27
   

The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 02:45 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:
This was a private gated community, where residents and guests had an expectation of being free to walk around, without being bothered, or harassed, or menaced, or stalked in the dark, by anyone else residing there.

Even on public streets, we try to prevent others from bothering
people by doing things like pan-handling. And these weren't public streets.
U are trying to invent a new principle
of morality or of law whereby we have lost our natural right
to follow anyone we want in public streets. U have not succeeded.



Thay tried to do that to Zimmy, on a retro-active basis.
That did not turn out as the repressionists wanted it to.





David
BillRM
 
  1  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 02:47 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
"Wrong [sic]" only by the criteria of that private club.
Anyone is free to violate & disregard those rules.


Of course you are free to disregard any such rules as the worst punishment would be that you might get kicked out of that club.

Quote:
Such a club need not exist for nabors to have the right
to move around on the streets of the area, LOOKING AROUND
and calling police when thay deem it appropriate.


A simple concept that for some strange reason Firefly can not seems to understand.
firefly
 
  1  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 02:52 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
U are trying to invent a new principle
of morality or of law whereby we have lost our natural right
to follow anyone we want in public streets

These weren't PUBLIC STREETS. It was a private gated community.

Why do you think the homeowner's association of that community wound up paying Trayvon Martin's parents a settlement of $1 million+?
BillRM
 
  1  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 02:54 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
If Trayvon was under the impression that Zimmerman was doing something wrong or illegal or might be doing so by following him he had a cell phone in his hand that he could have used to call the police himself.

What he did not have was the right to turn and attacked Zimmerman.

Nor was there any finding by the courts that Zimmerman was doing anything illegal that would under the law removed his rights to stand his ground when he was attack by Trayvon.

In other word as we all know Firefly is reaching to try to find some justification for Trayvon to launch an attack on Zimmerman.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 02:54 pm
@firefly,
David is one stupid attorney. I wonder how he makes a living at it! Mr. Green
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 02:54 pm
@BillRM,
DAVID wrote:
"Wrong [sic]" only by the criteria of that private club.
Anyone is free to violate & disregard those rules.
BillRM wrote:
Of course you are free to disregard any such rules as the worst punishment
would be that you might get kicked out of that club.


DAVID wrote:
Such a club need not exist for nabors to have the right
to move around on the streets of the area, LOOKING AROUND
and calling police when thay deem it appropriate.
BillRM wrote:
A simple concept that for some strange reason Firefly can not seem
to understand.
I dunno, but I suspect that the problem was
that decedent was a black.
OmSigDAVID
 
  3  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 02:57 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
David is one stupid attorney. I wonder how he makes a living at it! Mr. Green
I retired from the practice of law in another century.
It was fun and remunerative.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  3  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 03:00 pm
@firefly,
DAVID wrote:
U are trying to invent a new principle
of morality or of law whereby we have lost our natural right
to follow anyone we want in public streets
firefly wrote:
These weren't PUBLIC STREETS. It was a private gated community.

Why do you think the homeowner's association of that community
wound up paying Trayvon Martin's parents a settlement of $1 million+?
COWARDICE!

Un-justified fear.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 03:02 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:

Nor was there any finding by the courts that Zimmerman was doing anything illegal that would under the law removed his rights to stand his ground when he was attack by Trayvon.

Dummy, this wasn't a Stand Your Ground case--as even Mark O'Mara pointed out.

The one with a right to Stand Your Ground in that situation would have been Trayvon Martin--he had been actively pursued by someone who had come after him, in a menacing manner, and, under Florida law, he was the one who had a right to defend himself rather than flee.

And Zimmerman's behavior since his acquittal, including his menacing and threatening behavior toward others, continues to demonstrate his poor judgment and lack of impulse control.

firefly
 
  1  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 03:04 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
David is one stupid attorney. I wonder how he makes a living at it!

There are plenty of legal hacks who aren't exactly the shining lights of their profession.

