The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[jon_berzerk]

Bestselling author Brad Thor is offering to buy George Zimmerman a new gun and all the ammunition he wants after the Justice Department put a hold on releasing the evidence from Zimmerman’s murder trial, thus delaying the return of his handgun.

Author Brad Thor is offering to buy George Zimmerman a new gun.

Thor made the offer in a series of tweets Friday, then doubled down in a contentious TV interview in Chicago.

“Read this carefully, as I don’t want 2 be misunderstood: SCREW the #DOJ. If they won’t give #Zimmerman his gun back, I’ll buy him a new one,” he tweeted shortly after midnight Friday.

He followed up with a tweet to Zimmerman’s brother Robert Zimmerman Jr.: “Whatever gun he wants + however much ammo, consider it done. I’m buying. Done deal.”

Brad Thor?s Testy TV Exchange After He Offers to Buy George Zimmerman a New Gun | Video | TheBlaze.com

Gee, that's real constructive.

he went on to say he would buy him

an ar-15 if he wanted one as well

 

[Lakhota]

Bestselling author Brad Thor is offering to buy George Zimmerman a new gun and all the ammunition he wants after the Justice Department put a hold on releasing the evidence from Zimmerman’s murder trial, thus delaying the return of his handgun.

Author Brad Thor is offering to buy George Zimmerman a new gun.

Thor made the offer in a series of tweets Friday, then doubled down in a contentious TV interview in Chicago.

“Read this carefully, as I don’t want 2 be misunderstood: SCREW the #DOJ. If they won’t give #Zimmerman his gun back, I’ll buy him a new one,” he tweeted shortly after midnight Friday.

He followed up with a tweet to Zimmerman’s brother Robert Zimmerman Jr.: “Whatever gun he wants + however much ammo, consider it done. I’m buying. Done deal.”

Brad Thor?s Testy TV Exchange After He Offers to Buy George Zimmerman a New Gun | Video | TheBlaze.com

Gee, that's real constructive.

he went on to say he would buy him

an ar-15 if he wanted one as well

Gee, that's REALLY constructive. More guns is always a good solution...

 

[jon_berzerk]

Gee, that's real constructive.

he went on to say he would buy him

an ar-15 if he wanted one as well

Gee, that's REALLY constructive. More guns is always a good solution...

true

more guns less crime

 

[Lakhota]

he went on to say he would buy him

an ar-15 if he wanted one as well

Gee, that's REALLY constructive. More guns is always a good solution...

true

more guns less crime

Absolutely! Just ignore the statistics.

 

[Lakhota]

Far From The Mountaintop: Black America Still Reaching For MLK's Dream

 

[jon_berzerk]

Gee, that's REALLY constructive. More guns is always a good solution...

true

more guns less crime

Absolutely! Just ignore the statistics.

that is what the stats say

more guns= less crime

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Most people agree that Zimmerman can't be charged with murder or manslaughter again. But he was never charged with stalking! That can be unlinked from a murder acquittal.

The state is going to charge him with stalking now!

Or the Feds are going to charge him with civil rights violations and use stalking as a basis for the charge and why it's not double jeopardy.

I'm not as sure about assault with a deadly weapon, if that could be similarly unlinked.

 

[Papageorgio]

Most people agree that Zimmerman can't be charged with murder or manslaughter again. But he was never charged with stalking! That can be unlinked from a murder acquittal.

The state is going to charge him with stalking now!

Or the Feds are going to charge him with civil rights violations and use stalking as a basis for the charge and why it's not double jeopardy.

I'm not as sure about assault with a deadly weapon, if that could be similarly unlinked.

The state is done with him. The Feds, I think it may, but it is also doubtful.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Most people agree that Zimmerman can't be charged with murder or manslaughter again. But he was never charged with stalking! That can be unlinked from a murder acquittal.

The state is going to charge him with stalking now!

Or the Feds are going to charge him with civil rights violations and use stalking as a basis for the charge and why it's not double jeopardy.

I'm not as sure about assault with a deadly weapon, if that could be similarly unlinked.

The state is done with him. The Feds, I think it may, but it is also doubtful.

It may have been the back-up plan since prosecution started. I don't agree with the method, but since I believe Zimmerman should be punished for something, I'm all for it.

 

[Politico]

Most Leftytoons are.

 

[Snookie]

Dam right and I would claim i was afraid and standing my ground.

A note on juror 37 and her interview.

She called Him "George" during the whole interview like he was an intimate friend. Talk about bias. Stupid *****.

She also called him "Trayvon". Talk about bias, you stupid *****.

Cant fix stupid, Pete.

She also called Travon "boy"

 

[Snookie]

true

more guns less crime

Absolutely! Just ignore the statistics.

that is what the stats say

more guns= less crime

That's an oxymoron.

 

[Ravi]

No, you need to prove that GZ committed murder which was what they attempted to charge him with, then when they realized how poorly they had done in that regard, they tried to eek out a victory by throwing in a lessor charge. When everything is said and done, the prosecution failed miserably.

They had to prove that Trayvon was not a typical young adult male who thought he was immortal and that he did not double back to confront Zimmerman. If Trayvon doubled back and confronted Zimmerman, then it becomes self defense in Zimmerman's case and he has every right to defend himself. I believe this is what happened. Because the confrontation obviously took place. There is no evidence that Zimmerman raced around Trayvon and prevented him from going home. Trayvon must have stopped to at least scare Zimmerman away. My guess is he got physical and that was when all hell broke loose.

