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

[Uncensored2008]

Isn't it funny to note who's ALWAYS screaming and going on about "the new lynch mobs" or just "lynch mobs" nowadays? Hint: It ain't black folks.

That's because it ain't them being lynched.

We also note that you have no problem with lynching, as long as the victim is white.

Yeah, that does make you a racist.

 

[MarcATL]

Isn't it funny to note who's ALWAYS screaming and going on about "the new lynch mobs" or just "lynch mobs" nowadays? Hint: It ain't black folks.

That's because it ain't them being lynched.

We also note that you have no problem with lynching, as long as the victim is white.

Yeah, that does make you a racist.

No you stupid MORAN...the point is that those in this society who were actually most recently lynched, blacks, aren't the ones harping on and on and on about that term, using it indiscriminately and with no thought, rhyme or reason.

The only folks going on and on and on about "being lynched" actually have it cooshy nice and cozy, and are not members of any minority group. Yet they someone feel the need to be a victim and used such a historically charged word to show-case their victim-hood. Well, perceived and faux victim-hood rather.

No one is being lynched, no one has been lynched for decades. No one.

Talk about whiners.

 

[Peach]

Civilians can do that in certain circumstances, you know.

Well yes, but killing another human being is usually not described as "exceeding the authority of a civilian".

I'm not seeing where he said that the killing was exceeding his authority as a civilian.

" Zimmerman did indeed instigate the incident. But if he can make the case that his part was limited to exceeding his authority as a civilian the most he could be charged with is disorderly conduct and maybe harassment. "

The MOST he could be charged with? HE killed the victim.

 

[Si modo]

Well yes, but killing another human being is usually not described as "exceeding the authority of a civilian".

I'm not seeing where he said that the killing was exceeding his authority as a civilian.

" Zimmerman did indeed instigate the incident. But if he can make the case that his part was limited to exceeding his authority as a civilian the most he could be charged with is disorderly conduct and maybe harassment. "

The MOST he could be charged with? HE killed the victim.

And, you DO know that civilians can kill someone in certain circumstances, right?

 

[Uncensored2008]

No you stupid MORAN...the point is that those in this society who were actually most recently lynched, blacks, aren't the ones harping on and on and on about that term, using it indiscriminately and with no thought, rhyme or reason.

My calender says 2012 in more recent than 1921.

Well, you of the left mold reality to fit your bullshit.

The only folks going on and on and on about "being lynched" actually have it cooshy nice and cozy, and are not members of any minority group. Yet they someone feel the need to be a victim and used such a historically charged word to show-case their victim-hood. Well, perceived and faux victim-hood rather.

I suspect Zimmerman will face charges - but you convicted him the second you heard he was white. (Yes, I acknowledge that "hispanic" is white.)

You are part of the lynch mob.

No one is being lynched, no one has been lynched for decades. No one.

Talk about whiners.

You're doing your best to lynch Zimmerman.

 

[Gadawg73]

Isn't it funny to note who's ALWAYS screaming and going on about "the new lynch mobs" or just "lynch mobs" nowadays? Hint: It ain't black folks.

That's because it ain't them being lynched.

We also note that you have no problem with lynching, as long as the victim is white.

Yeah, that does make you a racist.

No you stupid MORAN...the point is that those in this society who were actually most recently lynched, blacks, aren't the ones harping on and on and on about that term, using it indiscriminately and with no thought, rhyme or reason.

The only folks going on and on and on about "being lynched" actually have it cooshy nice and cozy, and are not members of any minority group. Yet they someone feel the need to be a victim and used such a historically charged word to show-case their victim-hood. Well, perceived and faux victim-hood rather.

No one is being lynched, no one has been lynched for decades. No one.

Talk about whiners.

Marc, let me appeal to your reason and commnon sense.
The district attorney released their information Tuesday that they are convening a grand jury and the evidence will be given to the grand jury. If the grand jury comes back with a bill of indictment then there will surely be an arrest.
The police turned this case over to the district attorney's office as there is an investigative division of the district attorney's office. Now take into the consideration of this crazy rewritten Stand Your Ground Statute in 2005. Wouldn't you want someone with the DA's office investigating this as that would stand better ground in the presentation of the evidence to the grand jury than a police division investigative agency that is good at gathering the evidence at the scene and then turning it over?
Now if you were in charge of these rallies being held by the NAACP and Al Sharpton wouldn't you have believed it to be a good idea to tell all of those in attendance at these rallies and protests the truth: "The grand jury is meeting and we will wait and see if they indict Zimmerman and see when the trial date is"?
Marc, what else can anyone do other than gather the evidence, present it to the grand jury and arrest someone when the bill of indictment comes in?
Isn't it obvious to you that the reason that these good folks that want justice for this young man if he was gunned down and not in self defense need to be told the truth about the process from their own leaders and others leading these protests and gatherings?
They are not being told the truth. They are being told nothing has been done and that is a lie. The case was set for a grand jury and these good folks are also being taken advantage of for publicity reasons only.
And no one is speaking out against that and advising them of the facts of the process at any of these rallies.

