Zimmerman Gets Bond

and at this time I would like to, once again, point out that even if zimmerman did just follow trayvon unprovoked, that is not a crime.
 
Well, first off is that the claim is not SYG as a defense, it is self defense. Second of all, we don't know that an autopsy drug panel would show the dexi in DM to make the drug, water soluble, and time...So, the fact that the possibility of a crazed out assailant acting like he's on PCP, is of no concern to you eh? Then I seriously doubt that you have anything useful in honest debate on the matter.

what?

1. the claim is SYG as the defense.

2. there was an autopsy performed and i have yet to see your claims of certain drugs in his system. nice try.

3. your claim of " the fact that the possibility of a crazed out assailant acting like he's on PCP, is of no concern to you eh" is beyond absurd. i've never any such comments. perhaps you can enlighten us as to how you came to that conclusion. especially given the fact, that i've repeatedly said, the evidence the public knows, show zimmeran to likely be innocent.
 
what?

1. the claim is SYG as the defense.

can Zimmerman still claim he killed Martin in self defense under Florida’s stand your ground law? Maybe.
I started thinking about this more in depth last night after receiving an email from a well respected attorney who suggested that I misstated an aspect of the law during a television appearance. In particular, he believed I was wrong to say that “under Florida Law you can’t start a fight, start losing a fight and then claim you were standing your ground.”
The Florida Stand your Ground Law passed in 2005 reads as follows:
A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
So the law is pretty clear that if Zimmerman was attacked by Martin, he could use deadly force “if he. . . reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself.” Who was the aggressor becomes a, and probably the, crucial legal question.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlin...efense-claim-depend-on-who-started-the-fight/

So the defense will claim 'self defense' under the SYG statutes...Technical I know but still.

2. there was an autopsy performed and i have yet to see your claims of certain drugs in his system. nice try.

Positive for Pot, and like I said I don't know if they can even test for DM.

3. your claim of " the fact that the possibility of a crazed out assailant acting like he's on PCP, is of no concern to you eh" is beyond absurd. i've never any such comments. perhaps you can enlighten us as to how you came to that conclusion. especially given the fact, that i've repeatedly said, the evidence the public knows, show zimmeran to likely be innocent.

Are we confused? I am saying that M was the one crazed out that night, possibly on purple lean...And I provided an article, and definitions of what this substance does when abused.
 
ac;1030881]So the defense will claim 'self defense' under the SYG statutes...Technical I know but still.

sorry bud....it is not only technical, but is the actual defense his lawyers will use. there is no other FL law that will grant him a greater defense in killing someone.

Positive for Pot, and like I said I don't know if they can even test for DM.

fair enough....your opinion is speculation at this point. like i said...the drugs don't matter. he could have been on PCP, however, unless and only unless, he engaged in behavior to allow zimmerman to come under the SYG law, it doesn't matter his drug state or mental state.



Are we confused? I am saying that M was the one crazed out that night, possibly on purple lean...And I provided an article, and definitions of what this substance does when abused.

no, we are not confused. you are offering pure speculation and attempting to pass it off as fact.
 
keep denying reality all you want. there is plenty of evidence that is lining up with zimmerman telling the truth, you on the other hand are being left holding a sack of fail.

If he was telling the truth then why hide money and dupe passports? Looks like Mr Truth was planning on skipping the country.
 
The judge in the Trayvon Martin killing has set Zimmerman's bond again. This time at 1 million. I doubt George is going anywhere.





lol...how's that "waiver of speedy trial" thing goin' for ya, Georgie!

he is said to have a defense fund of $200,000 and would only have to put a non-refundable deposit of $100,000 to post bail

now the question is does he want to burn $100,000 to get out of jail

oh well
 
Actually there is some proof that he was at least supplying some in his circle...



Majority of Americans smoke pot? In what reality? Actually he did much worse. Martin was into doing what they call "Purple Drank", it is a home made substance that depending on degree of useage mimics PCP.



No.



Suspended from school for graffiti, drugs, and there is some evidence that he assaulted a school bus driver in Miami as well....So, yes.



Maybe he was channeling the "Choom Gang".... After all Obama did say that if he had a son he would look just like him...



Irrelevant, personal anecdotes have no bearing on the case.



Ah, so if you don't support Treyvon Martin then one must be racist eh? How intellectually easy, and might I say fraught with 'white guilt.'

The "MAJORITY" defense is thrown out there, when it's very well known that it can't be proven or disproven.
Kids use it as defense for drinking, smoking, and substance use.
Alcoholics use it to defend their drinking.
Tobacoo users use it to defend their smoking
and
MJ users use it to defend their own use.

How many Senior grads used it on prom night, in an attempt to get laid; ie: "C'mon baby, you know everyone else is doing it".
 