Even if that is not what happened, a reasonable person, without evidence proving otherwise, could believe that is what happened and that is why George Zimmerman is a free man today and why he should be. He is not required to prove his innocence. The prosecution is required to prove his guilt.

You have stated you will fight for our freedoms. This IS one of those freedoms you should be fighting for because if we want to remain free we MUST oppose the tyranny of those who hold so much power over us. That is why I, as a conservative, opposed The Patriot Act. I could see the potential of abuse that we saw with the NSA Wiretapping under Bush and the additional abuses under Obama and I believe things are only going to get worse.

Trayvon Martin's death was a tragedy. I THINK George Zimmerman was at least partially at fault for this needless death, but our legal system says we need more than just a gut feeling to convict a man. If we didn't Ted Kennedy would never have been a Senator because too many people had the "gut feeling" that he killed Mary Jo Kopechne.

Immie

I never agreed with charging him with murder. I always felt they should have charged him with manslaughter or felony assault.

The tyranny here is to assert that it's ok to follow someone WITH A gun. Don't follow people and mind your own business and freedom will thrive.

Again, if all he did was follow, he did nothing wrong.

We are free to follow anyone we want as long as they remain on public property and there is not a damned thing they can do about it legally. Kind of sucks when you have reporters chasing you with there incessant questions about how you feel after a tragedy, or for celebrities chased by popparazzi, but that is the way it is.

You make it sound as if it was a crime for Zimmerman to follow Martin.

Immie

Not a crime but certainly a reason for the person being followed to have a legitimate right to stand his ground. That's what always gets forgotten in this question. SYG applied to Martin, not Zimmerman.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I never agreed with charging him with murder. I always felt they should have charged him with manslaughter or felony assault.

The tyranny here is to assert that it's ok to follow someone WITH A gun. Don't follow people and mind your own business and freedom will thrive.

Again, if all he did was follow, he did nothing wrong.

We are free to follow anyone we want as long as they remain on public property and there is not a damned thing they can do about it legally. Kind of sucks when you have reporters chasing you with there incessant questions about how you feel after a tragedy, or for celebrities chased by popparazzi, but that is the way it is.

You make it sound as if it was a crime for Zimmerman to follow Martin.

Immie

Not a crime but certainly a reason for the person being followed to have a legitimate right to stand his ground. That's what always gets forgotten in this question. SYG applied to Martin, not Zimmerman.

Using that "logic" I should be able to turn and physically assault anyone walking behind me.

 

[Ravi]

Again, if all he did was follow, he did nothing wrong.

We are free to follow anyone we want as long as they remain on public property and there is not a damned thing they can do about it legally. Kind of sucks when you have reporters chasing you with there incessant questions about how you feel after a tragedy, or for celebrities chased by popparazzi, but that is the way it is.

You make it sound as if it was a crime for Zimmerman to follow Martin.

Immie

Not a crime but certainly a reason for the person being followed to have a legitimate right to stand his ground. That's what always gets forgotten in this question. SYG applied to Martin, not Zimmerman.

Using that "logic" I should be able to turn and physically assault anyone walking behind me.

Yes. That is why this law is a bad law and need to be tweaked. But as long as it is on the books it applied to Martin and not Zimmerman.

 

[Geaux4it]

Zimmerman was getting worked from a far superior opponent and without the gun, likely would of been gravely injured..

Thus lethal force justified

-Geaux

 

[Skull Pilot]

Not a crime but certainly a reason for the person being followed to have a legitimate right to stand his ground. That's what always gets forgotten in this question. SYG applied to Martin, not Zimmerman.

Using that "logic" I should be able to turn and physically assault anyone walking behind me.

Yes. That is why this law is a bad law and need to be tweaked. But as long as it is on the books it applied to Martin and not Zimmerman.

Sorry but no.

The first person to break the law in this case was Martin.

 

[Geaux4it]

I never agreed with charging him with murder. I always felt they should have charged him with manslaughter or felony assault.

The tyranny here is to assert that it's ok to follow someone WITH A gun. Don't follow people and mind your own business and freedom will thrive.

Again, if all he did was follow, he did nothing wrong.

We are free to follow anyone we want as long as they remain on public property and there is not a damned thing they can do about it legally. Kind of sucks when you have reporters chasing you with there incessant questions about how you feel after a tragedy, or for celebrities chased by popparazzi, but that is the way it is.

You make it sound as if it was a crime for Zimmerman to follow Martin.

Immie

Not a crime but certainly a reason for the person being followed to have a legitimate right to stand his ground. That's what always gets forgotten in this question. SYG applied to Martin, not Zimmerman.

Yep- But TM brought fist to a gun fight.

Not so smart

Society is safer when Trayvon types don't know who's armed

-Geaux

 

[Ravi]

Using that "logic" I should be able to turn and physically assault anyone walking behind me.

Yes. That is why this law is a bad law and need to be tweaked. But as long as it is on the books it applied to Martin and not Zimmerman.

Sorry but no.

The first person to break the law in this case was Martin.

No. One, we don't know who started the fight. Two, SYG gave Martin a legal reason to start the fight as he feared bodily harm. The law is pretty clear on that.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yes. That is why this law is a bad law and need to be tweaked. But as long as it is on the books it applied to Martin and not Zimmerman.

Sorry but no.

The first person to break the law in this case was Martin.

No. One, we don't know who started the fight. Two, SYG gave Martin a legal reason to start the fight as he feared bodily harm. The law is pretty clear on that.

Martin had one wound the gunshot. Zimmerman had several and did not pull his gun until after he was attacked.

Martin had no way to know if Zimmerman was armed. If he did know he probably wouldn't have attacked.