[quote]UtahLama wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
Four60, you’ve had some of the most clear-headed and thoughtful posts here.
[/quote]
Both Jewbacca and Four60 have impressed me with their level headed posts…stuff that makes you think without them having to beat you over the head with it.
Kudos.[/quote]
I wholeheartedly agree. Jewbacca is chockful of good info!
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]overstand wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
Stupidity is not a crime in Florida. If he gets off it may have more to do with the prosecutions choices than anything else. [/quote]
I think this is correct.
The prosecution has no way of proving Zimmerman provoked the fight with Martin; in fact, the investigator admitted it. As a result, the self-defense claim will stand and he won’t be convicted of 2nd degree murder.
If the prosecutor wasn’t such a political whore, she would have charged Zimmerman with “involuntary manslaughter,” which includes a “criminal negligence” stadard.
“Involuntary manslaughter” is for when you do something stupid — like drive way too fast and kill someone.
If they did involuntary manslaughter, all the STUPID shit Zimmerman did would be relevant and you’d get a conviction.
Now, it will be a very narrow case with the prosecution trying to show who threw the first punch.[/quote]
If the prosecution doesn’t satisfactorily prove 2nd degree murder, can the jury come back with manslaughter? How does something like that work?[/quote]
They can put manslaughter in the charge as well. It’s called a “lesser included offense.”
This idiot, however, appears to be swinging for the fences.
She needed to go for the “base hit” and call it good.[/quote]
It does appear that she has gone all in doesn’t it. Perhaps they are going to have a Perry Mason moment and reveal some secret bombshell evidence on the final day of the trial that catches the defense off guard and they secure a conviction that way. Surely in a case like this, where it is important to get a conviction it will be okay to waive disclosure rules to make it so. No?
When the prosecutor first charged him with second degree murder I had supposed they might have developed some solid evidence. The thought that they were bluffing in the hopes he would take a plea down to manslaughter seemed somewhat unlikely.
I am starting to think the prosecutor might have got caught up in the hype and may not get the desired result because of it.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]overstand wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
Stupidity is not a crime in Florida. If he gets off it may have more to do with the prosecutions choices than anything else. [/quote]
I think this is correct.
The prosecution has no way of proving Zimmerman provoked the fight with Martin; in fact, the investigator admitted it. As a result, the self-defense claim will stand and he won’t be convicted of 2nd degree murder.
If the prosecutor wasn’t such a political whore, she would have charged Zimmerman with “involuntary manslaughter,” which includes a “criminal negligence” stadard.
“Involuntary manslaughter” is for when you do something stupid — like drive way too fast and kill someone.
If they did involuntary manslaughter, all the STUPID shit Zimmerman did would be relevant and you’d get a conviction.
Now, it will be a very narrow case with the prosecution trying to show who threw the first punch.[/quote]
If the prosecution doesn’t satisfactorily prove 2nd degree murder, can the jury come back with manslaughter? How does something like that work?[/quote]
They can put manslaughter in the charge as well. It’s called a “lesser included offense.”
This idiot, however, appears to be swinging for the fences.
She needed to go for the “base hit” and call it good.[/quote]
It does appear that she has gone all in doesn’t it. Perhaps they are going to have a Perry Mason moment and reveal some secret bombshell evidence on the final day of the trial that catches the defense off guard and they secure a conviction that way. Surely in a case like this, where it is important to get a conviction it will be okay to waive disclosure rules to make it so. No?
When the prosecutor first charged him with second degree murder I had supposed they might have developed some solid evidence. The thought that they were bluffing in the hopes he would take a plea down to manslaughter seemed somewhat unlikely.
I am starting to think the prosecutor might have got caught up in the hype and may not get the desired result because of it.
[/quote]
Apparently she’s been known to overcharge before…so her boldness is nothing new, which makes me wonder why she was selected.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]overstand wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
Stupidity is not a crime in Florida. If he gets off it may have more to do with the prosecutions choices than anything else. [/quote]
I think this is correct.
The prosecution has no way of proving Zimmerman provoked the fight with Martin; in fact, the investigator admitted it. As a result, the self-defense claim will stand and he won’t be convicted of 2nd degree murder.
