Trayvon Martin

[pominoz]

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/drop-george-zimmerman-murder-charge-article-1.1080161#ixzz1vOBdi92l


August 8th. I think the judge will acquit.

All evidence corroborates Zimmermans account, and MArtins camp have been extremely shady.

That seems to be a very unbiased and impartial article :\

Fuck me. A self appointed plastic cop follows a child home on the basis that he's "suspicious" (cos, er, why?), calls the police - who tell him to stop following Martin - carries on following him in his car, then gets out and confronts him, carrying a gun. He then attacks the kid, who fights back, so he shoots him. Maybe in the final moments Zimmerman was defending himself, but the fact of the matter is they would never have got that moment, and Martin wouldn't be dead, if Zimmerman hadn't attacked him first. He also wouldn't be dead if America didn't have such stupid gun laws and such a stupid culture around guns in general.

Also, somebody attacked a white guy in a racist 'revenge' attack. What's your point? If he has been charged and will be convicted then the justice system is working, in that particular case. The thing that's getting Sharpton et al worked up is that the justice system blatantly isn't working - or at least, never would have without a massive campaign to push it - in the case of Martin/Zimmerman.

Is that aimed at me or prairiemoon?

 

[TheMightyQuinn]

It's a crazy feeling.

 

[Skashion]

Is that aimed at me or prairiemoon?

It's hard to despise a person more than I do Alan Dershowitz.

 

[KPXBLN]

That seems to be a very unbiased and impartial article :\

Fuck me. A self appointed plastic cop follows a child home on the basis that he's "suspicious" (cos, er, why?), calls the police - who tell him to stop following Martin - carries on following him in his car, then gets out and confronts him, carrying a gun. He then attacks the kid, who fights back, so he shoots him. Maybe in the final moments Zimmerman was defending himself, but the fact of the matter is they would never have got that moment, and Martin wouldn't be dead, if Zimmerman hadn't attacked him first. He also wouldn't be dead if America didn't have such stupid gun laws and such a stupid culture around guns in general.

Also, somebody attacked a white guy in a racist 'revenge' attack. What's your point? If he has been charged and will be convicted then the justice system is working, in that particular case. The thing that's getting Sharpton et al worked up is that the justice system blatantly isn't working - or at least, never would have without a massive campaign to push it - in the case of Martin/Zimmerman.

Is that aimed at me or prairiemoon?

Sorry, first paragraph wasn't really aimed at anyone in particular. I just think it's shit that Zimmerman is seemingly going to be able to get off with claiming self defence. It's also very ironic that he will be able to do so, given that the injuries Martin supposedly caused him were also self defence. It's weird that Zimmerman can use self defence as an excuse when he was the one that started the fight. Also when you add lethal weapons into a situation I think self defence is a very, very dodgy thing legally speaking, because it's nearly impossible to respond proportionally.

I can't remember who first brought up the racist revenge attack, but my point is that I think it's disingenous to try and deflect attention from the issue of who Trayvon Martin was and why he got killed by saying that there are also hate crimes committed by black people. It's just not the point and doesn't have any relevance to the question of why Martin got killed and why it took so long for Zimmerman to be charged, or even arrested.

 

[ElanJo]

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/drop-george-zimmerman-murder-charge-article-1.1080161#ixzz1vOBdi92l


August 8th. I think the judge will acquit.

All evidence corroborates Zimmermans account, and MArtins camp have been extremely shady.

That seems to be a very unbiased and impartial article :\

Fuck me. A self appointed plastic cop follows a child home on the basis that he's "suspicious" (cos, er, why?), calls the police - who tell him to stop following Martin - carries on following him in his car, then gets out and confronts him, carrying a gun. He then attacks the kid, who fights back, so he shoots him. Maybe in the final moments Zimmerman was defending himself, but the fact of the matter is they would never have got that moment, and Martin wouldn't be dead, if Zimmerman hadn't attacked him first. He also wouldn't be dead if America didn't have such stupid gun laws and such a stupid culture around guns in general.

Also, somebody attacked a white guy in a racist 'revenge' attack. What's your point? If he has been charged and will be convicted then the justice system is working, in that particular case. The thing that's getting Sharpton et al worked up is that the justice system blatantly isn't working - or at least, never would have without a massive campaign to push it - in the case of Martin/Zimmerman.

You have no idea who attacked who.

Let the court case unravel more evidence before claiming to know what happened. This thread is already rife with people, even some respected posters, making arses of themselves by shooting their mouths off

 

[Blue in Florida]

That seems to be a very unbiased and impartial article :\

Fuck me. A self appointed plastic cop follows a child home on the basis that he's "suspicious" (cos, er, why?), calls the police - who tell him to stop following Martin - carries on following him in his car, then gets out and confronts him, carrying a gun. He then attacks the kid, who fights back, so he shoots him. Maybe in the final moments Zimmerman was defending himself, but the fact of the matter is they would never have got that moment, and Martin wouldn't be dead, if Zimmerman hadn't attacked him first. He also wouldn't be dead if America didn't have such stupid gun laws and such a stupid culture around guns in general.

