Indeed....I stand corrected. The prosecution should have to disprove the statement...which leads me to wonder whether they have already considered that possibility. If they haven't anticipated that very simple statement, the whole "Murder 2" charge seems to be an exercise in futility
Or its part of the plan. "see, we did what the public demanded, and after seeing all the evidence his peers decided that he was not guilty of this charge" thinking that will appease everyone involved.
Twenty eight pages of useless arguements, and not even about the Florida "Stand Your Ground" law.
What a waste of time and electricity...........
There's been quite a bit mentioned about the SYG law, but it's really a simple topic. Did Martin attack Zimmerman or did Zimmerman attack Martin? If Martin was the aggressor - Zimmerman was within his legal rights to use deadly force in self defense.
Everyone has wanted to argue all kinds of minutiae about the "evidence" but it all boils doing to which one of them initiated hostile action. There's a lot of argument going on because The Blessed Trayvon™ being a CHILD who was shot by a WHITE-hispanic man doesn't really have anything to do with the case - but that's what everyone is arguing about. Racism, Martin being portrayed as a pre-teen "armed only with Skittles" etc. That's The Narrative™. That's what they want the argument to be about.
Even Doni's first post was based on the presumption that Zimmerman just killed Martin for no reason, comparing it to the "stiffer" penalties for cruelty to animals.
quote
Originally posted by Doni Hagan: In the state of Florida, under Florida statute 775.082, you are subject to up to a year in jail and a $5000 fine if you kill a dog.
828.12. Cruelty to animals (1) A person who unnecessarily overloads, overdrives, torments, deprives of necessary sustenance or shelter, or unnecessarily mutilates, or kills any animal, or causes the same to be done, or carries in or upon any vehicle, or otherwise, any animal in a cruel or inhumane manner, is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or by a fine of not more than $5,000, or both.
775.082. Penalties (a) For a misdemeanor of the first degree, by a definite term of imprisonment not exceeding 1 year.
BUT, in the same state, it appears that if you kill an unarmed child, you can go home with your gun, no problem.
The Narrative™ was never about whether Zimmerman acted in self-defense or not. The Blessed Trayvon™ was portrayed as an innocent victim preyed upon by an evil racist. Then the media proceeded to report on anything that supported The Narrative™ and ignore anything that didn't, editing and creating evidence when it furthered The Narrative™ (re: NBC).
The Zimmerman/Martin case is a pretty simple case. The media treatment, conviction by court of public opinion, race baiting groups putting out bounties for Zimmerman's arrest when he'd not yet been charged with a crime... have turned it into a circus.
But you won't anyone putting Zimmerman at risk by posting his address online, or calling for his arrest (dead or alive) or placing a bounty on his head, being called to answer for any of their actions. That's going to get a complete pass.
I don't know if it's still online or not (gonna have to look) but I listened to a recording of the call that Zimmerman made to the police dispatcher and they did not edit out his address or phone number when the dispatcher asked for it. "ALL" the 911 calls I listened to had the callers address and number bleeped out.
Just a note about the Stand Your Ground Law... The only thing this law does is allow you to meet force with force without first having to try and flee. They determined that if you try and flee that it puts you at a greater risk by turning your back to an attacker. This law is not a "Shoot First" law as some would want you to believe. The law itself is not about guns. It is about giving a victim a "fighting" chance to defend oneself with force (deadly force if necessary).
I am not by any stretch of anyone's imagination petitioning for the deification of Trayvon Martin...... but how does any of that have to do with the events of February 26th? Unless it's proven that he was in the process of acting on his "street thuggery" when he was shot and killed, I fail to see a cognitive connection...though I have little doubt such things will be discussed during the trial.
I'm having a hard time making that connection too. No matter one's past, unless you are currently committing a violent crime, I'm failing to see where Stand your Ground= judge, jury & executioner. As opposed to Martin's apparent lifestyle as I am, walking down the street, still doesn't constitute any sort of crime.
Originally posted by aceman: And that isn't part of the whole game plan?
Trayvon's parents and activists scream for an arrest or there will be civil unrest.
The state puts on the show of an investigation. Politically, they know they need to charge and arrest Zimmerman to calm the public.
They decide on Murder 2. And speak of pursuing a conviction on this charge. (Really they know it'll be difficult at best. But, the public is happy they acted.)
So the game goes on. The State can say they gave it their all, but just couldn't the conviction to stick. Zimmerman get a Not Guilty verdict and all are appeased.
I'm having a hard time making that connection too. No matter one's past, unless you are currently committing a violent crime, I'm failing to see where Stand your Ground= judge, jury & executioner. As opposed to Martin's apparent lifestyle as I am, walking down the street, still doesn't constitute any sort of crime.
