. (Strange. That sort of thing seems to happen a lot down thataway.) Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 26 Aug 13 - 06:48 PM That was the day Justice died in the State of Florida. Its been mortally ill for a long time in Florida (& other parts of the deep south)- I would bet it died a while back, and the Zimmerman affair was more the official certificate of death. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Aug 13 - 06:51 PM Firth: "Your major flaw (one of your major flaws) Goofball, is that you assume that others think the way you do." Your humongous flaw is that you assume people don't think at all, and you try to ram your illnesses down their throats! Look let's try to see if this sinks in through that brick lined ball on your shoulders...Bobert's too....the Martin family publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race. ..The Martin's personal attorney said THEY didn't think it was about race...the defense attorneys (separately from the personal family attorney) publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race...the prosecution publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race, the police publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race, the court's testimony showed that THEY didn't think it was a race issue, the jury members who gave interviews, publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race...the FBI investigated Zimmerman AND 36 of his known acquaintances and they publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race, nor did any evidence come up to indicate that Zimmerman had racial bigotry, in fact, they found he worked with 'minority' kids, prior to this..... Now with ALL that...just tell us why should we believe your uninformed, stupid rants about race???? Who the fuck do you think you are????? Now, what did all the people have in common....hint, it's not anything racial....hope that doesn't leave you completely lost! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 07:05 PM Goofball, I have ample evidence (right here in this thread, as a matter of fact) that SOME people DON'T think at all. And you can run around in circles, wiggling you fingers, and screaming all you want, but the fact remains that if the entire population of the world voted that the Earth is flat, it would STILL be a globe. And it appears that you can't even remember your own question. Have you ever considered psychotherapy? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 26 Aug 13 - 07:35 PM THIS is how you answered my last post???????? Why Should ANYONE in their right mind believe YOU???? Tell us just WHY, when every one involved with the case..INCLUDING THE FAMILY says it was NOT racially motivated, should we believe YOUR take on it????? Tell us....Give us YOUR supreme evidence!!!...other than you WANT it to be a racial issue...something more..what is it??? The ONLY racial remarks AT ALL, were given by Trayvon, when he was talking to his girlfriend, and said that a 'cracker' was following him..to which Rachel, his girlfriend said she thought 'it must be a homosexual rapist'. But I don't want to astray too far, because you'll go on one of your 'spin drifts' again...so here it is, (Focus now..try real hard): Why Should ANYONE in their right mind believe YOU???? Tell us just WHY, when every one involved with the case..INCLUDING THE FAMILY says it was NOT racially motivated, should we believe YOUR take on it????? Tell us....Give us YOUR supreme evidence!!!...other than you WANT it to be a racial issue...something more..what is it??? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 26 Aug 13 - 07:47 PM Lotta SCREAMING, GfinS... Think you need some Zoloft or a joint... You are suffering from BBS: BeardedBruce Syndome where SCREAMING somehow makes your point right??? Works the other way in the real world... People don't read SCREAMERS posts... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 26 Aug 13 - 09:04 PM The clear and concise logic of what I have already posted on this subject as right there for any and all to see and judge. Goofball, all your hysterical screaming is not going to change the FACTS. Have you ever thought of having a brain transplant? You ought to get a good price for trading in your brain, since it's never been used. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Aug 13 - 12:31 AM I'm not, nor was I screaming...I thought that by your responses, you were having a hard time READING...(see, I wasn't telling...or screaming)..Now, let us in on your supreme 'logic' and why you think this 'just has to be racial'...when EVERYONE, involved with the case..FAMILY TOO...says it was NOT racially motivated...What do you know, that the family, FBI, police, courts etc etc, don't know..or somehow overlooked. Being as you talked to everyone involved, maybe they told you some special little secret....Be a Snowden...tell us all! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 12:57 AM Read my previous posts. The murder of the 88 year-old man was motivated by robbery. Racism was present, but probably secondary. The murder of the Australian jogger was motivated by racism. The murder of Trayvon Martin was motivated by Zimmerman's desire to use his gun, and by Zimmerman's racism. That's crystal clear to anyone who possesses the power of thought. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 01:23 AM I know for a fact that Trayvon Martin's mother maintains that the murder of her son was motivated by racism. And there may very well be civil suits in the offing. So, Goofup, your claim that the family said that it was not racism is false. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 27 Aug 13 - 02:36 AM Bearded Bruce, your comment suggests that I should assume that George Zimmerman told the truth about the incident. I do not. In fact, I believe that Zimmerman is in the habit of lying to cover up his misdeeds. The evidence does not say that his head was being pounded on the sidewalk. If that were true, he'd need more than a little band-aid. If you listen carefully to the first 911 call, you can hear him crafting his story his story in advance. The truth in this case is obvious. Takes a real genius to complicate it. Anyone who believes George Zimmerman told the truth is either weak minded or cut from the same cloth. The first juror who came forward fits into the latter category, the second juror falls into the former. She feels like she let Trayvon Martin's parents down? Well she should because she sure did. She let a lot of people down. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 27 Aug 13 - 08:27 AM SSP, I respectfully disagree with your analysis. I saw the pictures, and the injuries to Zimmerman were consistent with his story. Had he intended to shoot Martin, would he have had his gun anywhere other than in his hand, and would he have had ANY injuries? Yet all the physical evidence indicates he shot him AFTER he (Zimmerman) was knocked down. Both of them made mistakes, and neither is faultless, but it has been determined that Zimmerman acted in self defense. To insist otherwise, and demand punishment for a crime that he has been determined by the courts to be not guilty of is EXACTLY what the Klan ( Bobert's favorite, it seems) would do- LYNCH someone based on the FEELING that they were guilty. After all, EVERYONE knows those that were hung did whatever they were accused of, right? Bobert was happy to deny Zimmerman of a fair trial, by allowing the prosecution to determine what evidence was available in discovery- THAT was brought up in the other thread ( was the PURPOSE of the thread, before it was hijacked by Bobert "Everyone who disagrees with me is a Klansman" ). I do agree the prosecution made a lousy case- but to say that means Zimmerman is guilty rather than that the prosecution made a lousy case is just plain WRONG. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 27 Aug 13 - 09:13 AM Suze has it 100% correct... Anyone with an IQ greater than that of a box of creek rocks, unless they are just flat out right winged racists, gets it... It ain't quantum physics... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 03:06 PM I agree. Suzy is absolutely right. Bulletin! This just in: George Zimmerman is asking the State of Florida (read "taxpayers!") to pay up to $300,000 to cover his court costs and legal expenses. This, after soliciting (and receiving!) large amounts of money in contributions from people who regard him as some kind of "hero!" It seems that in some areas of the country, there is profit to be made by murdering young black men. What's next? Bounties? As I heard a minister once say, "Believe me, there is ample reason for the weeping of Jesus!" Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: number 6 Date: 27 Aug 13 - 03:46 PM In response to Don Firth's statement .. "I know for a fact that Trayvon Martin's mother maintains that the murder of her son was motivated by racism. below is a quote (08/25/2013) from Tracy Martin ... the mother of Trayvon Tracy Martin said the family did not make it a race issue. "Had George Zimmerman been an African-American man, we still would be seeking the same justice as we would in this case. Race did play an issue. But we didn't make it a race issue. Never once." biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 04:47 PM Yes, Bill, she said that. "Race did play an issue. But we didn't make it a race issue." [Emphasis mine--DF] The family didn't want to make a race issue of it, probably knowing that, in that locality, it would be fruitless. In fact, it could have easily stirred up more racial troubles--in a community with a long history of racial troubles (See baseball player Jackie Robinson in relation to Sanford, Florida). Would Zimmerman have acted the way he did if he had seen a white kid walking down the street with a bag of candy and a cup of iced tea? I doubt it very seriously. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 04:59 PM That, incidentally, was from a considerably longer interview with Trayvon Martin's mother. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Aug 13 - 05:18 PM If Firth and Bobert WANT to believe that, just let them. It has NO bearing on the reality of the situation..it's just a trip they're on. It's 'fashionable' to their ideology!...which never seems to make sens, anyway. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 09:14 PM It IS the reality of the situation, whether your prejudice allows you to see it or not. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 27 Aug 13 - 09:41 PM Racial prejudice, Jackie Robinson, Trayvon Martin and Sanford, Florida. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 27 Aug 13 - 09:42 PM Back in the 70s when it seemed I went weeks living in the black community I learned a book's full of knowledge about the black culture... One thing I learned is that there was city black folks and then there was rural black folks... Trayvon's parents represent rural black folks... Now lotta white folk going, "Well, is that so bad? I mean, these people seem very reasonable"... (And they are) What white folk don't get is that Trayvon's parents were playing the game they know... The rural black folk composure... Ya' see, it wasn't always like that... There were times when Trayvon would have been lynched... That's reality... Some things need to be kept in perspective... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 27 Aug 13 - 11:14 PM That's right...Firth posts his reference source from another blog for wannabe 'so-called' liberals'..Give me a break!..No wonder your 'logic' is ridiculous!...Let's try this again: "It has NO bearing on the reality of the situation..it's just a trip they're on. It's 'fashionable' to their ideology!...which never seems to make sense, anyway." ..and if anyone else is taking them seriously, in regards to this matter, you might double check your skulls to see if it's leaking. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Aug 13 - 01:59 AM Saying it 10,000 times doesn't make what you're saying any truer, Goofball. Get real. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 28 Aug 13 - 07:17 AM ""And Zimmerman stated that he saw "someone acting suspicious, WHEN HE CALLED IN ON HIS CELL PHONE. The OPERATOR asked whether the person was white or black, and Zimmerman hesitated, and then said he thought he was black. NOT the reason he was watching him. NOT the reason he stopped him and asked what he was doing there. YOU are making it about him being black- that makes YOU the racist."" He thought he was black, and that is why he followed him and confronted him, because "everybody knows" all blacks on the street at night are muggers, burglars or drug dealers, RIGHT BB?. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 08:26 AM No, Don T. Zimmerman THOUGHT that he was acting suspiciously ( as he stated on the 911 call, a FACT you ignore) and wanted to see what he was up to, like a NEIGHBORHOOD WATVH person should do WHEN THEY SEE SOMEONE ACTING SUSPICIOUSLY. Zimmerman's choice to follow on foot was a poor decision- but not as poor as Martin's choice to physically attack someone for inquiring as to what he was doing there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 08:40 AM Vass you dere, BullshitBruce? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 09:03 AM Were YOU, Greggie boy? I am using the EVIDENCE that the prosecution presented as a basis -WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU using to determine what happened? After all, since Martin was "Black, and (probably) a Democrat", YOU would have called him a "Dumb Ni**er" from the evidence of your previous posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 09:53 AM Armed white man stalks and then murders unarmed black teenager... That's the meat 'n taters here... Not all the twisted il-logic by the racists here and elsewhere or the right wing blog-o-poo'ers... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 10:00 AM And Bobert states that the court is wrong- JUST LIKE THE KKK. Hail Bobert, the Ubermensch! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 10:14 AM Really, BullshitBruce ? to physically attack someone for inquiring as to what he was doing there. And your proof of this is where in the evidence presented? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 10:19 AM Just listen to the PROSECUTION witnesses. Oh, I forget- you "Liberals " can't be bothered listening to anyone who says something you might not agree with. What a shit-for-brain! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 10:26 AM That's a smokescreen, not an answer, BullshitBruce. Where EXACTLY in the "evidence"[sic] is the confirmation of your statement? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 11:37 AM Where the prosecution witnesses say that Zimmerman was on the bottom screaming, with Martin on top beating him. Now, please tell me what evidence there is that Zimmerman "Stalked" anyone? EVIDENCE, not Bobert's idea of what HE would have done. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 01:03 PM No, BullshitBruce, learn to read. You apparently don't even understand what you write yourself. Let's try again. You wrote: "to physically attack someone for inquiring as to what he was doing there." [emphasis mine] You can't provide proof for this because there is none. As usual. Just the same old horseshit. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 01:24 PM Bottom line... Zimmerman is a liar... He lied about the money ha received from Gun-Wacko-Nation... He lied about not knowing about stand-your-ground laws in Florida after taking a class on it... Liars lie... Look at the cuts on his head... Anyone who has ever been in a real fight knows that if Martin was on top and was banging his head into the concrete that those tint little cuts would real cuts that would require stitches... Zimmerman lied about them... I'd bet that in order to make his story more believable that he banged his own head... Zimmerman say that he was the one screaming yet the screaming stopped right after the gunshot... Zimmerman lied about that, too... Zimmerman is a lying ass creepy racist ass hole and anyone defending him is, as well... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 01:25 PM And how do YOU explain an armed Neighborhood Watch man being on the ground, gun NOT in his hand, being beaten? I assume that YOU and Bobert lie, from past experience, but give others the benefit of the doubt and presume they are telling the truth unless I have reason BASED ON FACT to think otherwise. Now, please tell me what evidence there is that Zimmerman "Stalked" anyone? EVIDENCE, not Bobert's idea of what HE would have done. Your claim that ANYTHING is shit has yet to be suported by any factual basis. But it IS what I expect from the "Liberal" voice, uncontested, and accepted by the failure of other Liberals to indicate any disagreement. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 01:31 PM And ANYONE, regardless of their "Street Cred", who advocates allowing the prosecution to withhold evidence from disclosure in order to get the verdict that they think should be made is just as bad as the KKK, in ignoring the law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 02:12 PM You still haven't provided any evidence whatsoeveer foryour horseshit, BullshitBruce. There's only two people that know what actually happened; one is conveniently dead, and the other has been proven a liar over and over again. So now, about that evidence, BullshitBruce........ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 02:16 PM So everything YOU AND BOBERT claim is also bullshit, since YOU have no evidence. You have denied the evidence, so you are just a racist liar. Bobert deserves you, asshole. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 02:22 PM Excuse me, BullshitBobert deserves you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 28 Aug 13 - 03:27 PM I'm going to say one more thing here and then stop conversing with BB and GfS on this topic. It's ultra-clear to me that GZ attempted to detain TM until the police got there. There is evidence to support that. GZ's lies and inconsistencies back that up as well. GZ felt confident doing what he did because he had a gun to "protect" himself should TM resist. TM did resist (which he had every right to do). I will tell you folks that if some strange man without a badge stalked and then attempted to detain me, I would not submit, I would physically struggle- partly out of fear, partly out anger. GZ was looking for that physical struggle so he could justify shooting TM. One last note, GfS I'm beginning to see why Bobert and Don Firth think ill of you. You take them to task on issues, when quite frankly, you ought to know better. Other times you say good things but when you go on like this, it gets lost. This IS about race. I am a middle aged white woman. GZ would not have stalked and accosted me like he did TM. Because young black males had reportedly broken into homes in that neighborhood, GZ felt he had a right to play cop and treat any young black male as a suspect. He did not have that right except by Florida law- a very fucked up law that makes it possible to shoot someone in cold blood and get away with it. B & DF, ignore these guys. They just enjoy upsetting us on a topic which really does upset us- and rightly so... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: beardedbruce Date: 28 Aug 13 - 03:33 PM So, SSP, YOU were there with BullshitBobert and Greggie boy the racist, and saw everything? The trial evidence from OTHER people , presented by the PROSECUTION, indicates Zimmerman did NOT have his gun out when he was knocked down. So, how did he "detain" anyone/ He COULD have asked what Martin was doing, which some here consider an assault, but he WAS knocked down and beaten, which some here consider to be a normal "Black" greeting- THAT is racist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 04:28 PM I already ignore bb, Suze... He does no have any capacity for rational thought... GfinS slips in rational thought just enough to remain on my "don't ignore" list but has been on it a time or two... We differ on one part of this... There were no apparent evidence on Trayvon's body to indicate a fight... I don't think there was a fight but agree, that if there was, Trayvon had every right to defend himself... