George Zimmerman Trial Thread (Found Not Guilty Jesus help us...)

[MR.CJ]

Obama is speaking

 

[MR.CJ]

Obama speaking that real shit

 

[Gold_Certificate]

In addition to Marissa Alexander, look up CeCe McDonald who was sentenced last year for defending herself against a white neo-Nazi.

He pleaded guilty to get manslaughter instead of second degree murder, so claiming self-defense was no longer available to him.

 

[can'tyoutell]

I wonder how much money Zimmerman would get if he put his sidearm up for sale on Ebay?

I hope he gets millions. More money for the Martin family.

 

[can'tyoutell]

I concede there was no proof that George Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation, which is what I originally believed was needed for a conviction. But I still have a problem with the following. That is harassment. I know the legal definition is slightly different, but the base definition is (1) : to annoy persistently (2) : to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct.

I believe if you harass someone and a physical confrontation results, you hold liability for that confrontation. Am I crazy for thinking this? Gold_Certificate, what say you?

 

[Gold_Certificate]

I concede there was no proof that George Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation, which is what I originally believed was needed for a conviction. But I still have a problem with the following. That is harassment. I know the legal definition is slightly different, but the base definition is (1) : to annoy persistently (2) : to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct.

I believe if you harass someone and a physical confrontation results, you hold liability for that confrontation. Am I crazy for thinking this? Gold_Certificate, what say you?

If it doesn't meet the legal definition for being a crime, then it doesn't count.

 

[Swiffness!]

shit just got real w/ that obama freestyle speech

 

[can'tyoutell]

I concede there was no proof that George Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation, which is what I originally believed was needed for a conviction. But I still have a problem with the following. That is harassment. I know the legal definition is slightly different, but the base definition is (1) : to annoy persistently (2) : to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct.

I believe if you harass someone and a physical confrontation results, you hold liability for that confrontation. Am I crazy for thinking this? Gold_Certificate, what say you?

If it doesn't meet the legal definition for being a crime, then it doesn't count.

It doesn't have to be legal to be a consideration though. But again, people have different opinions on what harassment is, especially when they are intellectually dishonest, so you're right. The harassment law needs changing, because it is to protect people from harassment, and I can't see how what Zimmeman did wasn't harassment.

 

[Hyde Parke]

Gold Certificate-She pleaded "no contest" to physically attacking Gray and Gray had injuries, so it's more than hearsay; and it does not support her claim that she feared him.

It was not illegal for her to wait in the house afterward, but it didn't support her claim that she feared "imminent peril of death or great bodily harm". The law doesn't require that she be injured either, but lack of injuries doesn't support the claim that she was attacked. Witnesses can be unreliable/subjective, but the presence of corroborating witness testimony can support a claim. This was the case with John Good's testimony:

Pleading no contest is not an admittance to guilt. There was an altercation that is a fact. Whether Gray had injuries of not Is also not evidence of guilt, those injuries could have been sustained during the physical altercation between the two. Injuries are just that, injuries, it would not be wise to impose insinuate or suggest that by the physical appearance of them, that =automatic guilt of the other party involved.

Waiting in the home afterwards could also be lend credence to her testimony. Had she left, it could strongly be argued she was fleeing; which is a typical action of someone who has just committed a crime.

It wasn't determined that there were a " lack of injuries". All injuries are not visible to the eye.

Concerning witnesses and their testimonies, Gray's son said in court that he saw his dad attacking Alexander. His testimony would be very credible, moreso than good's who couldn't actually see exactly what was taking place.

It was dark, raining, and he bitched out and went back into the house when he realized there was a serious altercation taking place.

Whether the bullet was fired into the air or the wall is another red herring. She never denied firing the shot, and if she said air first instead of wall, it doesn't discredit her story. The event was traumatic and she may not have remembered exactly where she aimed. Zimmerman feigned ignorance on a series of things when questioned more than once about the specific details that happened that night. It is not uncommon for a person to forget each detail, and each time the question is asked over a series of times, the answers don't remain exact as the first time it was asked.

Gold Certificate-Now, this doesn't mean she couldn't have feared "imminent peril of death or great bodily harm", but at the immunity hearing, the burden of proof was on her. This is why her immunity was denied, because she lacked anything supporting her claim other than her own changing testimony.

I'd blame her lawyer, her lack of supporting evidence was revealed to the prosecution at the immunity hearing. Giving the prosecution the upper hand during the trial.

Then, by turning down the plea, she received the mandatory sentence under Florida's "10-20-Life" rule

I'm not privy to what went on at the immunity hearing specifically, I cant comment on that.

