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

[Tommy bilfiger]

The Victims (1991-2011)

On average, Blacks have been 76 percent of the victims; Hispanics 17 percent; and Whites 7 percent. Over the past 20 years, the percentage of Black victims decreased by one percent, Whites decreased by 5 percent, and Hispanics increased by 5 percent

On average, Blacks have been 76 percent of the known offenders; Hispanics 19 percent, and Whites 4 percent.

There were 2,289 murders in Chicago between 2007 and 2011.

-These high murder police districts are on average 94 percent African American.

Four of them (districts 2, 3, 6, and 7) are next to each other on the eastern section of the South Side. This includes nine communities: Grand Boulevard (former location of the Robert Taylor Homes public housing project), Washington Park, Woodlawn, Greater Grand Crossing, South Shore, Englewood & West Englewood (home of Jennifer Hudson and Derrick Rose), Auburn Gresham, and Chatham. The other two Chicago police districts with the highest murder rates (districts 11 and 15) boundary each other on the central section of the West Side and include the four communities of Austin, Humboldt Park, West Garfield Park, and East Garfield Park.

http://www.ebony.com/news-views/enough-chicago-murder-by-the-numbers-405#axzz2ZMJ75FC2

^besides humbuldt park All blacc neighborhoods

"But whites kill fellow whites 84% of the time!!" foh wit that skewered non sense the volume of murders don't even compare to blaccs

 

[damobb2deep]

Stand Your Ground law doesn't need to change.

Zimmerman just practiced bad judgement that's all.

Yes, it does.

Marissa Alexander only fired a warning shot, and she's going to jail for 20 years for protecting her children.

All because she's Black.

While your child-killing hero goes free.

And shoot first laws are completely archaic and for conservatives who are trigger happy.

That's not stand your ground.

The bitch intentionally fired the shot.

she feared 4 her life after he verbally said "im goin 2 kill you"

 

[StillFaggyAF]

lmao at this broke ass saltine not knowing what Whole Foods is

 

[ohhhla]

Stand Your Ground law doesn't need to change.

Zimmerman just practiced bad judgement that's all.

Yes, it does.

Marissa Alexander only fired a warning shot, and she's going to jail for 20 years for protecting her children.

All because she's Black.

While your child-killing hero goes free.

And shoot first laws are completely archaic and for conservatives who are trigger happy.

That's not stand your ground.

The bitch intentionally fired the shot.

she feared 4 her life after he verbally said "im goin 2 kill you"

Too bad he didn't put hands on her and she went out and git her ass 20 yrs and once again it's not stand your ground.

She had another option, Zimmerman didn't when Trayvon was wailing on him.

You guys are biased to your race.

Can you admit it?

 

[Batman.]

He said "Why are you following me?" while he was punching him.

At least that's what I'm getting by the anti-Trayvoners.

 

[Gold_Certificate]

I don't see how definition (2) doesn't apply.

He was in willful pursuit of Trayvon even after the police told him to stop following him. "These assholes always get away" can be taken maliciously and once he got out the car, he harassed Trayvon, as heard by Rachel Jeantel.

The prosecution is complete shit for letting that slide.

The prosecution couldn't establish "malice" for second degree murder, they'd still have to establish it for stalking.

Plus, it must be shown that the willfully malicious following/harassing happened "repeatedly".

I still maintain that, "these assholes always get away" can be taken for malice.

I would also work around repeatedly as Zimmerman first followed Trayvon while on the phone with the cops and then followed him after the call. There's ways to work around definitions.

Shitty prosecution.

This was not established either.

It wasn't established that he followed him after the call with a cop?

Nah. Rachel Jeantel claims Treyvon lost Zimmerman after running and he later asked Zimmerman why he was following him. She doesn't say who approached who.

Zimmerman claims he lost Treyvon after he ran and Treyvon later approached him and asked him if he had a problem.

I remember hearing the phone convo and the cop told him to leave him alone.

And looks like he continued to follow him.

So...hello loophole! \/

Zimmerman's response to the non-emergency operator's suggestion was "Ok", followed by "He ran.", and later "I don’t know where this kid is.".

