Do you think Zimmerman will be convicted of murder?

@firefly,

Quote:

This thread has become the watering hole for the lunatic fringe of A2K

Arguing for equal rights in front of the law is certainly a radical position. Drunk

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

Arguing for equal rights in front of the law is certainly a radical position

Where is Zimmerman being deprived of his "equal rights"?

1 Reply

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

Quote:

Arguing for equal rights in front of the law is certainly a radical position

Where is Zimmerman being deprived of his "equal rights"?

He was deprived the second the State argued that Zimmerman was a criminal based upon his choice to execute his Constitutional right to carry a gun, as well as his right to confront the alleged punk. There is no clause which states that our guarantied rights are null and void if the encounter ends with someone dead. Martin dying does not cause Zimmerman to lose rights under the supreme law of the land.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

He hasn't been deprived of his legal rights--they are being well protected and he is receiving due process under the law.

You're just spouting your usual paranoia, devoid of any contact with the reality of this case.

As I said, this thread has become the watering hole for the A2K lunatic fringe--and, since those most vocally defending Zimmerman in this thread are the least familiar with all the actual evidence in this case, you all sound rather delusional and disconnected from reality. Zimmerman certainly seems to have the crazy contingent behind him in this thread--all grinding their own ax about unrelated issues rather than discussing the facts and evidence of the actual case--all the facts and evidence--and the actual laws involved.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Having a lawyer and a trial is no evidence of possessing equal rights, your usual slapdash dismissive moralizing will not due here.

Do you care to address the point, or are you to continue to evade it?

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

You're not making a valid, or even coherent, point--there is nothing to address.

You don't understand what due process means. Zimmerman is not being deprived of any legal rights.

1 Reply

@firefly,

So evasion it is, as you make me responsible for your bad behavior.

Predictable.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

She's certainly not responsible for your ignorance, which you continue to display here repeatedly.

Zimmerman has a lawyer. He's been advised of his rights. He's been granted bail. He will be able to defend his actions in court, and be able to present his version of events to a jury.

That certainly sounds like due process to me.

He's not considered a criminal because he carried a weapon. He's considered a suspect in a murder because, by his own admission, he killed someone.

Now he gets to present his version of events to a jury, and the jury will decide whether he's guilty of a crime.

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Self defense is not a crime.

So, why didn't Zimmerman defend himself with equal force--by simply fighting back.?

Why was the use of deadly force justified or necessary?

There is no evidence that Zimmerman made any effort to defend himself with equal force against someone who was unarmed.

I don't know. I could guess, but my guesses would surely be wrong.

1 Reply

@lindaopa,

lindaopa wrote:

I think he is a murderer. I think that he was charged with 2nd degree murder, instead of manslaughter, but that the evidence won't be compelling enough and he'll walk.

There is no chance that it was murder. It may have been manslaughter, but it wasn't murder.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Self defense is not a crime.

In a criminal case, a claim of self defense is an affirmative defense. That is: you admit that you performed the action (killing someone), but you must show that a reasonable person would believe their life to be in danger, and that there wasn't another way out.

Not just "I was scared," but "I was scared and I really had a reason to be scared, and killing the other person was my only option."

None of that changes the fact that self defense is not a crime.

DrewDad wrote:

I posted other self defense and stand-your-ground cases from Florida, and the outcomes, previously in the thread. Please, go find them and educate yourself.

No need. I am already familiar enough with the subject to defend my points.

If you ever manage to find a point where you think I am factually wrong about something, you can attempt to show that I am wrong if you like.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

oralloy wrote:
People are arguing for a standard of "guilty until proven innocent".

Because that is exactly the standard when someone claims self defense. Their guilt is not in question; the question is whether they can convince a jury that their actions were justified.

Wrong. If they are claiming self defense, their guilt most certainly is in question.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

Feel free to play your word games; the fact is, Zimmerman shot the kid, and he admits that he shot the kid.

