Spike Lee
“I Deeply Apologize To The McClain Family For Retweeting Their Address. It Was A Mistake. Please Leave The McClain’s In Peace. Justice In Court”
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]thirdruffian wrote:
If you look at the article, it says the Stand Your Ground law didn’t even apply, because dumbass Zimmerman was already on the ground and couldn’t retreat.[/quote]
? I thought that would work in Zimmermans defense?[/quote]
No, the “Stand Your Ground” law merely added you don’t have to run away, if you have the ability to do so.
Here, dumbass was on the ground, so he couldn’t run away.
It’s just plain-old “self-defense.”[/quote]
Nothing is really “plain” in this incident. There are “if these things hold true” it’s just plain-old self-defense. Even with Stand Your Ground law…wouldn’t there still be a need to determine the aggressor before establishing who is justified in their self-defense3??
With that…couldn’t this Stand Your Ground law have justified Martin in defending himself…and putting Zimmerman on the ground in the first place…??? Of course there is the confusing “speculation” that Martin followed Zimmerman back to the vehicle. But it’s just that…speculation.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]thirdruffian wrote:
If you look at the article, it says the Stand Your Ground law didn’t even apply, because dumbass Zimmerman was already on the ground and couldn’t retreat.[/quote]
? I thought that would work in Zimmermans defense?[/quote]
No, the “Stand Your Ground” law merely added you don’t have to run away, if you have the ability to do so.
Here, dumbass was on the ground, so he couldn’t run away.
It’s just plain-old “self-defense.”[/quote]
Nothing is really “plain” in this incident. There are “if these things hold true” it’s just plain-old self-defense. Even with Stand Your Ground law…wouldn’t there still be a need to determine the aggressor before establishing who is justified in their self-defense3??
With that…couldn’t this Stand Your Ground law have justified Martin in defending himself…and putting Zimmerman on the ground in the first place…??? Of course there is the confusing “speculation” that Martin followed Zimmerman back to the vehicle. But it’s just that…speculation. [/quote]
Well this is why it stings so much for the family. The Defense (Zimmerman) does not have to show much of anything because the burden of proof is on the Prosecution.
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
DarkNinjaa you missed this one showing dog fighting critics what he thinks as he carries Barnie over to Michael Vick’s. [/quote]
Haha, I was wondering when Bush would pop up.
FTR, what are the pics proving? That middle fingers don’t mean much? Thanks DN, not everybody would be such a motivated captain obvious.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
That has not come up, but I think in one of the articles posted on the second thread stated that he was not patrolling, he was on his way home and saw Trayvon and started following him. I don’t know if this is true or not, but I would imagine that will be Zimmerman’s story and there is no real way to prove him wrong unless they have an actual watch schedule. If there is one, it will come out sooner or later.
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]thirdruffian wrote:
If you look at the article, it says the Stand Your Ground law didn’t even apply, because dumbass Zimmerman was already on the ground and couldn’t retreat.[/quote]
? I thought that would work in Zimmermans defense?[/quote]
No, the “Stand Your Ground” law merely added you don’t have to run away, if you have the ability to do so.
Here, dumbass was on the ground, so he couldn’t run away.
It’s just plain-old “self-defense.”[/quote]
Nothing is really “plain” in this incident. There are “if these things hold true” it’s just plain-old self-defense. Even with Stand Your Ground law…wouldn’t there still be a need to determine the aggressor before establishing who is justified in their self-defense3??
With that…couldn’t this Stand Your Ground law have justified Martin in defending himself…and putting Zimmerman on the ground in the first place…??? Of course there is the confusing “speculation” that Martin followed Zimmerman back to the vehicle. But it’s just that…speculation. [/quote]
Well this is why it stings so much for the family. The Defense (Zimmerman) does not have to show much of anything because the burden of proof is on the Prosecution.[/quote]
Very true…nothing to refute Zimmerman’s claims. But(IMO) there is enough to still hold him responsible in being careless and negligent…if the prosecution goes that route.
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]thirdruffian wrote:
If you look at the article, it says the Stand Your Ground law didn’t even apply, because dumbass Zimmerman was already on the ground and couldn’t retreat.[/quote]
? I thought that would work in Zimmermans defense?[/quote]
No, the “Stand Your Ground” law merely added you don’t have to run away, if you have the ability to do so.
Here, dumbass was on the ground, so he couldn’t run away.
It’s just plain-old “self-defense.”[/quote]
Nothing is really “plain” in this incident. There are “if these things hold true” it’s just plain-old self-defense. Even with Stand Your Ground law…wouldn’t there still be a need to determine the aggressor before establishing who is justified in their self-defense3??
