White Girl Bleed A Lot

BigLittlejohn said:

Nodrama - It is clear to me that you have no idea how to read the statute, and I don't mean that in an insulting or negative way. Those items listed in 776.041 are all exceptions to when "Stand Your Ground" can be legally applied unless certain conditions are applicable to the situation.

Click to expand...

Not only do I read and interpret it correctly, but every lawyer in the land will interpret it the same way. If you REALLY think the law is the way you say it is, then why doesn't the prosecution use it to further their case? Why? I'll tell you why, cuz you are WRONG!!!

'Stand Your Ground', not 'Run Away then Stand your ground.'

NoDrama said:

You keep claiming he was a stalker, but stalking means you have to follow someone around on DIFFERENT instances, the vehicle and then on foot doesn't equal different instances, it means one instance. Just like shooting someone 6 times doesn't get you charged with 6 counts of murder.

You can argue all you want, but your dead ass wrong all the way. There was a witness to the altercation, his name is Zimmerman, you fool.

Click to expand...

as a guy who has stalked deer wild boar and turkeys i can promise you, multiple instances are not required.

the definition of stalking

stalk[SUP] 2[/SUP] (stôk)v. stalked, stalk·ing, stalks
v.intr.1. To walk with a stiff, haughty, or angry gait: stalked off in a huff.
2. To move threateningly or menacingly.
3. To track prey or quarry.

v.tr.1. To pursue by tracking stealthily.
2. To follow or observe (a person) persistently, especially out of obsession or derangement.
3. To go through (an area) in pursuit of prey or quarry.



legal stalking in Florida:

FLORIDA
Section 784.048. STALKING; DEFINITIONS; PENALTIES. 1997.

(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) "Harass" means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose.

(b) "Course of conduct" means a pattern a conduct composed of series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of "course of conduct." Such constitutionally protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests.

(c) "Credible threat" means a threat made with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety. The threat must be against the life of, or a threat to cause bodily injury to, a person.

(2) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

(3) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person, and makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury, commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(4) Any person who, after an injunction for protection against repeat violence pursuant to s. 784.046, or an injunction for protection against domestic violence pursuant to s. 741.30, or after any other court-imposed prohibition of conduct toward the subject person that person's property, knowingly, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(5) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses a minor under 16 years of age commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, so. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(6) Any law enforcement officer may arrest, without a warrant, any person he or she has probable cause to believe has violated the provisions of this section.


nuff said.

Dr Kynes said:

and repeatedly follows

Click to expand...

Repeatedly means more than one instance, which means totally separate instances, not a single instance that you arbitrarily say is more than one due to mode of transportation.

See?

Besides, they didn't charge him with it because it would NEVER fly, unless you were the only Juror of course, thank god the legal system was developed to marginalize people like yourself.

NoDrama said:

Repeatedly means more than one instance, which means totally separate instances, not a single instance that you arbitrarily say is more than one due to mode of transportation.

See? I win AGAIN!

Besides, they didn't charge him with it because it would NEVER fly, unless you were the only Juror of course, thank god the legal system was developed to marginalize people like yourself.

Click to expand...

cant you read, their is more than one cluase/statute to Florida law, 6 to be exact he only need to qualify for one
(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) "Harass" means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose.

(b) "Course of conduct" means a pattern a conduct composed of series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of "course of conduct." Such constitutionally protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests.

(c) "Credible threat" means a threat made with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety. The threat must be against the life of, or a threat to cause bodily injury to, a person.

(2) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

(3) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person, and makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury, commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(4) Any person who, after an injunction for protection against repeat violence pursuant to s. 784.046, or an injunction for protection against domestic violence pursuant to s. 741.30, or after any other court-imposed prohibition of conduct toward the subject person that person's property, knowingly, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses another person commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(5) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or harasses a minor under 16 years of age commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, so. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(6) Any law enforcement officer may arrest, without a warrant, any person he or she has probable cause to believe has violated the provisions of this section.

Samwell Seed Well said:

means a pattern a conduct composed of series of acts over a period of time,

Click to expand...

The entire act of following him is considered ONE act, not a series of acts. Why wouldn't they charge him with this, it would make their case a whole lot better! You know why? Cuz it didn't happen.

NoDrama said:

Repeatedly means more than one instance, which means totally separate instances, not a single instance that you arbitrarily say is more than one due to mode of transportation.

See? I win AGAIN!

