27
   

The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

 
 
firefly
 
  0  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 02:31 pm
@BillRM,
Of course Zimmerman did something wrong in following Trayvon Martin--he used extremely bad judgment, and he never considered the impact of his behavior on the person he was stalking.

Let me repeat...

Some people don't understand there was only one adult in this situation--and adults should be held to a higher standard of responsibility and judgement than a high school junior who isn't even old enough to buy a pack of cigarettes.

Zimmerman, an adult armed with a gun, irresponsibly and recklessly pursued a child in the darkness of a gated community, in disregard of Neighborhood Watch rules, and the advisement of a police dispatcher--all to satisfy his own personal obsessions, and all because he couldn't properly control his impulses and just sit in his vehicle and wait for the police to arrive. And his judgment was so impaired, he never identified himself or his motives to this child, which might have defused the situation or allayed the child's fears.

The fault lies squarely on the adult in this situation.

This was a totally needless and tragic death that resulted from George Zimmerman's impaired judgment.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 02:33 pm
@Rockhead,
'kay. Embarrassed
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 02:40 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
You arrive at all negative conclusions by your bigoted brain, and give no leeway to Martin's side but ten miles in every direction for Zimmerman.

You're a ******* racial bigot that's not worth my time to read or discuss anything with.


An on the other hand viewing with zero proof Zimmerman is a racist gun nut looking for an excused to killed an innocent black child.

An anyone who dare to think that Zimmerman acted in legal self defense is a racist

Amusing people indeed that should try to find a mirror.
Baldimo
 
  1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 02:43 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You going to answer the question CI? A screwdriver isn't normally a thief tool, it depends on who has it and what situation it is found in.

Call me a bigot all you like, but did he have a screwdriver in his backpack with the jewelry? Come on 1+1=3 with you? If he had just the screwdriver with him I wouldn't think twice about it, but it was with jewelry that didn't belong to him or his parents. "Holding it for a friend" is the oldest trick in the book, have you ever watched Cops?
firefly
 
  -1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 02:43 pm
@BillRM,
http://curezone.com/upload/Blogs/Zoebess/head_up_ass.jpg
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  0  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 02:45 pm
@Baldimo,
Why are you even bringing the business of that screwdriver up?

No one in their right mind thinks Trayvon Martin was planning any crimes that night--and the police have made that very clear. He was simply returning from a trip to the store. And he and his father were going to return to Miami the next day. Martin's alleged "suspicious" behavior was all in George Zimmerman's mind. And, had Zimmerman known this teen was a guest in that community, he would have continued driving to Target, because Martin wasn't doing anything to bother anyone--Martin was walking around, talking on his cell phone, and trying to dodge the rain. George Zimmerman misjudged and misinterpreted what he saw--because it was a black male in a hoodie.

What does this screwdriver/jewelry business have to do with the shooting? Or why Zimmerman couldn't just sit in the car and wait for the police? There was no crime in progress, nothing urgent was going on--why didn't Zimmerman just sit in his vehicle?
Baldimo
 
  1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 02:56 pm
@firefly,
I don't know firefly why are you bringing up a restraining order and an accusation of child molestation? None of them are prudent when it comes to the shooting.

firefly
 
  -1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 03:07 pm
@Baldimo,
Quote:
I don't know firefly why are you bringing up a restraining order and an accusation of child molestation?

You brought up the child molestation...So, why did you do that?

A history of aggressive behaviors and poor impulse control is relevant when it comes to why someone might stalk, and shoot, and kill an unarmed child. Zimmerman was angry when he followed Martin--angry at those "f--king punks" because those "assholes always get away." That was his mind-set, that was his obsession. That's what impaired his judgment, and that's why he couldn't exercise the self-control to remain in his vehicle until the police arrived. And he had demonstrated poor control of his anger and his impulses in the past...He has a pattern of such behavior....

Zimmerman also has a pattern of lying...and of trying to deceive the justice system...

And that's relevant in considering his credibility about the events of that night...
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 03:08 pm
@BillRM,
First of all, thank you Farmerman and Firefly for your comments on my post.

Quote:
LOL you do love the word stalking but even the prosecutor did not try to sell the idea that what Zimmerman was doing in following Trayvon was illegal.


It may not have been “illegal”…but it was stalking, Bill. STALKING!


Quote:
If he had indeed done anything illegal in following Trayvon then he would had likely lost his right of self defense and one would think that the prosecutor would claimed illegal stalking if there was any way to do so.


To Trayvon Martin…what was happening was someone was following him in a way any young, black male would consider intimidating in the deep south. It was stalking. Zimmerman was following Martin with a purpose.

Quote:
He follow someone that he feel the need to be check out by the police and that is not illegal stalking nor is that being the aggressor.


It sure as hell is being the aggressor…even if you are not able to crawl out from under whatever it is that is hiding that fact from you.

