Do you think Zimmerman will be convicted of murder?

Bullshit ............................................................

If she stated that she was not working out of political motivations then she is a liar and you are right she at least concerning that statement is clearly lying

Have the rest of you taken notice how parados use of words games is similar to Firefly?

Yeah; maybe Trayvon chose poorly
in selecting whose head he 'd beat upon the cement.



I dunno; u think maybe dissatisfaction with the area burglary rate ?

I dunno, but I suspect
that Angela is in a lot of trouble.

I wonder if she is taking counsel of Mike Nifong ?

What specifically do you think is BS?

Or is that your standard argument when you disagree but don't have any facts?

I submit that you are now calling her a liar because of peer pressure. My badgering you caused you to do so.

No if you are correct and she stated that she did not bring charges due to public pressure then she is knowingly lying in my opinion.

She would not had been lying by the act of dishonestly bringing charges however.

Zimmerman's arraignment date has been set for May 8 (moved up from May 29 for undisclosed reasons). His attorney will enter a plea of not guilty on behalf of his client (Zimmerman won't be there).

Question for the legal experts: What's next after that? Will there be another kind of hearing, do you think, or will the next time we see Zimmerman be at his trial?

I'm not a legal expert by any means, but my guess is what the attorneys request from the judge.

No, no... clearly you didn't do it because of the evidence. You only did it out of the pressure put on you by others. That would be correct, don't you think? It's all political.

Ok. I found some additional info and you're probably correct.

George Zimmerman: Self-defense hearing could dismiss death charge



Other sources I browsed referred to it as an 'evidentiary hearing', which would need to be requested by Zimmerman's attorney. I think that would come after the arraignment, though.

Whatever however my position had been very clear from my first comments that this prosecutor had not been acting in good faith and was appointed for the sole reason to override the local legal system and bring charges against Zimmerman no matter what the evidence happen to be.

So.. you succumbed to pressure? I think it's obvious.

You think that anyone who is more literate, and more careful and precise in their use of language, than you are, is using "word games".

You are the one who is choosing to use language which is both inflammatory and inaccurate to characterize this situation, and you have been doing that repeatedly.

Lets's look at the "word games" you have been playing....

Why do you keep asserting that, even in this thread, Zimmerman is being characterized as a racist? Seems to me that you are the one repeatedly using "racist" to describe Zimmerman--in a deliberate attempt to imply that those who feel Zimmerman had no reason, or justification, for following or shooting Martin are implying that he was motivated only by racial animosity. No one here has said any such thing.

Is this your "word game" or is it your ignorance regarding the meaning of the word "racist"? Do you know what the word means?

As far as I know, that's not what anyone here is saying about Zimmerman, and it's not what the prosecutor is saying either.

What has been alleged, as a possible motive for why Zimmerman even took note of Martin, and became concerned about him, is that Zimmerman was stereotyping Martin, that he was engaging in racial profiling, by assuming that a young black man in a hoodie, simply walking and looking at houses, was up to no good, that he was a "suspicious" character. And, while it is very possible that racial profiling did play a part in Zimmerman's mind-set, that would not necessarily mean that he was a "racist" or someone who harbored deep animosity toward blacks--all blacks. It would, however, suggest he possibly had discriminatory attitudes toward young black men in hoodies, and erroneously connected them with crime, and this may have caused him to misinterpret Martin's behavior, and to view a perfectly neutral situation as something urgently requiring some sort of law enforcement intervention.

But your scenario, of "of a poor black kid being gun down by a white gun carrying racist for no reason" reflects no recognition of the racial profiling mind-set that more likely affected Zimmerman, and which has been presented in this thread, and instead tries to discredit that entire view by recasting it in grossly exaggerated and inaccurate terms, with Zimmerman as a gun-toting racist--of a KKK type--who went after Martin for no reason other than a hatred of blacks. This is your usual straw man argument--you present an accurate version of how some are viewing Zimmerman, and you manipulatively use your own "word games" to do that.

And then you give us your version, the presumably more factual account of what happened between Zimmerman and Martin, and in this one, Martin has become, "a hoodlum attacking a crime watch volunteer and being kill as a result." Notice your "word games"--Martin has become "a hoodlum" and Zimmerman his obvious adversary as "a crime watch volunteer". The hoodlum vs the crime watch. Except there is no evidence that Martin was "a hoodlum". Is this your "word game" or your plain ignorance? Do you know what the word "hoodlum" means?

Was Martin acting in an aggressive or violent manner when Zimmerman called 911? No, not at all, he was just "suspicious"--even Zimmerman gave no indication to the police that he thought Martin was anything more than a possible potential burglar, or someone who might be high on drugs--Martin wasn't bothering anyone when Zimmerman made that call.
Did Martin have a criminal record--let alone a record for aggressive or violent behavior? No. He had gotten into trouble at school for things like graffiti on a school locker, and apparently possessing a bag with a trace of pot in it--hardly things to indicate he was violent or overly aggressive, and certainly no pattern of criminal behavior and run-ins with the law.

So, is your description of Martin as "a hoodlum" one of your word games, simply to justify Zimmerman's behavior, or do you engage in the same sort of racial profiling that might have afflicted and influenced Zimmerman? Are all kids who get into trouble, or who sometimes cut class or show up late, and consequently get suspended from school, all hoodlums, or is that something you would only say about the black kids? Does a black teen in a hoodie=hoodlum for you too?

Martin had no criminal record, and no previous pattern of conduct to indicate that he was a violent or overly aggressive person. Zimmerman, on the other hand, had two prior run-ins with the law over his aggressive behaviors, and he had been court-ordered to take anger management classes. Which one might be more accurately described as "a hoodlum"--an aggresive and violent young criminal? If one is being precise, the answer would be Zimmerman. Am I playing "word games"--or am I simply being more accurate than you?

You're the one who is playing "word games" by deliberately choosing emotionally charged terms, like "racist" and "hoodlum"--to manipulate how versions of this story might be viewed--except that you fail to realize that both of those terms are inaccurate because neither is justified by what we do know about either of those people. Accusing others of using "word games" simply reflects your own obvious lack of appreciation for accurate language use. Don't quibble because others try to be more precise in the words they use, and more precise in the meanings of those words--that's what good verbal communication is about. But that might be difficult for a sloppy thinker, like you, to realize.

??????????

What silly firefly clone you happen to be..........

Now I have to decide if you worth taking any more of my time as playing words games is not useful in any way.

I think that the ignore function is call for in your case..

How is the fact that it is my very firm opinion that the prosecutor were appointed for the sole reason of overruling the local justice system people and bring charges against Zimmerman no matter what the fact are had not been clearly expressed by me?

The term lying instead of being dishonest relate to a claimed statements of the prosecutor that she is not acting in the manner she is clearly acting in and if she had done so then she is also a liar if not she is just being a dishonest person.

Either way she is not an outstanding person in my opinion to say the least and that had been my clear position from the first.

Playing games of whether I consider her a liar or not is silly as I had alway been clear that I think that she does not give a **** about the facts one way or another and was appointed to bring charges not to do a fair investigation.

If he did turn and attacked Zimmerman for following him and try to do serous harm to Zimmerman then he was a hoodlum as good out standing citizens do not do any such things.

In fact Firefly without a showing that the local police and prosecutor had not acted in good faith I see zero justification in appointing a special prosecutor base only on a media driven public outcry.

Such an appointment is on it face a political act that should have no place in our justice system.

you don't like your own logic Bill?