The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[Avatar4321]

There is no stalking involved.

Only the judge and jury, not you, will decide that.

Yes. Heaven forbid any of us use our brains and look at the evidence or the law.

A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in

That's the Florida statute. following someone doesn't count.

 

[koshergrl]

If there was he would have been charged.

It's just another pretend crime that the lefty loons have piled on the man who dared to actually defend himself.

They're such chicken shit yellow bellies they think that anyone who actually stands up to an aggressor should be jailed. They see them as a threat.

 

[koshergrl]

There is no stalking involved.

Only the judge and jury, not you, will decide that.

You moron, he hasn't been charged with stalking.

So. No. Stalking. Involved.

Pretentious asswipe. Stay on topic, troll.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is no stalking involved.

Only the judge and jury, not you, will decide that.

Yes. Heaven forbid any of us use our brains and look at the evidence.

We are mere observers, Avatar. Yes, we have opinions and assumptions. But that is all. "Stalking" does not need to be a charge but can be a behavior adduced to lead credence to the prosecution's charges.

 

[25Caliber]

I was in and out until CST so I don't know who showed the photos, but the witness that took the bloody nose photo immediately after? Was it a responder who took them or no?

Not sure what you are referring to, but the neighbor that made the infamous 911 call took pictures of GZ within 3 minutes of the incident.

The photos we are referring to are the actual crime scene photos...the one causing the questions is the picture of Trayvons body face down and arms to the side. This had to be taken before CPR was administered, so why is this person snapping pictures before CPR is administered and how is that person getting to the crime scene before a fist responder? For Gods sake...the police were already enroute with a head start...lol.

several years ago i had to do cpr on someone

there was around 20 other people present

and not one knew how to do it

or was too shocked to function

i had to actually appoint someone to call 9-1-1

Anyone that has children and does not know CPR or just basic first aid should have their kids taken away...not really, but you know what I mean.

If for nothing else you learn it in case your kids need you one day and youre not standing there going, duh!

 

[Avatar4321]

Only the judge and jury, not you, will decide that.

Yes. Heaven forbid any of us use our brains and look at the evidence.

We are mere observers, Avatar. Yes, we have opinions and assumptions. But that is all.

A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree,

That's the Florida Statute on Stalking. No one is even alleging that Zimmerman did that.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Now you are babbling. Go to bed and get a good night's sleep. This will all seem a bad dream in the morning.

Who is babbling? You can't even argue any of my points, just throwing pointless jabs at me.

You reveal a lack of self discipline and an inability to reflect on the nature of discussion. Your assumptions today underline both points.

Stay on topic, please.

What are you talking about? You haven't even engaged me on the topic!

 

[TheOldSchool]

Second, if you believe Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating his head against the ground, while Zimmerman was screaming for help, the case is over.

I don't believe that for a second. Drawing a gun and shooting doesn't take that long

So despite the eye witnesses, the forensics showing he was shot at close range, and the injuries to his person, you are going to conclude that Martin wasn't on top of Zimmerman beaing his head against the ground?

I've never disputed any of those things. My problem with this whole thing is that Zimmerman made a really stupid move and someone is dead because of it. He shouldn't get to walk because of a technicality.

 

[Lakhota]

Zimmerman has a shady past.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes. Heaven forbid any of us use our brains and look at the evidence.

We are mere observers, Avatar. Yes, we have opinions and assumptions. But that is all.

A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree,

That's the Florida Statute on Stalking. No one is even alleging that Zimmerman did that.

You cut the full quote which negates your legal definition. Let me help you.

"We are mere observers, Avatar. Yes, we have opinions and assumptions. But that is all. "Stalking" does not need to be a charge but can be a behavior adduced to lead credence to the prosecution's charges."

 

[TemplarKormac]

I don't believe that for a second. Drawing a gun and shooting doesn't take that long

So despite the eye witnesses, the forensics showing he was shot at close range, and the injuries to his person, you are going to conclude that Martin wasn't on top of Zimmerman beaing his head against the ground?

I've never disputed any of those things. My problem with this whole thing is that Zimmerman made a really stupid move and someone is dead because of it. He shouldn't get to walk because of a technicality.

Define stupid:

As either Zimmerman stalking Martin

-OR-

As either Martin attacking someone who was armed.

 

[koshergrl]

What's the technicality, again?

