trayvan martin

doc111

doc111

Well-Known Member
Mindmelted said:
:clap::clap::clap::clap: Knew you would come and save the day doc.
The only reasonable one here it seems(and that includes me)Even though i never said i thought he was innocent or guilty.
While all the rest like to hear words that are not there or commands that are not commands.
Click to expand...
Bro, I've been falsely accused of a crime. Nothing even CLOSE to this magnitude but it nearly cost me my career nonetheless. I can't even imagine if my freedom or life would've been on the line or if my name had been dragged through the mud in the news media. Even if Zimm gets off, he's pretty well screwed. He may get a book or movie deal (I doubt it though), but he'll never get a normal job again. Shit, he may never be able to take his dog for a walk again!:sad:
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
doc111 said:
Bro, I've been falsely accused of a crime. Nothing even CLOSE to this magnitude but it nearly cost me my career nonetheless. I can't even imagine if my freedom or life would've been on the line or if my name had been dragged through the mud in the news media. Even if Zimm gets off, he's pretty well screwed. He may get a book or movie deal (I doubt it though), but he'll never get a normal job again. Shit, he may never be able to take his dog for a walk again!:sad:
Click to expand...
serves the psycho vigilante right.

if zimmerman simply "stood his ground", he'd be free today to stalk and harass whoever he profiled and martin would have gone home and had some skittles.

poke a beehive, get stung.
 
doc111

doc111

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
serves the psycho vigilante right.

if zimmerman simply "stood his ground", he'd be free today to stalk and harass whoever he profiled and martin would have gone home and had some skittles.

poke a beehive, get stung.
Click to expand...
Rush to judgement much??????:roll:
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
The current judge recused. The next judge in the rotation recused himself as well. Judges are finding all kinds of reasons to step away from this one...

I guess none of them want to issue the go-ahead order for a murder 2 charge after reading the affidavit of probable put forth by the prosecutor. I think Dershowitz called this one correctly, "a good judge would dismiss the charges". I doubt any Florida judge will have the balls to dismiss charges and be blamed for the civil unrest that follows, so we will get a show trial that drags on and on till the public (hopefully) loses interest.

I guess judge Lester drew the short straw.

"Judge Kenneth M. Lester Jr. will preside over the case. The next judge who would be in the court rotation, John D. Galluzzo, also cited a conflict, so Lester was selected, according to a news release from the court."

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-quits-trayvon-martin-case-cites-conflict-192240603.html
 
B

bundee1

Well-Known Member
This whole thing is wrong and Zimmerman is just plain wrong. Just because there is an SYG law in Florida doesnt make Zimmerman's act right. The moment he left the car he was wrong. He judged Trayvon wrongly and killed him for his own mistake.
 
Stillbuzzin

Stillbuzzin

Well-Known Member
doc111 said:
I have listened to them and don't recall anything that screams "2nd degree murder". Perhaps I will give them another listen. ;-)

As for defending Zimmerman? No, I'm not defending him, but I'm also not rushing to judgement. Especially this case which has few to NO eyewitnesses, and so much contradictory "evidence". If the man killed Trayvon and violated Florida state law, he deserves whatever the justice system sees fit to hand out. However, rushing to judgement often puts innocent people in prison. I have a REAL problem incarcerating innocent people. I don't know if he's innocent or not, but there seems to be little to NO physical evidence and a whole lot of speculation. I'm not about to send anyone to prison for life (or even a day for that matter) simply because it appears one way. On the surface, I admit, it looks horrible for Zimm, but upon closer examination a whole lot of reasonable doubt seems to be lurking around every corner. Any decent criminal defense attorney already knows this and will exploit it. I think the state has an uphill battle proving Murder 2 beyond a reasonable doubt. They may even have trouble with manslaughter given the lack of evidence.
:blsmoke:



http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/why-are-so-many-innocent-people-convicted-of-746194.html
Click to expand...
bongsmilieAmen amen finally some one with a lot of ability to comprehend
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
doc111 said:
I have listened to them and don't recall anything that screams "2nd degree murder". Perhaps I will give them another listen. ;-)