If the prosecutor wasn’t such a political whore, she would have charged Zimmerman with “involuntary manslaughter,” which includes a “criminal negligence” stadard.
“Involuntary manslaughter” is for when you do something stupid — like drive way too fast and kill someone.
If they did involuntary manslaughter, all the STUPID shit Zimmerman did would be relevant and you’d get a conviction.
Now, it will be a very narrow case with the prosecution trying to show who threw the first punch.[/quote]
If the prosecution doesn’t satisfactorily prove 2nd degree murder, can the jury come back with manslaughter? How does something like that work?[/quote]
They can put manslaughter in the charge as well. It’s called a “lesser included offense.”
This idiot, however, appears to be swinging for the fences.
She needed to go for the “base hit” and call it good.[/quote]
It does appear that she has gone all in doesn’t it. Perhaps they are going to have a Perry Mason moment and reveal some secret bombshell evidence on the final day of the trial that catches the defense off guard and they secure a conviction that way. Surely in a case like this, where it is important to get a conviction it will be okay to waive disclosure rules to make it so. No?
When the prosecutor first charged him with second degree murder I had supposed they might have developed some solid evidence. The thought that they were bluffing in the hopes he would take a plea down to manslaughter seemed somewhat unlikely.
I am starting to think the prosecutor might have got caught up in the hype and may not get the desired result because of it.
[/quote]
It’s my understanding the prosecutor is in a highly political position and would therefore benefit by riding the hype wave. It would seem the over zealous “justice for trayvon” crowd may inadvertently put that justice, if there is any to be had, at risk.
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Does the information regarding Trayvon being in possession of women’s jewelry that admittedly did not belong to him and from a source he refused to name, make anyone question his true intent while walking around at night in the rain? [/quote]
NOPE, and neither did Zimmermans altercations with the police make me question why Zimmerman went to the same 7/11 that night. Zimmerman was not found with booze in his truck or a I hate police sticker that night and Martin was not found with any burglary tools or weapons or any jewlry that night.
It was 2 people who went to the store and had an altercation on the way back. The story/crime is in what happened on the way back from the store.
People want you to look into everything other than what happened that night. Its a game both sides are playing [/quote]
I don’t think that Zimmerman’s run in with the police almost a decade ago can be viewed equally to Martin’s run in with the school authorities a week prior. For the simple fact that Zimmerman had a decade to grow out of his bad teen behavior while with Martin something that happened just a week prior could point to ongoing, current problems.
It does make make Martin look a little less than completely innocent. Even more significant though is the fact that Martin was at that time serving a suspension from school for possession of marijuana. I’m surprised that more hasn’t been made of that by Zimmerman’s defense because it would explain a lot.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
But I’m sure the media and others will have fun trying to conect the two.[/quote]
You are correct, again, of course that the two matter legally have nothing to do with each other.
But the media did intentionally try to stoke racial hatred by making a series of “mistakes” all attempting to paint this as a racially-motivated killing — the edited 911 tape being the most disgusting. Indeed, the media so successful: (1) you have blacks randomly attacking whites all around the country and (2) that otherwise intelligent guys like Professor X jump through amazing mental gymnastics trying to make a racial link to this crime.
As seen with the neo-nazis murders of innocents in Tulsa, the black-on-white random violence will stoke a white-on-black random violence backlash.
My question is: who will benefit from a race war in the USA?
Is it just the media because, if it bleeds it ledes, and they need ratings?
Is it Republicans? Is it Democrats? Is it an outside force?
Normal blacks and normal whites need to figure this shit out fast before the abnormal segments of our respective populations fuck up this country.[/quote]
Considering the fact that both sides are now armed with superior firepower compared to the 1960’s. I would say that a couple of blood baths could generate excellent ratings for the news networks while also providing the excuse to do away with the second amendment.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
Apparently she’s been known to overcharge before.[/quote]
Charged a 12-year-old with 1st degree murder I believe.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
Apparently she’s been known to overcharge before.[/quote]
Charged a 12-year-old with 1st degree murder I believe.[/quote]
Isn’t 1st degree murder pre-meditated? That sounds crazy.