Also, somebody attacked a white guy in a racist 'revenge' attack. What's your point? If he has been charged and will be convicted then the justice system is working, in that particular case. The thing that's getting Sharpton et al worked up is that the justice system blatantly isn't working - or at least, never would have without a massive campaign to push it - in the case of Martin/Zimmerman.

You have no idea who attacked who.

Let the court case unravel more evidence before claiming to know what happened. This thread is already rife with people, even some respected posters, making arses of themselves by shooting their mouths off

We always get it wrong here in Florida, see the 2000 election and the Casey Anthony case and the one with the woman on life support and the husband and family fighting over pulling the plug. There will be a race riot if Zimmerman gets off, even if they find video of him being attacked. It is a no win situation like it always is here.

 

[didactic]

We always get it wrong here in Florida, see the 2000 election and the Casey Anthony case and the one with the woman on life support and the husband and family fighting over pulling the plug. There will be a race riot if Zimmerman gets off, even if they find video of him being attacked. It is a no win situation like it always is here.

Casey Anthony was the worst one Florida seems to get it wrong more in favour of our fairer brothers and sisters. When Jeb was governer he was executing black folk for fun.

Anyway more information has come out regarding the Trayvon Martin case. George Zimmerman High On Pills During Trayvon Martin Shooting

A paramedic report states that, the 28-year-old was under the influence of the prescription drug Temazepam, or Restoril, used to treat insomnia and anxiety. Side effects of the drug include hallucinations and aggressiveness, according to News One.

 

[Skashion]

even some respected posters

Who the fuck are they?

 

[ElanJo]

even some respected posters

Who the fuck are they?

The few who, for the most part, use "there", "their" and "they're" in the correct manner

 

[scenecreamer]

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/drop-george-zimmerman-murder-charge-article-1.1080161#ixzz1vOBdi92l


August 8th. I think the judge will acquit.

All evidence corroborates Zimmermans account, and MArtins camp have been extremely shady.

That seems to be a very unbiased and impartial article :\

Fuck me. A self appointed plastic cop follows a child home on the basis that he's "suspicious" (cos, er, why?), calls the police - who tell him to stop following Martin - carries on following him in his car, then gets out and confronts him, carrying a gun. He then attacks the kid, who fights back, so he shoots him. Maybe in the final moments Zimmerman was defending himself, but the fact of the matter is they would never have got that moment, and Martin wouldn't be dead, if Zimmerman hadn't attacked him first. He also wouldn't be dead if America didn't have such stupid gun laws and such a stupid culture around guns in general.

Also, somebody attacked a white guy in a racist 'revenge' attack. What's your point? If he has been charged and will be convicted then the justice system is working, in that particular case. The thing that's getting Sharpton et al worked up is that the justice system blatantly isn't working - or at least, never would have without a massive campaign to push it - in the case of Martin/Zimmerman.

Unfortunately, your version of the events are just that. Only yours.

 

[gaudinho's stolen car]

even some respected posters

Who the fuck are they?

The few who, for the most part, use "there", "their" and "they're" in the correct manner

I class myself in that group. What's happened?

 

[scenecreamer]

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/drop-george-zimmerman-murder-charge-article-1.1080161#ixzz1vOBdi92l


August 8th. I think the judge will acquit.

All evidence corroborates Zimmermans account, and MArtins camp have been extremely shady.

That seems to be a very unbiased and impartial article :\

How could you imply that it isn't?

Are you familiar with the author? He is a very well respect legal scholar. You may have heard of him.....

 

[pominoz]

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/drop-george-zimmerman-murder-charge-article-1.1080161#ixzz1vOBdi92l


August 8th. I think the judge will acquit.

All evidence corroborates Zimmermans account, and MArtins camp have been extremely shady.

That seems to be a very unbiased and impartial article :\

How could you imply that it isn't?

Are you familiar with the author? He is a very well respect legal scholar. You may have heard of him.....

"Respected legal scholar", really?


He advocates torture, the bombing of villages in Palestine, defends Israel no matter what they do and is a right wing nutcase.

No wonder you like him ;)

 

[KPXBLN]

That seems to be a very unbiased and impartial article :\

Fuck me. A self appointed plastic cop follows a child home on the basis that he's "suspicious" (cos, er, why?), calls the police - who tell him to stop following Martin - carries on following him in his car, then gets out and confronts him, carrying a gun. He then attacks the kid, who fights back, so he shoots him. Maybe in the final moments Zimmerman was defending himself, but the fact of the matter is they would never have got that moment, and Martin wouldn't be dead, if Zimmerman hadn't attacked him first. He also wouldn't be dead if America didn't have such stupid gun laws and such a stupid culture around guns in general.