Loophole removed.

But amazingly, he somehow found Trayvon again and when confronted, Tray himself said, "Why are you following me?"

Oop, would ya look at that?

The Loophole is back on. \/

Speculation as to Treyvon's motivation for asking the question.

It's not known if that was referring to Zimmerman's admitted following during the non-emergency call.

Loophole removed again.

 

[BIRGGin]

lmao at this broke ass saltine not knowing what Whole Foods is

lol sorry I was too busy celebrating another victory for the whitehispanic man.

 

[Batman.]

lmao at this broke ass saltine not knowing what Whole Foods is

lol sorry I was too busy celebrating another victory for the whitehispanic man.

Only way you could not know is if you don't live independently or buy groceries.

You live in your mother's basement and eat Mac and Cheese for dinner.

 

[BIRGGin]

Only way you could not know is if you don't live independently or buy groceries.

You live in your mother's basement and eat Mac and Cheese for dinner.

Or I was being purposefully obtuse.

 

[Gold_Certificate]

Stand Your Ground law doesn't need to change.

Zimmerman just practiced bad judgement that's all.

Yes, it does.

Marissa Alexander only fired a warning shot, and she's going to jail for 20 years for protecting her children.

All because she's Black.

While your child-killing hero goes free.

And shoot first laws are completely archaic and for conservatives who are trigger happy.

That's not stand your ground.

The bitch intentionally fired the shot.

she feared 4 her life after he verbally said "im goin 2 kill you"

She claims she feared for her life, fled to the garage, got the gun from her car--instead of leaving--returned, and then fired a shot towards him and his sons as they were leaving.

That's not "stand your ground"; that's "aggravated assault with a firearm".

 

[Batman.]

Only way you could not know is if you don't live independently or buy groceries.

You live in your mother's basement and eat Mac and Cheese for dinner.

Or I was being purposefully obtuse.

You mean you weren't when you said there weren't hispanics that are white? Or when you admitted you didn't know what whole foods is?

You've always been obtuse. You live vicariously through someone else's victory and gloat because you have none of your own personal victories.

This dude is too pathetic, somebody get this guy some friends.

 

[Gold_Certificate]

I don't see how definition (2) doesn't apply.

He was in willful pursuit of Trayvon even after the police told him to stop following him. "These assholes always get away" can be taken maliciously and once he got out the car, he harassed Trayvon, as heard by Rachel Jeantel.

The prosecution is complete shit for letting that slide.

The prosecution couldn't establish "malice" for second degree murder, they'd still have to establish it for stalking.

Plus, it must be shown that the willfully malicious following/harassing happened "repeatedly".

I still maintain that, "these assholes always get away" can be taken for malice.

I would also work around repeatedly as Zimmerman first followed Trayvon while on the phone with the cops and then followed him after the call. There's ways to work around definitions.

Shitty prosecution.

This was not established either.

It wasn't established that he followed him after the call with a cop?

Nah. Rachel Jeantel claims Treyvon lost Zimmerman after running and he later asked Zimmerman why he was following him. She doesn't say who approached who.

Zimmerman claims he lost Treyvon after he ran and Treyvon later approached him and asked him if he had a problem.

I remember hearing the phone convo and the cop told him to leave him alone.

And looks like he continued to follow him.

So...hello loophole! \/

Zimmerman's response to the non-emergency operator's suggestion was "Ok", followed by "He ran.", and later "I don’t know where this kid is.".

Loophole removed.

But amazingly, he somehow found Trayvon again and when confronted, Tray himself said, "Why are you following me?"

Oop, would ya look at that?

The Loophole is back on. \/

Speculation as to Treyvon's motivation for asking the question.

It's not known if that was referring to Zimmerman's admitted following during the non-emergency call.

Loophole removed again.

Um, why would there be speculation as to why Trayvon would ask that question?

If he followed him a first time, then if he saw Tray again (even though you give the excuse that he lost him or ran), that would equate to a second time of following him after he was told (or suggested--pfft) not to.

Thus, repeated following, and ergo, the loophole for stalking.

