27
   

The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 01:18 pm
@firefly,
These guys have their concrete built up very high, Firefly. They will not let the reality of the situation penetrate...apparently because it is too threatening.

Zimmerman got a trail...and was acquitted.

That apparently is not enough for them. They want to claim that because he was acquitted...that means he was innocent and the incident was all the fault of Trayvon Martin.

The vilify Martin for that same reason.

The sickness in these people is one of the most disturbing bits of human conduct I've ever seen...not by any means the worst, but one of the worst.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 01:20 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Well stated, Frank.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 01:25 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Well stated, Frank.


Thank you, ci. Some of these Zimmerman defenders are not bad people...and I do not want to dislike them. But I truly cannot see how anyone can take the position they are taking without cringing. The "defend Zimmerman at any cost...including vilifying Martin" is so base...so degrading to humanity...I would be ashamed to show my face after asserting it in any way.

But...this gun culture obviously brings out the lowest humanity has to offer.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 01:32 pm
@BillRM,
Bill, the other side apparently has no regard for their credibility. For instance, they know very well that there was no stalking, and there was only momentary following that soon ended. They also know very well that Z was beaten to a pulp, with lacerations on the back of his head, his face (especially his nose) badly swelled, two black eyes, etc., while M only had marks on his hand.

Thus, we have a pack of liars here who are willing to posit endless lies and distortions.
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 01:33 pm
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:

Bill, the other side apparently has no regard for their credibility. For instance, they know very well that there was no stalking, and there was only momentary following that soon ended. They also know very well that Z was beaten to a pulp, with lacerations on the back of his head, his face (especially his nose) badly swelled, two black eyes, etc., while M only had marks on his hand.

Thus, we have a pack of liars here who are willing to posit endless lies and distortions.


Get into hyperbole often, Advocate?

0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 01:50 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Quote:
In that case, if you and others allege Zim was a stalker, why ain't he in jail?


The amusing thing is that if Zimmerman had been breaking any laws including the Stalking law that night he would had been strip of his rights to claim self defense in killing Trayvon.

Frank came up with the theory that the state lawyers was so brain dead that they was not aware of that fact and therefore did not used it to strip Zimmerman of his defense to the charges.

Sorry Frank that is nonsense the reason they did not try to claimed he was stalking Trayvon is because he was not in fact stalking Trayvon and the Prosecutors knew any claim that he had been would not fly with the courts.
BillRM
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 01:52 pm
@cicerone imposter,
The legal purpose was in getting the police to check out someone that Zimmerman felt might be up to no good.

There is no duty to be right in that regards or have some percent of the public agreeing with you after the fact that you was right or not to do so, before you can call the police in.

To legally punish people for calling in the police when they feel the need to do so would be a great gift to the criminal elements.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 02:03 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
In that case, if you and others allege Zim was a stalker, why ain't he in jail?


The amusing thing is that if Zimmerman had been breaking any laws including the Stalking law that night he would had been strip of his rights to claim self defense in killing Trayvon.

Frank came up with the theory that the state lawyers was so brain dead that they was not aware of that fact and therefore did not used it to strip Zimmerman of his defense to the charges.

Sorry Frank that is nonsense the reason they did not try to claimed he was stalking Trayvon is because he was not in fact stalking Trayvon and the Prosecutors knew any claim that he had been would not fly with the courts.


It is nonsense...because you made up the "brain dead" and "not aware of" crap. You are a straw man maker.

You have no idea of why the state did not bring up the stalking...and neither do I. But I have ethical wherewithal to acknowledge that I do not know...and you are trying (unsuccessfully) to bluster your way through it.
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -2  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 02:04 pm
What a terrible year 2013 has been for the lefties with first Martin and then the commie terrorist Mandela being taken out of the frame!
Dry your eyes boys, I'm sure there'll be a new hero coming along soon who you can snuggle up to..Smile

firefly
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 02:29 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
These guys have their concrete built up very high, Firefly. They will not let the reality of the situation penetrate...apparently because it is too threatening.

What's threatening to the gun nuts is the reality that this was a needless and totally avoidable death. And nothing about the verdict will ever change that tragic reality.

Zimmerman was not found "innocent" of instigating, creating, and provoking the conditions that led to a confrontation, and caused that needless and totally avoidable death--which is how the police investigator characterized it--the blame for that is squarely on Zimmerman's shoulders, regardless of the crap they try to manufacture and promote to try to vilify Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman's stalking of Martin was what led to that confrontation--Martin wasn't bothering Zimmerman, or anyone else--Zimmerman went after him.