 

[MarcATL]

No you stupid MORAN...the point is that those in this society who were actually most recently lynched, blacks, aren't the ones harping on and on and on about that term, using it indiscriminately and with no thought, rhyme or reason.

My calender says 2012 in more recent than 1921.

Well, you of the left mold reality to fit your bullshit.

The only folks going on and on and on about "being lynched" actually have it cooshy nice and cozy, and are not members of any minority group. Yet they someone feel the need to be a victim and used such a historically charged word to show-case their victim-hood. Well, perceived and faux victim-hood rather.

I suspect Zimmerman will face charges - but you convicted him the second you heard he was white. (Yes, I acknowledge that "hispanic" is white.)

You are part of the lynch mob.

No one is being lynched, no one has been lynched for decades. No one.

Talk about whiners.

You're doing your best to lynch Zimmerman.

Somewhere on the Interwebs, there's a tiny, tiny, tiny violin playing songs for you and the rest of the "victims."

Keep it up!!

 

[Peach]

I'm not seeing where he said that the killing was exceeding his authority as a civilian.

" Zimmerman did indeed instigate the incident. But if he can make the case that his part was limited to exceeding his authority as a civilian the most he could be charged with is disorderly conduct and maybe harassment. "

The MOST he could be charged with? HE killed the victim.

And, you DO know that civilians can kill someone in certain circumstances, right?

But the MOST they can be charged with is NOT "disorderly conduct".

 

[MarcATL]

That's because it ain't them being lynched.

We also note that you have no problem with lynching, as long as the victim is white.

Yeah, that does make you a racist.

No you stupid MORAN...the point is that those in this society who were actually most recently lynched, blacks, aren't the ones harping on and on and on about that term, using it indiscriminately and with no thought, rhyme or reason.

The only folks going on and on and on about "being lynched" actually have it cooshy nice and cozy, and are not members of any minority group. Yet they someone feel the need to be a victim and used such a historically charged word to show-case their victim-hood. Well, perceived and faux victim-hood rather.

No one is being lynched, no one has been lynched for decades. No one.

Talk about whiners.

Marc, let me appeal to your reason and commnon sense.
The district attorney released their information Tuesday that they are convening a grand jury and the evidence will be given to the grand jury. If the grand jury comes back with a bill of indictment then there will surely be an arrest.
The police turned this case over to the district attorney's office as there is an investigative division of the district attorney's office. Now take into the consideration of this crazy rewritten Stand Your Ground Statute in 2005. Wouldn't you want someone with the DA's office investigating this as that would stand better ground in the presentation of the evidence to the grand jury than a police division investigative agency that is good at gathering the evidence at the scene and then turning it over?
Now if you were in charge of these rallies being held by the NAACP and Al Sharpton wouldn't you have believed it to be a good idea to tell all of those in attendance at these rallies and protests the truth: "The grand jury is meeting and we will wait and see if they indict Zimmerman and see when the trial date is"?
Marc, what else can anyone do other than gather the evidence, present it to the grand jury and arrest someone when the bill of indictment comes in?
Isn't it obvious to you that the reason that these good folks that want justice for this young man if he was gunned down and not in self defense need to be told the truth about the process from their own leaders and others leading these protests and gatherings?
They are not being told the truth. They are being told nothing has been done and that is a lie. The case was set for a grand jury and these good folks are also being taken advantage of for publicity reasons only.
And no one is speaking out against that and advising them of the facts of the process at any of these rallies.

So is that why Zimmerman was allowed to go free after killing an unarmed black teenage boy?

Is that why the dead black teenage boy had a drug test done on his body, but not so much as a question to the free-roaming Zimmerman?

The outrage is over the blatant lack of justice.

I think it's fair to expect AT LEAST an arrest for Zimmerman while the authorities proceed with all you've stated above.

At the very least. That is fair afterall....isn't it?