SYG doesn't = judge, jury & executioner. It never did. Walking down the street isn't illegal. Nobody ever suggested it was.
I'm having a hard time making that connection too. No matter one's past, unless you are currently committing a violent crime, I'm failing to see where Stand your Ground= judge, jury & executioner. As opposed to Martin's apparent lifestyle as I am, walking down the street, still doesn't constitute any sort of crime.
Walking down the street/sidewalk does not constitute a crime untill you punch someone in the face (If thats what happened).
Edit to add... Following/kepping someone in sight so you can point them out to police, that you think looks suspicious, also does not constitute a crime and does not deserve a punch in the face (if thats what happened).
I live by this rule... I won't put my hands on you so long as you don't "try" to put your hands on me. Words are just words. A physical attack is a whole nother story!
[This message has been edited by JimmyS (edited 04-16-2012).]
A large piece of evidence that I have not heard mentioned was the phone conversation Trayvon was having with his girlfriend. Of course this was not recorded and she, the GF, can only say what transpired. I believe her first statement would be her most honest and she admitted that Trayvon voiced he was being followed and acted like he was scared. It appeared he made an attempted to elude Zimmerman, which from Zimmermans account did take place. From the GF, at some point the conversation ended abruptly and she sensed that there was some sudden confrontation. She is not talking now but I believe she will coerced into doctoring her report.
But, if Trayvon did elude Zimmerman and then confront him while at his car, Trayvon then becomes the aggressor. Again, you have to look at the physical evidence and did Trayvon have any marks on his body, bruises, or signs he was struck? Zimmerman did. If it was a verbal confrontation and Trayvon took it to the next level then he again becomes the aggressor. I can not imagine Zimmerman would become physical, since he knew the police were on the way and he also knew he had a gun. If Zimmerman pulled his gun, which I dont think he would have, Trayvon certainly, at least I hope, would not have attacked him. Again, there was evidence there was a struggle from witnesses hearing and seing a struggle. Zimmerman had marks on him and grass on his back. Sounds like the gun was pulled in desperation and Trayvon was shot while on top of Zimmerman. Did they find a bullet in the ground? If not the bullet went up, meaning Trayvon was on top of him.
I have to believe that Trayvon was thinking this guy was just another punk kid. Zimmerman looks young in his picture. He certainly does not look menacing, but neither does Trayvon.
[This message has been edited by RotrexFiero (edited 04-16-2012).]
Believe it or not, that's what I wanted to concentrate on in the first place. Read my first few posts.
But since I'm not an NRA member, I got outvoted somehow.
I am an NRA member, and was hoping this thread would stay on topic, rather than turn into the op-ed that it has devolved into.
quote
So people expressing their opinions are a waste of electricity. Thanks for participating. [/B]
Expressing opinions is not a waste of electricity, however, arguments are useless without fact-based information. At this point, the media and leaders of some organizations have so cluttered the situation that real facts will be hard to sort out.
Of course, since I expressed my opinion about the content of this thread, I gusee I am just as guilty......
[QUOTE]I watched "Face the Nation" on CBS this morning. There were two guests on the show and the CBS reporter that brought the story to the forefront.
I would appreciate others takes on the views of the two guest panelists. I have my own opinion of what they said in response to Bob Schieffer's questions.[/B]
I posted this comment a few pages back. I am still interested if anyone else watched the show and had an opinion of the panelists responses.
[This message has been edited by olejoedad (edited 04-16-2012).]
I want to say my last post was not meant to be a "told you so". I don't play that game with someone's life as the subject. it just seems that the "no blood on his head" was a long discussion being argued over many pages of this thread; lest it not be forgotten.
I just saw the beginning of the trial on Sky News.Wow!! He looked completely different to the 'Media Image' we have seen up until now I would NOT have recognised him at ALL. If I hadn't been aware of who he was by the lead-up to the video, I simply would NOT have guessed who it was in the dock This becomes more and more confusing, and I STILL have a very open mind about what actually HAPPENED that day. I haven't judged anybody...just waiting to see how it all transpires.
[This message has been edited by fierofetish (edited 04-20-2012).]
I just saw the beginning of the trial on Sky News.Wow!! He looked completely different to the 'Media Image' we have seen up until now I would NOT have recognised him at ALL. If I hadn't been aware of who he was by the lead-up to the video, I simply would NOT have guessed who it was in the dock This becomes more and more confusing, and I STILL have a very open mind about what actually HAPPENED that day. I haven't judged anybody...just waiting to see how it all transpires.
