R.I.P Trayvon

Its so funny

When Dee Dee lied it was a lie

But when GZ lies about running,skipping,to joggin,
not following to going in the same direction
not knowing stand your ground,but got A's in SYG class
not knowing how much money was donated but tells wife to pay all the bills with donated $ etc etc

None of those were lies they were just inconsistencies

SMH
 
Deuce King said:
This ride along request with the police just proves how much of a wannabe cop Zimmerman wanted to be. 
Click to expand...
True indeed.  What it doesn't prove though is that he set out to murder Trayvon Martin, which is the point of this trial.

I think at this point, anyone reasonable person can see that Zimmerman isn't getting convicted of 2nd Degree Murder.  There is just far too much room for reasonable doubt.  

It seems like everything that the prosecution has proven, like Zimmerman lying about never hearing of the Stand Your Ground law, is all just fluff--it doesn't indicate murder.  Lying doesn't equal murder in a court of law.  Even if you have a gut feeling (which I think most of us do) that Zimmerman is lying his *** off, you don't convict based on your gut.  You convict based on the evidence presented to you during the trial, and it feels like a lot of what the prosecution has done isn't necessarily sticking.  There's just so much room for doubt.  

This whole thing is sad because the picture of Zimmerman couldn't be any more clearer, thanks to his own words the night Martin was killed and the work of the prosecution during this case.  Dude was/is a chump d-bag who felt the need to be in positions of authority.  He overstepped his authority that night, racially profiled a kid walking to the crib and the kid ends up dead.  In a perfect world, they'd put Zimmerman under the prison.  Unfortunately, sometimes **** works out in favor of the defendant, especially when the other party involved in the situation is dead.  Damn, damn shame.  

I blame Angela Corey.  Justice for Trayvon could've came in the form of a Manslaughter charge/conviction.  
 
So, meeting force with force. Does that mean equal force? Like if I punch, stab, or shoot you. You have the right to punch, stab, or shoot me back? In some cases, death may occur. But if I punch you, you can't stab or shoot me because that's not equal force?
 
If not 2nd degree

It should be manslaughter

If not manslaughter it should be perjury

But watch this fool walk on all counts cuz his pops is a judge

End of story
 
CelticsFan9783 said:
It is a really whacky law. To me it sounds like: if you're in a fight, feel free to one up the other person if you "fear for your life." You're protected by the law.

A: Someone punching you, beat him with a bat
B: Someone beating you with a bat, stab him
C: Someone stabbing you, shoot him
Click to expand...

TECHNICALLY.. u could go from A to C... if u felt imminent fear. That said, it's all subjective... that's the entire point of the jury to determine if GZ's sense of imminent fear is something a REASONABLE PERSON would have. Anyone could say they felt imminent fear and shoot someone for anything if it wasn't for the "reasonable person" standard.
 
letsgetit22 said:
So, meeting force with force. Does that mean equal force? Like if I punch, stab, or shoot you. You have the right to punch, stab, or shoot me back? In some cases, death may occur. But if I punch you, you can't stab or shoot me because that's not equal force?
Click to expand...


Well, then you get into what is "equal" force? How do you objectify "equal force". You can kill someone punching someone in the nose once by the bone hitting the brain, but you can shoot someone 10 times and they survive. That part is very vague (like all of the laws).
 
rashi said:
CelticsFan9783 said:
It is a really whacky law. To me it sounds like: if you're in a fight, feel free to one up the other person if you "fear for your life." You're protected by the law.

A: Someone punching you, beat him with a bat
B: Someone beating you with a bat, stab him
C: Someone stabbing you, shoot him
Click to expand...


This is the section of the Law.


(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
Click to expand...

You guys have to understand that this Law was enacted because criminals were breaking into peoples house, getting beat up, and then suing the home owner.

This could have been avoided is GZ was just minding his own business. Stay in your lane.
Click to expand...

To me though, that bolded section is open to sooooo much subjectivity that it doesn't mean anything. Someone could have been abused as a kid so if they get into an altercation where they are being hit, and it's not anything extreme for you or I, but to them it brings back horrible memories and the scars from them being a kid...they can react in an otherwise extreme manner because in their mind they were in a life threatening situation.

It makes zero sense to me how you can have a law that's based on someone's personal belief of what is life threatening for them..anyone can lie and say "well I believed that if I let this go on any longer then he was going to kill me or hit me with a weapon or break my jaw/neck.

I don't even see how the justification for the law makes sense. Criminals breaking into people's private homes then they deserve anything they get bc you already broke a law by trespassing and very likely with the intent to commit burglary or even murder. In the case of a criminal breaking in while you're asleep or if you have young kids I can see them having the right to do whatever. If the robber gets hurt who cares...did these burglars suing homeowners actually win some of these cases? :lol: if so Florida has some of the dumbest juries and worst prosecutors on the planet. This law is flat out dumb as its currently constructed
 
Last edited:
MikeJeffJo said:
If not 2nd degree

It should be manslaughter

If not manslaughter it should be perjury

But watch this fool walk on all counts cuz his pops is a judge

End of story
Click to expand...
Zimmy ain't put on a defense yet and you already throwing in the towel? lol
 
how long til someone skype calls this dude while hes testifying?
laugh.gif
 
LyonBC1 said:
To me though, that bolded section is open to sooooo much subjectivity that it doesn't mean anything. Someone could have been abused as a kid so if they get into an altercation where they are being hit, and it's not anything extreme for you or I, but to them it brings back horrible memories and the scars from them being a kid...they can react in an otherwise extreme manner because in their mind they were in a life threatening situation.

It makes zero sense to me how you can have a law that's based on someone's personal belief of what is life threatening for them..anyone can lie and say "well I believed that if I let this go on any longer then he was going to kill me or hit me with a weapon or break my jaw/neck.

I don't even see how the justification for the law makes sense. Criminals breaking into people's private homes then they deserve anything they get bc you already broke a law by trespassing and very likely with the intent to commit burglary or even murder. In the case of a criminal breaking in while you're asleep or if you have young kids I can see them having the right to do whatever. If the robber gets hurt who cares...did these burglars suing homeowners actually win some of these cases? :lol: if so Florida has some of the dumbest juries and worst prosecutors on the planet. This law is flat out dumb as its currently constructed
Click to expand...

Believe me, I know. That's how law is written. Lawyers use their own language. Every law has loopholes. Fact is, there is no way you can make laws so specific because there are an infinite number of variants. I still there is a possibility that he will get convicted, though. Not of 2nd Degree murder, but something and possibly getting sued Civil court. The State of Florida always try to aim too high for charges. If they charged him with a lesser charge, this case would be a piece of cake. If GZ gets off, people should direct their anger at the State of Florida.
 
All the laws in the world are stupid

1 time I got arrested for pissing in the back of a cops house

He held me at gun point til the cops came and arrested me

When the law pulled up a stray dog came and pissed in the same spot I did

But they aint arrest the dog and I got charged with criminal trespassing

Just to let me know a dogs life means more than a blackman

FOH with yo lame law
 
so, based on what the professor said about being followed in the dark, one would assume they're in danger and can react?

all these people calling this dude, knowing he's on tv 
laugh.gif


roll.gif
tears
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

therealest1
R.I.P. Paul Reubens AKA Pee-wee Herman
Replies
13
Views
578
$tacy
$tacy

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom