27
   

The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 05:57 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
You,
Quote:
My point is that I innocently followed/tailed/watched her with no malicious intent, but no doubt some of the sex-crazed anti-Zim brigade in here would say I "stalked" her.


Please use any of the dictionary definitions I have posted on "stalk, stalked, or stalking" to apply it to your claim that the anti-Zim brigade would say you "stalked" her?

You're another dummy; it's becoming endless with the pro-Zim gang.

spendius
 
  3  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:02 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
I hope the lady is still blissfully unaware of how lucky she was to have lit up at that point and thus to have unwittingly avoided the attentions of a ******* non-smoker.

That she might become aware of how near a brush she had with a White Noise is not a matter she should be burdened with.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:07 pm
Since you anti-Zim guys seem to have a curious unhealthy obsession for the word "stalk" here's a couple more for ya--
In the days before Pearl Harbor, Jap mini-subs stalked the harbor entrance to see what US ships were in there, and US destroyers had to depth-charge them.
Martin was like one of those subs stalking the neighbourhood, and Zim was the destroyer who depth-charged him!

PS- I'd have preferred to say Martin was "walking" or "strolling", but because you like the word "stalking", I used that instead..Smile
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:09 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Please use any of the dictionary definitions I have posted on "stalk, stalked, or stalking" to apply it to your claim that the anti-Zim brigade would say you "stalked" her?


None of the definitions cover Zimmerman actions but that did not even slow you down in using the term in that regard.
firefly
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:16 pm
@Frank Apisa,
What gives these people the impression the prosecution didn't deal with Zimmerman's pursuit of Martin? Of course they raised that issue...

Would they prefer the word "tracking"--the way he "tracked" Martin was "stalking". They are playing nonsense word games.'
Quote:
Prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda told jurors in Sanford, Florida, Thursday that Trayvon Martin was doing "normal things" on Feb. 26, 2012. But George Zimmerman thought he was "up to no good." Zimmerman "presumed something that was not true," that the teenager on his way home from a convenience store was a "suspect," a criminal. "Instead of waiting for the police to come and do their job," de la Rionda said, Zimmerman tracked Trayvon and confronted him. Consequently, "a teenager is dead," de la Rionda continued. "He is dead through no fault of his own. He is dead because another man made assumptions."...

• Zimmerman's actions led to the confrontation with Trayvon. De la Rionda said: "But who followed who? Who was minding his own business? Of the two, who was the one who was armed and who knew that they were armed?" Zimmerman brought a gun to a fight that he started, de la Rionda said.

• Zimmerman's claims to police that he was fearful don't make sense. The fearfulness Zimmerman expressed, de la Rionda contended, was part of a string of exaggerations used to convince police that he felt threatened. Among these were his claim that Trayvon circled his car and seemed at one point to be reaching into his waistband. "Why does this defendant get out of the car if he thinks [Trayvon] is a threat to him? Because he has a gun, an equalizer."

• Zimmerman's claim of self-defense is bogus. "Is it really self-defense when you follow somebody?" De la Rionda reminded jurors that the defendant had taken a course in which the curriculum included studying the law in terms of self-defense. "So [he] knows all the bullet points needed to show that."...

• The fact that Zimmerman called Trayvon an "asshole" under his breath was "not a description," de la Rionda said. "Why is he uttering that word, other than that is how he feels. [...] I would say that is more than a little angry: that's ill will, that's hatred." By calling him a "******* punk," the prosecutor went on, Zimmerman indicated he had already made up his mind that Trayvon was a criminal.

• De la Rionda noted that paying attention to what was going on in the neighborhood was a good thing. And that wanting to be a cop and taking criminal-justice courses, as Zimmerman had done, were also good things. But it was wrong for him to take the law into own hands, he added.

• The prosecutor used snippets from taped police interviews with Zimmerman, the reenactment of the shooting and an interview with Fox host Sean Hannity to support his argument that Zimmerman changed his story.

For instance, de la Rionda said, Zimmerman claimed to police that he was not following Trayvon but looking for the name of a street that he didn't know even though he had lived in the gated community where the shooting took place for four years and walked his dog there every day. The prosecutor says it was an obvious lie for him to say he didn't know the street's name.

Zimmerman's description of the fight he says Trayvon started in a surprise punch to the nose also doesn't stand up to scrutiny, de la Rionda said, noting that Zimmerman quickly caught himself and backtracked during the reenactment with the police: "When I walked back toward him ... I saw him coming toward me."

Zimmerman's description of the fight also makes no sense, de la Rionda told jurors. Zimmerman said that he fell backward onto the grass after Trayvon punched him. Trayvon then climbed on top of him, in Zimmerman's version, and kept punching him, saying "you're going to die tonight, ************," as Zimmerman began screaming for help. At this point, Trayvon put his hands over Zimmerman's nose and mouth and went for Zimmerman's gun, according to his version.

How many hands did Trayvon have? de la Rionda asked. And how did the teenager see the gun, in the dark, with Zimmerman on his back and the weapon holstered inside his waistband on the back of his hip beneath him. "How did the victim see this gun? Or is it just another lie that [Zimmerman] tells?" And, "He's holding one hand over his mouth, one hand over his noise and with that third hand he reaches for the gun?"

