I Don't Think Many Of You Know What "Confronted" Means

You can't "confront" someone if you're actively trying to get away from them.

When and if they catch up with you after pursuing you, you aren't "confronting" them when you stand your ground.

What we have here is a case of standing your ground, and a criminal then gunning down the lawful citizen who was rightfully standing their ground.

Zimmerman is toast...TOAST I said!

You would convict someone without seeing any of the evidence. I am sure of that.
When the alleged victim is black.
I prefer to see all of the evidence and any witnesses before I reach a conclusion that a defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Something about The United States Constitution that clearly states Zimmerman is PRESUMED innocent.
I know the presumption of innocence is a difficult standard to comprehend when one's judgment is clearly grounded with prejudices and bias be they black or white.
I saw this in the 60s with whites and now I see it with blacks.

Lets see how many people come out as witnesses against Zimmerman from past altercations?
Bingo!!!

At some point, a clown (like this dude) feels he's untouchable....that he represents the community's "standards".​
 
Last edited:
You would convict someone without seeing any of the evidence. I am sure of that.
When the alleged victim is black.
I prefer to see all of the evidence and any witnesses before I reach a conclusion that a defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Something about The United States Constitution that clearly states Zimmerman is PRESUMED innocent.
I know the presumption of innocence is a difficult standard to comprehend when one's judgment is clearly grounded with prejudices and bias be they black or white.
I saw this in the 60s with whites and now I see it with blacks.

Right and that's what judges and juries are for. The Sanford Police Department is not judge/jury/executioner yet they are essentially wielding judicial authority by refusing to arrest Zimmerman. If Zimmerman wants to assert an affirmative defense via Florida's Stand Your Ground law, the burden of proof is on him to present his case at a legal hearing before a judge. But there is no judge right now and there is no case because the SPD has refused to arrest/charge him; they've essentially made their own judicial ruling and unilaterally dismissed all potential charges without having proper authority to do so. Sanford Florida isn't Nazi Germany so its police department shouldn't be operating like the Gestapo.

My guess is he has not been arrrested yet becuase a charge has not been determined. Will it be murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, etc.

Furthermore, they are also probably trying to determine if they have a case of a racially motivated crime....did race play a role in his decision to scout the poor kid out.

Once they charge him, they have to prove the charge....so to charge hiim too early may result in a botched prosecution.

The guy is innocent until proven guilty....but based on what I have heard...again, third hand information.....this attack was unwarranted.

You can arrest someone without setting in stone the charges against them. If you charge him with manslaughter or negligent homicide you are not prohibited from then upping the charge to murder later on down the line and double jeopardy doesn't hold until the case has been adjudicated. They don't need to stall an arrest so that they can obtain evidence or make a case because Zimmerman shooting and killing Martin is already an established fact. Zimmerman doesn't deny that because really he can't. So at this point, Zimmerman must use an affirmative defense (Stand Your Ground self defense) to mitigate a murder charge. But the key here is that when a defendant uses an affirmative defense, the burden shifts to the defendant to prove he was acting in self-defense so it's a bit of a role reversal here in that Zimmerman is essentially established guilty until he proves he was justified in killing Martin. It is because of this that delaying arresting him makes troubling little sense and doesn't seem to accomplish much of anything other than encouraging Zimmerman to flee the state.
 
Right and that's what judges and juries are for. The Sanford Police Department is not judge/jury/executioner yet they are essentially wielding judicial authority by refusing to arrest Zimmerman. If Zimmerman wants to assert an affirmative defense via Florida's Stand Your Ground law, the burden of proof is on him to present his case at a legal hearing before a judge. But there is no judge right now and there is no case because the SPD has refused to arrest/charge him; they've essentially made their own judicial ruling and unilaterally dismissed all potential charges without having proper authority to do so. Sanford Florida isn't Nazi Germany so its police department shouldn't be operating like the Gestapo.

My guess is he has not been arrrested yet becuase a charge has not been determined. Will it be murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, etc.

Furthermore, they are also probably trying to determine if they have a case of a racially motivated crime....did race play a role in his decision to scout the poor kid out.

Once they charge him, they have to prove the charge....so to charge hiim too early may result in a botched prosecution.

The guy is innocent until proven guilty....but based on what I have heard...again, third hand information.....this attack was unwarranted.