I'ma need you to get yo argument together.

You're assuming his question could not have referred to the following Zimmerman admitted to on the non-emergency call; such assumptions are speculation.

And neither Zimmerman nor Rachel Jeantel claim that Zimmerman saw Treyvon first after Treyvon ran; so the bolded is also speculation.

Loophole still removed.

 

[Gold_Certificate]

Stand Your Ground law doesn't need to change.

Zimmerman just practiced bad judgement that's all.

Yes, it does.

Marissa Alexander only fired a warning shot, and she's going to jail for 20 years for protecting her children.

All because she's Black.

While your child-killing hero goes free.

And shoot first laws are completely archaic and for conservatives who are trigger happy.

That's not stand your ground.

The bitch intentionally fired the shot.

she feared 4 her life after he verbally said "im goin 2 kill you"

She claims she feared for her life, fled to the garage, got the gun from her car--instead of leaving--returned, and then fired a shot towards him and his sons as they were leaving.

That's not "stand your ground"; that's "aggravated assault with a firearm".

The man has a history of abuse, dear.

When someone has a history of abuse, and shout threats, it's grounds for defense.

Also, it was a single warning shot that didn't kill him.

And yes, it applies under stand your ground because of his past abusive history and the perceived threat to her well-being.

The bolded perfectly fits Florida's legal definition of "aggravated assault":

784.011 Assault.—

(1) An “assault” is an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other person that such violence is imminent.

(2) Whoever commits an assault shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

History.—s. 5, Feb. 10, 1832; RS 2400; GS 3226; RGS 5059; CGL 7161; s. 1, ch. 70-88; s. 729, ch 71-136; s. 17, ch. 74-383; s. 7, ch. 75-298; s. 171, ch. 91-224.

Note.—Former s. 784.02.

784.021 Aggravated assault.—

(1) An “aggravated assault” is an assault:

(a) With a deadly weapon without intent to kill; or

(b) With an intent to commit a felony.

(2) Whoever commits an aggravated assault shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

History.—s. 2, ch. 3275, 1881; RS 2402; GS 3228; RGS 5061; CGL 7163; s. 1, ch. 29709, 1955; s. 1, ch. 57-345; s. 731, ch. 71-136; s. 18, ch. 74-383; s. 8, ch. 75-298.

Note.—Former s. 784.04.

It doesn't fit "stand your ground", because fleeing to her car counts as retreating from the situation. It would've been under "stand your ground" if she had the gun on her when he first threatened her and shot at him then.

She was also charged with battery for a separate assault on him, months after she shot toward him and his sons; which she plead "no contest" to.

 

[damobb2deep]

Stand Your Ground law doesn't need to change.

Zimmerman just practiced bad judgement that's all.

Yes, it does.

Marissa Alexander only fired a warning shot, and she's going to jail for 20 years for protecting her children.

All because she's Black.

While your child-killing hero goes free.

And shoot first laws are completely archaic and for conservatives who are trigger happy.

That's not stand your ground.

The bitch intentionally fired the shot.

she feared 4 her life after he verbally said "im goin 2 kill you"

She claims she feared for her life, fled to the garage, got the gun from her car--instead of leaving--returned, and then fired a shot towards him and his sons as they were leaving.

That's not "stand your ground"; that's "aggravated assault with a firearm".

the kids was in the house but not by him.. he admited 2 sayin he wanted 2 put hands on her in the garage... 1 thats her house and had reasonable fear 4 her life... even tho Zimmerman didnt use stand yo ground... his defense was painting the picture he had reasonable fear 4 his life...

 

[5th Letter]

BIRGGin you're this close to getting banned. I'm just letting you know.

 

[Chef_Taylor]

BIRGGin you're this close to getting banned. I'm just letting you know.

If he attempt to create another troll account swamp that one out too.

 

[Gold_Certificate]

I don't see how definition (2) doesn't apply.

He was in willful pursuit of Trayvon even after the police told him to stop following him. "These assholes always get away" can be taken maliciously and once he got out the car, he harassed Trayvon, as heard by Rachel Jeantel.