De la Rionda said Zimmerman had told officers that after firing his pistol, he didn't at first realize he had shot Trayvon. But if that was the case, the prosecutor asked "What the heck's he doing holstering the gun?"

As to the testimony of eyewitness John Good, who said he saw the darker-skinned, darker-clothed person in the fight on top swinging his fists at the person beneath, de la Rionda pointed out that Good didn't see the actual shooting or the blows hitting. And he didn't see the defendant's hands. "Did [Zimmerman] have the gun out? ... Was [Trayvon] trying to protect himself from the gun?"

• If Trayvon was beating Zimmerman so badly, de la Rionda asked, why did the police and medical examiner find minor injuries to his knuckles and no blood from Zimmerman on his hands?

• After the shooting, Zimmerman said he spread Trayvon's arms out, claiming that he was looking for a weapon. Said de la Rionda, "Why did he have to say that? Because it's part of wanting to be a cop. [...] Because that's what cops do." When the police arrived and found Trayvon face down, his hands were underneath him.

To believe Zimmerman's version, the prosecutor said, jurors have to believe that Trayvon surprised him with a sucker-punch, that Zimmerman lay on the ground being whaled on and finally managed to pull out his pistol and shoot the teenager through the heart from a difficult angle.

Instead, de la Rionda said, there was a fight in which the two rolled around, with the victim and the defendant each sometimes on top. "But, again, why did this occur? What led up to this?"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/11/1222816/-Prosecutor-Trayvon-Martin-is-dead-because-George-Zimmerman-wrongly-profiled-him-as-up-to-no-good#


What led up to the confrontation and alleged fight was that Zimmerman used bad judgment when he tracked/stalked'/followed/pursued Martin...

And that's the reality these gun nuts can't accept or acknowledge. This was a needless and totally avoidable death...

Zimmerman didn't need a gun that night, he needed better judgment and self-control. He alone created the danger, that allegedly required the use of his gun, by stalking his "suspect,"

That's the reality the gun nuts can't accept, because it means everything they are trying to promote, in terms of needing guns for self-protection, really doesn't apply to Zimmerman's situation.

The defense did a great smoke and mirrors job to distract the jury from Zimmerman's significant credibility problems, just as the dream team did with their, "If the glove don't fit you must acquit," strategy in O.J.'s case.

cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:17 pm
@BillRM,
That's because you don't understand English.

It seems no matter how often I post the dictionary definition of stalk, you fail to understand it.

Quote:
stalk
stôk/Submit
verb
gerund or present participle: stalking
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; More


Also.

Quote:
stalking
stalking [staw-king] Show IPA
noun 1 adjective 1

noun
1.
the act or an instance of stalking, or harassing another in an aggressive, often threatening and illegal manner:
Stalking is now a crime in many states.

adjective
2.
of or pertaining to the act of pursuing or harassing:
Stalking laws have alleviated some problems for famous people.
Romeo Fabulini
 
  2  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:20 pm
Luckily for Zim, his bleeding nose and head were excellent "witnesses for the defence" and nobody could argue with them..Smile
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:25 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
That wasn't "excellent defense." It was the failure of the prosecution; Zim's injuries were minor, and Trayvon didn't have any trace of Zim's blood anywhere on him. Those injuries could have been self-inflected. Nobody knows for sure, because there were no witnesses to prove otherwise.

You ever been in a bloody fight? Naw, all of you guys are chicken littles - depending on your penis - oops, I mean your guns.

0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:28 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
approach stealthily
creep up on
shadow


An where oh where is there any indication that Zimmerman did not follow Trayvon in an open manner not as a cat stalking a bird??????????

Quote:
threatening and illegal manner


An how is following someone for a few minutes on the public streets in order to guide the police to him illegal?????????????????????????
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:31 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
What gives these people the impression the prosecution didn't deal with Zimmerman's pursuit of Martin? Of course they raised that issue..


weakly, because the state arrested Zimmerman on the basis of the story that the Marin lead mob was selling, that Martin was killed in a fit of racism. the problem for the prosecutors was that they were in an arena that is supposed to be fueled on provable facts, and the facts argued against this killing having anything to do with race based hatred (it was thug based hatred if any). even now Shellie swears that Zimmerman is not a racist, and we know that suspecting Martin because he was a young black was a reasonable rational result. the state went to trial with half a story, they said that zimmerman was reckless but because they could not argue racism they had no motive.
Romeo Fabulini
 
  2  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:34 pm
Quote:
Cicerone said: Those injuries could have been self-inflected

Or Nanny McPhee could have whacked him with her stick, or the Last of the Mohicans could have tried to scalp him, or it could have been done by a photon torpedo from an orbiting Klingon Bird of Prey, anythings possible..
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:37 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
That could be true too!~ You can't prove it either way; that's a FACT.
firefly
 
  0  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:40 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:

It seems no matter how often I post the dictionary definition of stalk, you fail to understand it.