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
But I’m sure the media and others will have fun trying to conect the two.[/quote]
You are correct, again, of course that the two matter legally have nothing to do with each other.
But the media did intentionally try to stoke racial hatred by making a series of “mistakes” all attempting to paint this as a racially-motivated killing — the edited 911 tape being the most disgusting. Indeed, the media so successful: (1) you have blacks randomly attacking whites all around the country and (2) that otherwise intelligent guys like Professor X jump through amazing mental gymnastics trying to make a racial link to this crime.
As seen with the neo-nazis murders of innocents in Tulsa, the black-on-white random violence will stoke a white-on-black random violence backlash.
My question is: who will benefit from a race war in the USA?
Is it just the media because, if it bleeds it ledes, and they need ratings?
Is it Republicans? Is it Democrats? Is it an outside force?
Normal blacks and normal whites need to figure this shit out fast before the abnormal segments of our respective populations fuck up this country.[/quote]
Don’t over estimate the results of this case on the day to day living of “Normal” Black or white people. The day after the trial people will gasp, some will yell and most will go back to the day to day of living.
And that is what will happen no matter what the verdict is.
We have tension in the states no question, but its no where near what it use to be but the comedy comes around when people try to pretend its NOT THERE.
I have seen vids of racial crime on youtube before. I grew up in Brooklyn with the whole howard beach thing went down and people tried to tell me that it had nothing to do with race. Well it did, but it was also about Dumb people.
Dumb people will do Dumb shit. The only thing situations like this do is give a Catch Phrase for someone to yell out after they commit the Dumbass act.
If you ask me on a one to one. “Do I think Trayvon being Black had a part in why Zimmerman found him so suspicous”? I will say without question YES. But it had nothing to do with his Dumbass actions after. You can have racial thought and bias without following them up with DUMBASS actions.
Most people know and understand this. The meida’s whole thing is Ratings. The politics behind this is “If I can make you afraid, then I can promise to calm your fear with a promise of change” ITs how we get Fear based laws. But In order for this to work I first must make people afraid of something. Race bating is the fastest way to do this.
I have no issues with marches and speeches. I think its healthy for people to yell out about what they fear. It keeps the rest of us sharp and aware. And even if it does not affect me or my family at least I know what you are afraid of.
[/quote]
If only that were so. I think that with all the emotion that has been generated by the rhetoric surrounding this case a not guilty verdict is not going to go down well. Especially with those individuals who are not particularly mature.
Think about how many people died over the Rodney King verdict and all that happened there was he got his natural ass kicked after fleeing and eluding. Trayvon is dead under circumstances where it could be reasonably argued that he may have been completely innocent of any wrong doing, this could be much worse.
[quote]red04 wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
Apparently she’s been known to overcharge before.[/quote]
Charged a 12-year-old with 1st degree murder I believe.[/quote]
Isn’t 1st degree murder pre-meditated? That sounds crazy.[/quote]
Yes. Kid killed a toddler. Don’t know the details.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Does the information regarding Trayvon being in possession of women’s jewelry that admittedly did not belong to him and from a source he refused to name, make anyone question his true intent while walking around at night in the rain? [/quote]
NOPE, and neither did Zimmermans altercations with the police make me question why Zimmerman went to the same 7/11 that night. Zimmerman was not found with booze in his truck or a I hate police sticker that night and Martin was not found with any burglary tools or weapons or any jewlry that night.
It was 2 people who went to the store and had an altercation on the way back. The story/crime is in what happened on the way back from the store.
People want you to look into everything other than what happened that night. Its a game both sides are playing [/quote]
I don’t think that Zimmerman’s run in with the police almost a decade ago can be viewed equally to Martin’s run in with the school authorities a week prior. For the simple fact that Zimmerman had a decade to grow out of his bad teen behavior while with Martin something that happened just a week prior could point to ongoing, current problems.
