The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

Given you can write such an agreement to allow you to seized every dime plus that they get for writing books or granting interviews I can see such an agreement working.

If have work in fact for other people to keep housekeeper maids or wives or husbands from selling them out.

You,

Where did you learn English? You would fail fifth grade English class.

I don't know what you're talking about. In a previous post, to you, I clearly said, about Scheibe, "I don't consider her a victim," so why are you falsely claiming I did?
Stop using me to mount your usual strawman arguments.

Shellie never said George was physically abusive, in fact, she made it clear he was never physically abusive during their marriage.

She said he was emotionally abusive to her and she did provide examples--you just never listened to her interviews, or you only heard what you want to hear. The reason she walked out on him the day before he killed Martin was because he had humiliated her in public, after she told him she felt ill, and she didn't want to take that sort of abuse any more.

His abandoning her, to face her own perjury charge alone, was another betrayal, and another sort of public humiliation, because everyone questioned why he wasn't there for her, just as she had been in that courtroom for him, and she had opened herself to that perjury charge for him. And Shellie didn't know what to say, she had no idea where the hell he was, he had just suddenly taken off and disappeared.

Why not take her word? Did you see him in the courtroom during her perjury proceeding? After she had sat in that courtroom every day for him, he couldn't have given her a bigger slap in the face, and a public slap in the face, than not to show up for her court case. And he didn't even let her know where he was. He just vanished.

That might or might not be your idea of "abuse" but it's Shellie's idea of mistreatment, or emotional abuse, that he had been directing at her, things designed to hurt and humiliate her, and damage her self-esteem, and that's why she left him before he killed Martin, she had had enough. And she said, she's sorry that the killing got her re-involved with the relationship, that she got pulled back into it because he needed her. I guess, as soon as the trial ended, she had served her purpose for him, so he abandoned her rather immediately, like a used Kleenex.

Her response was to file for divorce. She was the one who moved to legally dissolve the relationship. She's not playing "the victim"--she's acting, she's taking control, she's removing herself from the marriage and any further obligation to him.

And, in September, it was George who provoked that entire incident, by hot-headedly charging over to the house, and assaulting her father, and making gestures as though he might pull a gun on them.

If you menace, and threaten, and mistreat people, the way Zimmerman does, that is harmful to people, it's emotionally harmful because of the amount of anxiety he generates and the amount of anger he provokes.

And there is no reason to think that he didn't behave in a similar manner toward Trayvon Martin that night, with definitely harmful results, because that's Zimmerman's pattern. He may not be like that constantly, but it's a definite part of a pattern with him.

These women aren't promoting themselves as "victims"--that's your usual strawman. On the other hand, you and the Zimmerman groupies in this thread, can't stop promoting Zimmerman as a victim, although his legal difficulties, and law enforcement run-ins, are clearly due to his own behaviors, and judgments, and all of them could have been avoided by him, including the killing of Martin.

That's your idea of a victim?

Most of us know from this thread that the Zimmerman groupies are very confused people! They have no concept of right or wrong, and continue to support the aggressor rather than all the victims.

They'll never admit they're wrong - even if Zimmerman ends up killing another person.

LOL........and not a mark on Trayvon but for the one round Zimmerman fired into his attacker body.

Minor injuries; REPEATED OFTEN ENOUGH FOR ANY FOOL TO KNOW BY NOW! Only idiots insist on it being anything more. Zimmerman refused further medical care or to be taken to the hospital.

Like everything else in this 'case' - idiots continue to expand their imaginations as to what actually happened. They haven't produced one FACT or EVIDENCE that is consistent with any official report. NONE.

TNCFS

Minor or not minor it show who the attacker happen to had been and as one of the prosecutor own witness stated you do not need to wait until you are almost dead to employ deadly force. Thanks god that the jury got it right.

The interesting thing is that it is irrelevant whether Z profiled a black. It is not illegal or even relevant here that M was possibly profiled. It is also not relevant that he briefly followed M. That was legal (and perfectly advisable conduct for a neighborhood watch guy.)

It is clear that M sucker-punched Z, straddled him, and almost beat him to a pulp. A witness saw the latter, and the jury, back by interviews with it, concluded this was the case.

Case closed!

Um, it was a rainy and M had a hood over his head.

You are right no matter how the supporters of the hoodlum Trayvon whine and declare us all racists the jury had rule and the case is closed.

You said something wrong. Trayvon did have other marks on his body. There were lacerations on his hands. I wonder how those came about. [choke]

That's all you know about our legal system; it's not always ethical or right.

Your ignorance is endless.

Why don't you ask Zimmerman rather than jumping to conclusions?
TNCFS

Be honest. Were you receiving a beating that gave you the marks Z had, and you had a gun, would you not use it on your attacker? I think that even Mother Teresa would use her gun.

LOL all the evidence show Trayvon was the attacker and Zimmerman even willingly took a police lie detector test the next day and passed it.

Zimmerman is the victim of an attacked by a hoodlum and a jury found that to be the case so CASE CLOSED.

1. I don't own a gun.
2. I have had my fights, but that's when I was much younger.
3. I had my share of bloody nose.
4. I never ever thought about carrying a gun for self-defense.

Only cowards carry guns, because they want to look tough. Without guns, they are sissies.

Not to mention that the SOB was trying to interfere with the man breathing on top of everything else.

You mean that I am married to a sissies.......LOL

Right, Adovocate, it was "perfectly advisable conduct for a neighborhood watch guy" to follow Martin--if it's so "perfectly advisable conduct for a neighborhood watch guy", why is following a "suspect" against the neighborhood watch rules--and Zimmerman set up that neighborhood watch, so it's not like he didn't know those rules.

If Martin straddled him, and was beating him to a pulp, how did Zimmerman manage to get his gun out--it was holstered in the back of his waist?

I think he had that gun out all along, and what the witness saw, which wasn't much, was not a "beating" or a fight, but a struggle over the gun.

And Zimmerman's reaching for that gun would have been good reason for Trayvon to have punched him once in the nose--in self-defense.

So, how do you think Zimmerman managed to his gun out, with Martin on top of him, straddling him, and beating him up? Or don't you think.

I think you mean your mind is closed.

By the way fool a criminal attack is not mutual combat on the playground or even a bar fight and no one have any obligation to fight fair when attacked by a criminal.

Nor do we have any obligation to be defenseless from an attacked by someone forty years younger, let alone an attacker armed with a knife or a gun for that matter.

If you care to die under the fists of a low life such as Trayvon let alone the knives or gun of such a person that is fine with me but both my wife and I are going to have the means to fight back.