George Zimmerman /Trayvon Martin General Discussion #14 Friday July 12

Status
Not open for further replies.

ScarlettScarpetta

When the going gets tough, drink coffee
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
12,687
Reaction score
123
Funny. TM called GZ two different racial slurs..

BAd argument STATE.
 

BiggNewt

New Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
I don't believe MOM just stood up and made an objection??? The guy has got to be very worried.

IMO

He did it because Guy just lied about what reasonable doubt is..You know what he says about liars...They are murderers...IMO
 

Overuled

New Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
158
Reaction score
0
Did Guy just say a seventeen year old driving around in a car?? omg. moo
 

AngelWings444

New Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
5,066
Reaction score
6
I thought TM was already home according to RJ?

Nope. He wasn't at his house. He was "almost" there. We really do not have any idea how close he was since RJ was on the phone and wouldn't know Trayvon's exact location.

I tell my son that I am almost home, near home, by the house, etc...when I am at different distances.

IMO
 

logicalgirl

Peace Hawk
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
16,024
Reaction score
0
Love it! Prosecution now flipping the people - what if TM was driving around and saw GZ, got out of his car and followed him and now GZ was dead - what would you do?

IMO
 

JeannaT

Former Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
8,636
Reaction score
146
I know this is beside the point, but IMO boys and men don't start to look like adults until they are about 21-22. At 16, 17 they still look like boys. They still look lanky and their necks look skinny.

Some still look boyish. Some look like men, IMHO, and have a full bushy beard and all their adult height at 17.

Trayvon was one of those kind, IMHO.
 

ScarlettScarpetta

When the going gets tough, drink coffee
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
12,687
Reaction score
123
I know this is beside the point, but IMO boys and men don't start to look like adults until they are about 21-22. At 16, 17 they still look like boys. They still look lanky and their necks look skinny.

Completely untrue. I could show you a pic of kid I know that has been 6'2 since 13. Many many teen boys are big quick and stay that way.
 

BiggNewt

New Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2013
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Love it! Prosecution now flipping the people - what if TM was driving around and saw GZ, got out of his car and followed him and now GZ was dead - what would you do?

IMO

Have a trial and find out the facts...Just like this one...
 

dog.gone.cute

Kyron Horman - Missing Since 6-4-10
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
15,653
Reaction score
1,945
LUNCH Break !

:drumroll: then Jury Instructions ...

:drumroll: then Verdict Watch ...


:please::please::please: for Zimmerman !
 

Frigga

New Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
5,229
Reaction score
29
When my kids reached that age, they no longer were allowed to see the pediatrician, and were referred to a Family practitioner. Because a 17 year old is not a child, and medically it's inappropriate to treat them like that.

They have become adults, in the eyes of the medical community.

IMHO

That's weird because our pediatricians group see children through the age of 18- when they become legal adults or finish High School.
 

ScarlettScarpetta

When the going gets tough, drink coffee
Joined
Mar 8, 2012
Messages
12,687
Reaction score
123
Nope. He wasn't at his house. He was "almost" there. We really do not have any idea how close he was since RJ was on the phone and wouldn't know Trayvon's exact location.

I tell my son that I am almost home, near home, by the house, etc...when I am at different distances.

IMO

NO HE WAS AT. She stated HE said he was AT his daddy's house.. as referenced with a link to the testimony in the last post about this.
 

katiewonders

Inactive
Joined
Oct 13, 2010
Messages
1,051
Reaction score
0
I wouldn't be surprised if the jury comes back with a verdict today. If they are in agreement after their discussion of the evidence, in the first straw vote, they won't want to spend another weekend in a hotel. IMO
 

Zoe Bogart

Let's not ask for the Moon, we have the Stars
Joined
Sep 7, 2008
Messages
4,841
Reaction score
34
In my opinion you are incorrect. Again, Zimmerman killed someone. He KILLED someone. He admits to doing so, but is saying that he should be given a pass for this particular killing.

Do you actually believe he has no further obligations other than to say the two words, "Self Defense"? That's what you are claiming. And no, don't respond by saying that Zimmerman did say more than just this, because that negates the original claim that this was unnecessary. According to the oft repeated 'Florida law' statement, Zimmerman never needed to say any more than these two magical words. According to some, a simple "Self Defense" statement somehow kicks all the burden onto the prosecution. Forget the corpse, he said it was self defense.

Apparently some believe that the prosecution must prove exactly what happened, and why, and what people were feeling, and they must somehow demonstrate that it was impossible for the killer to suffer some unspecified injury down the road -- perhaps a lightning strike due to the storm. Can you PROVE lightning was impossible? It was Florida after all. And apparently Zimmerman doesn't even have to claim he was afraid of lightning, the prosecution must still prove that this fear as well was unreasonable.

It's silly. It's not THEIR job to explain why Trayvon Martin is dead, it's the job of the guy who followed and killed him.

The burden of proof is on the prosecution.
 

Chris_Texas

New Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,926
Reaction score
3
YES he is presumed innocent! Yes, he is! This is where so many people don't understand how the court works in the United States.

It's literally called, "presumption of innocence" and it's the cornerstone of our justice system. He is presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty in a court of law.

IMHO and probably you might want to research this. It's the stuff we all learned in 6th grade civics. The defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

That's why we have a trial rather than throwing him in Prison without one. But Zimmerman is not claiming he did not shoot an unarmed teen, he is claiming he shot this unarmed teen because he had no choice.

At that point he has an obligation to explain WHY he had no choice. It is not assumed he had no choice, nor is it assumed he is telling the truth. IMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top