With that…couldn’t this Stand Your Ground law have justified Martin in defending himself…and putting Zimmerman on the ground in the first place…??? Of course there is the confusing “speculation” that Martin followed Zimmerman back to the vehicle. But it’s just that…speculation. [/quote]
Well this is why it stings so much for the family. The Defense (Zimmerman) does not have to show much of anything because the burden of proof is on the Prosecution.[/quote]
Self Defense is an affirmative defense. The burden of proof is on the defense to prove it by a prponderance of the evidence. If they can’t, all the prosecution has to do is prove Zim shot trayvon beyond a reasonable doubt.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
As discussed, his state license would override neighborhood association “no no’s”.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Spike Lee
“I Deeply Apologize To The McClain Family For Retweeting Their Address. It Was A Mistake. Please Leave The McClain’s In Peace. Justice In Court”
[/quote]
What a piece of shit.
Him tweeting the supposed address of Z. is morally in the same neighbourhood as Zimmerman’s eagerness to escalate.
I’ll definitely pirate the shit out of any of his flics I might be interested in.
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
That has not come up, but I think in one of the articles posted on the second thread stated that he was not patrolling, he was on his way home and saw Trayvon and started following him. I don’t know if this is true or not, but I would imagine that will be Zimmerman’s story and there is no real way to prove him wrong unless they have an actual watch schedule. If there is one, it will come out sooner or later.[/quote]
I’m wondering even if he did break one of the rules of the Neighborhood Watch would it even add up to anything more than a fine or maybe being kicked off the watch program?
This case is so jacked up and sad and could have ended if Zimmerman would have stayed his ass in his car and just took pics and maybe did a video hell what phone can’t do that. Dumbassitness
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
That has not come up, but I think in one of the articles posted on the second thread stated that he was not patrolling, he was on his way home and saw Trayvon and started following him. I don’t know if this is true or not, but I would imagine that will be Zimmerman’s story and there is no real way to prove him wrong unless they have an actual watch schedule. If there is one, it will come out sooner or later.[/quote]
I’m wondering even if he did break one of the rules of the Neighborhood Watch would it even add up to anything more than a fine or maybe being kicked off the watch program?
This case is so jacked up and sad and could have ended if Zimmerman would have stayed his ass in his car and just took pics and maybe did a video hell what phone can’t do that. Dumbassitness[/quote]
Exactly.
My understanding is that, as townwatch captain, he was self-appointed and unregistered with the township. But most of his neighbors accepted his beat as legit.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]thirdruffian wrote:
If you look at the article, it says the Stand Your Ground law didn’t even apply, because dumbass Zimmerman was already on the ground and couldn’t retreat.[/quote]
? I thought that would work in Zimmermans defense?[/quote]
No, the “Stand Your Ground” law merely added you don’t have to run away, if you have the ability to do so.
Here, dumbass was on the ground, so he couldn’t run away.
It’s just plain-old “self-defense.”[/quote]
Nothing is really “plain” in this incident. There are “if these things hold true” it’s just plain-old self-defense. Even with Stand Your Ground law…wouldn’t there still be a need to determine the aggressor before establishing who is justified in their self-defense3??
With that…couldn’t this Stand Your Ground law have justified Martin in defending himself…and putting Zimmerman on the ground in the first place…??? Of course there is the confusing “speculation” that Martin followed Zimmerman back to the vehicle. But it’s just that…speculation. [/quote]
Well this is why it stings so much for the family. The Defense (Zimmerman) does not have to show much of anything because the burden of proof is on the Prosecution.[/quote]
Self Defense is an affirmative defense. The burden of proof is on the defense to prove it by a prponderance of the evidence. If they can’t, all the prosecution has to do is prove Zim shot trayvon beyond a reasonable doubt.
[/quote]
If this is true and he can’t use the Stand your Ground law and falls on Self Defense then he is in for a fight because its not even a question about the Shot.
So then the real question is Stand your Ground or Self Defense?
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]thirdruffian wrote:
If you look at the article, it says the Stand Your Ground law didn’t even apply, because dumbass Zimmerman was already on the ground and couldn’t retreat.[/quote]
? I thought that would work in Zimmermans defense?[/quote]
No, the “Stand Your Ground” law merely added you don’t have to run away, if you have the ability to do so.
Here, dumbass was on the ground, so he couldn’t run away.
It’s just plain-old “self-defense.”[/quote]
Nothing is really “plain” in this incident. There are “if these things hold true” it’s just plain-old self-defense. Even with Stand Your Ground law…wouldn’t there still be a need to determine the aggressor before establishing who is justified in their self-defense3??
With that…couldn’t this Stand Your Ground law have justified Martin in defending himself…and putting Zimmerman on the ground in the first place…??? Of course there is the confusing “speculation” that Martin followed Zimmerman back to the vehicle. But it’s just that…speculation. [/quote]
Well this is why it stings so much for the family. The Defense (Zimmerman) does not have to show much of anything because the burden of proof is on the Prosecution.[/quote]
Very true…nothing to refute Zimmerman’s claims. But(IMO) there is enough to still hold him responsible in being careless and negligent…if the prosecution goes that route. [/quote]
I think it is easy to criticize in hindsight.
It’s not that weird to think a neighborhood watch captain would roll up to a suspicious outsider to ask who he is visiting.
It’s not weird to think Trayvon veered off as he pulled up.
It’s not weird to think Trayvon avoiding a question appeared even more suspicious.