 

[Si modo]

" Zimmerman did indeed instigate the incident. But if he can make the case that his part was limited to exceeding his authority as a civilian the most he could be charged with is disorderly conduct and maybe harassment. "

The MOST he could be charged with? HE killed the victim.

And, you DO know that civilians can kill someone in certain circumstances, right?

But the MOST they can be charged with is NOT "disorderly conduct".

 

[Si modo]

No you stupid MORAN...the point is that those in this society who were actually most recently lynched, blacks, aren't the ones harping on and on and on about that term, using it indiscriminately and with no thought, rhyme or reason.

The only folks going on and on and on about "being lynched" actually have it cooshy nice and cozy, and are not members of any minority group. Yet they someone feel the need to be a victim and used such a historically charged word to show-case their victim-hood. Well, perceived and faux victim-hood rather.

No one is being lynched, no one has been lynched for decades. No one.

Talk about whiners.

Marc, let me appeal to your reason and commnon sense.
The district attorney released their information Tuesday that they are convening a grand jury and the evidence will be given to the grand jury. If the grand jury comes back with a bill of indictment then there will surely be an arrest.
The police turned this case over to the district attorney's office as there is an investigative division of the district attorney's office. Now take into the consideration of this crazy rewritten Stand Your Ground Statute in 2005. Wouldn't you want someone with the DA's office investigating this as that would stand better ground in the presentation of the evidence to the grand jury than a police division investigative agency that is good at gathering the evidence at the scene and then turning it over?
Now if you were in charge of these rallies being held by the NAACP and Al Sharpton wouldn't you have believed it to be a good idea to tell all of those in attendance at these rallies and protests the truth: "The grand jury is meeting and we will wait and see if they indict Zimmerman and see when the trial date is"?
Marc, what else can anyone do other than gather the evidence, present it to the grand jury and arrest someone when the bill of indictment comes in?
Isn't it obvious to you that the reason that these good folks that want justice for this young man if he was gunned down and not in self defense need to be told the truth about the process from their own leaders and others leading these protests and gatherings?
They are not being told the truth. They are being told nothing has been done and that is a lie. The case was set for a grand jury and these good folks are also being taken advantage of for publicity reasons only.
And no one is speaking out against that and advising them of the facts of the process at any of these rallies.

So is that why Zimmerman was allowed to go free after killing an unarmed black teenage boy?

Is that why the dead black teenage boy had a drug test done on his body, but not so much as a question to the free-roaming Zimmerman?

The outrage is over the blatant lack of justice.

I think it's fair to expect AT LEAST an arrest for Zimmerman while the authorities proceed with all you've stated above.

At the very least. That is fair afterall....isn't it?

Well, tox analyses are SOP in autopsies, for one. Secondly, the police cannot do a BAC test on anyone without probable cause or their consent; it is illegal. Third, the law allows for someone to shoot another in these circumstances given the current evidence.

If he broke the law, then he should be tried. It's not clear that he DID break the law.

 

[MarcATL]

The fact that it's not clear that he DID break the law is the reason for the outrage.

Ghedditt!?!?

 

[Peach]

Marc, let me appeal to your reason and commnon sense.
The district attorney released their information Tuesday that they are convening a grand jury and the evidence will be given to the grand jury. If the grand jury comes back with a bill of indictment then there will surely be an arrest.
The police turned this case over to the district attorney's office as there is an investigative division of the district attorney's office. Now take into the consideration of this crazy rewritten Stand Your Ground Statute in 2005. Wouldn't you want someone with the DA's office investigating this as that would stand better ground in the presentation of the evidence to the grand jury than a police division investigative agency that is good at gathering the evidence at the scene and then turning it over?
Now if you were in charge of these rallies being held by the NAACP and Al Sharpton wouldn't you have believed it to be a good idea to tell all of those in attendance at these rallies and protests the truth: "The grand jury is meeting and we will wait and see if they indict Zimmerman and see when the trial date is"?
Marc, what else can anyone do other than gather the evidence, present it to the grand jury and arrest someone when the bill of indictment comes in?
Isn't it obvious to you that the reason that these good folks that want justice for this young man if he was gunned down and not in self defense need to be told the truth about the process from their own leaders and others leading these protests and gatherings?
They are not being told the truth. They are being told nothing has been done and that is a lie. The case was set for a grand jury and these good folks are also being taken advantage of for publicity reasons only.
And no one is speaking out against that and advising them of the facts of the process at any of these rallies.

So is that why Zimmerman was allowed to go free after killing an unarmed black teenage boy?