True, her lawyer did a poor job of defending her. When she didn't accept what the prosecution offered, they went for the kill, I guess to show her how its really done. Figuratively. Still doesn't prove her to be guilty of any crime, and a jury returning with a verdict that quick is insane. It prob took that long just to read the instruction. Sounds like they found her guilty without ever giving/ considering her the benefit of the doubt

 

[stringer bell]

 

[Hyde Parke]

This Zimmerman case, just goes to show how dumbed down society has become. During the trial, the defense tells the jury not to speculate but that's EXACTLY what they were doing. Not one of those witnesses knew exactly what happened, but there were facts that were overlooked.

The 911 call, Zimmerman reporting someone he feels is suspicious, him getting out of his car, him being told not to follow, and him killing an unarmed child at point blank range. Those are the facts. There is no doubt about that.

In what world that you know, will the only living real witness knowing he could be facing death/life in prison, admit to initiating and then acting on the confrontation and murdering someone? I wont wait, there are none. that's why defense attorney's stay getting paid.

You can make up all the theories in the world on this to make the story into what you want it to be, but the facts were right there, all along.

 

[riddlerap]

someone linked me this last night..

 

[riddlerap]

real talk though, one of the reasons i would hate to be black is because it seems like if you dont agree with the majority opinion of blacks, you get labeled an outcast (ie: "coon"). its like black people expect all blacks to have the same mindset. no other race is like that, certainly not whites anyway. you cant really progress if youre constantly shunning anyone who thinks differently.

 

[2stepz_ahead]

real talk though, one of the reasons i would hate to be black is because it seems like if you dont agree with the majority opinion of blacks, you get labeled an outcast (ie: "coon"). its like black people expect all blacks to have the same mindset. no other race is like that, certainly not whites anyway. you cant really progress if youre constantly shunning anyone who thinks differently.

you could help us out by changing you avi....stop posting on a mostly black site...

eat a dikk and lick a wall socket

 

[Hyde Parke]

real talk though, one of the reasons i would hate to be black is because it seems like if you dont agree with the majority opinion of blacks, you get labeled an outcast (ie: "coon"). its like black people expect all blacks to have the same mindset. no other race is like that, certainly not whites anyway. you cant really progress if youre constantly shunning anyone who thinks differently.

its really nothing for you to be worried about or even have a slight concern, you'll never be black.

 

[riddlerap]

real talk though, one of the reasons i would hate to be black is because it seems like if you dont agree with the majority opinion of blacks, you get labeled an outcast (ie: "coon"). its like black people expect all blacks to have the same mindset. no other race is like that, certainly not whites anyway. you cant really progress if youre constantly shunning anyone who thinks differently.

you could help us out by changing you avi....stop posting on a mostly black site...

eat a dikk and lick a wall socket

 

[riddlerap]

real talk though, one of the reasons i would hate to be black is because it seems like if you dont agree with the majority opinion of blacks, you get labeled an outcast (ie: "coon"). its like black people expect all blacks to have the same mindset. no other race is like that, certainly not whites anyway. you cant really progress if youre constantly shunning anyone who thinks differently.

its really nothing for you to be worried about or even have a slight concern, you'll never be black.

you dont have to be black to have a logical observation about black people. i wasnt pointing out what i did to diss black people, i just find it weird/interesting.

 

[playmaker88]

real talk though, one of the reasons i would hate to be black is because it seems like if you dont agree with the majority opinion of blacks, you get labeled an outcast (ie: "coon"). its like black people expect all blacks to have the same mindset. no other race is like that, certainly not whites anyway. you cant really progress if youre constantly shunning anyone who thinks differently.

its really nothing for you to be worried about or even have a slight concern, you'll never be black.

you dont have to be black to have a logical observation about black people. i wasnt pointing out what i did to diss black people, i just find it weird/interesting.

Logical observation...lol you feast on youth culture and you are all the sudden a sociologist

 

[Hyde Parke]

real talk though, one of the reasons i would hate to be black is because it seems like if you dont agree with the majority opinion of blacks, you get labeled an outcast (ie: "coon"). its like black people expect all blacks to have the same mindset. no other race is like that, certainly not whites anyway. you cant really progress if youre constantly shunning anyone who thinks differently.

its really nothing for you to be worried about or even have a slight concern, you'll never be black.

you dont have to be black to have a logical observation about black people. i wasnt pointing out what i did to diss black people, i just find it weird/interesting.

what you are pointing out is your lack of knowledge by speaking on things you have observed through a filtered lense. you don't have to be black to observe, true, but by default you have no connection whatsoever to the observation, you are the observer, not the observed. so all that is left is your perception, albeit an irrational one.

 

[Gucci Scott King]