Quote:
But it nice to know that you think that someone had a right to launch a deadly attacked on someone following them no matter what word you used for following.


The “deadly attack” was the one that killed Trayvon Martin…not the reaction of Trayvon Martin to George Zimmerman stalking him.

Quote:
An yet you do not have a right of self defense if knocked down and jumped on in your strange world view.


I have not said that. And as I said, I can even understand (no matter how reluctantly) Zimmerman's conduct. What I consider despicable beyond measure is what is going on and being said by people like you now…knowing what we know now. It disgusts me…and should disgust anyone with any sense of decency.

Quote:
footnote by using the word stalking in such a manner you are down grading real illegal actions such as when a man stalked his ex-girlfriend.


Nonsense…and stop giving me advice on how not to downgrade actions. You have no appreciation for the subtlties of that kind of thing.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 03:10 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Frank I reality wish to get this very clear, if you have someone following you on the public streets you feel that you have the legal right to attacked that person and try to harm him or her?


If someone were doing to me what Zimmerman was doing to Martin...I would confront that person.

You do not know what happened after the confrontation, because after the confrontation...Trayvon Martin was dead...shot to death by George Zimmerman.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 03:11 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

How oh Frank is following someone once to guide the police to that person come under the below meaning of illegal stalking?


Quote:


http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Stalking

In most states, to charge and convict a defendant of stalking, several elements must be proved Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. These elements include a course of conduct or behavior, the presence of threats, and the criminal intent to cause fear in the victim.

A course of conduct is a series of acts that, viewed collectively, present a pattern of behavior. Some states stipulate the requisite number of acts, with several requiring the stalker to commit two or more acts. States designate as stalking a variety of acts, ranging from specifically defined actions, such as nonconsensual communication or lying in wait, to more general types of action, such as harassment.

Most states require that the stalker pose a threat or act in a way that causes a reasonable person to feel fearful. The threat does not have to be written or verbal to instill fear. For example, a stalker can convey a threat by sending the victim black roses, forming his hand into a gun and pointing it at her, or delivering a dead animal to her doorstep.

To be convicted of stalking in most states, the stalker must display a criminal intent to cause fear in the victim. Various statutes require the conduct of the stalker to be "willful," "purposeful," "intentional," or "knowing." Many states do not require proof that the defendant intended to cause fear as long as he intended to commit the act that resulted in fear. In these states, if the victim is reasonably frightened by the alleged perpetrator's conduct, the intent element of the crime has been met



Jesus H. Christ, Bill...at the end of this thing, Trayvon Martin was dead...shot to death by this guy.

Wake up.
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 03:20 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Jesus H. Christ, Bill...at the end of this thing, Trayvon Martin was dead...shot to death by this guy.

Wake up.


Sure he was in legal self defense by jury verdict. His death cause by the actions of Trayvon himself not Zimmerman.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 03:23 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
Jesus H. Christ, Bill...at the end of this thing, Trayvon Martin was dead...shot to death by this guy.

Wake up.


Sure he was in legal self defense by jury verdict. His death cause by the actions of Trayvon himself not Zimmerman.


As I said up above:

What I consider despicable beyond measure is what is going on and being said by people like you now…knowing what we know now. It disgusts me…and should disgust anyone with any sense of decency.
BillRM
 
  -1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 03:26 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
It may not have been “illegal”…but it was stalking, Bill. STALKING!


Not in any normal meaning of the term it was following repeat following not stalking.

Quote:
black male would consider intimidating in the deep south.


So he did not call 911 or just keep walking home his solution was to attacked Zimmerman!!!!!!

Quote:
It sure as hell is being the aggressor


It he wished to be the aggressor he could had confronted Trayvon directly without call 911 and asking for the cops to come and check him out.

Quote:
The “deadly attack” was the one that killed Trayvon Martin…not the reaction of Trayvon Martin to George Zimmerman stalking him.


So being knocked down and jumped on and having someone hittings you and trying to pound your brains out on the sidewalk is just being playful?
BillRM
 
  0  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 03:30 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
knowing what we know now. It disgusts me…and should disgust anyone with any sense of decency.


Knowing what that all the kingmen/FBI agents could not find that Zimmerman care about anyone skin color?

That by Trayvon own texts and pictures on his cell phone and women jewelry and record in school that he was a hoodlum what to be?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 03:35 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
It may not have been “illegal”…but it was stalking, Bill. STALKING!


Not in any normal meaning of the term it was following repeat following not stalking.

Quote:
black male would consider intimidating in the deep south.


So he did not call 911 or just keep walking home his solution was to attacked Zimmerman!!!!!!

Quote:
It sure as hell is being the aggressor


It he wished to be the aggressor he could had confronted Trayvon directly without call 911 and asking for the cops to come and check him out.