As for defending Zimmerman? No, I'm not defending him, but I'm also not rushing to judgement. Especially this case which has few to NO eyewitnesses, and so much contradictory "evidence". If the man killed Trayvon and violated Florida state law, he deserves whatever the justice system sees fit to hand out. However, rushing to judgement often puts innocent people in prison. I have a REAL problem incarcerating innocent people. I don't know if he's innocent or not, but there seems to be little to NO physical evidence and a whole lot of speculation. I'm not about to send anyone to prison for life (or even a day for that matter) simply because it appears one way. On the surface, I admit, it looks horrible for Zimm, but upon closer examination a whole lot of reasonable doubt seems to be lurking around every corner. Any decent criminal defense attorney already knows this and will exploit it. I think the state has an uphill battle proving Murder 2 beyond a reasonable doubt. They may even have trouble with manslaughter given the lack of evidence.
:blsmoke:



http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/why-are-so-many-innocent-people-convicted-of-746194.html
Click to expand...
ok if you listen to the 911 tape how long was Zimmerman on the phone with the 911 operator AFTER he said "ok" to not following...How long was he on after the ok ??? when you have the answer I will show you why Zimmerman is at fault
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
ok if you listen to the 911 tape how long was Zimmerman on the phone with the 911 operator AFTER he said "ok" to not following...How long was he on after the ok ??? when you have the answer I will show you why Zimmerman is at fault
Click to expand...
Why not spare us the suspense and just tell us why Zimmer is at fault?
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
desert dude said:
Why not spare us the suspense and just tell us why Zimmer is at fault?
Click to expand...
in order to make the point I would need you to know for yourself how long he was on the phone after he said ok to not following... If you are going to defend be prepared for logical questions.
 
Eulin

Eulin

Member
Originally Posted by desert dude
Why not spare us the suspense and just tell us why Zimmer is at fault?



in order to make the point I would need you to know for yourself how long he was on the phone after he said ok to not following... If you are going to defend be prepared for logical questions.
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
if you listen to this one you can still get a understanding of how Zimmerman kept following trayvon

at 1:40 he is getting out his truck

at 1:56 he is told not to following

at 2:00 he said "ok"

so lets say it should take him the same time to return to truck ( about 16 seconds)

the call lasted another 42+ seconds after he was told not to follow, in which he should have made it back to his truck..again good luck defending this shit.. Murder 2 probably not but the jury can always go with the lesser charge of manslaughter.

[youtube]6aVwPqXc-bk[/youtube]
 
MuyLocoNC

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
if you listen to this one you can still get a understanding of how Zimmerman kept following trayvon

at 1:40 he is getting out his truck

at 1:56 he is told not to following

at 2:00 he said "ok"

so lets say it should take him the same time to return to truck ( about 16 seconds)

the call lasted another 42+ seconds after he was told not to follow, in which he should have made it back to his truck..again good luck defending this shit.. Murder 2 probably not but the jury can always go with the lesser charge of manslaughter.



[youtube]6aVwPqXc-bk[/youtube]
Click to expand...
@1:56 he is told they don't NEED him to follow, he was never directed NOT to. They also didn't need him to keep breathing or need him to digest the food in his stomach, but he did both of those legal actions as well.

He wasn't REQUIRED to return to his truck, it's a free country and he can go where he pleases, confront whomever he pleases, none of your bullshit amounts to anything but a free man exercising his right to go wherever he so chooses. It doesn't cancel his right to self defense in any way. If he then attacked Trayvan, he's in deep shit. If Trayvan attacked him for ANY reason, he'll walk or get a slap on the wrist.

You may not like it, you may not like people who carry concealed weapons, well all I can say to that is tough shit. I'd put it at about 50/50 that he gets convicted at this point, but I highly doubt it will be 2nd degree murder.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
MuyLocoNC said:
If Trayvan attacked him for ANY reason, he'll walk or get a slap on the wrist.
Click to expand...
not true.

zimmerman, because he was the aggressor, would then be required to "exhaust all reasonable options of escape" (as well as satisfying other conditions).

considering he had 360 degrees of open space around him, i'd say he in no way satisfied the above scenario.
 
MuyLocoNC

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
not true.

zimmerman, because he was the aggressor, would then be required to "exhaust all reasonable options of escape" (as well as satisfying other conditions).

considering he had 360 degrees of open space around him, i'd say he in no way satisfied the above scenario.
Click to expand...
If he had turned to return to his truck as he states, he satisfied that condition. I still disagree with the assumption he was the aggressor, following him to ask him his business is far from aggressive, not to mention perfectly legal. I will concede there are many scenarios that would lead to his conviction, but as the sole survivor and the PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE, his story is going to be hard to overcome. And the prosecution is off to an awful start if they don't have some bombshell evidence we don't know about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top