Zimmerman Guilty?
- Thread starter garyt27
- Start date
I can't believe the results of this poll so far...how on earth can he be found innocent? That is just crazy!!!! Don't people think with their brains anymore?
Zimmerman was told NOT to follow him, and he did it anyway, (I consider this to mean he was looking for trouble to begin with) and ended up killing him!!!!
I will have to say lots of prayers today that he is found guilty of this murder!!!
Zimmerman was told NOT to follow him, and he did it anyway, (I consider this to mean he was looking for trouble to begin with) and ended up killing him!!!!
I will have to say lots of prayers today that he is found guilty of this murder!!!
MMDad
Lem Putt
You haven't paid any attention to the facts of the case, have you?
BadGirl
I am so very blessed
Where did you get your facts from?
MMDad
Lem Putt
Facts? Who needs facts? Emotion rules!
Prove he followed TM. Also, prove he was told not to follow TM, the dispatcher stated "we don't need you to do that". That is not a command to not do something, that is a statement that the actions are not warranted.
Also, since when is following someone an act of aggression? If it is, we are all guilty of an act of aggression since we have "followed" someone, whether in the mall, on the road, at work, etc.
While most people want a guilt verdict, the evidence does not support it, in fact, the evidence clearly shows that this is a clear cut case of self defense but for the sake of race relations stirred up by the race bait'ers, let's convict an innocent person to prevent people from rioting and for the expediency of public safety, facts and justice be damned.
TM could have just kept on walking, he didn't have to confront GZ, and lastly, he didn't have to throw the first punch. Up to the moment TM threw that first punch both parties were well within in their rights and were acting within accordance of the law. But when TM throw that first punch, he became the aggressor, when he was on the ground, on top of GZ, he gave GZ the right to use the weapon he had to stop the attack for GZ did not know at what point TM was going to stop. For those who say GZ was not in fear of his life, how do you know that, if someone was on top of you, pounding you, telling you that they are going to beat the snot out of you, and finally telling you that you are going to die, would you not be in fear of your life?
So you go pray for an innocent person to go to jail but before you do, look at the evidence, it might surprise you.
Hank
my war
People lose me on this. My interpretation of "we don't need you to do that", is don't do it.
MMDad
Lem Putt
You try to hold a door for someone. They tell you "I don't need you to do that" but you do it anyway. Or they say "do not hold the door for me." Which one is a request, and which one is a statement?
"We don't need you to do that" is not a request or order. It is merely a statement that they don't need that. They didn't even say "we don't want you to do that" which would actually indicate that they didn't want him to.
"We don't need you to do that" merely implies that they were not asking him to follow. It does not imply that they asked him not to.
NextJen
Raisin cane
I see a clear difference in someone saying they don't need something and saying don't do something.
For example:
Me to son, "I don't need you to raise your voice at me."
Me to son, "Don't raise your voice at me."
The first implies that Mom has not hit her limit and there is wiggle room that my son will take and possibly push the limits and keep his voice elevated. But the second means he better shut his pie hole or he is in trouble.
I can understand why, grasp of the English language often escapes you.
One's interpretation is not always reality or the true meaning of something, it is how one interprets (perceives) something, not how it truly is.
SoMDGirl42
Well-Known Member
Do I think he's guilty of murder? No
Do I think he'll be found guilty of murder/manslaughter? Yes
Total opposite of OJ Simpson. Black man accused of killing a white woman and man. Everyone knows he was guilty as sin. Found him innocent. No riots from white people.
Zimmerman: White/hispanic man accused of killing a black man. Everyone knows he was guilty of trying to protect his neighborhood. They'll find him guilty of murder/manslaughter to prevent all the black people from rioting.
Do I think he'll be found guilty of murder/manslaughter? Yes
Total opposite of OJ Simpson. Black man accused of killing a white woman and man. Everyone knows he was guilty as sin. Found him innocent. No riots from white people.
Zimmerman: White/hispanic man accused of killing a black man. Everyone knows he was guilty of trying to protect his neighborhood. They'll find him guilty of murder/manslaughter to prevent all the black people from rioting.
Absolutely right. The same way the left gets elected - no thought needed, or ability to even think required - just get emotional about it.
Very obviously you're not thinking at all. Logic, the law, and evidence mean nothing to you.
Don't you use your brain to factor in any of those little things that our laws of trial and justice are based on?
Wow. You actually think with *your* brain?
"He was "told" not to follow him". Um - not exactly.
Also, it's not against the law TO follow someone.
Foxhound
Finishing last
Regardless of what sparked the altercation, the simple fact of the matter is, there is enough evidence to show TM was on top of GZ, GZs head showed signs of impact trauma at the time. When ones head is being traumatized it becomes easy to become disoriented and lose the ability to adequately defend ones self.
How many people here have taken a blow to the head that caused near loss of consciousness, but were left with no visible marks other than a lump on the head? I'm betting quite a few. GZ had visible injuries to the back of his head. The gunshot evidence suggests to forensic experts that TM was above GZ. Pretty clear GZ was defending himself at that point and in fear of severe bodily harm or death. Thus self defense.
Could all of this been avoided? Probably. Mistakes were probably made by both. But once GZ perceived he was in severe danger, it became self defense.
The Judge seems to want GZ to go down for something. The media has had a heyday with it. GZ will not see justice. He will probably be charged with something.
How many people here have taken a blow to the head that caused near loss of consciousness, but were left with no visible marks other than a lump on the head? I'm betting quite a few. GZ had visible injuries to the back of his head. The gunshot evidence suggests to forensic experts that TM was above GZ. Pretty clear GZ was defending himself at that point and in fear of severe bodily harm or death. Thus self defense.
Could all of this been avoided? Probably. Mistakes were probably made by both. But once GZ perceived he was in severe danger, it became self defense.
The Judge seems to want GZ to go down for something. The media has had a heyday with it. GZ will not see justice. He will probably be charged with something.
Is negligence something the jury is considering? I thought it was just Murder 2 and Manslaughter. The judge threw out the attempt to get Murder 3 added.
MMDad
Lem Putt
For that matter, "innocent" is not an option either. It's either guilty or not guilty.
As we know from OJ, a not guilty verdict does not mean you didn't do it. It just means that the state did not prove their case.
Each of our thoughts are based on our interpretation. How you interpret something may not be the same as I interpret the same thing.
Does this mean that the way you interpret is better than mine, or the true one?
This is how our reasoning mind sets are made. Our interpretations are all that we got, or to say that we live by. You can only reason or think, by what you have learned or experienced through your life, I am not saying that you can't understand by what you hear or see by other's experiences. But it seems to me, that where justice is concerned, that the majority rules, even if it is based on the mere truth. (In my mind, cases such as OJ and Casey Anthony were found not guilty and should have been based on truths, in my opinion...but that is a different argument.)
Yes this could have been avoided...and it was all because of Zimmerman...don't you agree? I don't understand why it was not wrong for him to be following him? Wasn't he purposely following him? And why was he? What is the reason?
I had heard, if I am not mistaken, that there had been several break-ins in the neighborhood by African-Americans. So, wasn't this why he was following him?
I imagine he will probably get off...did you ever notice that most of these high-profile cases that are televised, the defendants get off? Take O.J. and Casey Anthony.