It does make make Martin look a little less than completely innocent. Even more significant though is the fact that Martin was at that time serving a suspension from school for possession of marijuana. I’m surprised that more hasn’t been made of that by Zimmerman’s defense because it would explain a lot. [/quote]
This was still apart of Zimmermans life in 2005 and 2006. Both charges delt with Violence and Domestic Abuse charges.
Trayvon was supsended from School and had not seen a court or police station. It was all delt with thru the school system not the Courts.
Does any of this have a bearing on that night…NOPE.
I see Trayvon as no more than a 17yr old. No angel and no demon.
I also Don’t see zimmerman as a Klansman or a guy patroling to kill someone.
Lets not make this into a He said she said thing. What happened betwen them two on that night had nothing to do with the weed residue found in Trayvons book bag. Or the police violence and Girlfriend troubles Zimmerman had in 2005 and 2006.
Its about that night.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
But I’m sure the media and others will have fun trying to conect the two.[/quote]
You are correct, again, of course that the two matter legally have nothing to do with each other.
But the media did intentionally try to stoke racial hatred by making a series of “mistakes” all attempting to paint this as a racially-motivated killing — the edited 911 tape being the most disgusting. Indeed, the media so successful: (1) you have blacks randomly attacking whites all around the country and (2) that otherwise intelligent guys like Professor X jump through amazing mental gymnastics trying to make a racial link to this crime.
As seen with the neo-nazis murders of innocents in Tulsa, the black-on-white random violence will stoke a white-on-black random violence backlash.
My question is: who will benefit from a race war in the USA?
Is it just the media because, if it bleeds it ledes, and they need ratings?
Is it Republicans? Is it Democrats? Is it an outside force?
Normal blacks and normal whites need to figure this shit out fast before the abnormal segments of our respective populations fuck up this country.[/quote]
Don’t over estimate the results of this case on the day to day living of “Normal” Black or white people. The day after the trial people will gasp, some will yell and most will go back to the day to day of living.
And that is what will happen no matter what the verdict is.
We have tension in the states no question, but its no where near what it use to be but the comedy comes around when people try to pretend its NOT THERE.
I have seen vids of racial crime on youtube before. I grew up in Brooklyn with the whole howard beach thing went down and people tried to tell me that it had nothing to do with race. Well it did, but it was also about Dumb people.
Dumb people will do Dumb shit. The only thing situations like this do is give a Catch Phrase for someone to yell out after they commit the Dumbass act.
If you ask me on a one to one. “Do I think Trayvon being Black had a part in why Zimmerman found him so suspicous”? I will say without question YES. But it had nothing to do with his Dumbass actions after. You can have racial thought and bias without following them up with DUMBASS actions.
Most people know and understand this. The meida’s whole thing is Ratings. The politics behind this is “If I can make you afraid, then I can promise to calm your fear with a promise of change” ITs how we get Fear based laws. But In order for this to work I first must make people afraid of something. Race bating is the fastest way to do this.
I have no issues with marches and speeches. I think its healthy for people to yell out about what they fear. It keeps the rest of us sharp and aware. And even if it does not affect me or my family at least I know what you are afraid of.
[/quote]
If only that were so. I think that with all the emotion that has been generated by the rhetoric surrounding this case a not guilty verdict is not going to go down well. Especially with those individuals who are not particularly mature.
Think about how many people died over the Rodney King verdict and all that happened there was he got his natural ass kicked after fleeing and eluding. Trayvon is dead under circumstances where it could be reasonably argued that he may have been completely innocent of any wrong doing, this could be much worse. [/quote]
The LA riots that went down over Rodney King had more to do with the Police problems that went down in that Area before hand. The Verdict was just the final straw for a hot topic in that area.
And after watching that tape (and trust me I was stationed with a police officer who had the uncut version and it was worse than what most seen on TV). I can understand the confusion most people had. But hey, LA will riot over almost anything.
I’ve lived long enough to see cases like this before. The Hatian man in NY that had the pole rammed up his backside by precient cops. The Howard Beach, Elenor Bumpers, Bernhard Goetz, Yusuf Hawkins, etc that went down. You had some yelling, some marches and for the most part that is it.