Exactly F88!!! Now..if those had been the photographic 'profiles' projected initially by the Press....I doubt very much whether this whole 'Firestorm' would be such 'major News' as it has become. It also proves that manipulation to possibly distort the truth for financial gain by the Media is the NORM rather than the exception. But, as any sane person will recognise...neither photos nor rhetoric prove a single darned thing. I am secretly wondering if Mr. Zimmerman (see what I did just there? ) disappeared to undergo a visual morphing to improve his image. God how I hate the Media ...and I can't rermember using 'hate' as an emotion describing my feelings ) Nick
[This message has been edited by fierofetish (edited 04-21-2012).]
Exactly F88!!! Now..if those had been the photographic 'profiles' projected initially by the Press....I doubt very much whether this whole 'Firestorm' would be such 'major News' as it has become. It also proves that manipulation to possibly distort the truth for financial gain by the Media is the NORM rather than the exception. But, as any sane person will recognise...neither photos nor rhetoric prove a single darned thing. I am secretly wondering if Mr. Zimmerman (see what I did just there? ) disappeared to undergo a visual morphing to improve his image. God how I hate the Media ...and I can't rermember using 'hate' as an emotion describing my feelings ) Nick
Not sure if that pic that F88 posted is any better, Shows Zimmerman NOW (looks like he has lost a bunch of weight and is scared shitless) and a pic of martin.
Does anybody wonder where the media orifinally aquired their pics from in the first place??
[This message has been edited by newf (edited 04-21-2012).]
Originally posted by newf: Not sure if that pic that F88 posted is any better, Shows Zimmerman NOW (looks like he has lost a bunch of weight and is scared shitless) and a pic of martin.
Does anybody wonder where the media orifinally aquired their pics from in the first place??
Of course it shows Zimmerman "NOW". That's the point. The picture of an overweight Zimmerman is from 2005, when he was 21. The picture on the right was taken more recently but before the shooting and looks much more like Zimmerman does today in court.
What would you "prefer?" Is there any possible picture that you wouldn't find fault with?
I could have posted this picture of Martin, but I was looking for a recent picture that is representative of how both looked recently without trying to paint either one in a specific light.
There are *very* few pics online of Martin other than the 5+ year old pics of him as a pre-teen.
Here's another photo of Martin that reports he was 17 in the photo. Is that better or worse?
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 04-21-2012).]
Of course it shows Zimmerman "NOW". That's the point. The picture of an overweight Zimmerman is from 2005, when he was 21. The picture on the right was taken more recently but before the shooting and looks much more like Zimmerman does today in court.
What would you "prefer?" Is there any possible picture that you wouldn't find fault with?
I could have posted this picture of Martin, but I was looking for a recent picture that is representative of how both looked recently without trying to paint either one in a specific light.
There are *very* few pics online of Martin other than the 5+ year old pics of him as a pre-teen.
Here's another photo of Martin that reports he was 17 in the photo. Is that better or worse?
I really don't care what pics you post, doesn't change what happened. I've seen plenty of pics of Martin on the news some of them during a family getaway that was apparently just before he was killed.
I think Zimmerman looks gaunt and afraid probably because of what he is facing so using the pics of him and Martin that you showed COULD be used to say that the media is trying to sway opinion as well, if one was so inclined. You know by those who like to pick out the negative in everything IMO.
Are the pics of Martin supposed to show that he is a thug? Because they seem to show he was probably a normal immature teen.
[This message has been edited by newf (edited 04-21-2012).]
I really don't care what pics you post, doesn't change what happened. I've seen plenty of pics of Martin on the news some of them during a family getaway that was apparently just before he was killed.
I think Zimmerman looks gaunt and afraid probably because of what he is facing so using the pics of him and Martin that you showed COULD be used to say that the media is trying to sway opinion as well, if one was so inclined. You know by those who like to pick out the negative in everything IMO.
Are the pics of Martin supposed to show that he is a thug? Because they seem to show he was probably a normal immature teen.
Right, a normal immature teen with gold teeth and tattoos up both arms.
Now, you find recent pictures of Martin that don't show that... Go ahead, and skip the pictures of his early teens, we have all seen those. Even I was cute when I was that age.
Originally posted by newf: I really don't care what pics you post, doesn't change what happened. I've seen plenty of pics of Martin on the news some of them during a family getaway that was apparently just before he was killed.