Quote:
The “deadly attack” was the one that killed Trayvon Martin…not the reaction of Trayvon Martin to George Zimmerman stalking him.


So being knocked down and jumped on and having someone hittings you and trying to pound your brains out on the sidewalk is just being playful?



Perhaps I did not make myself clear, Bill.

What I consider despicable beyond measure is what is going on and being said by people like you now…knowing what we know now. It disgusts me…and should disgust anyone with any sense of decency.
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 03:41 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
knowing what we know now. It disgusts me…and should disgust anyone with any sense of decency


So there is something indecency in calling the police if you think someone is acting strangely?

So there is something indecency about following someone on the public streets in an attempted to be able to guide the police to him?

There is something indecency when being subject to a serous and life threatening attack to defend yourself?
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 04:14 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
knowing what we know now. It disgusts me…and should disgust anyone with any sense of decency


So there is something indecency in calling the police if you think someone is acting strangely?

So there is something indecency about following someone on the public streets in an attempted to be able to guide the police to him?

There is something indecency when being subject to a serous and life threatening attack to defend yourself?


There is something very indecent about people trying to vilify a young man who did nothing more than have the bad taste to get shot to death by someone stalking him.

The people doing this…vilifying the young dead man and staunchly defending what was a reckless and wrong action on the part of a wanna-be vigilante…are beneath contempt, although many of us here are willing to be as contemptible of them as possible.

I hope some day you wake up and see your current stand as the piece of garbage it is, Bill. You will be a better human being on the day that happens…if it happens.
firefly
 
  1  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 04:19 pm
@Frank Apisa,
BillRM has no sense of decency. That's why he can't understand, or acknowledge, what you're talking about.

This is a person who apologists for, and defends, rapists and child pornographers, blames females for their own rapes, and who vilely insulted members of A2K who shared their experiences about having been raped in a thread about rape.

In another thread he advocated depriving all Muslim-Americans of their rightful civil liberties because he considered all mosques, and even a proposed Muslim community center in Manhattan, as a terrorist threat. He made it clear, however, that he was stopping short of suggesting we throw them all in internment camps--he just wanted the civil liberties of all Muslim-Americans restricted, for no justification beyond his own bigotry and Islamophobia.

He slammed the black civil rights organization rainbow/PUSH as being a "lynch mob" for merely investigating complaints that Paula Deen--who he considers "a poor old Southern woman"--had tolerated racially discriminatory employment practices at her restaurants. He's not in the least concerned about racial discrimination or inequity in the workplace, or in recognizing how pernicious and psychologically damaging racial profiling and covert racism can be in other areas.

His credentials as a sexist and bigot have been well established in numerous threads.

And his bigotry is so deeply ingrained in his thinking he can't even see it.

In the interest of defending his gun rights--and he has said, "We are all Zimmerman"--he will cheerfully, and shamelessly, smear the innocent victim of a needless shooting with his racist crap, so the shooter can appear blameless--even when that shooter acted inappropriately, and with incredibly bad judgment, and caused an unnecessary, and totally avoidable death.

BillRM has no sense of decency, and nothing you say will penetrate--unfortunately, he's also brain dead as well.





Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Mon 12 Aug, 2013 04:29 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

BillRM has no sense of decency. That's why he can't understand, or acknowledge, what you're talking about.

This is a person who apologists for, and defends, rapists and child pornographers, blames females for their own rapes, and who vilely insulted members of A2K who shared their experiences about having been raped in a thread about rape.

In another thread he advocated depriving all Muslim-Americans of their rightful civil liberties because he considered all mosques, and even a proposed Muslim community center in Manhattan, as a terrorist threat. He made it clear, however, that he was stopping short of suggesting we throw them all in internment camps--he just wanted the civil liberties of all Muslim-Americans restricted, for no justification beyond his own bigotry and Islamophobia.

He slammed the black civil rights organization rainbow/PUSH as being a "lynch mob" for merely investigating complaints that Paula Deen--who he considers "a poor old Southern woman"--had tolerated racially discriminatory employment practices at her restaurants. He's not in the least concerned about racial discrimination or inequity in the workplace, or in recognizing how pernicious and psychologically damaging racial profiling and covert racism can be in other areas.

His credentials as a sexist and bigot have been well established in numerous threads.

And his bigotry is so deeply ingrained in his thinking he can't even see it.

In the interest of defending his gun rights--and he has said, "We are all Zimmerman"--he will cheerfully, and shamelessly, smear the innocent victim of a needless shooting with his racist crap, so the shooter can appear blameless--even when that shooter acted inappropriately, and with incredibly bad judgment, and caused an unnecessary, and totally avoidable death.

BillRM has no sense of decency, and nothing you say will penetrate--unfortunately, he's also brain dead as well.



Enough with the sweet talk, Firefly. How do you really feel? Wink
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 09/20/2024 at 06:43:58