|
11090. arkymalarky - 7/14/2013 4:40:39 AM either you accept the legal system we have or you don't based on whether or not you get your way. 11091. anomie - 7/14/2013 4:45:04 AM Too simple, Arky. There was no evidence of murder. There was no evidence Z took the law into his own hands. You want to live in a country where we convict people with no evidence? I have never seen a trial where the conversation about evidence has been so silly, and where so many assumptions are just taken as fact. There is absolutely no way in your mind that Martin could have attacked Zimmerman. Just could never happen because he was just a poor innocent teen with skittles. That's your evidence. 11092. arkymalarky - 7/14/2013 4:47:19 AM Not too simple. Either you accept the justice system when you don't get your way or you don't. Period. 11093. arkymalarky - 7/14/2013 4:47:51 AM Apart from all of this, we'd better start having a conversation as a country about the insanity that has become our system of dealing with gun violence. and I say this is a gun owner who believes in the right to defend yourself with guns. It's getting crazy. 11094. arkymalarky - 7/14/2013 4:53:22 AM Had I been in Martin's shoes and been armed I would have dealt with someone stalking meconva dark street with all the force available to him. So my contention has always been that Martin's confrontation was justified. 11095. arkymalarky - 7/14/2013 4:54:54 AM ...me on a dark street with all the force available to me.... 11096. anomie - 7/14/2013 5:00:40 AM Yes too simple. Guilty verdicts are routinely appealed to protect things like OUR RIGHTS. Remember those? Really, I don't know where ya'll are coming from. Talk about vigilanties, you all have Zimmerman beat by a mile!
YOu have no doubt about what happened? Really? You KNOW what took place that dark night? Of course you don't.
Now you have Martin being the aggressor, but you say it was justified. This blows my mind and so I have to quit this.
11097. Wombat - 7/14/2013 5:04:12 AM Anomie,
Don't be an idiot. Zimmerman followed Martin, ignored the advice of the police dispatcher, got out of his car, and encountered Martin. The reason the jury found Zimmerman innocent under the law is because the prosecution was unable to prove that Zimmerman had done so with the intent of confronting Martin. (I thought manslaughter might hold up, but apparently not.) I accept the verdict.
You need to accept the FACT that had Zimmerman done what he--as an allegedly responsible member of his neighborhood watch--was supposed to do, Travon Martin would still be alive. The FACT that he is not has everything to do with Zimmerman's actions. The standard of proof is lower for civil suits, and hopefully Zimmerman will end up paying the consequences for whatever part of his thought processes that led him to get out of his car. 11098. arkymalarky - 7/14/2013 5:09:14 AM I don't know why you have such an emotional investment in this anomie, but it is really clouding your judgment. it's not just about disagreeing over whether Z should be guilty or not, it's your unbelievable total defense of his actions start to finish. I totally agree with Wombat. 11099. arkymalarky - 7/14/2013 5:10:40 AM Zimmerman's character will get him eventually. This isn't his first legal problem, and it certainly won't be his last. 11100. arkymalarky - 7/14/2013 5:12:50 AM and no, anomie. Zimmerman was the aggressor, and at the point he got out of his car and started following Martin, Martin turned and confronted him. I personally think Martin was justified in whatever harm he could inflict on Zimmerman at that point. I know I certainly would have tried to inflict what I could given the same circumstances. 11101. anomie - 7/14/2013 5:23:37 AM Arky, I guess I just I just took my civics lessons all too seriously when I learned about the ideals of law and justice and the rights we have as citizens. Blame it on my midwest education.
This is not a case of having video that shows policement beating up on Rodney King. This is a case where you all are convicting a man with no evidence and good bit of evidence that actually supports self defense. I did not start off as a Zimmerman fan, but I nopw consider him to be a victim of government sanctioned hate. These prosecuters used hate and race language to try to assasinate this man for the very reason that they had NO evidence. And you all are doing the same thing. I see none of you being concerned about the rights of the accused. You don't need to like the defendent to be concerned about the process. You can ruin a man's life and still give him a "not guilty" verdict. If Zimmerman's character is gonna do him in, then let it. Don't use a lynch mob. 11102. anomie - 7/14/2013 5:26:22 AM Wombat, yada yada yada. you haven't even begun to prove he did anything illegal and you haven't proved it wasn't self defense. I hope he gets immunnity from civil liabilities and can make a little money on a book to get back on his feet.
And thanks for the advice... I try never to be an idiot. 11103. anomie - 7/14/2013 5:29:39 AM And for the record, I absolutely hate that I am on the Fox News/Ann Coulter side of this. Don;t think that made me consider long and hard that I might be wrong. Thanks, ya'll! 11104. anomie - 7/14/2013 5:30:33 AM ...don't thing that DIDN't... You know what I mean. 11105. judithathome - 7/14/2013 6:17:20 AM I just I just took my civics lessons all too seriously when I learned about the ideals of law and justice and the rights we have as citizens.
Martin had a right to walk the streets safely, did he not?
How do you feel about the original OJ verdict? 11106. judithathome - 7/14/2013 9:36:31 AM On one of the after shows someone asked "How do you think Zimmerman will be remembered after today?" and I immediately thought "With OJ....."
Someone else said even Michael Vick got 2 years in prison and he shot dogs! 11107. robertjayb - 7/14/2013 2:08:41 PM A telling post-verdict comment from State Attorney Angela Corey: Second-degree murder was the appropriate charge because Zimmerman's mind-set "fit the bill of second-degree murder."
His mind-set? Really? She devined his "mind-set" as warranting the threat of life in prison. Not his actions. But his "mind-set."
Another Corey statement: "We believe this case all along was about boundaries, and George Zimmerman exceeded those boundaries." Boundaries? Really? What the hell does that mean?
Not law. Not actions. But mind-set and boundaries. That is meaningless blither from coo-coo land.
(Wisconsin State Journal)
11108. anomie - 7/14/2013 2:45:05 PM Judith, of course Martin had rights. You all keep trying to put me in the position of being the bad guy here. But Arky even has Martin attacking Zimmerman, (although we realy don't know, so I can't convict Martin either). Martin did not have the right to attack Zimmerman. So it judt makes your case look all the weaker when you pretend like Martin did nothing. And then everyone keeps parroting the if/then stuff. That's also cheap. Personally, I think they both played a part.
The OJ case has nothing to do with this. 11109. anomie - 7/14/2013 2:46:54 PM I heard that Vick nonsense. I think in Vick's case ceratin proofs were offerred that he committed a crime. Same with the other cases she mentioned.
|