And to be honest. By the time this goes to trial in maybe a year the news will have something new to yell and screem about.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
Apparently she’s been known to overcharge before.[/quote]
Charged a 12-year-old with 1st degree murder I believe.[/quote]
DAMN…I would like to read that case.
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
Apparently she’s been known to overcharge before.[/quote]
Charged a 12-year-old with 1st degree murder I believe.[/quote]
DAMN…I would like to read that case.[/quote]
Found this in wikipedia on Angela Corey:
In 2011 Corey’s office oversaw a case in which 12-year-old Cristian Fernandez was accused of killing his two-year-old brother. Corey sought and received a grand jury indictment Fernandez on charges of homicide and aggravated child abuse, and decided to try him as an adult. This move, which made Fernandez the youngest person ever to face a murder charge in Jacksonville’s history, drew criticism and protests to send the case to juvenile court instead, but Corey held that the juvenile system was inadequate to handle a crime of this magnitude. However, Corey stated she did not intend for Fernandez to stand trial or serve a life sentence, but would rather accept a plea deal. As of February 1, 2012 the defense and prosecution had not agreed to a plea deal, but were still in discussion. A trial was scheduled for February 27, 2012, but was postponed.
And this from one of the footnotes:
"Cristian is the youngest person in Jacksonville’s history to face a first-degree murder charge. As a mitigator in his favor, the prosecution said Thursday there is a question about if his 2-year-old half brother would have died if not also for the actions of the boys’ mother, Biannela Susana.
The defense team also has spoken repeatedly about Cristian as a long-suffering victim of abuse.
Authorities say he inflicted fatal injuries by slamming toddler David Galarraga against a bookshelf in March while Susana was out. She faces an aggravated manslaughter charge. Her arrest report shows she told police she surfed the Internet and waited about two hours before getting help for David."
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]overstand wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
Stupidity is not a crime in Florida. If he gets off it may have more to do with the prosecutions choices than anything else. [/quote]
I think this is correct.
The prosecution has no way of proving Zimmerman provoked the fight with Martin; in fact, the investigator admitted it. As a result, the self-defense claim will stand and he won’t be convicted of 2nd degree murder.
If the prosecutor wasn’t such a political whore, she would have charged Zimmerman with “involuntary manslaughter,” which includes a “criminal negligence” stadard.
“Involuntary manslaughter” is for when you do something stupid — like drive way too fast and kill someone.
If they did involuntary manslaughter, all the STUPID shit Zimmerman did would be relevant and you’d get a conviction.
Now, it will be a very narrow case with the prosecution trying to show who threw the first punch.[/quote]
If the prosecution doesn’t satisfactorily prove 2nd degree murder, can the jury come back with manslaughter? How does something like that work?[/quote]
They can put manslaughter in the charge as well. It’s called a “lesser included offense.”
This idiot, however, appears to be swinging for the fences.
She needed to go for the “base hit” and call it good.[/quote]
It does appear that she has gone all in doesn’t it. Perhaps they are going to have a Perry Mason moment and reveal some secret bombshell evidence on the final day of the trial that catches the defense off guard and they secure a conviction that way. Surely in a case like this, where it is important to get a conviction it will be okay to waive disclosure rules to make it so. No?
When the prosecutor first charged him with second degree murder I had supposed they might have developed some solid evidence. The thought that they were bluffing in the hopes he would take a plea down to manslaughter seemed somewhat unlikely.
I am starting to think the prosecutor might have got caught up in the hype and may not get the desired result because of it.
[/quote]
Apparently she’s been known to overcharge before…so her boldness is nothing new, which makes me wonder why she was selected.[/quote]
I think that is self evident. The case has become politicized. A prosecutor was chosen who would give the desired result. Some people are irresponsibly comparing Trayvon Martin to Emmett Till which is a wild comparison considering the differences in the two cases. But now that the comparison is being made they have to go out and try to prosecute Zimmerman as if he was Emmett Till’s killer or they are going to be accused of racism.