Besides, they didn't charge him with it because it would NEVER fly, unless you were the only Juror of course, thank god the legal system was developed to marginalize people like yourself.

Click to expand...

he followed martin, and called 911, the operator said stop following, he continued following. he then exited his truck and began an entirely fresh new and delightful course of following thus fulfilling the florida statute's requirements regarding stalking.

our legal system is fucked up by lawyers to marginalize people like me.

but if you catch a weed possession case, be sure to demand a jury, then i'll be your huckleberry.

Dr Kynes said:

he followed martin, and called 911, the operator said stop following, he continued following. he then exited his truck and began an entirely fresh new and delightful course of following thus fulfilling the florida statute's requirements regarding stalking.

our legal system is fucked up by lawyers to marginalize people like me.

but if you catch a weed possession case, be sure to demand a jury, then i'll be your huckleberry.

Click to expand...

Not once not ever did the operator say to stop following, that NEVER happened not once not ever. This is EASILY proved. Even if the operator did say to stop, guess what? They have ZERO authority, none, zilch, goose eggs there buddy. The 911 dispatch cannot tell you to do ANYTHING, they might suggest it but they have no authority whatsoever, none, NOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNEEE!!!!!!!

NoDrama said:

The entire act of following him is considered ONE act, not a series of acts. Why wouldn't they charge him with this, it would make their case a whole lot better! You know why? Cuz it didn't happen.

Click to expand...

maybe the DA is a dinkbag

maybe the DA is tanking the case deliberately

maybe the DA has a plan that he hasnt shared with you

maybe martin was actually a cocaine negro, possessed of superhuman strength and an unquenchable desire for white women.

maybe zimmerman was trying to prevent martin's suicide, and the gun went off

maybe the DA wants to ensure that the jury has to choose to convict on the murder charge instead of taking the easy out of a stalking conviction.

maybe martin tackled zimmerman and began performing a third degree indian burn, thus forcing zimmerman to shoot him before martin could escalate to a Rear Admiral.

maybe zimmerman has a closet full of creepy candid photos of martin, with the eyes cut out, and weird obsessive love poems written in lipstick on the walls...

Dr Kynes said:

maybe the DA is a dinkbag

maybe the DA is tanking the case deliberately

maybe the DA has a plan that he hasnt shared with you

maybe martin was actually a cocaine negro, possessed of superhuman strength and an unquenchable desire for white women.

maybe zimmerman was trying to prevent martin's suicide, and the gun went off

maybe the DA wants to ensure that the jury has to choose to convict on the murder charge instead of taking the easy out of a stalking conviction.

maybe martin tackled zimmerman and began performing a third degree indian burn, thus forcing zimmerman to shoot him before martin could escalate to a Rear Admiral.

maybe zimmerman has a closet full of creepy candid photos of martin, with the eyes cut out, and weird obsessive love poems written in lipstick on the walls...

Click to expand...

Maybe? Maybe I will invent the cure for cancer? What you got to say now? huh?

NoDrama said:

Not once not ever did the operator say to stop following, that NEVER happened not once not ever. This is EASILY proved. Even if the operator did say to stop, guess what? They have ZERO authority, none, zilch, goose eggs there buddy. The 911 dispatch cannot tell you to do ANYTHING, they might suggest it but they have no authority whatsoever, none, NOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNEEE!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

so now zimmerman WAS following the Bearer of the Skittles?

i cant even follow the logic web you weave.

zimmerman followed martin, with no cause, while carrying a gun, and even after being told to stop following by the 911 operator he continues (cause youre not the boss of me! Neener Neener Neener!) the following, then gets out of his car and continues following on foot he is NOT acting in a menacing manner? martin has no cause for alarm that he is being tailed by a creepy dude with a gun? i tell you what i would have reached for my own piece or stabbed him with my knife or choked him like a rat.

your claims that martin was a superhuman negro powerhouse of wanton destruction and mayhem is really really REALLY weak. in a fair and just world zimmerman would be on the slab, not martin.

NoDrama said:

Maybe? Maybe I will invent the cure for cancer? What you got to say now? huh?

Click to expand...

i think maybe you been smoking too much weed. youre all paranoid.


defending zimmerman is his lawyer's job. youre not gonna convince anybody that what he did was right. zimmerman is a tool, and he set back gun rights causes by at least a decade with his halfwitted shenanigans and depraved lust for the blood of young black boys.