THAT HE DIDN'T COMMIT A CRIME.

People don't go to prison for doing things you don't like. They go to prison for COMMITTING A CRIME. Like Trayvon did, when he attacked Zimmerman.

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't believe that for a second. Drawing a gun and shooting doesn't take that long

So despite the eye witnesses, the forensics showing he was shot at close range, and the injuries to his person, you are going to conclude that Martin wasn't on top of Zimmerman beaing his head against the ground?

I've never disputed any of those things. My problem with this whole thing is that Zimmerman made a really stupid move and someone is dead because of it. He shouldn't get to walk because of a technicality.

Self defense isn't a technicality. It's a natural right. It's one of the fundamental laws of nature that we have the right to defend ourselves.

No one should be punished for exercising their natural rights.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Now you are babbling. Go to bed and get a good night's sleep. This will all seem a bad dream in the morning.

Who is babbling? You can't even argue any of my points, just throwing pointless jabs at me.

You reveal a lack of self discipline and an inability to reflect on the nature of discussion. Your assumptions today underline both points.

Stay on topic, please.

What are you talking about? You haven't even engaged me on the topic!

The fact that you are now trolling and babbling on demonstrates that you cannot discuss the topic. First note of your trolling.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Self defense is lawful, moron.

Murder isn't. The jury has 2 options:

Stalking and murder? Or stalking and self-defense. Either way Zimmerman is no hero and should serve as a lesson to any dumbasses that think they should go out on patrol without any authorization.

Assume:

Makes an ASS out of U and ME. Keep thinking that.

haHA! Out of you AND me! Tis a crazy game we play Mr. Kormac!

 

[koshergrl]

We are mere observers, Avatar. Yes, we have opinions and assumptions. But that is all.

A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree,

That's the Florida Statute on Stalking. No one is even alleging that Zimmerman did that.

You cut the full quote which negates your legal definition. Let me help you.

"We are mere observers, Avatar. Yes, we have opinions and assumptions. But that is all. "Stalking" does not need to be a charge but can be a behavior adduced to lead credence to the prosecution's charges."

 

[TemplarKormac]

You reveal a lack of self discipline and an inability to reflect on the nature of discussion. Your assumptions today underline both points.

Stay on topic, please.

What are you talking about? You haven't even engaged me on the topic!

The fact that you are now trolling and babbling on demonstrates that you cannot discuss the topic. First note of your trolling.

Oh jeez. Jake you really are reaching for straws aren't you? How can I discuss a topic with you when you are too busy attacking my intelligence and character?

 

[Cuyo]

They like to ignore the fact that he didn't just punch him. He punched him, got him on the ground, and was whaling the living shit out of him, while Zimmerman BEGGED people to help him.

They didn't, and he killed the little turd before the little turd killed him. That's why people carry guns.

People carry guns for many reasons. In this case, because he thought he was Wyatt Earp.

We understand that he's allowed to carry a gun. It's not often self defense, however, in a chosen confrontation with an unarmed teenager.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Murder isn't. The jury has 2 options:

Stalking and murder? Or stalking and self-defense. Either way Zimmerman is no hero and should serve as a lesson to any dumbasses that think they should go out on patrol without any authorization.

Assume:

Makes an ASS out of U and ME. Keep thinking that.

haHA! Out of you AND me! Tis a crazy game we play Mr. Kormac!

Lool, I don't assume, I watch the trial. I don't know about you, buddy.

 

[Avatar4321]

We are mere observers, Avatar. Yes, we have opinions and assumptions. But that is all.

A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree,

That's the Florida Statute on Stalking. No one is even alleging that Zimmerman did that.

You cut the full quote which negates your legal definition. Let me help you.

"We are mere observers, Avatar. Yes, we have opinions and assumptions. But that is all. "Stalking" does not need to be a charge but can be a behavior adduced to lead credence to the prosecution's charges."

So now the judge and jury can find that he was stalking Trayvon despite the fact that the Florida statute does not support that claim and the fact that the Prosecution isn't even alleging that happened?

No stalking happened. There is no evidence to support that it did. If a judge or a jury presumed that it did happen, they would be legally incorrect.

I quoted the elements of the statute. The Punishment for the charge is irrelevant to the conversation so I didn't quote those.

Tell me, how can someone repeatedly follow, harass, or cyberstalk someone they just saw for the first time?