They understand it, C.I., they don't want to acknowledge it.

If a man stalked one of their wives or daughters through a private community, in the dark, and never identified himself to her, you can damn well bet they'd call his behavior "stalking" if she pulled out her gun to defend herself when he caught up to her, and she wound up getting arrested for brandishing her weapon. They'd be arguing for her right to defend herself, and to display her weapon, based on her feeling that someone who stalks like that is a perceived threat.

But, for some reason, they can't admit that the teen Zimmerman stalked had that same right to defend himself based on his perception of Zimmerman's stalking as a perceived threat to him
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:44 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
That could be true too!~ You can't prove it either way; that's a FACT


Sorry there was neighbor on the scene within a minute of the shooting that took pictures of Zimmerman wounds with a cell phone.

So yes we can indeed disprove such silliness.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 06:48 pm
@BillRM,
Stalking is illegal; what Zim did is now outlawed, because they learned people like Zim is dangerous to the community at large.

There is no benefit for people like Zim to have guns in their community - even as a Neighborhood Watch member.

Ain't that sumt'n! At least the police/sheriff there has some common sense - unlike the dummies on this thread who continue to defend Zim.
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 07:01 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Stalking is illegal;

and had the state figured it had a chance in hell of convicting zimmerman for stalking it would have charged him with stalking. all of this talk about stalking is irrelevant because a man is presumed innocent until proven guilty and the state did not even have enough evidence of a crime to charge him.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 07:15 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
weakly, because the state arrested Zimmerman on the basis of the story that the Marin lead mob was selling, that Martin was killed in a fit of racism

Come on, Hawkeye. You know that isn't true.

The Chief Police Investigator wanted to arrest and charge Zimmerman the night of the shooting because his story was "unconvincing"--not because of anything relating to race. The D.A. passed on doing that, and that's what led Martin's parents to demand accountability for the questionable circumstances of their son's death. And their anger was at the D.A., for not arresting their son's shooter and holding him accountable for their son's death. It was a cry for justice on their part--they felt it was the D.A. who treated their son's death as unimportant because he was a young male black victim. Their complaint was with the D.A.

It was Martin's parents who started all the noise and all the protests, and they weren't selling any story that their son was killed in "a fit of racism"--they thought he had been wrongly racially profiled and that had led to his questionable death. And all they wanted, when they started their protests, and they asked Sharpton to assist them in organizing them and getting media attention for them, was for the D.A. to reopen the case and arrest Zimmerman. And, those peaceful protests achieved their aim.

The governor, quite appropriately, agreed there was legal merit to these demonstrations, and so he appointed a special prosecutor, and she felt there was reason to arrest Zimmerman--again based on his "unconvincing " story of self defense. Zimmerman's story was inconsistent, contradictory, and seemed "embellished". That's what made him, and his credibility suspect--he killed an unarmed kid, and his self-defense story was "unconvincing"

I'm really surprised that you, of all people, would fall for the right-wing gun nut version of what happened. That version ignores all the evidence that points to Zimmerman's apparent lies--the valid reasons he should have been arrested the night of the shooting, and, had that occurred, none of those demonstrations would have been necessary.

There is not the slightest doubt in my mind that, if one of your children was killed under similarly questionable circumstances, and the shooter was not arrested, despite his "unconvincing" story, and the recommendation of the police investigator that he should have been arrested and charged the night of the shooting, that, just like Martin's parents, you would have carried on to beat the band. You'd be carrying on about a "dysfunctional government" that was so incompetent it didn't care about your unarmed child winding up dead at the hands of a shooter with a questionable and unconvincing story of self-defense--you'd be screaming for the man's arrest, and you'd be blasting the government, and you'd be calling for protests.

I really do think you'd react just the way Martin's parents did.

hawkeye10
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 07:24 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
You'd be carrying on about a "dysfunctional government" that was so incompetent it didn't care about your unarmed child winding up dead at the hands of a shooter with a questionable and unconvincing story of self-defense--you'd be screaming for the man's arrest, and you'd be blasting the government.
if you paid attention you would know that i am all about having good processes which are followed by good people who care, I am about the rule of law, I hate hate hate special rules for "special" people and ad hoc procedures substituted in place of the rule of law. WAshington corruption is what you get when the rule of law breaks down.

I know damn well you are familiar with folks who have say one of their kids killed, where the killer gets the death penalty, and they still insist that the dead person being their kid does not negate their opposition to the very existence of the death penalty and who say that their kids killer should not be executed. I am like them. My beliefs do not changed based upon what ever trauma i happen to be currently in the middle of, they were too well considered before they were adopted for that.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 07:32 pm
@hawkeye10,
You are unique in many ways. You don't need to spell it out for us on how you'll behave if one of your children gets killed by a Zimmerman.

That doesn't negate the pain of others who have lost children to gun violence.

Some thing you'll never understand or appreciate. This thread is not about you.
oralloy
 
  1  
Mon 16 Dec, 2013 07:33 pm

Has Mr. Zimmerman received all his guns back yet? Or is it time for the civil rights community to start cracking down on the government again?
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 07/18/2025 at 06:38:26