BS: George Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'

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???