Those are not the jury instructions; that is a very small part of the jury's instructions: context.
Those are not the jury instructions; that is a very small part of the jury's instructions: context.
Then what's stopping you from posting them and a link; but make sure it's to a verifiable site and not just some liberal "wishing" blog?
Here is a link to the full instructions; I don't know the site, but the instructions are correct: link
I had already seen this, before my post; but even your link does not support the complaint by Christie that the two cases being discussed are somehow related by the "stand your ground" law?
In answer to Mott's question, Team Z were all too busy masturbating to violent porn to notice right away.
Then what's stopping you from posting them and a link; but make sure it's to a verifiable site and not just some liberal "wishing" blog?
I presume you have statements from all the jurors to make a blanket statement? This was not about stand your ground; the only place you heard that was from the media; the defense didn't use it as they had a better chance with reasonable doubt and 2nd degree murder, and it worked.
I think you misunderstand my position: Zimmerman should never have been indicted as there was not probable cause. The original prosecutor had that right before the state stepped in. You don't get your ass handed to you the way the prosecutor did at the trial with believable probable cause.
There was not probable cause??????????? Insanely ridiculous. If Zimmerman had been black, he would have been immediately arrested, and undoubtedly "rough handled". Are you serious? You, and adult, and known by the police force, shoot an unarmed teen, "dead", in supposed "self defense", and given the 911 call, you better bet your ass there was probable cause. I know you think there is 2 and six kinds of justice, and there actually "is"....that doesn't mean that it is right.
That's a pretty hypocritical comment and is projection on your behalf. Why do you and the other Zimmy defenders are either oddly quiet or keep making comments, as you have, that are totally irrelevant to my point. Your hung up on what a court decided. I never brought that up and it has absolutely nothing to do with the point I have made. Why do you and the other Zimmy supporters refuse to support and defend this woman and why won't you recognize this GLARING inconsistency? Why do you and the other Zimmy defenders refuse to defend her?So, reality cannot dent your insistence that it isn't "right" because she unsuccessfully claimed something that Zimmerman didn't claim at all and you therefore think the NRA is at fault?
What drives people crazy is emotive nonsense in place of intelligent conversation and the attempt to say another is racist when they point out inconvenient reality.
ROTFLMAO! That's the only honest answer I've had so far! LOLIn answer to Mott's question, Team Z were all too busy masturbating to violent porn to notice right away.
Could be. I just read about it. I'm sure Grnd heard about this years ago.Or we discussed it months ago, when the event happened.
Could be. I just read about it. I'm sure Grnd heard about this years ago.![]()
That's a pretty hypocritical comment and is projection on your behalf. Why do you and the other Zimmy defenders are either oddly quiet or keep making comments, as you have, that are totally irrelevant to my point. Your hung up on what a court decided. I never brought that up and it has absolutely nothing to do with the point I have made. Why do you and the other Zimmy supporters refuse to support and defend this woman and why won't you recognize this GLARING inconsistency? Why do you and the other Zimmy defenders refuse to defend her?
If Grind or Billy defend her actions I'll give them props. as to the others who keep ruining from this basic question or who evade by trying to distract with irrelevant comments , as you have, I can only assume your hypocrites, bigots, or both.
Are rednecks ever going to acknowledge 10,000 gun murders is too much!Pinheads ever gonna admit that defending the 2nd Amend. and defending the "right of self defense" does not equate to dedending Zimmerman?