You care enough to speculate on the motives behind my choice of pics.
quote
Originally posted by newf: I think Zimmerman looks gaunt and afraid probably because of what he is facing
Facing not only a 2nd degree murder charge, but the amount of hostility and death threats that have been directed at him and his family would tend to make most rational people afraid. That's why his parents testified via teleconference, because of threats on their lives. It's also why Zimmerman appears to be wearing a bullet proof vest under his suit.
quote
Originally posted by newf: so using the pics of him and Martin that you showed COULD be used to say that the media is trying to sway opinion as well, if one was so inclined. You know by those who like to pick out the negative in everything IMO.
You mean like this?
quote
Originally posted by newf: Are the pics of Martin supposed to show that he is a thug? Because they seem to show he was probably a normal immature teen.
I posted this picture because it showed the least "thug like" image of Martin I could find closer to his age at the time of the shooting. The "thug" pics were to show other examples that I chose not to use initially. Had I been trying to portray him as a thug, those would have been used first.
You're probably right that he was a normal immature teen. There are many "normal" immature teens on both the right side and wrong side of the law, so that statement in of itself doesn't show anything about whether Martin was up to no good that night or not, or if he attacked Zimmerman or not.
Originally posted by Formula88: You care enough to speculate on the motives behind my choice of pics.
Nope, I simply asked I didn't speculate nor do I care.
quote
Originally posted by Formula88:
Facing not only a 2nd degree murder charge, It's also why Zimmerman appears to be wearing a bullet proof vest under his suit.
I agree I imagine he's scared and apparently remorseful for what he did. Gotta suck when you kill a child, no matter what the reason.
quote
Originally posted by Formula88:
You mean like this?
Nope just asked your opinion of the pics you posted. Thanks for the response. Have you seen the pics of Martin on the day trip riding a horse and so on? They have been on the news a lot and are supposedly very recent.
I just saw the beginning of the trial on Sky News.Wow!! He looked completely different to the 'Media Image' we have seen up until now
It goes for both parties involved. Its part of the biggest beef i had with the entire thing. The 'media' needs to report facts and stop screwing with 'reality' to fit an agenda and let the system do its job. There should be NO agenda with reporting news.
( and no, i am not young and naive and i know they do this, but it doesn't make it right )
I agree I imagine he's scared and apparently remorseful for what he did. Gotta suck when you kill a child, no matter what the reason.
Or an adult. Its never a good thing when you are forced to take a life. Even when its to protect yourself or someone else ( even if its in the line of duty and its your job ). If it doesn't bother you after, something is wrong with you.
The 'media' needs to report facts and stop screwing with 'reality' to fit an agenda and let the system do its job. There should be NO agenda with reporting news.
The First Amendment deals with Freedom of the Press. The media has forgotten that with that freedom comes the burden to excercise that freedom in a responsible manner.
Just as the Second Amendment deals with the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. That freedom must also be excercised responsibly.
The First Amendment deals with Freedom of the Press. The media has forgotten that with that freedom comes the burden to excercise that freedom in a responsible manner.
Just as the Second Amendment deals with the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. That freedom must also be excercised responsibly.
The Second Amedment is no longer a right. It is more like a privilege. It is the only Amendment that is regulated by the gooberment and requires a background check in order to exercise your "RIGHT". In most states you must take a class ($$$), pass a background check ($$$), be fingerprinted ($$$) and obtain a permit ($$$) in order to carry concealed. Here in Florida, the class is between $50 - $100 depending on where you go, the background check is $5, fingerprints are $10 and the permit is $117. $232 just to exercise my "RIGHT". Show me any other Constitutional Right that will cost me money to exercise.
Media and family are great to show Zimmermans 'mug shot' alongside a 13 year old kid. To me most 17 year olds are full grown adults that just arent technically of 'legal age' yet. They say and try to make Martin a child ( his parents words). Again a 17 year old is not a child EXCEPT to their parents. He may be a typical immature teenager, but that dont mean hes a child. In a few months, he would have been legally an adult anyway.
The Second Amedment is no longer a right. It is more like a privilege. It is the only Amendment that is regulated by the gooberment and requires a background check in order to exercise your "RIGHT". In most states you must take a class ($$$), pass a background check ($$$), be fingerprinted ($$$) and obtain a permit ($$$) in order to carry concealed. Here in Florida, the class is between $50 - $100 depending on where you go, the background check is $5, fingerprints are $10 and the permit is $117. $232 just to exercise my "RIGHT". Show me any other Constitutional Right that will cost me money to exercise.
While I do agree with your sentiments and comments, I would point out that it is legal to buy a long gun through private sales with no gooberment involvement.
I would NOT have recognised him at ALL. If I hadn't been aware of who he was by the lead-up to the video, I simply would NOT have guessed who it was in the dock
) disappeared to undergo a visual morphing to improve his image.