The prosecution is complete shit for letting that slide.

The prosecution couldn't establish "malice" for second degree murder, they'd still have to establish it for stalking.

Plus, it must be shown that the willfully malicious following/harassing happened "repeatedly".

I still maintain that, "these assholes always get away" can be taken for malice.

I would also work around repeatedly as Zimmerman first followed Trayvon while on the phone with the cops and then followed him after the call. There's ways to work around definitions.

Shitty prosecution.

This was not established either.

It wasn't established that he followed him after the call with a cop?

Nah. Rachel Jeantel claims Treyvon lost Zimmerman after running and he later asked Zimmerman why he was following him. She doesn't say who approached who.

Zimmerman claims he lost Treyvon after he ran and Treyvon later approached him and asked him if he had a problem.

I remember hearing the phone convo and the cop told him to leave him alone.

And looks like he continued to follow him.

So...hello loophole! \/

Zimmerman's response to the non-emergency operator's suggestion was "Ok", followed by "He ran.", and later "I don’t know where this kid is.".

Loophole removed.

But amazingly, he somehow found Trayvon again and when confronted, Tray himself said, "Why are you following me?"

Oop, would ya look at that?

The Loophole is back on. \/

Speculation as to Treyvon's motivation for asking the question.

It's not known if that was referring to Zimmerman's admitted following during the non-emergency call.

Loophole removed again.

Um, why would there be speculation as to why Trayvon would ask that question?

If he followed him a first time, then if he saw Tray again (even though you give the excuse that he lost him or ran), that would equate to a second time of following him after he was told (or suggested--pfft) not to.

Thus, repeated following, and ergo, the loophole for stalking.

I'ma need you to get yo argument together.

You're assuming his question could not have referred to the following Zimmerman admitted to on the non-emergency call; such assumptions are speculation.

And neither Zimmerman nor Rachel Jeantel claim that Zimmerman saw Treyvon first after Treyvon ran; so the bolded is also speculation.

Loophole still removed.

Where did you see me say that, hon?

If Zimmerman pursued Trayvon after the call, it's still a repeated following.

If Zimmerman found Tray after he ran, then it's still a repeated following.

Neither the bolded nor the underlined have been established; also speculation.

And to answer your question, you speculated earlier with this:

...But amazingly, he somehow found Trayvon again and when confronted, Tray himself said, "Why are you following me?"...

 

[Gold_Certificate]

Stand Your Ground law doesn't need to change.

Zimmerman just practiced bad judgement that's all.

Yes, it does.

Marissa Alexander only fired a warning shot, and she's going to jail for 20 years for protecting her children.

All because she's Black.

While your child-killing hero goes free.

And shoot first laws are completely archaic and for conservatives who are trigger happy.

That's not stand your ground.

The bitch intentionally fired the shot.

she feared 4 her life after he verbally said "im goin 2 kill you"

She claims she feared for her life, fled to the garage, got the gun from her car--instead of leaving--returned, and then fired a shot towards him and his sons as they were leaving.

That's not "stand your ground"; that's "aggravated assault with a firearm".

The man has a history of abuse, dear.

When someone has a history of abuse, and shout threats, it's grounds for defense.

Also, it was a single warning shot that didn't kill him.

And yes, it applies under stand your ground because of his past abusive history and the perceived threat to her well-being.

The bolded perfectly fits Florida's legal definition of "aggravated assault":

784.011 Assault.—

(1) An “assault” is an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other person that such violence is imminent.

(2) Whoever commits an assault shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

History.—s. 5, Feb. 10, 1832; RS 2400; GS 3226; RGS 5059; CGL 7161; s. 1, ch. 70-88; s. 729, ch 71-136; s. 17, ch. 74-383; s. 7, ch. 75-298; s. 171, ch. 91-224.

Note.—Former s. 784.02.

784.021 Aggravated assault.—

(1) An “aggravated assault” is an assault:

(a) With a deadly weapon without intent to kill; or

(b) With an intent to commit a felony.