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Does the information regarding Trayvon being in possession of women’s jewelry that admittedly did not belong to him and from a source he refused to name, make anyone question his true intent while walking around at night in the rain? [/quote]
NOPE, and neither did Zimmermans altercations with the police make me question why Zimmerman went to the same 7/11 that night. Zimmerman was not found with booze in his truck or a I hate police sticker that night and Martin was not found with any burglary tools or weapons or any jewlry that night.
It was 2 people who went to the store and had an altercation on the way back. The story/crime is in what happened on the way back from the store.
People want you to look into everything other than what happened that night. Its a game both sides are playing [/quote]
I don’t think that Zimmerman’s run in with the police almost a decade ago can be viewed equally to Martin’s run in with the school authorities a week prior. For the simple fact that Zimmerman had a decade to grow out of his bad teen behavior while with Martin something that happened just a week prior could point to ongoing, current problems.
It does make make Martin look a little less than completely innocent. Even more significant though is the fact that Martin was at that time serving a suspension from school for possession of marijuana. I’m surprised that more hasn’t been made of that by Zimmerman’s defense because it would explain a lot. [/quote]
This was still apart of Zimmermans life in 2005 and 2006. Both charges delt with Violence and Domestic Abuse charges.
Trayvon was supsended from School and had not seen a court or police station. It was all delt with thru the school system not the Courts.
Does any of this have a bearing on that night…NOPE.
I see Trayvon as no more than a 17yr old. No angel and no demon.
I also Don’t see zimmerman as a Klansman or a guy patroling to kill someone.
Lets not make this into a He said she said thing. What happened betwen them two on that night had nothing to do with the weed residue found in Trayvons book bag. Or the police violence and Girlfriend troubles Zimmerman had in 2005 and 2006.
Its about that night. [/quote]
On the contrary. One week prior to the night in question Martin was caught with weed. That is quite relevant. It strongly suggests that Martin was a marijuana smoker. Which could explain a lot of things.
For example if I was 17 and I wanted to go burn one, I would use a legitimate reason to leave the house like going to 7/11 to get my brother some skittles as my way to get out of the house for a little while.
Trying to get one lit in the rain can be a little difficult. It would explain why he was loitering and speaking from personal experience it makes you look damned suspicious. It can also make you a little paranoid of Five O. Which would explain taking a closer look at someone sitting in a car.
Or if he was waiting to score that would explain his loitering in the rain. Speaking from personal experience it makes you look damned suspicious which can be stressful and cause paranoia. It could also explain approaching Zimmerman sitting in his car before he bolted. He might have thought that was his hook up, then when he saw it was Zimmerman he got scared.
Then there is the issue of Martin’s mental state being affected by withdrawal. Speaking from personal experience marijuana withdrawal causes two weeks of irritability and short temper. I would hate to go through that along pussy withdrawal because I was stuck with the hicks in the sticks a hundred miles away from my girlfriend in Miami!
Under those circumstances I think I could snap on some douche from neighborhood watch. Which could explain him getting into a fight with Zimmerman.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Does the information regarding Trayvon being in possession of women’s jewelry that admittedly did not belong to him and from a source he refused to name, make anyone question his true intent while walking around at night in the rain? [/quote]
NOPE, and neither did Zimmermans altercations with the police make me question why Zimmerman went to the same 7/11 that night. Zimmerman was not found with booze in his truck or a I hate police sticker that night and Martin was not found with any burglary tools or weapons or any jewlry that night.
It was 2 people who went to the store and had an altercation on the way back. The story/crime is in what happened on the way back from the store.
People want you to look into everything other than what happened that night. Its a game both sides are playing [/quote]
I don’t think that Zimmerman’s run in with the police almost a decade ago can be viewed equally to Martin’s run in with the school authorities a week prior. For the simple fact that Zimmerman had a decade to grow out of his bad teen behavior while with Martin something that happened just a week prior could point to ongoing, current problems.
It does make make Martin look a little less than completely innocent. Even more significant though is the fact that Martin was at that time serving a suspension from school for possession of marijuana. I’m surprised that more hasn’t been made of that by Zimmerman’s defense because it would explain a lot. [/quote]
This was still apart of Zimmermans life in 2005 and 2006. Both charges delt with Violence and Domestic Abuse charges.