Race? Almost certainly! He (Zimmerman) calls the Kid a fucking Coon on the 911 tape.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNI5CA5jijw]Trayvon Martin 911 Call - Did George Zimmerman Say 'F*ng Coons'? - YouTube[/ame]
WoW!! Even I thought that part was exagerrated, but it's crystal clear to the ear what he said, "These f--ckin' C@@NS!" :eek:

Folks, it's clear as day from 2:40.

WoW!!! That MFer is TOAST!!!
 
Who used the word 'confront' with regard to this case?
Pay attention ditz...a lot of your fellow righties have been using the word "confront" in regards to the victim being the one who confronted the killer then ended up being shot to death.

Pay, a damn, tention.

No tolerance for a simple question asked?

It was a valid question......and you felt the need to ridicule her for asking it

Relax Jar, I never see you share such sentiments with her when she's one of the most belligerent posters on this board with every single post.

Take it easy...huh?
 
You can't "confront" someone if you're actively trying to get away from them.

When and if they catch up with you after pursuing you, you aren't "confronting" them when you stand your ground.

What we have here is a case of standing your ground, and a criminal then gunning down the lawful citizen who was rightfully standing their ground.

Zimmerman is toast...TOAST I said!

Who used the word 'confront' with regard to this case?
Pay attention ditz...a lot of your fellow righties have been using the word "confront" in regards to the victim being the one who confronted the killer then ended up being shot to death.

Pay, a damn, tention.

Why should I pay attention to people who have no valid opinions? All any of us know is what we have heard through the media. Anyone with an IQ into double digits knows that the media rarely get their facts right.... and they do not know ALL the facts. Until we have ALL the facts, none of us has a valid opinion. This is more about whipping up racial tension than any real interest in justice. I find that disgusting.
 
Florida passed in 2005 "Stand your Ground" legislation self defense law.
Now keep in mind all of you arm chair jurists that I do not like this law and do not believe this law is a good idea but this is CURRENT law in Florida.

The statute clearly states that if someone is attacked they can stand their ground and use whatever force they deem necessary to keep their ground.

Again, I do know if this is the case and it does appear there is good evidence that Zimmerman followed this kid so that is a question of material fact and makes that a jury question.

But that could be a reason why he has not been charged yet.

This statute clearly states that a citizen has NO duty to retreat and eliminates any duty to retreat before using deadly force to confront any attacker.

Rightly so police and prosecutors OPPOSED THIS LEGISLATION but it passed anyway.
These kind of laws always foster a shoot first, ask questions later mentality and accordingly I also oppose them.

The kicker in these statutes, as I have worked a few of these cases, is that the law includes a provision that grants immunity from prosecution or civil lawsuits if a person is deemed to have acted in self defense though these dumb ass lawmakers never clearly specified who grants this immunity and bestows it.
 
You would convict someone without seeing any of the evidence. I am sure of that.
When the alleged victim is black.
I prefer to see all of the evidence and any witnesses before I reach a conclusion that a defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Something about The United States Constitution that clearly states Zimmerman is PRESUMED innocent.
I know the presumption of innocence is a difficult standard to comprehend when one's judgment is clearly grounded with prejudices and bias be they black or white.
I saw this in the 60s with whites and now I see it with blacks.

Presumption of innocence means that an accused must be granted a trial before he can be judicially punished.

I guess Zimmerman hadn't HEARD-about.....

 
Florida passed in 2005 "Stand your Ground" legislation self defense law.
Now keep in mind all of you arm chair jurists that I do not like this law and do not believe this law is a good idea but this is CURRENT law in Florida.

The statute clearly states that if someone is attacked they can stand their ground and use whatever force they deem necessary to keep their ground.

Again, I do know if this is the case and it does appear there is good evidence that Zimmerman followed this kid so that is a question of material fact and makes that a jury question.

But that could be a reason why he has not been charged yet.

This statute clearly states that a citizen has NO duty to retreat and eliminates any duty to retreat before using deadly force to confront any attacker.

Rightly so police and prosecutors OPPOSED THIS LEGISLATION but it passed anyway.
These kind of laws always foster a shoot first, ask questions later mentality and accordingly I also oppose them.

The kicker in these statutes, as I have worked a few of these cases, is that the law includes a provision that grants immunity from prosecution or civil lawsuits if a person is deemed to have acted in self defense though these dumb ass lawmakers never clearly specified who grants this immunity and bestows it.
Where does that law apply svengali?

In the park, the streets, or in your own home/castle?

Hmmmm.....!?!!??
 
