Trayvon Martin's murderer George Zimmerman is still a free man

[Jive Turkey]

I think if you want to have an opinion on the matter, you first need to go to tim's south side. That's the impression I'm getting anyway

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by tim722

You're not thinking straight. He was suspicious. Nobody knows what happened after that.

Just wondering why LuckyNumber, why don't you come to my south side to protest all the black on black crime?

About 450 black men killed 450 black men in Chicago. Bring you're people to me. Come to me and protest. Are you afraid? Why focus on one white person who killed s black man? Why not follow all the black men who are killed by black men? Oh you don't care about them. You're only interested if a white man kills a black man. Meet me today at 67th and Ashland to protest.

Everybody does know that George Zimmerman is Peruvian, right?

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by tim722

I never said it was criminal did I? Not saying it was criminal but enough to call 911 as a suspicious person in Zimmermans eyes.

You said GZ profiled him as a criminal.

Why? For doing what?

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by tim722

Just wondering where all you white people are on the south and west side of Chicago? About 450 black males were killed last year in Chicago, mostly by black males. Where are you when it comes time to come to my hood to protest? Are you scared? We can protest during the day. You don't give a shit. You only care if the one in a hundred times a white guy kills a black. You could care less when a black kills a black. Or a black kills a white. It happens every day. Irvine, you are an idiot, blacks commit most of the burglaries.

Don't lecture me. I live in the inner city in a city that's over 50% African American. We've had 3 shootings within a block of where I live so far this summer.

You'd do a lot better finding a non-racist argument rather than inventing imaginary thoughts for others.

And you might realize that Sanford is quite different from Chicago.

[MrsSpringsteen]

Inventing imaginary thoughts for others is a hobby for some posters here

What I find "disgusting" is the conduct of that lawyer Don West. He comes off as an extremely arrogant condescending guy. You won the case, no need to continue to try to rehabilitate the image of your client within minutes of doing so. We get it, he's a saint and nothing but a victim. Even if you don't believe it, that's your "job" I suppose. Your daughter's little ice cream picture with the hash tag we beat stupid (when her father cross examined Rachel Jeantel) was disgusting too. I could say she was acting like a privileged ignorant white girl, but that would be racist and disgusting I suppose. You were in the picture, whether or not she asked your permission to post it on the internet..well it reflected quite poorly on you. Your little knock knock joke shortly after the opening of the prosecution, with the description of Trayvon's death, well I found that disgusting too.

I wouldn't take those t shirts as representative of the entire black community, nor would I ever condone them. Can I try to understand the anger of many African American people even though I've never lived a day in their shoes? Yes, I can try. Don't think I'll be all that successful.

The legal system is not a search for the truth, that's a fairytale. It's about what can be proven in court, who has the most money and the best lawyers, and a bunch of other things that have nothing to do with the truth. All that doesn't make that jury's verdict, or any jury's verdict, wrong. It's the system we have, I'd still rather have a non professional jury then the way it works in so many other countries. But the many inequalities that exist in the system, as a general commentary not directly related to this case, can't be denied.

I just had a hard a hard time sleeping last night, the whole thing just bothers me very much. Wouldn't want to be on that jury, I know that for sure.

George gets his gun back, he fears for his life. I fear for what this verdict might do to certain people who might be motivated to think they can get away with murder, manslaughter, whatever you want to call it.

The other comment that was laughable to me was O'Mara's comment that it was David vs Goliath. You apparently had unlimited funds-you hired a guy to do an animated recreation with technology used in Avatar and Iron Man, among other movies. You paid the guy who wrote the book on forensic pathology $400/hour. The list could probably go on and on. Yes the state has plenty of resources and power, but you're hardly the public defenders that you also managed to insult. At least he apologized for that.

I do think the prosecution could have had witnesses who were better prepared, don't think they were well prepared and suddenly did a 180 on the stand. It made them appear incompetent, the witnesses and sometimes the prosecutors. Don't put witnesses on in your first week who obviously are helping the defense way more than they're helping you. That's not the reason for the verdict, but there were apparent flaws. The mistakes of the testing and the ME office didn't help them either, the defense took full advantage of them. That's what they're supposed to do.

I wonder how George's wacky neighbor and friend Frank Taffee (have seen him act wacky several times on tv, would guess that's why he didn't testify) had some sort of information that the jury was 5-1 for acquittal when they asked the manslaughter question. He claimed so on tv last night. Either he was pulling that out of his you know what, or something improper was going on somewhere. When they asked the general question about manslaughter and never asked a more specific one, I thought it had to be an acquittal.