What bothers many people, including those who wholeheartedly think the verdict was legally correct, is that Zimmerman has never expressed any remorse about what he did that night that brought about a needless confrontation and an unnecessary death. In retrospect, except to the deluded gun nuts, he clearly made an error in judgment by labeling an innocent kid, who was a guest in his community, as some sort of intruder who was "up to no good"--all Martin was doing was meandering around on his way home from the store. And, Zimmerman made an even bigger error in judgment by stalking the kid, because that was what brought about the confrontation--Martin was not pursuing Zimmerman, Zimmerman went after him, without ever considering the possible consequences of his rash and impulsive actions in doing that.

But, even in retrospect, Zimmerman is unable to reconsider his actions, or to take full responsibility for them, because he chalks it all up to "God's Plan." And that's part of the reason he can't acknowledge any real remorse.

He wound up needlessly killing an innocent kid, because he didn't have the judgment or self-control to remain in his vehicle, and he knows that now, and yet he cannot express any true remorse. He's missing a sense of morality, and a conscience, that most normal people have.

The gun nuts in this thread are trying to justify his lack of remorse by dehumanizing and vilifying Martin, so that his needless and totally avoidable death is perversely viewed as a deserved death, and they assert that even the dead teen's corpse should be viewed as something sub-human.

It's by doing that that they expose their own sickness. This has nothing to do with supporting the verdict, or supporting Zimmerman's actions at the moment he fired his gun, these are sick people who are doing this bizarre vilification and dehumanization of Martin for their own disturbed reasons--some of which are clearly racist--and they can't stop doing it.

It's sick, and it's vile. And there is no excuse for it.
Quote:
But...this gun culture obviously brings out the lowest humanity has to offer...

It apparently does. They are the proof of that.


0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 03:45 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
You have no idea of why the state did not bring up the stalking...and neither do I


He did not stalk him as the law as written on the matter clearly does not cover the calling in of the police or the following of someone for a few minutes one time to guide the police to Trayvon so it was not an issue and it that simple.

If it was otherwise the Prosecutors would had cheerfully used a stalking offense to strip Zimmerman of this right to a self defense , defense.

Sorry Frank but Zimmerman did zero wrong that night and is a victim of Trayvon attacked and the state filing of charges base on political pressures.that included threaten to riot if he was not charge by large crowds chatting no justice no peace.

To make it worst if possible the federal government in form of a department of the DOJ help paid for those rallies.
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 03:49 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
You have no idea of why the state did not bring up the stalking...and neither do I


He did not stalk him so it was not an issue it that simple.


Zimmerman stalked Martin. But continue under your delusions.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 03:50 pm
@Advocate,
You,
Quote:
Z was beaten to a pulp.
No where in any of the official reports prove this claim.

Only in the crazed minds of all the gun nuts and pro-Zimmerman advocates who have nothing more than their own imaginations and nothing more.

You guys are sickening, ignorant, and totally devoid of common sense.

I hope all of you suffer more than Trayvon's parents.

0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  2  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 03:52 pm
@Frank Apisa,
The Zimmerman haters have latched onto the "stalked" word regardless of how inapplicable the word is.

I guess it makes them happy, so they should go for it.
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 03:55 pm
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:

The Zimmerman haters have latched onto the "stalked" word regardless of how inapplicable the word is.

I guess it makes them happy, so they should go for it.


The people taking issue with the people vilifying Martin consider it reasonable to point out the obvious...that Zimmerman stalked Martin.

That seems to bother the Zimmerman apologists.

Hey...they gotta deal with it. Wink
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 03:56 pm
@Advocate,
You,
Quote:
The Zimmerman haters have latched onto the "stalked" word regardless of how inapplicable the word is.


That's because you're too dumb to know the definition of common English words.

Quote:
stalk2
stôk/Submit
verb
past tense: stalked; past participle: stalked
1.
pursue or approach stealthily.
"a cat stalking a bird"
synonyms: creep up on, trail, follow, shadow, track down, go after, be after, course, hunt;


Where in this definition don't you understand the words?
Advocate
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 04:00 pm
@cicerone imposter,
The conventional meaning is quite different. That's probably why the prosecutor was not dumb enough to use the word.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 04:02 pm
@Advocate,
You,
Quote:
The conventional meaning is quite different.
Re: Stalker
And what might that be?

ROFLMAO
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 04:03 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Zimmerman stalked Martin. But continue under your delusions.


Sorry we cover that claim he did not stalked Trayvon in the common meaning and he surely did not do so in the legal meaning of the word.

He openly follow Trayvon repeat openly follow Trayvon and for one brief time period so there go the common meanings that had been posted here.

As far as the legal meaning of stalking once more he follow the man for one short period of time for a legal purpose so there go that meaning of the term.
Advocate
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 04:06 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Frequently following, or spying on, someone!
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 07/18/2025 at 12:53:12