Was the kid shot in the back or in the front? Does he have marks on his hands to show he might've hit Zimmerman? Or does he have defensive wounds to show Zimmerman might've hit him? How far away from Zimmerman was he when he was shot? They're gonna know that stuff, and pretty much tell what went down.

I've always been big on waiting for the facts before rushing to judgement on anybody. But I heard the shooter said the victim was moving away, and he (Zimmerman) was told not to follow but he did anyway. So if there was a confrontation, it appears that Zimmerman initiated it. And that makes this murder to some degree IMHO, rather than self defense.
 
Zimmerman is toast...TOAST I said!

This is why black countries are such sh!tholes, they have no concept of justice.

Justice was done with a gun. And, now we roaches (sharpton, jackson, etc.) who are trying to damage civilization to punish the just outcome.

The black attacked Zimmerman, not the other way around.
 
My guess is he has not been arrrested yet becuase a charge has not been determined. Will it be murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, etc.

Furthermore, they are also probably trying to determine if they have a case of a racially motivated crime....did race play a role in his decision to scout the poor kid out.

Once they charge him, they have to prove the charge....so to charge hiim too early may result in a botched prosecution.

The guy is innocent until proven guilty....but based on what I have heard...again, third hand information.....this attack was unwarranted.


Race? Almost certainly! He (Zimmerman) calls the Kid a fucking Coon on the 911 tape.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNI5CA5jijw]Trayvon Martin 911 Call - Did George Zimmerman Say 'F*ng Coons'? - YouTube[/ame]
WoW!! Even I thought that part was exagerrated, but it's crystal clear to the ear what he said, "These f--ckin' C@@NS!" :eek:

Folks, it's clear as day from 2:40.

.
WoW!!! That MFer is TOAST!!!
Yeah, he said it under his breath. What a POS.
 
Who used the word 'confront' with regard to this case?
Pay attention ditz...a lot of your fellow righties have been using the word "confront" in regards to the victim being the one who confronted the killer then ended up being shot to death.

Pay, a damn, tention.

Why should I pay attention to people who have no valid opinions? All any of us know is what we have heard through the media. Anyone with an IQ into double digits knows that the media rarely get their facts right.... and they do not know ALL the facts. Until we have ALL the facts, none of us has a valid opinion. This is more about whipping up racial tension than any real interest in justice. I find that disgusting.
Save your BS anti-media propaganda for someone who's stupid enough to buy it. :rolleyes:
 
Right and that's what judges and juries are for. The Sanford Police Department is not judge/jury/executioner yet they are essentially wielding judicial authority by refusing to arrest Zimmerman. If Zimmerman wants to assert an affirmative defense via Florida's Stand Your Ground law, the burden of proof is on him to present his case at a legal hearing before a judge. But there is no judge right now and there is no case because the SPD has refused to arrest/charge him; they've essentially made their own judicial ruling and unilaterally dismissed all potential charges without having proper authority to do so. Sanford Florida isn't Nazi Germany so its police department shouldn't be operating like the Gestapo.

My guess is he has not been arrrested yet becuase a charge has not been determined. Will it be murder, voluntary manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter, etc.

Furthermore, they are also probably trying to determine if they have a case of a racially motivated crime....did race play a role in his decision to scout the poor kid out.

Once they charge him, they have to prove the charge....so to charge hiim too early may result in a botched prosecution.

The guy is innocent until proven guilty....but based on what I have heard...again, third hand information.....this attack was unwarranted.

You can arrest someone without setting in stone the charges against them. If you charge him with manslaughter or negligent homicide you are not prohibited from then upping the charge to murder later on down the line and double jeopardy doesn't hold until the case has been adjudicated. They don't need to stall an arrest so that they can obtain evidence or make a case because Zimmerman shooting and killing Martin is already an established fact. Zimmerman doesn't deny that because really he can't. So at this point, Zimmerman must use an affirmative defense (Stand Your Ground self defense) to mitigate a murder charge. But the key here is that when a defendant uses an affirmative defense, the burden shifts to the defendant to prove he was acting in self-defense so it's a bit of a role reversal here in that Zimmerman is essentially established guilty until he proves he was justified in killing Martin. It is because of this that delaying arresting him makes troubling little sense and doesn't seem to accomplish much of anything other than encouraging Zimmerman to flee the state.


