You keep stating this, mind laying out the proof you speak of, I guess I missed it. Convince me, counselor.
Last edited:
Judge revokes Zimmerman's bond
- Thread starter Cancel 2018. 3
- Start date
You keep stating this, mind laying out the proof you speak of, I guess I missed it. Convince me, counselor.
Come on Dude, Grind just disagrees with you, but he is not an idiot, far from it.
Grind, you can't do it in court, you know this better than most. You don't play "let's Make a Deal with a Judge, it just doesn't work that way.
True, but we have no evidence zimmerman initiated a confrontation, and given that lack of injuries on one side and the presence of injuries on the other, it's highly likely the one who caused the most damage is the initiator.
Even so, if you read self defense legislation, there is almost no way that trayvons reaction was appropriate. Even if zimmerman had grabbed trayvons arm, the response trayvon used in retaliation would still give zimmerman the legal right to shoot him.
2 months ago proles were waiting to hang zimmerman from the highest tree. I am happy that after having multiple holes being punched in the narrative, you have at least adopted a "Wait and see" viewpoint. This is good.
Althea
Althea told me...
Not sure what any of this has to do with the fact that Zim lied under oath, when he claimed that he thought Martin was older.
You still haven't looked up the legal definition for 'assault'.
Your assertions are just as speculative as mine. I speculate that Zimmerman assaulted Trayvon first. Assault doesn't require physical contact.
For someone who purports to be waiting for all the evidence before arriving at a conclusion, you certainly go to great lengths to give Zimmerman the benefit of every possible doubt.
Like you, based on what is known thus far, I have my own opinion of what happened. Zimmerman killed a kid who was doing nothing wrong and claiming 'self defense' AFTER making contact despite being advised by police dispatch not to.
Enough evidence is in about Zimmerman's fixation on young blacks, his cozy relationship with that laugh-riot sorry-ass excuse for a police department, his ex-judge daddy, his 45-plus calls to 9/11. My money's on Zimmerman being guilty of 2nd degree murder. I'll settle for manslaughter.
well as I stated, it might have just been an oversight. I dont' believe zimmerman would try to purposely hide something knowing the media would be all up his ass. In any case, i think it's pretty much a non-issue, as assuming he's dead guilty on lying about bond, it seems pretty reasonable one would want to get the best price for their freedom. Using that to impugne someones character is silly.
Nothing. But since he's 'innocent until proven guilty', some here will give him the benefit of the doubt in spite of what is already known, specifically that Zimmerman will lie to a judge and already has. That has a devastating effect on his credibility - for some people, anyway.
i was responding to your inquiry. If you have a problem with relevance of topic, blame yourself.
How would he KNOW how old the kid was ?.....was his answer a lie in the tape.....or in other testimony ?
Late teens.....maybe 19.....he later said 'I thought he was a little bit younger than me'....Zim is 28....
Is 19 a little bit younger than 28.....?
He said, " About like his late teens."......whats your point...? That was before he met him face to face....that was first impression from a distance....
His impression might have changed after he got his clock cleaned up close and personal......
I have had the wait and see viewpoint.
So, Trayvon has no right to defend himself when he felt threatened with his fists, but Zimmerman has the right to use deadly force? I guess this is the part of the law I think is unfair.
Twist, spin and split hairs. Obviously you need to on this. I don't, and probably neither will the jury.
I am using "Assault" in place of having to type out "Assault and battery"/"aggravated assault"/"assault and battery" etc. It's just an easier shorthand.
Believe it or not, that's how our entire judicial system is structured. Zimmerman is innocent until proven guilty. So far, I haven't seen much evidence that points to him being guilty of anything.
My opinion is actually based on something, not just pulled out of thin air because it's what I want to believe. Also, my opinion is more relevant, because if it's a tie, then he must be found not guilty. Which is my overarching contention, that zimmerman is not guilty of what he is being accused of. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and by proxy, yourself, to prove his guilt.
I know it has influenced juries before.
Man...is that a stretch.....how do you know he didn't lie to the dispatcher instead....???
He wasn't under oath then.......
Thats laughable.....
Rationalist
Hail Voltaire
Yes, because you liberals are wiping your asses with the Constitution. You people don't give a fuck about whether Zimmerman is actually guilty. Like I said, why do we even need a trial? You fascists have obviously already decided, so let's get on with the lynching already.
there is no evidence trayvon had a right to feel threatened. And zimmerman has not been charged with stalking. It's not illegal to follow someone, and it's not appropriate to beat someone up for doing so. It is perfectly legal to shoot someone in self defense though, as you are receiving multiple head injuries.
\Thats it ?.........Thats all ya got.....
Aren't YOU the one splitting hairs......?
He took a guess after seeing Martin from a distance for seconds or minutes....whats so difficult to understand about that?