Also, somebody attacked a white guy in a racist 'revenge' attack. What's your point? If he has been charged and will be convicted then the justice system is working, in that particular case. The thing that's getting Sharpton et al worked up is that the justice system blatantly isn't working - or at least, never would have without a massive campaign to push it - in the case of Martin/Zimmerman.

Unfortunately, your version of the events are just that. Only yours.

True, I literally made up everything myself and didn't read any detailed articles about what happened or anything.

 

[ElanJo]

That seems to be a very unbiased and impartial article :\

How could you imply that it isn't?

Are you familiar with the author? He is a very well respect legal scholar. You may have heard of him.....

"Respected legal scholar", really?


He advocates torture, the bombing of villages in Palestine, defends Israel no matter what they do and is a right wing nutcase.

No wonder you like him ;)

Hitler was a twat but he was/is still respected as a public speaker.

His political views on Israel etc have no bearing on whether or not Dershowitz is a "respected legal scholar". Considering that he's a defence attorney, it's likely that he knows a little more about domestic law than you or I and so it'd be foolish to not consider his thoughts on the subject. And it'd be pathetically moronic to dismiss them for the reasons you state.

 

[didactic]

How could you imply that it isn't?

Are you familiar with the author? He is a very well respect legal scholar. You may have heard of him.....

"Respected legal scholar", really?


He advocates torture, the bombing of villages in Palestine, defends Israel no matter what they do and is a right wing nutcase.

No wonder you like him ;)

Hitler was a twat but he was/is still respected as a public speaker.

His political views on Israel etc have no bearing on whether or not Dershowitz is a "respected legal scholar". Considering that he's a defence attorney, it's likely that he knows a little more about domestic law than you or I and so it'd be foolish to not consider his thoughts on the subject. And it'd be pathetically moronic to dismiss them for the reasons you state.

He may be respected but maybe his views on Israel betray his leaning a little as usually Jewish people who see no fault with the nation defend other Jewish people regardless of what it is they are being accused of. Zimmerman is a Jewish name so this has become more about race and who has the most authentic supporters than the evidence and the case at hand.

I hope none of this distracts the jury from making the right decision.

 

[pominoz]

How could you imply that it isn't?

Are you familiar with the author? He is a very well respect legal scholar. You may have heard of him.....

"Respected legal scholar", really?


He advocates torture, the bombing of villages in Palestine, defends Israel no matter what they do and is a right wing nutcase.

No wonder you like him ;)

Hitler was a twat but he was/is still respected as a public speaker.

His political views on Israel etc have no bearing on whether or not Dershowitz is a "respected legal scholar". Considering that he's a defence attorney, it's likely that he knows a little more about domestic law than you or I and so it'd be foolish to not consider his thoughts on the subject. And it'd be pathetically moronic to dismiss them for the reasons you state.

So you believe that his clearly right wing,nutjob views on other matters, have no bearing on this subject?

Now that's moronic.

 

[scenecreamer]

I think that may be what they call a straw man argument....

His views on the law and procedure are all that is relevant here. FFs, he's a Harvard professor. I guarantee he understands this subject better than any of us.

He was also part of the OJ Simpson defense team, and that's fine with me.

 

[didactic]

I think that may be what they call a straw man argument....

His views on the law and procedure are all that is relevant here. FFs, he's a Harvard professor. I guarantee he understands this subject better than any of us.

He was also part of the OJ Simpson defense team, and that's fine with me.

You defense of this man gets more and more flimsy. We all know how "innocent" OJ was.

 

[scenecreamer]

"Respected legal scholar", really?


He advocates torture, the bombing of villages in Palestine, defends Israel no matter what they do and is a right wing nutcase.

No wonder you like him ;)

Hitler was a twat but he was/is still respected as a public speaker.

His political views on Israel etc have no bearing on whether or not Dershowitz is a "respected legal scholar". Considering that he's a defence attorney, it's likely that he knows a little more about domestic law than you or I and so it'd be foolish to not consider his thoughts on the subject. And it'd be pathetically moronic to dismiss them for the reasons you state.

He may be respected but maybe his views on Israel betray his leaning a little as usually Jewish people who see no fault with the nation defend other Jewish people regardless of what it is they are being accused of. Zimmerman is a Jewish name so this has become more about race and who has the most authentic supporters than the evidence and the case at hand.

I hope none of this distracts the jury from making the right decision.

The article discusses the evidence at hand. The evidence supports Zimmerman. This is why the State didnt originally press charges. This is why the special prosecutor dismissed the grand jury. He most likely would have been acquitted. So she brought the charges against him herself. You know race riots are bad in the tourist season.