(2) Whoever commits an aggravated assault shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

History.—s. 2, ch. 3275, 1881; RS 2402; GS 3228; RGS 5061; CGL 7163; s. 1, ch. 29709, 1955; s. 1, ch. 57-345; s. 731, ch. 71-136; s. 18, ch. 74-383; s. 8, ch. 75-298.

Note.—Former s. 784.04.

It doesn't fit "stand your ground", because fleeing to her car counts as retreating from the situation. It would've been under "stand your ground" if she had the gun on her when he first threatened her and shot at him then.

She was also charged with battery for a separate assault on him, months after she shot toward him and his sons; which she plead "no contest" to.

The fact that she used a "deadly weapon without intent to kill" doesn't deter it from being within the stand your ground law.

Don't see where you're going with this.

"Stand your ground" refers to the lack of a "duty to retreat" if someone desires to defend themselves with force.

Marissa Alexander retreated before returning and using force; so "stand your ground" does not apply here.

(3) 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 if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

 

[Gold_Certificate]

Stand Your Ground law doesn't need to change.

Zimmerman just practiced bad judgement that's all.

Yes, it does.

Marissa Alexander only fired a warning shot, and she's going to jail for 20 years for protecting her children.

All because she's Black.

While your child-killing hero goes free.

And shoot first laws are completely archaic and for conservatives who are trigger happy.

That's not stand your ground.

The bitch intentionally fired the shot.

she feared 4 her life after he verbally said "im goin 2 kill you"

She claims she feared for her life, fled to the garage, got the gun from her car--instead of leaving--returned, and then fired a shot towards him and his sons as they were leaving.

That's not "stand your ground"; that's "aggravated assault with a firearm".

the kids was in the house but not by him.. he admited 2 sayin he wanted 2 put hands on her in the garage... 1 thats her house and had reasonable fear 4 her life... even tho Zimmerman didnt use stand yo ground... his defense was painting the picture he had reasonable fear 4 his life...

She chose to get the gun and go back when she went to her car in the garage, this is why her "stand your ground" claim was rejected:

A judge ruled against Alexander in a Stand Your Ground hearing in 2011, saying that her choice to go back in the house to face her husband was not consistent with someone who was in “genuine fear of his or her life.”

As far as where the children were, it's her word against theirs:

“When she [Alexander] discharges a firearm in the direction of human beings, the Legislature says it’s dangerous,” Corey told Brown. “And one of the reasons is because the bullet went through the wall where one of the children was standing. It happened to deflect up into the ceiling, but if it had deflected down it could have hit one of the children.”

 

[can'tyoutell]

Stand Your Ground law doesn't need to change.

Zimmerman just practiced bad judgement that's all.

Yes, it does.

Marissa Alexander only fired a warning shot, and she's going to jail for 20 years for protecting her children.

All because she's Black.

While your child-killing hero goes free.

And shoot first laws are completely archaic and for conservatives who are trigger happy.

That's not stand your ground.

The bitch intentionally fired the shot.

she feared 4 her life after he verbally said "im goin 2 kill you"

She claims she feared for her life, fled to the garage, got the gun from her car--instead of leaving--returned, and then fired a shot towards him and his sons as they were leaving.

That's not "stand your ground"; that's "aggravated assault with a firearm".

the kids was in the house but not by him.. he admited 2 sayin he wanted 2 put hands on her in the garage... 1 thats her house and had reasonable fear 4 her life... even tho Zimmerman didnt use stand yo ground... his defense was painting the picture he had reasonable fear 4 his life...

She chose to get the gun and go back when she went to her car in the garage, this is why her "stand your ground" claim was rejected:

A judge ruled against Alexander in a Stand Your Ground hearing in 2011, saying that her choice to go back in the house to face her husband was not consistent with someone who was in “genuine fear of his or her life.”

As far as where the children were, it's her word against theirs:

“When she [Alexander] discharges a firearm in the direction of human beings, the Legislature says it’s dangerous,” Corey told Brown. “And one of the reasons is because the bullet went through the wall where one of the children was standing. It happened to deflect up into the ceiling, but if it had deflected down it could have hit one of the children.”

Was she supposed to just stand there and get beaten again?