If he was telling the truth then why hide money and dupe passports? Looks like Mr Truth was planning on skipping the country.

always good to have a backup plan. I would definitely have one especially if I was getting railroaded in the media, where it's confirmed the media actually spliced my audio to imply things I never said or alluded to.
 
So you admit that your "evidence" is pretty much worthless?

ask yourself this question, if the test is so worthless why was it ever conducted in the first place?

... I'll wait on that one.

passed a lie detector test
has injuries, which are consistent with, and match his story
multiple witnesses back up that trayvon was on top of him and beating him up
zimmerman was mere feet from his car. he was not "chasing trayvon" down the street

Your side, on the otherhand:

- Denied zimmerman was injured, you turned out to be incorrect
- Spliced his audio to make it imply something he never alluded to (and you guys got caught)
- jumped to like 10 different other conclusions with zero evidence

The anti-zimmermans have been wrong on EVERYTHING so far. And it will only continue.

The anti-zimmermans: wrong side of history
 
The "MAJORITY" defense is thrown out there, when it's very well known that it can't be proven or disproven.
Kids use it as defense for drinking, smoking, and substance use.
Alcoholics use it to defend their drinking.
Tobacoo users use it to defend their smoking
and
MJ users use it to defend their own use.

How many Senior grads used it on prom night, in an attempt to get laid; ie: "C'mon baby, you know everyone else is doing it".

How true. And usually put out there by someone that knows full well they are in the wrong.
 
Now the night in question M was at 7-11 buying two of the three ingredients used in this concoction, and the video at the store shows a young man barely able to stand up on his own....If, and I am saying if he was doing this drug on that night, it is possible that Z had no choice but to shoot him.
Thanks for the laugh.
 
Well, judging from your first post on the subject Althea, I don't think you are in line to be an impartial jurist in the case now are you?
The facts are documented. Zimmerman went hunting for a robber. He thought he found one.

Now he's a murderer. Your "he bought two of the three ingredients" comment is nonsense.



Hunters typically buy rain gear, and weatherproof boots if they hunt in the rain. They also buy bullets.

By your logic, anyone who purchases rain gear/boots, is by default....a hunter.
 
The facts are documented. Zimmerman went hunting for a robber. He thought he found one.

Now he's a murderer. Your "he bought two of the three ingredients" comment is nonsense.



Hunters typically buy rain gear, and weatherproof boots if they hunt in the rain. They also buy bullets.

By your logic, anyone who purchases rain gear/boots, is by default....a hunter.

true or false:

it's illegal to follow someone on a public street
 
true or false:

it's illegal to follow someone on a public street
Zimmerman's not being prosecuted for following anyone.

He's being prosecuted for following, with the intent to kill.

It would have been very easy for Zimmerman to explain what his reason for following Martin was. He chose to take an aggressive approach instead.


Now he'll spend most of his life in jail, or he'll be hunted down in 'self defense' if acquitted.

Either way, he made a terribly poor decision, and will pay with his life.
 
Zimmerman's not being prosecuted for following anyone.

He's being prosecuted for following, with the intent to kill.

And yet you talk about him "going on the hunt" and chasing trayvon down, which, as we have established, following someone is not a crime. It's never been a crime. Him following trayvon is entirely irrelevant.

The rest of what you say is entirely unproven. It comes down to who initiated contact, and it's very plausible (I would say likely/confirmed) that it was trayvon that initiated the attack. Zimmerman was on the phone with police. Why would he start a violent confrontation when talking to police?

Either way, he made a terribly poor decision, and will pay with his life.

the hero zimmerman will be acquited, and hopefully everyone will see the error of their ways.

confirmed: your side has been wrong on everything so far.
 
Zimmerman's not being prosecuted for following anyone.

He's being prosecuted for following, with the intent to kill.

It would have been very easy for Zimmerman to explain what his reason for following Martin was. He chose to take an aggressive approach instead.


Now he'll spend most of his life in jail, or he'll be hunted down in 'self defense' if acquitted.

Either way, he made a terribly poor decision, and will pay with his life.

This is the part I don't get. GZ immediately assumed the worst. GZ never told TM he was part of a neighborhood watch and just checking up on people he wasn't familiar with. If he had done so, it would be a big part of his defense: "I told Martin not to panic because I was just looking out for the neighborhood, blah blah blah."
 
This is the part I don't get. GZ immediately assumed the worst. GZ never told TM he was part of a neighborhood watch and just checking up on people he wasn't familiar with. If he had done so, it would be a big part of his defense: "I told Martin not to panic because I was just looking out for the neighborhood, blah blah blah."
Exactly!

Perhaps if he hadn't chosen to carry his weapon to the chase, his actions would've resembled someone with a modicum of common sense.
 
Back
Top