Very good and I agree except the defendant never has any burden. The burden is always on the prosecution.
But I believe you meant that if a defendant is going to use that Stand Your Ground defense he has to inform the prosecution of it in Jackson discovery process and have some form of evidence to get past motions hearings where the prosecution is trying to bar that defense being made.
The system works folks. Al Sharpton is down there staying at The Ritz Carlton holding news conferences.
Which side is the best way to go?
 
Race? Almost certainly! He (Zimmerman) calls the Kid a fucking Coon on the 911 tape.

Trayvon Martin 911 Call - Did George Zimmerman Say 'F*ng Coons'? - YouTube
WoW!! Even I thought that part was exagerrated, but it's crystal clear to the ear what he said, "These f--ckin' C@@NS!" :eek:

Folks, it's clear as day from 2:40.

.
WoW!!! That MFer is TOAST!!!
Yeah, he said it under his breath. What a POS.

Ya think there's any probable cause for this being a racially motivated murder now?
 
Pay attention ditz...a lot of your fellow righties have been using the word "confront" in regards to the victim being the one who confronted the killer then ended up being shot to death.

Pay, a damn, tention.

Why should I pay attention to people who have no valid opinions? All any of us know is what we have heard through the media. Anyone with an IQ into double digits knows that the media rarely get their facts right.... and they do not know ALL the facts. Until we have ALL the facts, none of us has a valid opinion. This is more about whipping up racial tension than any real interest in justice. I find that disgusting.
Save your BS anti-media propaganda for someone who's stupid enough to buy it. :rolleyes:

What have you offered other than your opinion based on media reports?
Were you there?
You may believe Al Sharpton and his version or the police version but I do not believe either version.
You, I, Al Sharpton and the police WERE NOT THERE AND ARE NOT WITNESSES.
Why else would Sharpton go there except to whip up racial tension.
I believe you agree as I know you as a reasonable man.
 
WoW!! Even I thought that part was exagerrated, but it's crystal clear to the ear what he said, "These f--ckin' C@@NS!" :eek:

Folks, it's clear as day from 2:40.

.
WoW!!! That MFer is TOAST!!!
Yeah, he said it under his breath. What a POS.

Ya think there's any probable cause for this being a racially motivated murder now?

Most definitely. It's clear as day on the tape.
 
I support Due Process here, and a full account of both their past histories. I bet the Kid comes out allot cleaner than the shooter. Lets see how many people come out as witnesses against Zimmerman from past altercations?

I think the guy is guilty of murder. It also sounded like the kid was whipping the shit out of a wannabe super cop. Zimmerman was told to stop by a 911 operator, he did not. He instigated this and he should be held accountable for his part. Then you have the cowards and scum who go straight to race. They dont make it any better. Wonder how much money they are making on this poor kids death.
Who's making money out of this and how?

Thanks.

All the civil rights activist who collect "donations" in the name of the victim. The ones who desperately need things like this to be about race so they dont have to go out and get a job. Ill give you credit for not going right to race in your thread here, ill even agree this dude committed murder, but there are others here and out there who want it to be about race. A whit guy shooting a black kid.
 
Zimmerman is toast...TOAST I said!

This is why black countries are such sh!tholes, they have no concept of justice.

Justice was done with a gun. And, now we roaches (sharpton, jackson, etc.) who are trying to damage civilization to punish the just outcome.

The black attacked Zimmerman, not the other way around.

So basically what you are telling us is you are a racist piece of trash and you support the shooter no matter what, ok got it.
 
Why should I pay attention to people who have no valid opinions? All any of us know is what we have heard through the media. Anyone with an IQ into double digits knows that the media rarely get their facts right.... and they do not know ALL the facts. Until we have ALL the facts, none of us has a valid opinion. This is more about whipping up racial tension than any real interest in justice. I find that disgusting.
Save your BS anti-media propaganda for someone who's stupid enough to buy it. :rolleyes:

What have you offered other than your opinion based on media reports?
Were you there?
You may believe Al Sharpton and his version or the police version but I do not believe either version.
You, I, Al Sharpton and the police WERE NOT THERE AND ARE NOT WITNESSES.
Why else would Sharpton go there except to whip up racial tension.
I believe you agree as I know you as a reasonable man.
WTF has quoted Al Sharpton on anything dawg?

You're acting as if we have no evidence. We have written reports. We have 911 calls, we hear live recording of the incident.

Why are you acting this way?

WTF is up dude?!?!?
 

Forum List

Back
Top