Dr Kynes said:

i think maybe you been smoking too much weed. youre all paranoid.


defending zimmerman is his lawyer's job. youre not gonna convince anybody that what he did was right. zimmerman is a tool, and he set back gun rights causes by at least a decade with his halfwitted shenanigans and depraved lust for the blood of young black boys.

Click to expand...

Prosecuting Zimmerman is the job of the DA, not yours. You aren't going to convince anyone that Zimmerman was out to kill a "Ni**er" either.

Where have I tried to convince ANYONE that what he did was right? Where exactly? And please make sure to Quote those posts or shall we just note that you won't put anything up because it didn't happen?

NoDrama said:

Prosecuting Zimmerman is the job of the DA, not yours. You aren't going to convince anyone that Zimmerman was out to kill a "Ni**er" either.

Where have I tried to convince ANYONE that what he did was right? Where exactly? And please make sure to Quote those posts or shall we just note that you won't put anything up because it didn't happen?

Click to expand...

i express my outrage that this dipshit set back firearms rights by at least ten years so im trying to convict the Z-man? the Z-man is convicting himself every time he trots out a new retarded angle on his weak ass lies and bullshit stories.

Zimmerdimmer tells more fables that Aesop, and shovels more shit than hercules. if i was the DA he would be on no-bond and facing multiple felony counts.

spineless DA's should be charged with aiding and abetting the crimes of the clowns they plea bargain down to misdemeanors with time served.

im not gonna dig throiugh 5000 posts to find the ones where you make crazy statements about how zimmerwiener was justified. it's not worth my time.

Dr Kynes said:

im not gonna dig throiugh 5000 posts to find the ones where you make crazy statements about how zimmerwiener was justified. it's not worth my time.

Click to expand...

LOL

Translation: " I can't back up my statement so I will instead just deflect by making up even more outrageous and unfounded lies."

NoDrama said:

Not only do I read and interpret it correctly, but every lawyer in the land will interpret it the same way. If you REALLY think the law is the way you say it is, then why doesn't the prosecution use it to further their case? Why? I'll tell you why, cuz you are WRONG!!!

'Stand Your Ground', not 'Run Away then Stand your ground.'

Click to expand...

Please feel free to demonstrate how these words:

"(Unless) he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force."

Is not a duty to retreat before using force.

You are caught up in the fact that the law is commonly called "Stand Your Ground" that you aren't reading what the actual statute says. There is not a lawyer in the country that would agree with your "reading" of the provisions of the statute I quoted. Not one.

DD, the problem with the one eye-witness testimony is that he saw a portion of the conflict, left to go call the police and then when he returned, Zimmerman was already standing over a dead/dying Martin. Said Eyewitness saw none of what led to or what immediately preceeded the shooting. If a jury finds that Mr. Zimmerman's actions were in fact reasonable, I will be content with that decision, but under the law, you don't get to start a fight and because it's not going your way, shoot your way out of it unless you make an attempt to get out of the dangerous situation prior to using deadly force. The statute is pretty clear on that point, which again is why I even took the discussion down this road.

In Florida
Stand your ground
actaully entails
Follow and Provoke
obviously

BigLittlejohn said:

Please feel free to demonstrate how these words:

"(Unless) he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force."

Is not a duty to retreat before using force.

Click to expand...

LOL Why don't you just ask every lawyer in the nation, every one of them is going to tell you that you are wrong.

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

Click to expand...

Do you know what the word "or" means? Perhaps not, so let me copy and paste the dictionary reference to the word "OR" for you

or/ôr/

Conjunction:	Used to link alternatives: "a cup of tea or coffee"; "are you coming or not?".
Noun:	A Boolean operator that gives the value one if at least one operand (or input) has a value of one, and otherwise has a value of zero. Gold or yellow, as a heraldic tincture: "a bend or".

Click to expand...

Do you suppose that it might be an alternative to YOUR supposed understanding of the law? Maybe?
Have a nice day.

[video=youtube;IHLOtQvS6MQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHLOtQvS6MQ[/video]
racist fail

lol Cheezus that's awesome. Dude picks a fight with a big guy wearing a boxing t-shirt isn't real bright. Darwin approves.

Zimmerman needs somewhere safe for his wife to stay...does anyone want to email the Zimms and let them know that Shellie can stay at your house while this shit is going on. I hear she is a real good cook. You can also let Zimmy know that you will be on her like white on rice, so no one will be able to get to her. If this continues thru the cold months I bet she would be a great bed warmer.