Notice how these people avoid discussing Zimmerman's actions since his acquittal. The man is definitely a loose cannon.
OmSigDAVID
 
  3  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 03:07 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
If Trayvon was under the impression that Zimmerman was doing something wrong or illegal or might be doing so by following him he had a cell phone in his hand that he could have used to call the police himself.
OF COURSE! The repressionists never bring out that point.

Y don t u bring out that point, Firefly??
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 03:09 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
David is one stupid attorney. I wonder how he makes a living at it!
firefly wrote:
There are plenty of legal hacks who aren't exactly the shining lights of their profession.
Did I make some particular mistake, Firefly??
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 03:13 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:
The one with a right to Stand Your Ground in that situation
would have been Trayvon Martin--he had been actively pursued by someone who had come after him,
BUT there is NOTHING RONG with that; it is perfectly proper.

No one woud have faulted Martin for standing his ground.
He was culpable for slamming Zimmy 's head on the street for no reason.

Being followed is not a reason.





David
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 03:13 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
I dunno, but I suspect that the problem was
that decedent was a black.


Add to that Zimmerman was wrongly painted by the media, looking for a good story, as white and a racist when he was not white in any normal meaning of that term and he was not a racist.

Hell Zimmerman mother was dark enough that she could had been Trayvon mother instead.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  0  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 03:17 pm
There was an “I am Trayvon Day of Remembrance Peace Walk” held today to remember the real victim in this situation--the teen who lost his life because of George Zimmerman's impaired judgment and lack of self-control.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/02/09/3225733/i-am-trayvon-day-of-remembrance.html#storylink=cpy

As Martin's parents have continued to promote positive causes, and to try to see some good come out of their family tragedy, Zimmerman has continued to menace and threaten others. That says it all.

Advocate
 
  2  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 03:37 pm
Any lawyer will tell you that Z following M is irrelevant to the case. This is not even worth discussing. However, M sitting on top of Z and beating the crap out ;of him is very relevant, and justified Z shooting him.

The stuff that happened later to Z is a "he said-she said" type of thing. Who knows the true story. This is truly irrelevant to the shooting.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 03:52 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:
There was an “I am Trayvon Day of Remembrance Peace Walk” held today to remember the real victim in this situation--the teen who lost his life because of George Zimmerman's impaired judgment and lack of self-control.

Read more here:
http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/02/09/3225733/i-am-trayvon-day-of-remembrance.html#storylink=cpy

As Martin's parents have continued to promote positive causes, and to try to see some good come out of their family tragedy, Zimmerman has continued to menace and threaten others. That says it all.

1. He brought it on himself thru his gratuitous violence.
2. He deserved what he got.
3. The rest of us are safer now that he is gone.
BillRM
 
  2  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 04:02 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
1. He brought it on himself thru his gratuitous violence.
2. He deserved what he got.
3. The rest of us are safer now that he is gone.


How true and it is amusing to think that those jokers are claiming that Zimmerman should had exercise enough self control to accept being beaten either into the hospital intensive care unit or the grave yard.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -1  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 04:15 pm
Blacks are always demanding 'civil rights' and 'equality' stuff, they'll be demanding the right to sit on whites and beat the krap out of them without being punished next..Wink

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/black-mugger_zpse94d2ac9.jpg~original
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  2  
Sat 8 Feb, 2014 04:41 pm
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7Mox5igXj-M/UA-Qf2sdb-I/AAAAAAAAC_0/SrFWF_3HIhQ/s200/thimage0044.gif

Keep it up, David, BillRM, Advocate, and Romeo, I don't think I've read a more moronic slew of factually uniformed, inaccurate, and clearly bigoted comments regarding this case anywhere on the internet.

What a pathetic group of jerks you are, no wonder you over-identify so strongly with an asshole like Zimmerman. I love watching you all make fools of yourselves.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7Mox5igXj-M/UA-Qf2sdb-I/AAAAAAAAC_0/SrFWF_3HIhQ/s200/thimage0044.gif



 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 11/17/2024 at 01:24:01