Your referral to self-defense as if it were a crime may well count as a word game (and a very Orwellian one at that).

However, Hawkeye's post pointing out that self defense is not a crime, is not a word game. He is just defending the truth.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Well, there is the fact that they lied about how much money they had in the first place. Doesn't seem like anyone is disputing that. Judges don't look to kindly upon lies.

Cycloptichorn

While I can agree that it is bad to lie to the judge, I question the policy that if the defendant has money, bail needs to be set at a higher level so as to deprive him of all his money.

Not only does this deprive defendants of the money they need to defend themselves, it can also unjustly bankrupt innocent people.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

@firefly,

Quote:
There is no evidence that Zimmerman made any effort to defend himself with equal force against someone who was unarmed.

That, firefly's claim, is a flagrant lie, i.e. I don't buy the idea thathe/she/it/whatever is stupid enough not to comprehend that two black eyes, a boken nose, and the cuts and lacerations on the back of George Zimmerman's head are major evidence of the pistol having been a last resort afer everyhing else failed.

I have firefly on ignore since I believe that he/she is some sort of a propagandist who has some motive beyond the usual to simply be sitting on one or more talk forums putting out the demoKKKrat party line in oblivious disregard of facts or reason.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

Quote:

some sort of a propagandist who has some motive beyond the usual to simply be sitting on one or more talk forums putting out the demoKKKrat party line in oblivious disregard of facts or reason.

Given that she/he/it had in tens of thousands postings had revealed zero about her background there is surely something strange about this poster to say the least.

My guess and all it can be is a guess is there is something in "her" background that if we knew of it would greatly reduce her creditability on this site.

0 Replies

@Ceili,

Quote:

while Zimmerman's defense fund has only raised $200,000 and change?
It gives me hope for the American people...

Only 200,000 dollars to date!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My my in any case. I had donate money and had been waiting for the judge to used the amount already in the fund as an excused to raised his bail before adding to that amount.

Somehow I do not think I am the only one waiting to after the government tied up a large percent of the funding in the account by way of a large bail before donating more funds.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Well, there is the fact that they lied about how much money they had in the first place. Doesn't seem like anyone is disputing that. Judges don't look to kindly upon lies.

Cycloptichorn

While I can agree that it is bad to lie to the judge, I question the policy that if the defendant has money, bail needs to be set at a higher level so as to deprive him of all his money.

Not only does this deprive defendants of the money they need to defend themselves, it can also unjustly bankrupt innocent people.

The entire point is to set it high enough that the defendant won't run off and cut his losses. Zimmerman also reportedly had a second passport he didn't tell anyone about.

If you have an extra passport, and a few hundred thousand dollars, and you thought you were being railroaded for a crime you didn't commit - you wouldn't consider running? I sure as hell would.

Remember that high bails don't bankrupt people - as long as they show up for court.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Years ago repeat years ago he lost one passport and apply for another and in packing to leave his home for a safe house he came across his lost passport and turn it over at once to his lawyer who then turn it over to the court.

The second passport is a non issue concerning his flight risk in fact it is strong strong evidence that he is not a flight risk as otherwise why turn over the second passport to his lawyer when it turn up?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Years ago repeat years ago he lost one passport and apply for another and in packing to leave his home for a safe house he came across his lost passport and turn it over at once to his lawyer who then turn it over to the court.

Well, if you believe everything the guy says implicitly, than sure. But we usually view the accounts given by those who have murdered someone skeptically.

Quote:

The second passport is a non issue concerning his flight risk in fact it is strong strong evidence that he is not a flight risk as otherwise why turn over the second passport to his lawyer when it turn up?

Maybe he didn't want to be in any further trouble, or maybe he really wasn't planning on running anywhere? It doesn't matter. The truth is that the guy should be treated as if he is a flight risk, and that's exactly what the judge is doing.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

Do you think Zimmerman will be convicted of murder?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know