Trayvon was supsended from School and had not seen a court or police station. It was all delt with thru the school system not the Courts.
Does any of this have a bearing on that night…NOPE.
I see Trayvon as no more than a 17yr old. No angel and no demon.
I also Don’t see zimmerman as a Klansman or a guy patroling to kill someone.
Lets not make this into a He said she said thing. What happened betwen them two on that night had nothing to do with the weed residue found in Trayvons book bag. Or the police violence and Girlfriend troubles Zimmerman had in 2005 and 2006.
Its about that night. [/quote]
On the contrary. One week prior to the night in question Martin was caught with weed. That is quite relevant. It strongly suggests that Martin was a marijuana smoker. Which could explain a lot of things.
For example if I was 17 and I wanted to go burn one, I would use a legitimate reason to leave the house like going to 7/11 to get my brother some skittles as my way to get out of the house for a little while.
Trying to get one lit in the rain can be a little difficult. It would explain why he was loitering and speaking from personal experience it makes you look damned suspicious. It can also make you a little paranoid of Five O. Which would explain taking a closer look at someone sitting in a car.
Or if he was waiting to score that would explain his loitering in the rain. Speaking from personal experience it makes you look damned suspicious which can be stressful and cause paranoia. It could also explain approaching Zimmerman sitting in his car before he bolted. He might have thought that was his hook up, then when he saw it was Zimmerman he got scared.
Then there is the issue of Martin’s mental state being affected by withdrawal. Speaking from personal experience marijuana withdrawal causes two weeks of irritability and short temper. I would hate to go through that along pussy withdrawal because I was stuck with the hicks in the sticks a hundred miles away from my girlfriend in Miami!
Under those circumstances I think I could snap on some douche from neighborhood watch. Which could explain him getting into a fight with Zimmerman. [/quote]
hahahah, OH wow man. Ok. I can’t debate if you are going to reach like this.
They found weed residue in his backpack, not a kilo, hahahahahahaha. Lets just say you may have a hard time finding 12 people in florida who even see weed as a issue. The cops didn’t even find it worthy of conversation its why the school had to do something.
Still, has nothing to do with the case.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
On the contrary. One week prior to the night in question Martin was caught with weed. That is quite relevant. It strongly suggests that Martin was a marijuana smoker. Which could explain a lot of things.
For example if I was 17 and I wanted to go burn one, I would use a legitimate reason to leave the house like going to 7/11 to get my brother some skittles as my way to get out of the house for a little while.
Trying to get one lit in the rain can be a little difficult. It would explain why he was loitering and speaking from personal experience it makes you look damned suspicious. It can also make you a little paranoid of Five O. Which would explain taking a closer look at someone sitting in a car.
Or if he was waiting to score that would explain his loitering in the rain. Speaking from personal experience it makes you look damned suspicious which can be stressful and cause paranoia. It could also explain approaching Zimmerman sitting in his car before he bolted. He might have thought that was his hook up, then when he saw it was Zimmerman he got scared.
Then there is the issue of Martin’s mental state being affected by withdrawal. Speaking from personal experience marijuana withdrawal causes two weeks of irritability and short temper. I would hate to go through that along pussy withdrawal because I was stuck with the hicks in the sticks a hundred miles away from my girlfriend in Miami!
Under those circumstances I think I could snap on some douche from neighborhood watch. Which could explain him getting into a fight with Zimmerman. [/quote]
LMAO, were you high when you wrote this? How did you come up with all that? Definitely give you credit for the vivid imagination.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
Does the information regarding Trayvon being in possession of women’s jewelry that admittedly did not belong to him and from a source he refused to name, make anyone question his true intent while walking around at night in the rain? [/quote]
NOPE, and neither did Zimmermans altercations with the police make me question why Zimmerman went to the same 7/11 that night. Zimmerman was not found with booze in his truck or a I hate police sticker that night and Martin was not found with any burglary tools or weapons or any jewlry that night.
It was 2 people who went to the store and had an altercation on the way back. The story/crime is in what happened on the way back from the store.