[U2girl]

Originally Posted by BVS

The last one standing gets to claim self defense?

Evidently, the one with the gun following around young black people does.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

Inventing imaginary thoughts for others is a hobby for some posters here

What I find "disgusting" is the conduct of that lawyer Don West. He comes off as an extremely arrogant condescending guy. You won the case, no need to continue to try to rehabilitate the image of your client within minutes of doing so. We get it, he's a saint and nothing but a victim. Even if you don't believe it, that's your "job" I suppose. Your daughter's little ice cream picture with the hash tag we beat stupid (when her father cross examined Rachel Jeantel) was disgusting too. I could say she was acting like a privileged ignorant white girl, but that would be racist and disgusting I suppose. You were in the picture, whether or not she asked your permission to post it on the internet..well it reflected quite poorly on you. Your little knock knock joke shortly after the opening of the prosecution, with the description of Trayvon's death, well I found that disgusting too.

I wouldn't take those t shirts as representative of the entire black community, nor would I ever condone them. Can I try to understand the anger of many African American people even though I've never lived a day in their shoes? Yes, I can try. Don't think I'll be all that successful.

The legal system is not a search for the truth, that's a fairytale. It's about what can be proven in court, who has the most money and the best lawyers, and a bunch of other things that have nothing to do with the truth. All that doesn't make that jury's verdict, or any jury's verdict, wrong. It's the system we have, I'd still rather have a non professional jury then the way it works in so many other countries. But the many inequalities that exist in the system, as a general commentary not directly related to this case, can't be denied.

I just had a hard a hard time sleeping last night, the whole thing just bothers me very much. Wouldn't want to be on that jury, I know that for sure.

George gets his gun back, he fears for his life. I fear for what this verdict might do to certain people who might be motivated to think they can get away with murder, manslaughter, whatever you want to call it.

The other comment that was laughable to me was O'Mara's comment that it was David vs Goliath. You apparently had unlimited funds-you hired a guy to do an animated recreation with technology used in Avatar and Iron Man, among other movies. You paid the guy who wrote the book on forensic pathology $400/hour. The list could probably go on and on. Yes the state has plenty of resources and power, but you're hardly the public defenders that you also managed to insult. At least he apologized for that.

I do think the prosecution could have had witnesses who were better prepared, don't think they were well prepared and suddenly did a 180 on the stand. It made them appear incompetent, the witnesses and sometimes the prosecutors. Don't put witnesses on in your first week who obviously are helping the defense way more than they're helping you. That's not the reason for the verdict, but there were apparent flaws. The mistakes of the testing and the ME office didn't help them either, the defense took full advantage of them. That's what they're supposed to do.

I wonder how George's wacky neighbor and friend Frank Taffee (have seen him act wacky several times on tv, would guess that's why he didn't testify) had some sort of information that the jury was 5-1 for acquittal when they asked the manslaughter question. He claimed so on tv last night. Either he was pulling that out of his you know what, or something improper was going on somewhere. When they asked the general question about manslaughter and never asked a more specific one, I thought it had to be an acquittal.

speaking of inventing imaginary thoughts

[deep]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

Inventing imaginary thoughts for others is a hobby for some posters here

What I find "disgusting" is the conduct of that lawyer Don West. He comes off as an extremely arrogant condescending guy. You won the case, no need to continue to try to rehabilitate the image of your client within minutes of doing so. We get it, he's a saint and nothing but a victim. Even if you don't believe it, that's your "job" I suppose. Your daughter's little ice cream picture with the hash tag we beat stupid (when her father cross examined Rachel Jeantel) was disgusting too. I could say she was acting like a privileged ignorant white girl, but that would be racist and disgusting I suppose. You were in the picture, whether or not she asked your permission to post it on the internet..well it reflected quite poorly on you. Your little knock knock joke shortly after the opening of the prosecution, with the description of Trayvon's death, well I found that disgusting too.

I wouldn't take those t shirts as representative of the entire black community, nor would I ever condone them. Can I try to understand the anger of many African American people even though I've never lived a day in their shoes? Yes, I can try. Don't think I'll be all that successful.

The legal system is not a search for the truth, that's a fairytale. It's about what can be proven in court, who has the most money and the best lawyers, and a bunch of other things that have nothing to do with the truth. All that doesn't make that jury's verdict, or any jury's verdict, wrong. It's the system we have, I'd still rather have a non professional jury then the way it works in so many other countries. But the many inequalities that exist in the system, as a general commentary not directly related to this case, can't be denied.

I just had a hard a hard time sleeping last night, the whole thing just bothers me very much. Wouldn't want to be on that jury, I know that for sure.

George gets his gun back, he fears for his life. I fear for what this verdict might do to certain people who might be motivated to think they can get away with murder, manslaughter, whatever you want to call it.

The other comment that was laughable to me was O'Mara's comment that it was David vs Goliath. You apparently had unlimited funds-you hired a guy to do an animated recreation with technology used in Avatar and Iron Man, among other movies. You paid the guy who wrote the book on forensic pathology $400/hour. The list could probably go on and on. Yes the state has plenty of resources and power, but you're hardly the public defenders that you also managed to insult. At least he apologized for that.

I do think the prosecution could have had witnesses who were better prepared, don't think they were well prepared and suddenly did a 180 on the stand. It made them appear incompetent, the witnesses and sometimes the prosecutors. Don't put witnesses on in your first week who obviously are helping the defense way more than they're helping you. That's not the reason for the verdict, but there were apparent flaws. The mistakes of the testing and the ME office didn't help them either, the defense took full advantage of them. That's what they're supposed to do.

I wonder how George's wacky neighbor and friend Frank Taffee (have seen him act wacky several times on tv, would guess that's why he didn't testify) had some sort of information that the jury was 5-1 for acquittal when they asked the manslaughter question. He claimed so on tv last night. Either he was pulling that out of his you know what, or something improper was going on somewhere. When they asked the general question about manslaughter and never asked a more specific one, I thought it had to be an acquittal.

thanks for this thoughtful post

this incident seems to be dividing people into two camps, you fall under the side that prefers common decency and respect for human life

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by deep

thanks for this thoughtful post

this incident seems to be dividing people into two camps, you fall under the side that prefers common decency and respect for human life

The two camps are balanced and reasonable, and unbalanced and hysterical. There are both kinds on either side of the argument

[deep]

but at the end of the day, there is one event

and if one is hysterically on one side, they are either on the right side or wrong side of the event

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

The two camps are balanced and reasonable, and unbalanced and hysterical. There are both kinds on either side of the argument

[deep]

The two camps are balanced and reasonable, and unbalanced and hysterical. There are both kinds on either side of the any argument

fixed

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by deep

but at the end of the day, there is one event

and if one is hysterically on one side, they are either on the right side or wrong side of the event

Ultimately, ya, I can agree with this. But in this case, we'll never know for certain which was the right side

Originally Posted by deep

fixed

Sure, I agree with this too

[deep]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

Ultimately, ya, I can agree with this. But in this case, we'll never know for certain which was the right side

I disagree, Zimmerman as an adult, made several bad, reckless choices he did not have to make that put him in a position to kill an unarmed 17 year old kid.

The jails are full of people that made bad choices, if they all had Zimmerman's legal defense team many would not have been convicted. And I am not of a general opinion that people that kill other unarmed people should not be in jail.

A claim of self defense on one's own property against an intruder could be more credible.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by tim722

You're not thinking straight. He was suspicious. Nobody knows what happened after that.

Just wondering why LuckyNumber, why don't you come to my south side to protest all the black on black crime?

About 450 black men killed 450 black men in Chicago. Bring you're people to me. Come to me and protest. Are you afraid? Why focus on one white person who killed s black man? Why not follow all the black men who are killed by black men? Oh you don't care about them. You're only interested if a white man kills a black man. Meet me today at 67th and Ashland to protest.

That's because thinking straight isn't fun!

Sure, I'll come to 'your' south side and uhh... 'protest all the black on black crime.' What relevance does this have to do with anything at all? Who are 'my people?' What the devil are you talking about? I'm not focusing on shit, and George Zimmerman wasn't even white.

If anything, you're a racist pig for dragging race into this. Where does anything I've said imply that I don't care about so called 'black on black' violence? What the hell are you talking about? You totally just wrote up a bunch of nonsense and quoted whoever you wanted to and directed nonsensical words towards them. Good job.

P.S. OBT & Pine Hills, yo.