Is that why the dead black teenage boy had a drug test done on his body, but not so much as a question to the free-roaming Zimmerman?

The outrage is over the blatant lack of justice.

I think it's fair to expect AT LEAST an arrest for Zimmerman while the authorities proceed with all you've stated above.

At the very least. That is fair afterall....isn't it?

Well, tox analyses are SOP in autopsies, for one. Secondly, the police cannot do a BAC test on anyone without probable cause or their consent; it is illegal. Third, the law allows for someone to shoot another in these circumstances given the current evidence.

If he broke the law, then he should be tried. It's not clear that he DID break the law.

Secondly, the police cannot do a BAC test on anyone without probable cause or their consent; it is illegal.

Discharging a firearm which resulted in a death should be enough "cause".

 

[Si modo]

So is that why Zimmerman was allowed to go free after killing an unarmed black teenage boy?

Is that why the dead black teenage boy had a drug test done on his body, but not so much as a question to the free-roaming Zimmerman?

The outrage is over the blatant lack of justice.

I think it's fair to expect AT LEAST an arrest for Zimmerman while the authorities proceed with all you've stated above.

At the very least. That is fair afterall....isn't it?

Well, tox analyses are SOP in autopsies, for one. Secondly, the police cannot do a BAC test on anyone without probable cause or their consent; it is illegal. Third, the law allows for someone to shoot another in these circumstances given the current evidence.

If he broke the law, then he should be tried. It's not clear that he DID break the law.

Secondly, the police cannot do a BAC test on anyone without probable cause or their consent; it is illegal.

Discharging a firearm which resulted in a death should be enough "cause".

Ummm, probable cause is specific to the actual investigation to be done - a test for alcohol. Discharging a firearm or even killing someone is not a standard indication of intoxication.

 

[MikeK]

And, you DO know that civilians can kill someone in certain circumstances, right?

But the MOST they can be charged with is NOT "disorderly conduct".

 

[Dante]

Martin - Zimmerman | Arrests | Florida Statute | Criminal Investigations

A tragey has visited the city of Sanford, Florida, and espeially the families involved in this very public circus. A young man is dead, and a mob is hounding and hunting an innocent man accused of no crime. The mob is bent on exacting a pound of flesh be owed ( Pound of flesh ), regardless of facts or solid evidence.

Sanford, Fla., explains why George Zimmerman was not arrested

Sanford, Fla., explains why George Zimmerman was not arrested - BlogPost - The Washington Post

"...the letter, signed by Sanford City Manager Norton Bonaparte Jr., says. “By Florida Statute, law enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the facts and circumstances they had at the time.” (Caps are theirs.)"


We are a nation of laws and NOT mob rule. The Founding Fathers and the Framers would be horrified, and maybe hypocritical, over the current display of a majority demanding law be put aside. The people who founded our nation were often mob-ish in action, but believed the system they set up would keep their not so better natures from running rough shod over the rights of individuals, and over the rule of law: Principles over personalities and emotions.

People are clamoring for an arrest of a man who is not a suspect in a crime. The US Justice Dept is said to be assisting in an investigation of a death. This means they are NOT there to assist building a case. That would be a criminal charge looking for a justification/scenario/cause. Evidence is what our system of justice demands during investigations. Investigations are NOT initiated solely in order to charge and convict people. They are initiated as searches for evidence and truth, truth being very subjective. Lack of evidence equals no charges brought.

Maybe a federal statute can be looked into, if state statutes cannot be brought to bear. But there needs to be evidence a crime was committed. This display of the mob using emotion to demand justice is nothing more than a modern day lynch mob.

Even if this man Zimmerman is eventually found to be accused in a court of law, this story is turning into a sad period in the history of Criminal and Civil Justice in American democracy.

 

[rdean]

He chased down an unarmed black teen who, while being taped begging for his life was shot dead.

"Black" makes it not a crime? That your point?

 

[Sunshine]

Yeah, whatcha gonna do with all those southern white racists!

 

[Dante]

He chased down an unarmed black teen who, while being taped begging for his life was shot dead.

"Black" makes it not a crime? That your point?

None of this is a legal argument. This is a thread about law and the justice system. Please respect that, or go away. there are other threads you can scream and emote in.

 

[Dante]

Yeah, whatcha gonna do with all those southern white racists!

Southern white racisst are not involved in the tragedy. Like others, they may insert themselves into a public debate over it, but this is about law and the justice system.

People need to recognize this or our system is in more trouble than before.