People want you to look into everything other than what happened that night. Its a game both sides are playing [/quote]
I don’t think that Zimmerman’s run in with the police almost a decade ago can be viewed equally to Martin’s run in with the school authorities a week prior. For the simple fact that Zimmerman had a decade to grow out of his bad teen behavior while with Martin something that happened just a week prior could point to ongoing, current problems.
It does make make Martin look a little less than completely innocent. Even more significant though is the fact that Martin was at that time serving a suspension from school for possession of marijuana. I’m surprised that more hasn’t been made of that by Zimmerman’s defense because it would explain a lot. [/quote]
This was still apart of Zimmermans life in 2005 and 2006. Both charges delt with Violence and Domestic Abuse charges.
Trayvon was supsended from School and had not seen a court or police station. It was all delt with thru the school system not the Courts.
Does any of this have a bearing on that night…NOPE.
I see Trayvon as no more than a 17yr old. No angel and no demon.
I also Don’t see zimmerman as a Klansman or a guy patroling to kill someone.
Lets not make this into a He said she said thing. What happened betwen them two on that night had nothing to do with the weed residue found in Trayvons book bag. Or the police violence and Girlfriend troubles Zimmerman had in 2005 and 2006.
Its about that night. [/quote]
On the contrary. One week prior to the night in question Martin was caught with weed. That is quite relevant. It strongly suggests that Martin was a marijuana smoker. Which could explain a lot of things.
For example if I was 17 and I wanted to go burn one, I would use a legitimate reason to leave the house like going to 7/11 to get my brother some skittles as my way to get out of the house for a little while.
Trying to get one lit in the rain can be a little difficult. It would explain why he was loitering and speaking from personal experience it makes you look damned suspicious. It can also make you a little paranoid of Five O. Which would explain taking a closer look at someone sitting in a car.
Or if he was waiting to score that would explain his loitering in the rain. Speaking from personal experience it makes you look damned suspicious which can be stressful and cause paranoia. It could also explain approaching Zimmerman sitting in his car before he bolted. He might have thought that was his hook up, then when he saw it was Zimmerman he got scared.
Then there is the issue of Martin’s mental state being affected by withdrawal. Speaking from personal experience marijuana withdrawal causes two weeks of irritability and short temper. I would hate to go through that along pussy withdrawal because I was stuck with the hicks in the sticks a hundred miles away from my girlfriend in Miami!
Under those circumstances I think I could snap on some douche from neighborhood watch. Which could explain him getting into a fight with Zimmerman. [/quote]
[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
[quote]WW3General wrote:
[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:
[quote]WW3General wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]WW3General wrote:
I mean they created a new race of humanity just to stoke the racial fires, who had heard of a white hispanic before this case? .[/quote]
I am laughing at this. I do believe MANY OF US have stated that hispanics were listed as white in Texas on most test forms through most of my childhood. It isn’t some new race that was made up. it is the simple fact that hispanics were not separated from white in many states, I would assume especially in the south.
Further, this guy is half white and his dad is white. How the hell is he just “hispanic”?[/quote]
I am not saying he is hispanic. I am saying that the term white hipanic is bullshit just to make racial tensions worse. Zimmerman should be the one who decides what his label should be if he wants one at all. I am from northern European ancestors, I also have Cherokee in my recent past. I am not called a white/native or a white/indian, or a white/ Cherokee, I am Caucasian or other on most forms. Just like a man who is half black and half white is not a white/ black man or a White/ African. I think it is ridiculous that they created a new term in the media to bring race more fully into this murder. Why was it not just reported that a man killed a teenager? Why would his race matter? It should not matter that is the whole point, a person is dead because of a man’s actions race had nothing to do with it until the media got ahold of it.[/quote]
While I agree that it should not be important. The term White Hispanic is not new. A white Hispanic is someone born in a Latin American country who has no indigenous blood, as opposed to those of pure indigenous blood, and Mestizos.
[/quote]
So by your definition it has no place in this instance?[/quote]
no, no bearing.
A dude shot and killed another dude. Criminality will be decided in court.[/quote]