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Aug 13 - 04:42 PM Beardedbruce, when the self-appointed vigilante phoned the police and reported seeing what he thought was a person acting suspiciously (after all, he was a black teenager wearing a hooded sweatshirt, carrying a package of candy and cup of iced tea he had just purchased at a nearby convenience store, and was walking back home--therefore. ipso facto, acting "suspiciously"). The police dispatcher told him to stay in his car until the police got there and NOT to get out and approach the "suspect." [This is not someone's supposition, it is a matter of record.] Zimmerman disobeyed, got out of his car, approached Trayvon Martin, and demanded to know what he was doing there. For all Trayvon Martin knew, this man who had confronted him in an aggressive manner was a mugger. Martin had every right to be there, and confronted in such a manner, obviously felt threatened. So he attempted to defend himself. Does the "stand your ground" law apply to everyone? Or is it for whites only? Why is this so difficult for you to understand? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 28 Aug 13 - 05:17 PM Okay Bruce, I'll let you bait me this once more. Gz didn't have to have his gun out when he attempted to detain TM. He knew he had it and it gave him the confidence to attempt to detain him. He knew if TM resisted his wannabe cop take down, he could then "protect" himself. Stand Your Ground allows a person to everything they can to provoke a physical confrontation with an unarmed person, and then pull out your gun and shoot that person if it doesn't go your way. That's just what happened. It's wrong to defend that GZ's actions. And now he wants to sue? Who told him to go out and hire a $400 an hour hotshot lawyer! People are not entitled to be reimbursed for legal fees when acquitted. He lied to the court about his finances which doesn't merit much sympathy for his current financial dilemma. Now that he has been found "not guilty," see how bold he's gotten? He likes being in the spotlight. Doesn't want to give it up. He's such a disgusting creature. With those beady little eyes and fat face, he reminds me of a pig. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 28 Aug 13 - 05:29 PM And in related news: "Shellie Zimmerman — wife of George Zimmerman, the Florida man who was acquitted of murder charges in the shooting death of teenager Trayvon Martin — pleaded guilty to charges of perjury Wednesday for misleading a judge about the state of her family's finances. According to CNN, Shellie Zimmerman was sentenced to one year of probation, 100 hours of community service and ordered to write a letter of apology to Judge Kenneth Lester within 30 days and reimburse the court for legal costs. She pleaded guilty to lying to Judge Lester in an April 2012 bond hearing in which she alleged that her family was indigent. In fact, the Zimmermans had more than $135,000 in donated defense fund money sitting in the bank at the time. In pleading guilty to perjury rather than going to trial on the original third-degree felony charge of perjury in an official proceeding, Mrs. Zimmerman avoided much higher fines and possible prison time. George Zimmerman was found not guilty by a six-member jury in July. His attorneys filed a reimbursement request with the state of Florida on Tuesday asking that the court costs of George Zimmerman's defense be partially covered by the state. The suit will ask for between $200,000 and $300,000 in fees." Raw Story |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Lighter Date: 28 Aug 13 - 05:47 PM They can ask for whatever they want, but they won't get it. Those on CNN familiar with Florida law say that all the law will cover will be "out-of-pocket fees," not attorneys' fees, which make up the lion's share of Zimmerman's expenses. Hundreds of thousands of dollars. Mark Nejame estimates that if Zimmerman's lawyers file for $200,000, the court will likely award him $10,000 - $20,000. Filing for every imaginable reimbursement appears to be a standard legal move in Florida for an acquitted criminal defendant. Those seeking outrage should, once again, look elsewhere. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Aug 13 - 07:53 PM George Zimmerman just went shopping for one of THESE. (Scroll down a bit.) Now, he can REALLY go hunting! Don Firth P. S. I don't know how long that web site will be there, but if it goes away soon, THIS is the sort of little toy he was interested in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 07:53 PM What is the cost of injustice??? A lot more than we think... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 28 Aug 13 - 09:07 PM Yo, Bullshit Bruce- Thanks for the barge-load of horseshit, but you STILL haven't provided any evidence to support your claim: "to physically attack someone for inquiring as to what he was doing there." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 28 Aug 13 - 09:31 PM This isn't all that complicated... An adult white man with a gun stalked and murdered an unarmed teenager walking home from a convenience store... This adult white man is a confessed liar... Liars lie and lie and lie... That is this adult white male... The Florida justice ain't got much justice in it so they let the adult white armed lyin' ass cracker off... The End B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 28 Aug 13 - 10:19 PM ....the Martin family publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race. ..The Martin's personal attorney said THEY didn't think it was about race...the defense attorneys (separately from the personal family attorney) publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race...the prosecution publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race, the police publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race, the court's testimony showed that THEY didn't think it was a race issue, the jury members who gave interviews, publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race...the FBI investigated Zimmerman AND 36 of his known acquaintances and they publicly stated that THEY didn't think it was about race, nor did any evidence come up to indicate that Zimmerman had racial bigotry, in fact, they found he worked with 'minority' kids, prior to this..... That being said, AGAIN, Today I heard Rev. Bernice King, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s daughter give a speech, where she said 'replace hate with love'. Anybody listening?......or are you being a little too racist? ....and let's not start with a racist bias, one way or the other, and cherry pick what you WANT to believe, to support that bias...people get hurt or dead...ask Rachel Jeantel, who advised Trayvon, that the guy following him was probably a homosexual rapist. As far as the information that led people to get all 'excited' that this was just about race, you might consider this and why some of you are determined that this was all about race. And consider this: March 13, 2012 - Sanford Police Department's homicide detective Christopher Serino recommends Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter. IF THAT HAD HAPPENED, Zimmerman more than likely would have been convicted. ...and I've said repeatedly, that the prosecution bungled this case.... That being said, AGAIN, Today I heard Rev. Bernice King, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s daughter give a speech, where she said 'replace hate with love'. Anybody listening?......or are you being a little too racist? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 28 Aug 13 - 11:08 PM Load of dingoes kidneys. Trayvon Martin's mother said that race DID play a part in it, but they weren't going to try to make an issue of it. Undoubtedly because it would probably stir up all manner of racial unrest. Anyone who seriously believes that Zimmerman was NOT racially profiling Trayvon Martin is not playing with a full deck. And who, pray tell, is the racist here? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 29 Aug 13 - 02:35 AM Show it...and not from a blog. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 29 Aug 13 - 08:45 AM ""Zimmerman THOUGHT that he was acting suspiciously ( as he stated on the 911 call, a FACT you ignore) and wanted to see what he was up to, like a NEIGHBORHOOD WATVH person should do WHEN THEY SEE SOMEONE ACTING SUSPICIOUSLY."" I've seen quite a lot of that kind of suspicion in my time BB! "What's that black kid doing in my neighbourhood, he must be up to no good!" And it would never occur to him that the kid was taking sideways glances because he was wondering "who was following him and why?" Zimmerman would have taken no notice whatever of a white kid. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 29 Aug 13 - 08:50 AM Here's what makes this entire issue so sickening... The Zimmerman worshipers here and elsewhere have never voiced any remorse for the death of Trayvon Martin... That says more about their humanity, or lack there of... Pretty heartless... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 29 Aug 13 - 12:19 PM Goofball, I don't get my information from blogs, like you do. I get my information from several varied news sources, examining all viewpoints, endeavoring to find out what really happened--not, as you do, to find back-up for anybody's prejudices, especially whatever my own my happen to be. I was a news editor, remember? I know how to suss out the facts from various reports. You should really try to stop your knee from jerking like that. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 29 Aug 13 - 12:51 PM A CNN interview with Trayvon Martin's parents HERE. You'll have to sit through a commercial, though. Most interesting! Hang in. There is also a video of Zimmerman's arrival at the police station, in which there are no visible signs of injury. Early on, I recall seeing several pictures of Zimmerman's "injuries." The cut on the back of his head appeared in different places in the different photos, and the amount of blood varied from a trickle to a flood. Lousy Photoshopping job. And also early on, no sign of a broken nose. Maybe Zimmerman ran into a door? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 29 Aug 13 - 04:48 PM In honor of Greg F., I feel I should say this: Bullshit Bruce, You are so full of bullshit. Eat fucking shit and die. Yours Truly, Greg F. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 29 Aug 13 - 04:54 PM And, after 1,615 posts, somebody ought to tell you to go fuck yourselves... Go fuck yourselves! Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 29 Aug 13 - 07:35 PM One would think that a right wing non-musican coming to a folk musicians web site would just stick with other topics other than pushing his right winged, ignorant mythology... Go figure??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 30 Aug 13 - 03:21 AM Then stop doing it. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 30 Aug 13 - 05:24 AM From day one the Sanford authorities portrayed Zimmerman as the victim and Martin as a thug, and that didn't change at the trial. Nobody in this whole sorry mess stood up for Trayvon Martin's constitutional right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but there are people all over the southern states celebrating the victory of Vigilante Law over US Law. This video is worth a listen as it encapsulates everything I have been trying to put across in this thread. The following article is also relevant to the way in which the authorities spat upon the corpse of a murdered teenager: ""Florida jurors heard that Trayvon Martin was aggressive and paranoid due to marijuana intoxication the night he was murdered. But was he? Carl Hart, a neuropsychopharmacologist who spent fifteen years studying the neurophysiological, psychological and behavioral effects of marijuana, finds this line of reasoning "laughable" in The New York Times. "The toxicology exam, which was conducted the morning after Mr. Martin was killed, found a mere 1.5 nanograms per milliliter of blood of tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, in his body. This strongly suggests he had not ingested marijuana for at least 24 hours. This is also far below the THC levels that I have found necessary, in my experimental research on dozens of subjects, to induce intoxication: between 40 and 400 nanograms per milliliter. In fact, his THC levels were significantly lower than the sober, baseline levels of about 14 nanograms per milliliter of many of my patients, who are daily users. Mr. Martin could not have been intoxicated with marijuana at the time of the shooting; the amount of THC found in his system was too low for it to have had any meaningful effect on him." "" This is indicative of the lengths Sanford law personnel were willing to go to, in order to paint Trayvon Martin as a drugged up thug and portray him as responsible for his own death. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 30 Aug 13 - 08:39 AM The sad thing about this all, Don, is that there are still way too many white people who haven't come all that far from the days when black people were being lynched... Yeah, they always have their rationalizations just like we read here from the MudKKers who continue to defend their right to murder black people... I've lived long enough to remember the Klan... I've known folks who were in the Klan... I've heard their rhetoric... I can smell Klan from a mile away... This is what institutional racism looks like... You won't change the minds and hearts of the two MudKKers here, Don... Their minds and hearts are too hardened... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 30 Aug 13 - 09:01 AM Interesting... My above post was the 1619th post... 1619??? What's the relevance??? 1619 was the year that the first African slaves were brought to the "New World"... For the next 244 years slavery was legal... After the Emancipation Proclamation black Americans suffered from 110 years of Jim Crow on crack cocaine and now seeing Jim Crow's revival with the Tea Party ascent... 1619 was a shameful year for our nation... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 30 Aug 13 - 01:22 PM OK, Bobert, you just posted two sentences here, that seem to conflict with each other, so I will ask you, using your words, if you are failing to see something here, OK? Bobert: "The sad thing about this all, Don, is that there are still way too many white people who haven't come all that far from the days when black people were being lynched... Yeah, they always have their rationalizations just like we read here from the MudKKers who continue to defend their right to murder black people... ...You won't change the minds and hearts of the two MudKKers here, Don... Their minds and hearts are too hardened..." Their minds and hearts are too hardened???? Don't you think that is the PERCEPTION (on here)of minds and hearts that are too hardened?? There is no one one here that hates blacks, that I can see...only those whose minds and hearts are too hardened to see it. Ever consider that?? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 30 Aug 13 - 02:18 PM ""There is no one one here that hates blacks, that I can see...only those whose minds and hearts are too hardened to see it. Ever consider that??"" Tell it to the bastards here who are celebrating the release of a man who is revelling in having got away with murder and buying more, and more powerful n***er killing weapons. Not a word from them about the death of a black schoolboy. Not a scintilla of sympathy for him, or empathy for his family. They'd have been yelling their heads off if Trayvon were white. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 30 Aug 13 - 02:44 PM I agree, Don... Neither GfinS nor bb have posted anything that shows any feeling of sadness for Trayvon Martin or his family... Just cheering... That, GfinS, is what I meant by hardened hearts... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 30 Aug 13 - 03:03 PM Excellent link, Don T! Everyone should listen--all the way to the end--of what the commentator is saying. And if the commentator is a bit excited and angry, there is more than ample reason for it. I agree 100%! And here he is again, commenting on an interview (unbelievable!) with George Zimmerman's brother, Robert. The anger you hear in the commentator's voice is righteous anger. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 30 Aug 13 - 03:08 PM Sorry! Neglected to post the link for the above. Here it is: CLICKY. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 30 Aug 13 - 03:37 PM The speakers at the Lincoln Memorial this past Wednesday were entirely correct... We have a lot of work to do... Jim Crow is sneaking back... Okay, in some areas there ain't no sneak to it... He's just barging in... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 30 Aug 13 - 07:26 PM Here's an interesting little twist to the story. Was it brought up at the trial? Is it relevant? "Shellie Zimmerman, wife of George Zimmerman, the Florida man who was found not guilty of second degree murder in the slaying of teenager Trayvon Martin, told ABC News that she does not know if she will stay married to her husband. In an interview with reporter Christi O'Connor, Shellie Zimmerman said that she will have to think carefully about whether she plans to stay married to George Zimmerman, and that she had walked out on him after a particularly nasty argument on the night before he shot Martin. "I was staying at my father's house," Zimmerman said. "We had gotten into an argument the night before and I left." On Wednesday, Shellie Zimmerman pleaded guilty to perjury in the same courtroom where her husband was acquitted of murder. Unlike her appearances at his trial, however, George Zimmerman was not in attendance, leaving her feeling "very much alone." She declined to say whether or not her husband has a violent temper when O'Connor asked about the argument that caused her to walk out on him in 2012. "Does George have a temper? How volatile did it get the evening before?" the reporter asked. "Not going to answer that," Zimmerman replied." The Raw Story |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 30 Aug 13 - 08:00 PM The more times we review this story the worse it stinks... And it stinks well beyond just this story... It stinks because ALEC and the NRA have pushed legalized murder onto the books oh way too many states where anyone can virtually shoot and kill anyone they want and get away with it... It stinks because the racism still permeating Southern states is as real today as ever... But they say that all politics is local so... ...it stinks because there are people here at a folks musicains web site who are Zimmerman cheerleaders... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 30 Aug 13 - 09:47 PM Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 30 Aug 13 - 05:24 AM From day one the Sanford authorities portrayed Zimmerman as the victim and Martin as a thug, and that didn't change at the trial. Nobody in this whole sorry mess stood up for Trayvon Martin's constitutional right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but there are people all over the southern states celebrating the victory of Vigilante Law over US Law. This video is worth a listen as it encapsulates everything I have been trying to put across in this thread. The following article is also relevant to the way in which the authorities spat upon the corpse of a murdered teenager: ""Florida jurors heard that Trayvon Martin was aggressive and paranoid due to marijuana intoxication the night he was murdered. But was he? Carl Hart, a neuropsychopharmacologist who spent fifteen years studying the neurophysiological, psychological and behavioral effects of marijuana, finds this line of reasoning "laughable" in The New York Times. "The toxicology exam, which was conducted the morning after Mr. Martin was killed, found a mere 1.5 nanograms per milliliter of blood of tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, in his body. This strongly suggests he had not ingested marijuana for at least 24 hours. This is also far below the THC levels that I have found necessary, in my experimental research on dozens of subjects, to induce intoxication: between 40 and 400 nanograms per milliliter. In fact, his THC levels were significantly lower than the sober, baseline levels of about 14 nanograms per milliliter of many of my patients, who are daily users. Mr. Martin could not have been intoxicated with marijuana at the time of the shooting; the amount of THC found in his system was too low for it to have had any meaningful effect on him." "" This is indicative of the lengths Sanford law personnel were willing to go to, in order to paint Trayvon Martin as a drugged up thug and portray him as responsible for his own death. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST Date: 30 Aug 13 - 09:56 PM Don T. Hallelujah! Amen is one thing, Hallelujah is another... Can I get a witness? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 31 Aug 13 - 02:59 AM I can go along with that...matter of fact, if you scroll back, I've been saying that the whole mess was a series of 'misreading the moments, and making stupid mistakes...pot might no make you 'aggressive', but it CAN (and does) cause you to misread a moment, and act inappropriately..on his part, whereas Zimmerman was on a different trip, misreading Trayvon, and what he was doing. Rahel talking to Trayvon, on here cell, certainly misread the situation, and told Trayvon about Zimmerman probably being a homosexual rapist. With that in your head, when you're stoned, sure could get you to misread, EASILY. (Jeez,, I wonder if the D.A. was stoned too, when he charged him with murder, instead of manslaughter!!) They should have built their case better, before arresting and chaging him....But NOOOOOOOOO-O-O.....pressure was being thown on them for the wannabe prove a point idiots!!!..maybe who had the same 'zeal' as some of you have expressed!! Think about it............. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 31 Aug 13 - 09:11 AM "".pot might no make you 'aggressive', but it CAN (and does) cause you to misread a moment, and act inappropriately."" DO try to keep up GfS! ""The toxicology exam, which was conducted the morning after Mr. Martin was killed, found a mere 1.5 nanograms per milliliter of blood of tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, in his body. This strongly suggests he had not ingested marijuana for at least 24 hours. This is also far below the THC levels that I have found necessary, in my experimental research on dozens of subjects, to induce intoxication: between 40 and 400 nanograms per milliliter..........Mr. Martin could not have been intoxicated with marijuana at the time of the shooting; the amount of THC found in his system was too low for it to have had any meaningful effect on him."" 1.5 billionths of a gram of active principle = No drugged up aggression, no blurred perception and no drug induced misapprehension or inappropriate behaviour. Less effect than a half pint of bitter shandy. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 31 Aug 13 - 10:51 AM GfinS doesn't actually read much of other folks posts, Don... Just scans them to see if he can find something to attack, regardless of that something's context... I read Suzie's post and read it the same way as you... But here's the deal... It is not even relevant to the real story... It is a sidebar that has/had nothing to do with the murder... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 31 Aug 13 - 10:56 AM Don T: "Do try to keep up".... Speaking of which the following was not a quote from my post.... Don T: """The toxicology exam, which was conducted the morning after Mr. Martin was killed, found a mere 1.5 nanograms per milliliter of blood of tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, in his body. This strongly suggests he had not ingested marijuana for at least 24 hours. This is also far below the THC levels that I have found necessary, in my experimental research on dozens of subjects, to induce intoxication: between 40 and 400 nanograms per milliliter..........Mr. Martin could not have been intoxicated with marijuana at the time of the shooting; the amount of THC found in his system was too low for it to have had any meaningful effect on him."" Perhaps you were replying to someone else. However the first part was...but not the majority part of your post was from me. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 31 Aug 13 - 11:52 AM You're damn right it's a sidebar. Let's talk about adderall. Might be a script but it's every bit the same as being hopped up on coke or meth. I think GZ's wife will divorce him. She's realizing now that if her husband was anything more than a narcissistic asshole looking for trouble and attention (in that order), he would never have put her in the position that he did. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 01 Sep 13 - 07:08 AM ""Perhaps you were replying to someone else. However the first part was...but not the majority part of your post was from me."" The quote was an excerpt from what I had posted earlier and was intended to show you how far off the mark you were with your fatuous comment: ""I've been saying that the whole mess was a series of 'misreading the moments, and making stupid mistakes...pot might no make you 'aggressive', but it CAN (and does) cause you to misread a moment, and act inappropriately.."" NO POT = NO POT INDUCED MISREADING OF THE SITUATION! Get it NOW?? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 01 Sep 13 - 07:23 AM ""But here's the deal... It is not even relevant to the real story... It is a sidebar that has/had nothing to do with the murder..."" I beg to differ Bobz, and the reason is in the first part of that article. It says """"Florida jurors heard that Trayvon Martin was aggressive and paranoid due to marijuana intoxication the night he was murdered."" If that LIE was presented to the jury as evidence, and was given a free pass by both prosecution and judge, skewing the view of the jury in Zimmerman's favour, it's the whole deal, supporting my firm conviction that nobody in that courtroom was trying to convict Zimmerman. That's it,........in black and white, so to speak. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 01 Sep 13 - 10:12 AM The meat and taters is as follows, Don: 1. Zimmerman sees black kid walking thru the neighborhood 2. Zimmerman call police 3. Police tell Zimmerman to stay in his car and that they will send real cops 4. Zimmerman disobeys police and gets out of his car with a 9mm 5. Zimmerman stalks Martin 6. Zimmerman shoots and kills Martin The End Anything else is just smoke and mirrors... We don't have capital punishment for pot smoking... The prosecutor and judge should not have allowed Martin's use of pot to be entered as evidence as it had nothing to do with this murder... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 01 Sep 13 - 11:05 AM Stand Your Ground was not supposed be part of the jury's decision either but the one juror admitted that it was. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 01 Sep 13 - 11:24 AM Yup... The trial was as bad as the O.J. trial but I'd say the Marcia Clark did a better job than the Florida prosecutor/bozos... I find it inhuman that here we are remembering Martin as a pot smoking aggressor when nothing could be further from the truth... It is a sham... It's like blaming the rape victim for looking good... Disgusting trial and disgusting racism here and elsewhere with the racists blinded by their own racism... At least the Klan knew they were racists and proud of it... We now have grinnin' in your face racists who deny that they are racists while carrying out racist agendas... Meet the new Klan... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 13 - 12:57 PM With my experience (observation, not pot smoking myself), people high on marijuana are downright mellow. NOT the least bit aggressive. I'd feel safer in the company of a bunch of pot-smokers than I would be around a bunch of boozers. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 01 Sep 13 - 01:04 PM True. Hey Don, you got one right!! And Bobert is pissed at the 'Klan' because he went to one of their meetings, but he had to bring his sheet. (P-Vine wouldn't buy him a new one)...so he grabbed one off his bed....He showed up at the meeting, tried to put it on...but alas, it had a lot of 'stains' on it..AND, when he was trying to pot it one, over his head, and pulled it down to fit right, it cracked. Needless to say, he never went back....they tore it of of him and made Tea out of it! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 01 Sep 13 - 01:07 PM ooops, typos in the other one..... True. Hey Don, you got one right!! And Bobert is pissed at the 'Klan' because he went to one of their meetings, but he had to bring his own sheet outfit. (P-Vine wouldn't buy him a new one)...so he grabbed one off his bed....He showed up at the meeting, tried to put it on...but alas, it had a lot of 'stains' on it..AND, when he was trying to put it one, over his head, and pulled it down to fit right, it cracked...broke in several places.. Needless to say, he never went back....they tore it of of him and made Tea out of it! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 01 Sep 13 - 01:18 PM jeez.. still more typos....You'll just have to brush up on reading typonese. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 01 Sep 13 - 01:21 PM Goofted One, Judging from the quality of the corrected text those weren't typos in the initial post, just plain stupidity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 01 Sep 13 - 01:49 PM Oh, do you mean that if I typed it right the first time, you would have taken it seriously?? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 01 Sep 13 - 02:05 PM No, I'm pissed because I barely escaped a rural Klan get together and might have been lynched had I not outrun them... Plus I am pissed because here in 2013 we are seeing a resurgence of hate groups... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 13 - 02:08 PM No. Stupid is a condition that manifests itself in manifold ways. As you so graphically demonstrate. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 01 Sep 13 - 02:22 PM Well how else could you understand it, then? You got too much stuff cluttering your brain to talk plainly! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,gillymor Date: 01 Sep 13 - 02:37 PM Actually, Goofus, the spelling was the best part of your post(s). As good as any sign you'd see at a Tea Party rally. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 13 - 02:40 PM The comprehension problem is yours, Goofball. My writing is quite plain and clear (Elements of Style, by William Strunk, Jr. and E. B. White), and I'm sure no one else finds it too difficult to comprehend or too complicated. Good grammar and correctly punctuated (essential for clear comprehension). Pretty straightforward, really. Maybe you should have spent more time with Dick and Jack back in first grade, instead of shooting paper clips at the teacher's behind. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 13 - 04:11 PM Goofballupagus: "Well, how else could you understand it, then? You've got too much stuff cluttering your brain to talk plainly!" The contents of my mind is not "stuff cluttering (my) brain." That's called "knowledge." It comes from having had a good education, and being aware that an education is just a start. I do a great deal of reading and keep up on what's going on in the world, and I know how to find information if there is something I don't know about. Most intelligent people have this same capacity. I take it that you are not a member of Mensa? Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 01 Sep 13 - 04:24 PM Firth: "Most intelligent people have this same capacity. I take it that you are not a member of Mensa?" I was talking about why I...wait..... Firth: "Stupid is a condition that manifests itself in manifold ways. As you so graphically demonstrate." I was referring to why it was stupid.....How else could YOU understand it??!!?? Go back....re-read...YOU'RE the one who has a comprehension problem! Now do you finally get it?? 'Stupid is as stupid does'~~Forrest Gump Keep trying....I'm rootin' for ya'! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 13 - 04:33 PM Troll! I'm not going to get sucked into your stupid game. Let others judge for themselves. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 01 Sep 13 - 04:38 PM Others???? OK..you tell all those voices in your head to come to a consensus..and get back to us! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 01 Sep 13 - 04:40 PM Stupid is not something that can be controlled while... ...ignorance is quit the opposite... Just food for thought... BTW, Don, I hate to tell you but you left out a predicate in you 2:40 post... Just funnin' but you did... Still, plainly stated, however... I mean, predicates ain't all they are cracked up to be... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 01 Sep 13 - 04:47 PM So let me get this straight, Florida had a statute that allows you to sue for legal fees if you are acquitted AND one that allows you to provoke a confrontation, shoot your adversary dead and get acquitted. Could there be a set up more conducive to the triumph of evil? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 01 Sep 13 - 04:48 PM ..and what was I telling you??? GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 13 - 04:49 PM "Good grammar and correctly punctuated." You're right, Bobert. But actually, I used a sentence fragment intentionally, for emphasis. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 13 - 06:23 PM That appears to be the way it is in Florida and some other places, Suzy. Sad to say, I tend to get a bit steamed because of it, but it appears there are some folks who seem to think it's just peachy-keen. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 13 - 06:26 PM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 13 - 06:30 PM . . . Twitchy trigger finger. . . . Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 01 Sep 13 - 08:26 PM Firth: "But actually, I used a sentence fragment intentionally, for emphasis." Boy-Howdy!!.. When I do that you say it doesn't make sense..Yeee-HAWW!! Oh, and you post of:... From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 13 - 06:26 PM ...Was one of the best you've done in a LONG time...since you posts on classical music!! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 01 Sep 13 - 09:49 PM Goofball, when one departs from the rules of grammar using a sentence fragment, or for that matter, a sentence consisting of only a single word, it is usually for emphasis, but it is essential that the meaning is clear. It's not a substitute for chronically bad grammar, which usually springs from a combination of ignorance and laziness. I know you are literature-challenged, but Hemingway did it all the time. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 02 Sep 13 - 01:00 AM Actually, when I'm posting, I try to do it conversationally..as if the person I'm posting to is right here, and I'm talking to him or her. The only difference is, when I'm speaking, I don't forget to pronounce the 'R's, like I do, when I space out and don't hit the key...and BTW, Hemingway wrote in short sentences, and it makes for easy reading, but not too many people really talk that way.....well, maybe around the ward, but you'd know about that better than I. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 02 Sep 13 - 04:28 PM Hey, this could become a new twist for ambulance chasers... They could just run ads for folks who want to off their neighbor or someone who they would just like to off... The lawyer could walk them thru all the ins and outs of Florida law and then its "bang, bang, you're dead", then a long trial with the lawyer's meter running, the customary acquittal and then the Florida taxpayers write a big check to the lawyer... Maybe they could set up a national association of stand-your-ground-states and advertise on TV... Oh, I can see the ads now... "Gotta a pesky neighbor and need some cash? Call 1-OFF-JOHNNIE for a free consultation."... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 02 Sep 13 - 05:49 PM Now THAT"S real American entrepreneurship, Bobster! Maybe they could sell murder-for-hire franchises, too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 02 Sep 13 - 07:30 PM Hey, I think I need to talk with a patent lawyer... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 06 Sep 13 - 12:40 PM Well, well. Click Here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 06 Sep 13 - 12:56 PM Interesting! That guy is a real piece of work! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: gnu Date: 06 Sep 13 - 01:27 PM Good lord! Youse are still going on about this and there is no trial transcript to read? Why aren't youse on about THAT injustice rather than proclaiming you have the knowledge to be judge and jury in this case with NOTHING to back it up with? I am saddened. Do you people have access to rope at the hardware store? If so, it frightens me when you say justice was subverted but you have NO proof of it. Why are you all failing in demanding publc disclosure of the trial transcript? Not enough jollies in reading facts? Don't bother to answer me directly. I won't read your replies until I read the trial transcript because I kinda like to view the evidence before I start slingin shit and rope. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 06 Sep 13 - 02:34 PM From what we do know there are things that should not have occurred before and during the trial... 1. The judge should have issued a gag order on the prosecution and defense... 2. Zimmerman's attorney should not have released personal information about what was on Martin's cell phone to the public... 3. The judge should have allowed the prosecution to present "expert witnesses" as to whose voice was on the recording... 4. The judge should not have allowed Martin's use of marijuana to be entered into evidence... 5. Zimmerman's attorney should not have been allowed to present testimony in regards to Zimmerman's claim that he didn't know Florida's stand-your-ground laws... 6. The judge allowed character evidence on Martin but blocked it on Zimmerman... Remember that out-right lie Zimmerman told the court about not having any money to pay for his defense??? If it was okay to trash the victim in court then it should have been okay to trash the defendant... If this case was turned around and Martin was the defendant, any one of the above would be grounds for either a mistrial or an appeal... The problem here is that Martin isn't around to appeal... You don't need the transcripts to get this far... Most people were enraged over the O.J. verdict... There weren't too many folks saying, "Geeze, I need a full transcript" before forming an overall opinion of the way the trial went down... These were very public trails... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 06 Sep 13 - 02:55 PM Gnu, it is plain that the verdict was cut-and-dried before it even came to trial. The trial itself was simply going though the motions and the court transcripts are, essentially, a piece of fiction to attempt to justify blaming the victim for his own murder. As Bobert says, welcome to the South. Don Firth P. S. You won't read replies to your post? Okay, then others will. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 06 Sep 13 - 04:36 PM there is no trial transcript to read? Gnu, please stop going on about the trial transcript. It most certainly IS available - all you have to do is contact the court and pay for a copy, and they'll mail it right to you. General info on the Court Clerk's Office here: http://www.seminoleclerk.org/officialrecords.shtm The order form is available here: http://officialrecords.seminoleclerk.org/OfficialRecordsOrderForm.pdf Don't care to do that? Then stop whining. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: gnu Date: 06 Sep 13 - 04:38 PM "You don't need the transcripts to get this far..." But ya need em to understand the verdict. "... the court transcripts are, essentially, a piece of fiction..." So, obviously, you must have read them before you pass judgement on them. Please share your inside knowledge by linking us to what you call fiction. As for other people reading the replies. I assume they will think... "WTF?" Find the jurors guilty of charges accused by people who haven't even read the transcripts? the is inane." Yeah... I did read... doesn't make me wrong when I judge such conjecture which has no proof, basis or logic. ONE more time. If he is guilty, FRY THE FUCKER. But, I believe ya gotta prove it FIRST. And, ya can't fry the jury without reading the transcript FIRST. I am glad the law prohibits mob rule and lynch mobs on accounta I find most of this thread pretty scary stuff. Majority perception has NO place in a court of law. If you disagree with that, you disagree with THE LAW. Finally... I have, from the very beginning, said *I* do not KNOW what happened and neither do YOU. I will not join your mob and I wouldn't sell you any rope even if you offered me million dollars an inch. Also, if Z is guilty of what YOU charge him with, I will supply the rope and build the scaffold and put the noose around his neck and push his ass over the edge... unlike many who decry a "travesty of justice" with NO PROOF. Even if he WAS/IS found guilty, a lot of pussies out there wouldn't debit him from the human bank account. I find the mob unruly, uneducated and unacceptable in my court of law. Thank Dog MY court of law protects all from YOUR kangaroo court. Now... please PM me when you all get together and petition the State of Florida for access to the trial transcript. If ya got time to call for a hangin, ya got time ta call for transparency in the courts of your country. Seriously, if ya don't get off that big fuckin white horse yas rode in on and clean up all the horseshit yer never gonna get this fucker. WTF do you not understand about that? Oh dear! There goes gnu swearing again... he must be totally wrong. He's an idiot.... LET'S GET Z!!!!! Ya just don't get it............... sigh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 06 Sep 13 - 05:47 PM when you all get together and petition the State of Florida for access to the trial transcript. No petition required, gnu - see below. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 06 Sep 13 - 07:33 PM Gn-ze, I grew up in the South... I went to college in the South... Other than living in Jefferson County, WV (more Southern than many places in the deep South with Confederate flags on every pickup truck), I have lived all my life in the South... I also known one heck of a lot of black people who live in the South (urban and rural) who have told me the stories... I have accidentally found myself way to close to a Klan rally where it was very possible a lynching was going on... I have seen Southern justice way closer than I ever wanted to... I worked in a Southern jail as a teacher... I worked in a half way house in the "hood"... I know more about the kind of justice that the South dishes out than anyone here in Mudburg... No brag, just fact... I have seen the good ol' boys "lynch" black defendants in their sentencing... There is a disproportionate numbers of black people incarcerated in the South... Put to death in the South... I'm sorry, gn-ze... You are one of my closest friends here but... ...you just don't have a clue about what occurs here... Send a donation to the Southern Poverty Law Canter and they, in turn, will send you a magazine that will open your eyes to just how much injustice is going down down here... Racism is institutionalized here... It is everywhere... I hate to post this, man, but... B:~( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Greg F. Date: 06 Sep 13 - 08:12 PM He can save a few bucks and just go to their website, Bobert. Not that sending them a few bucks wouldn't be a good and useful thing to do. www.splcenter.org |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 06 Sep 13 - 08:43 PM Yeah, these folks have been on the front lines against the Klan and other hate groups... But send 'um a few buck, gn-ze... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 07 Sep 13 - 03:48 AM OK, hold on to your seats..buckle in.......steady now.....but, in this matter 'gnu' is correct. They had the trial, the jurors didn't belong to the KKK....they understood the South..they were picked by both the prosecution and the defense .. The SAME over zealousness of Bobert and Firth is what fucked up the prosecution into rushing it, and eventually blowing the case....it's over, Zimmerman was acquitted...get over it! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Sep 13 - 08:07 AM "" "WTF?" Find the jurors guilty of charges accused by people who haven't even read the transcripts? "" Nobody blames, or has blamed, the jurors for reaching the verdict that was force fed to them by the most corrupt fixed trial I have ever seen. The jurors were the only innocent people present in tht court. The only other innocent person you would need to contact through a medium. Zimmerman innocent? Pigs might fly!! Zimmerman committed the first perfect murder of the 21st century, but given the ridiculous laws in many US states, it won't be the last. And only the murders of black people will result in acquittal of thoose who kill under those laws. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Sep 13 - 08:20 AM ""Florida jurors heard that Trayvon Martin was aggressive and paranoid due to marijuana intoxication the night he was murdered. But was he? Carl Hart, a neuropsychopharmacologist who spent fifteen years studying the neurophysiological, psychological and behavioral effects of marijuana, finds this line of reasoning "laughable" in The New York Times. "The toxicology exam, which was conducted the morning after Mr. Martin was killed, found a mere 1.5 nanograms per milliliter of blood of tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, in his body. This strongly suggests he had not ingested marijuana for at least 24 hours. This is also far below the THC levels that I have found necessary, in my experimental research on dozens of subjects, to induce intoxication: between 40 and 400 nanograms per milliliter. In fact, his THC levels were significantly lower than the sober, baseline levels of about 14 nanograms per milliliter of many of my patients, who are daily users. Mr. Martin could not have been intoxicated with marijuana at the time of the shooting; the amount of THC found in his system was too low for it to have had any meaningful effect on him." "" It doesn't require the trial transcript to know that the jury should not have been told that Martin was under the influence, by lawyers who must have known it was an outright LIE! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Sep 13 - 08:28 AM Based on that, there must be grounds for appeal and retrial, but of course it's Florida, and you would have difficulty anybody who cares enough about black kids to make an issue of it. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Sep 13 - 08:31 AM finding anybody DT |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 07 Sep 13 - 01:39 PM Wow! http://youtu.be/0kcVZJxAo74 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 07 Sep 13 - 03:23 PM Don...oh Don...Have you ever heard of double jeopardy? You can't retry a person found innocent, to give it another go at it. Not just in Florida..everywhere. Jeez, no wonder.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Sep 13 - 03:41 PM ""Don...oh Don...Have you ever heard of double jeopardy? You can't retry a person found innocent, to give it another go at it. Not just in Florida..everywhere."" Not everywhere clown! Not, for instance in the UK, where the government have decided that protecting criminals from punishment when new technology furnishes proof of guilt (think DNA) is stupidity, not justice. Never mind, Gandhi was right when he said ""US civilisation would be a good idea"" I hope it happens soon. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 07 Sep 13 - 03:45 PM I also hope that the next person Zimmerman stalks (and there will be a next) turns out to be a redneck with a gun of his own. Then I'll do some celebrating of poetic, not American, justice! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 07 Sep 13 - 03:54 PM Don T: "Not everywhere clown! Not, for instance in the UK,...) Florida is at the Southeastern tip of the U.S. In case you've been keeping up on the latest news regarding the case, Zimmerman shot him in Florida, U.S.A. ..now maybe if he shot him in Italy, he could be tried again....but.... (I can't believe this!) GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 07 Sep 13 - 04:39 PM Sorry, GfinS... True Americans don't "get over" injustice... Come live in the South for a few years and you might get it... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 07 Sep 13 - 04:48 PM Zimmerman couldn't be retried on murder or manslaughter charges, but there is a move extant to file charges of a racial crime against him. I'm not particularly interested in seeing Zimmerman hang, but they'd better get that trigger-happy self-appointed superhero off the streets and into a cell before he murders someone else. And mark my words, he will. He's very full of himself right now. According to those who know him, including his wife who is divorcing him, he's very proud of himself and he's strutting around like a peacock. He recently went to Kel-Tek, the gun manufacturer who made his 9mm. automatic and bought himself a Kel-Tek 12 gauge, eight round tactical shotgun. A hunting we will go,Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 07 Sep 13 - 04:56 PM Correction. The Kel-Tec "Impact" tactical shotgun (Zimmerman's new toy) is a dual-tube shotgun that will hold 14 rounds (7 each tube), plus one in the chamber. Fifteen 12-gauge shotgun shells altogether. That ought to do it!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 07 Sep 13 - 07:41 PM Yeah, we don't need this guy on the streets... Like his wife has said, "He thinks he is invincible"... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 07 Sep 13 - 08:33 PM Official Sanford, Florida police records show that "There is a pattern of George Zimmerman making dozens of calls to 911 over several years, frequently about young men of color." This provides one of the bases for further investigation into the possibility of filing hate-crime charges against Zimmerman. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 07 Sep 13 - 08:42 PM The way I see it is that, like with O.J., Zimmerman's bad karma is going to catch up with him... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 08 Sep 13 - 11:51 AM ""The way I see it is that, like with O.J., Zimmerman's bad karma is going to catch up with him..."" I'll keep a bottle of the good stuff handy for the day that happens! Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 08 Sep 13 - 01:10 PM See what happens when you leave 'justice' up to political hacks?? If they would have taken their time, and done it right, according to the law, and investigated it properly before pressing charges, instead of trying to capitalize on emotions for the 'so-called liberals' he'd be in jail now. Congratulations!!! Keep it up! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 08 Sep 13 - 01:58 PM "Political hacks?" The only "political hacks" here were Southern bigots. Extreme Conservatives. Goofball, this is Sanford, Florida. They had no intention of doing it "according to the law and investigating it properly before pressing charges." This was a mock trial, and JUSTICE was not the aim. After all, the person Zimmerman killed was only a black teenager, so, they figure, why sweat it? Go through the motions, get it over with, give Zimmerman his gun back, and get him back out there to prowl the streets again. Liberals had nothing to do with it. They didn't give a damn about what Liberals thought, one way or the other. "Sure, maybe George was a bit overzealous, but the person he killed was only a black kid." And YOU want to blame that on Liberals! I said your knowledge of political science was nonexistent and with every one of your posts, you prove me right. And you sense of Justice is totally nonexistent at well. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 08 Sep 13 - 06:23 PM Absolute pathetic post, GfinS... You really don't get it, do you... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 08 Sep 13 - 07:55 PM Oh, heck... ...1700... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 09 Sep 13 - 03:37 PM Breaking News: Zimmerman detained by Florida police for possible domestic abuse. (helluva guy). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 09 Sep 13 - 03:52 PM Breaking News: Zimmerman's estranged wife claims he threatened her with a gun. (I'm shocked!). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 09 Sep 13 - 03:59 PM "Police in Lake Mary, Florida, arrested George Zimmerman Monday afternoon after being notified by his wife that he was allegedly threatening her and her father with a gun. WKMG-TV reported that police were called to the home of Shellie Zimmerman's parents, David and Machelle Dean, and were investigating the incident. Shellie Zimmerman's lawyer announced on Thursday that she had filed for divorce, and she told ABC News in an interview that he had been behaving recklessly since being found not guilty of murder in July 2013 after shooting and killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in 2012. "I have a selfish husband," Shellie Zimmerman told ABC. "And I think George is all about George." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 09 Sep 13 - 06:44 PM Not just a racist, but a psychopath as well! Why am I not surprised? As I mentioned before, I used to know a guy who was an ex-Marine and a gun-nut. He turned out to be downright dangerous to be around, so I made myself scarce. It was shortly thereafter that his wife divorced him. He kept his loaded .45 automatic on the bedside table, and she was increasingly afraid of such things as getting up in the middle of the night to go to the bathroom, then having her head blown off while coming back into the bedroom. I know the type. Trigger-happy. "Have gun, itching to kill someone!" Unfortunately, this type of person usually has to actually kill someone before they can lock him up. For the safety of the rest of us! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 09 Sep 13 - 11:05 PM This is what happens when whacked out people are acquitted of outright murder... He thinks he's Rambo... Tell ya' what... I ain't been doing martial arts now for 15 years but I'd love to have 5 minutes with him unarmed... Take the gun away from him and he's just a punk... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Suzy Sock Puppet Date: 09 Sep 13 - 11:42 PM Ah ha! Great news! Told y'all he was a sociopath who would go down yet for sumpin' Remember what he said about about Trayvon in his 911 call? "Sumpin's wrong with him. Yup." Yup, that sumpin' was YOU asshole! Don T., pass that bottle over! Ha ha! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 10 Sep 13 - 04:39 PM ""If they would have taken their time, and done it right, according to the law, and investigated it properly before pressing charges, instead of trying to capitalize on emotions for the 'so-called liberals' he'd be in jail now."" You just don't get it GfS! They never wanted, nor intended, to do it right. They acquitted Zimmerman the night that he killed Trayvon Martin. The rest was just window dressing. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 10 Sep 13 - 07:42 PM "Just don't get it" and GfinS in the same sentence??? How can that be??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 13 Sep 13 - 04:39 PM "A series of indiscreet emails by a Florida police chief has revealed his belief that Trayvon Martin's killer George Zimmerman is a volatile character who is "a Sandy Hook waiting to happen". Steve Bracknell is the chief of the Lake Mary police department, which is investigating Zimmerman, 29, for allegedly threatening his estranged wife, Shellie, and his father-in-law with a gun on Monday. In an email exchange with a Lake Mary resident critical of the department's initial decision not to arrest or charge Zimmerman, Bracknell appears to agree with the writer's description of Zimmerman, acquitted in July of murdering Martin, an unarmed black teenager, as "a ticking time bomb"." Florida police chief: George Zimmerman is 'a Sandy Hook waiting to happen' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 13 Sep 13 - 07:30 PM Yeah, George is one of those folks who the 90% of Americans who believe that wackos and criminals shouldn't own guns is afraid of... George is both... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 13 Sep 13 - 10:30 PM From the trajectory his life is taking he appears to be heading to an early exit, prison or a psychiatric facility. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 14 Sep 13 - 12:19 AM What has me a bit apprehensive is the thought of what he is liable to do whom on the way to getting there. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 14 Sep 13 - 01:24 AM "--do to whom--" Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Sep 13 - 02:22 AM Bobert: "Yeah, George is one of those folks who the 90% of Americans who believe that wackos and criminals shouldn't own guns is afraid of... George is both..." Next thing you know, he'll be shooting turtles! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 14 Sep 13 - 08:39 AM You will be happy to know that a monster snapping turtle climbed out of our pond yesterday, posed no threats to my cats and I went down and talked with him a little... His shell from front to back was right at 18-20 inches... Last I saw him he was headed to the creek... I only kill to protect my family (cats included) and I don not enjoy it... As for Zimmerman??? He likes shooting people... Don is correct... George's life seems to be on it's way down the drain... I doubt if he can go the next year without being killed or incarcerated... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: bobad Date: 19 Nov 13 - 02:34 PM It looks like Georgie has gone off the rails once again: Chilling 911 call where George Zimmerman tries to frame his girlfriend after attacking her |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Elmore Date: 19 Nov 13 - 03:07 PM He must enjoy brief visits to Florida jails. Hope he doesn't murder someone else. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Don Firth Date: 19 Nov 13 - 06:41 PM That ding-a-ling (psychopath) needs to be locked up. He's already killed once, and sooner or later--probably sooner--he's going to do it again. You can make book on it! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: Bobert Date: 19 Nov 13 - 08:50 PM And will ya'll look at the bimbo that was Z'z "girlfriend"??? She4 a flippin' hooker, ya'll... Plus, Zimmerman is done... He will be dead in 5 years... His life is over... He's on death row and too stupid to know it... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld' From: GUEST,Troubadour Date: 20 Nov 13 - 07:13 AM I just hope that the next guy he threatens with that crowd killer is another gun nut, dead quick on the draw. That'll save the life of some innocent bystander or driver who upsets Georgie Boy. |