It’s not weird to think Zimmerman exited his car to identify himself and ask his question.
Or that Trayvon took off running and Zimmerman headed back to his car.
Or that Trayvon, shown to have authority issues in general, attacked and brought us to the situation at hand.
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
That has not come up, but I think in one of the articles posted on the second thread stated that he was not patrolling, he was on his way home and saw Trayvon and started following him. I don’t know if this is true or not, but I would imagine that will be Zimmerman’s story and there is no real way to prove him wrong unless they have an actual watch schedule. If there is one, it will come out sooner or later.[/quote]
I don’t see how this slipped past two exhausted threads. Nevertheless…I thought Zimmerman referenced his “patrol” during 911 call…??? Before justifying self-defense on his part…shouldn’t Zimmerman have to establish being justified in his actions leading up the shooting?? Namely…carrying a firearm while on his watch patrol(if verified as such)???
[quote]overstand wrote:
You are posting pictures of white people in a blatant attempt at turning this into a racial debate. That = race baiting.
I just posted a picture proving the middle finger pic thethirdruffian posted was photoshopped, and in the other thread I posted that the white beanie with two middle fingers was not Trayvon. I am interested in facts and legitimate discourse. You are not.
You have added nothing to this discussion besides hate and racism. [/quote]
Oh is that why you are soooooooo offended??? Please stop whining like a starving pussy. When you were smearing Trayvon, I didn’t have a go at you. When you posted far right links I didn’t have a go at you. Keep your emotions in check, woman.
When you posted the picture of fake Trayvon, you were quick to judge and call that child a gangster. So I’m not supposed to show other pictures – and yes, of people of different races, celebs, youth and elderly – to contradict your theory? I’ve told you, YOU and others posting this kind of pictures ARE the race baiters. You wanted to paint this boy in a bad light based on gestures that apparently only black people do. Now what? Trying to redeem yourself? Riiiiight. LOL.
As for me only adding hate and racism, yawn yawn yawn yaaaaaaawn. Please, go reread your posts and the comments in links you purposely posted in the other threads. Filled with prejudices and hate for black people. Most of them even agree the n***r Trayvon deserved to die. For someone like you frequenting these kind of sites, that’s telling, bitch.
As I said, do your fucking stuff and I’ll do mine. Don’t want to read my shit, put me on fucking ignore. I see your fucking shit I don’t tell you to fuck off. Get a fucking thick skin.
I’m done wasting my time with a fucker like you.
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
That has not come up, but I think in one of the articles posted on the second thread stated that he was not patrolling, he was on his way home and saw Trayvon and started following him. I don’t know if this is true or not, but I would imagine that will be Zimmerman’s story and there is no real way to prove him wrong unless they have an actual watch schedule. If there is one, it will come out sooner or later.[/quote]
I’m wondering even if he did break one of the rules of the Neighborhood Watch would it even add up to anything more than a fine or maybe being kicked off the watch program?
This case is so jacked up and sad and could have ended if Zimmerman would have stayed his ass in his car and just took pics and maybe did a video hell what phone can’t do that. Dumbassitness[/quote]
As discussed, state law would override a neighborhood association.
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
That has not come up, but I think in one of the articles posted on the second thread stated that he was not patrolling, he was on his way home and saw Trayvon and started following him. I don’t know if this is true or not, but I would imagine that will be Zimmerman’s story and there is no real way to prove him wrong unless they have an actual watch schedule. If there is one, it will come out sooner or later.[/quote]
I’m wondering even if he did break one of the rules of the Neighborhood Watch would it even add up to anything more than a fine or maybe being kicked off the watch program?
This case is so jacked up and sad and could have ended if Zimmerman would have stayed his ass in his car and just took pics and maybe did a video hell what phone can’t do that. Dumbassitness[/quote]
Agreed. If he had just kept his ass in his car, none of this would have happened and we all could have all spent the last three threads posting cat pics.
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Dr.Matt581 wrote:
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Without having to read through the “books” of threads…has anyone even discussed Zimmerman violating numerous Neighborhood Watch guidelines?? Namely…carrying firearm in first place…which I know is a no-no…CCL or not. [/quote]
That has not come up, but I think in one of the articles posted on the second thread stated that he was not patrolling, he was on his way home and saw Trayvon and started following him. I don’t know if this is true or not, but I would imagine that will be Zimmerman’s story and there is no real way to prove him wrong unless they have an actual watch schedule. If there is one, it will come out sooner or later.[/quote]
I’m wondering even if he did break one of the rules of the Neighborhood Watch would it even add up to anything more than a fine or maybe being kicked off the watch program?
This case is so jacked up and sad and could have ended if Zimmerman would have stayed his ass in his car and just took pics and maybe did a video hell what phone can’t do that. Dumbassitness[/quote]
Agreed. If he had just kept his ass in his car, none of this would have happened and we all could have all spent the last three threads posting cat pics.
[/quote]
LOL (sorry the laugh)
Well, we can still post cat pics, but it won’t feel right.