[BonosSaint]

The two camps are balanced and reasonable, and unbalanced and hysterical. There are both kinds on either side of the argument

Define hysterical. Be specific about the quoted post. Because I don't see it. (I am assuming that you were referring to the post that you called inventing imaginary thoughts and that deep complimented as the quote above followed deep's compliment on the thoughtfulness of the post)

FYM does allow us to present our observations and impressions. We are not in a court of law here. The post was thoughtful and took a side. And someone else can take another. I saw passion and anger and a sense of justice denied in that post. I didn't see hysteria.

One can differentiate between the law and what they believe is just. Not always the same thing. I thought the correct legal verdict may have been reached--or not. But I think that George Zimmerman likely provoked an incident with a young man who by all accounts at least initially was doing nothing to warrant a provocation and ended up killing that unarmed young man. That young man is dead because he was in the wrong place, at the wrong time, in the company of a man with really bad judgment. One can say that without being irrational.

I do know hysterical is a big word for you. It's a vague word.

I think you'd make your argument better if you dealt with the specific points as many of the people have done with you, going over points rather than a presentation they may or may not have found to their liking, assuming of course that you want to engage in discussion instead of belittling.

Arguers like you and me, JT, we use reason (unless a trigger has been unlocked) but we often lack fire. It does the soul good to see a little passion.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by BonosSaint

Define hysterical. Be specific about the quoted post. Because I don't see it.

FYM does allow us to present our observations and impressions. We are not in a court of law here. The post was thoughtful and took a side. And someone else can take another. I saw passion and anger and a sense of justice denied in that post. I didn't see hysteria.

One can differentiate between the law and what they believe is just. Not always the same thing. I thought the correct legal verdict may have been reached--or not. But I think that George Zimmerman likely provoked an incident with a young man who by all accounts at least initially was doing nothing to warrant a provocation and ended up killing that unarmed young man. That young man is dead because he was in the wrong place, at the wrong time, in the company of a man with really bad judgment. One can say that without being irrational.

I do know hysterical is a big word for you. It's a vague word.

I think you'd make your argument better if you dealt with the specific points as many of the people have done with you, going over points rather than a presentation they may or may not have found to their liking, assuming of course that you want to engage in discussion instead of belittling.

Arguers like you and me, JT, we use reason (unless a trigger has been unlocked) but we often lack fire. It does the soul good to see a little passion.

I won't quote anything specific because said poster is notorious for flying off the handle.
But there were posts about how the Medical Examiner should be fired (for what exactly? I asked several times. Tried to address specific points. got nothing). Conspiracy theories about neighbours having inside information. Knowing 100% that Zimmerman was lying. There were more. I can go back and look if you like. All of this points to someone who has spent way too much time tied to the case. 40 plus hours watching a televised court case... not healthy. go outside. Stop obsessing over it. I know the type. She's just an example of a lot of what I've seen.
Not saying there aren't reasonable arguments from that side. I think - I'm pretty sure I did. I meant to - I took back what I said about showing your true colours if you think the prosecution bumbled the case. Both Sean and BVS showed how that isn't necessarily true. But they're at least arguing from the facts. Not taking the facts, saying "nope, don't like 'em" and forming some opinion to fit into a prejudice.

Not sure what you mean by hysterical being a big word for me. This might be the first time I've used it in fym. Can you explain that a bit?

As far as not having passion, in the case, yes, I honestly couldn't give a shit how the trial went. I was always more interested in the public reaction. But don't take my sometimes cold style as a lack of passion. On the issues I care about, I engage in because I'm very passionate about them. I'm sure that has come bubbling to the surface here on more than one occasion and I usually like when someone gets all fired up in debates (Ashleeeeeyyyyyy)

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

Pine Hills, yo.

Hey! I used to live there!

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

Ultimately, ya, I can agree with this. But in this case, we'll never know for certain which was the right side

Gotta go with deep on this one:

Originally Posted by deep

I disagree, Zimmerman as an adult, made several bad, reckless choices he did not have to make that put him in a position to kill an unarmed 17 year old kid.

The jails are full of people that made bad choices, if they all had Zimmerman's legal defense team many would not have been convicted. And I am not of a general opinion that people that kill other unarmed people should not be in jail.

A claim of self defense on one's own property against an intruder could be more credible.

To me, it really is that simple--race and all the other drama aside--it really should have been that simple.

[Jive Turkey]

Not sure why the defense team is getting such praise. This didn't seem like a difficult case to defend