Zimmerman not guitly

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

Not just the year I registered, but this is a very good answer.

My mind connects dots in unconventional ways.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

My mind connects dots in unconventional ways.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2012/01/0...ital-of-canada

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by leeaspell

I was expecting a guilty verdict because of race, regardless of what was being said about race not being a factor. I guess I was wrong, with that said, I didn't want to see a guilty verdict.

I might get flamed or even banned for this, but good riddance, one less druggy petty thieve on the streets is fine by me. You know those crack heads stealing your truck, and breaking in to your house in the middle of the night, they started off as druggy petty thieves too

Really good riddance to a 17 year old kid who had a couple minor mishaps with the law, Had some thc in his system hell I bet half this board would fail a drug test, No history of any crack as you say, no history of stealing trucks or breaking into anybodies house, Just a regular kid just like most of us were at one time, You have taken this too seriously and I believe you may have some serious mental problems if you are serious about what you have written.

Fact is no one wins this case Zimmerman will never be able to live a normal life and it will effect his family, Martin's family will certainly never be the same as they have lost a member and for you to somehow get joy from this and say good riddance to a young man who never did half the things you said he did proves to me that you are a petty and angry man.

[leeaspell]

Petty, maybe. Angry, not at all. Like I said, flame suit on. You got your opinion, I got mine. But I won't sink to pretty much calling you a retard. And I never said he had a history of crack or stealing trucks or breaking in to houses.

[MrSmooth]

[canadiantdi]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

No, but good guess. Actually Edmonton does have lots of things to do, and is known as "festival city" because it does have a large number of festivals.

It wasn't a guess. You told me in a thread about body armor that you called it deadmonton because Edmonton is dead compared to other places like Calgary. I was pointing out how ironic it was that you were against the average citizen owning body armor while listing your location as deadmonton.. I figured that the real reason for your location was the crime/murder, not the lack of festivals.

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=125667

[leeaspell]

Originally Posted by MrSmooth

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by leeaspell

Petty, maybe. Angry, not at all. Like I said, flame suit on. You got your opinion, I got mine. But I won't sink to pretty much calling you a retard. And I never said he had a history of crack or stealing trucks or breaking in to houses.

one less druggy petty thieve on the streets is fine by me. You know those crack heads stealing your truck, and breaking in to your house in the middle of the night, they started off as druggy petty thieves too

Who were you talking about then ?

[Wild&Free]

[leeaspell]

I said they started off as poor innocent petty thugs, never did I say he was a home invading crackhead. Maybe try making the letters bigger, then people might believe the words you are trying to twist on what I said.

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by TomCanuck

I think they did persecute him, causing this trial in the first place.

I think that when someone shoots another person... kills them and then claims it was all above board... its too important to leave to the opinions of police alone.

There should always be an expectation of a hearing or a trial.

Its shameful how quickly some folks wanted to sign off on the life of a young man.

We'll never know whether Zimmerman is innocent but at least everyone knows that he is not guilty in the eyes of the law and the people in his community.

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

The fundamental danger of an acquittal is not race riots, it's more George Zimmermans. - Jay Smooth. Quote from twitter.

That about sums up my feelings on this.

So true.

The whole race thig has been overplayed.

There were white republicans that wanted a trial and black democrates that didn't.

Will there be some tension courtesy of the NAACP or some other lobby group?
Of cousre... thats what puts bacon on their table... just like any other special interest group... lurking to exploit a situation for their political and financial gain.

But thats OK... the NRA, the CCW folks, self defence institutions and neo-nazis will be doing the same thing.

Most everyone else will probably just get on with their day to day lives while running a gauntlet between two groups of people with opposing causes.


Same as any other day.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by canadiantdi

It wasn't a guess. You told me in a thread about body armor that you called it deadmonton because Edmonton is dead compared to other places like Calgary. I was pointing out how ironic it was that you were against the average citizen owning body armor while listing your location as deadmonton.. I figured that the real reason for your location was the crime/murder, not the lack of festivals.

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=125667

More than one reason for the moniker. But yes Edmonton is less interesting then Calgary, but then again Paris has more interesting things then most places in Canada, and in fact I like some pretty small places because of the quaintness and quality of life. Can't beat living in a location where everyone knows everyone, and the worst thing that happens is a few kids raid your pea patch.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger

So true.

The whole race thig has been overplayed.

There were white republicans that wanted a trial and black democrates that didn't.

Will there be some tension courtesy of the NAACP or some other lobby group?
Of cousre... thats what puts bacon on their table... just like any other special interest group... lurking to exploit a situation for their political and financial gain.

But thats OK... the NRA, the CCW folks, self defence institutions and neo-nazis will be doing the same thing.

Most everyone else will probably just get on with their day to day lives while running a gauntlet between two groups of people with opposing causes.


Same as any other day.

What scares me is the New Black Panthers have made it clear they plan to cause riots. They have been busing people in to enact their revenge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xQtryE1stw

http://www.libertyfederation.com/bla...nds_to_florida

[TomCanuck]

Originally Posted by i_hate_snow

I'm glad media failed to persecute this man.

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger

I think that when someone shoots another person... kills them and then claims it was all above board... its too important to leave to the opinions of police alone.

There should always be an expectation of a hearing or a trial.

Its shameful how quickly some folks wanted to sign off on the life of a young man.

We'll never know whether Zimmerman is innocent but at least everyone knows that he is not guilty in the eyes of the law and the people in his community.

The evidence available was insufficient to support any verdict beyond self defense. So why put him through the ordeal of a trial? Politics. Race politics.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by TomCanuck

The evidence available was insufficient to support any verdict beyond self defense. So why put him through the ordeal of a trial? Politics. Race politics.

I believe there was a need for a trial in this case. It was not so simple as a home invasion shooting, or other such definite cases of self defense.

Race just made it much more news worthy.

[TomCanuck]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

I believe there was a need for a trial in this case. It was not so simple as a home invasion shooting, or other such definite cases of self defense.

Race just made it much more news worthy.

Ah, a show trial, to placate the masses anger? Regardless of the infinitesimal chances of a conviction?

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by TomCanuck

Ah, a show trial, to placate the masses anger? Regardless of the infinitesimal chances of a conviction?

I don't think this was a show trial for race relations. I personally think regardless of the race of the individuals involved, there would have been a trial. However because of the race of the two, it made big news.

From what I read about the case, there could have been a possibility of a conviction or an acquittal, or even a conviction on a lesser charge. This was not a simple matter of self defense in a home invasion.

[Sporty]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

The fundamental danger of an acquittal is not race riots, it's more George Zimmermans. - Jay Smooth. Quote from twitter.

That about sums up my feelings on this.

Yep!

Basically this facilitates the idea that it's ok for people to profile, stalk, instigate a confrontation then kill, all in the name of "self defense".

[deanmc]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger

I think that when someone shoots another person... kills them and then claims it was all above board... its too important to leave to the opinions of police alone.

There should always be an expectation of a hearing or a trial.

Its shameful how quickly some folks wanted to sign off on the life of a young man.

We'll never know whether Zimmerman is innocent but at least everyone knows that he is not guilty in the eyes of the law and the people in his community.

You realize that would mean requiring US police to hold and charge someone without probable cause right? Which would require the removal of the Bill of rights.

[deanmc]

Originally Posted by TomCanuck

The evidence available was insufficient to support any verdict beyond self defense. So why put him through the ordeal of a trial? Politics. Race politics.

Agreed and if IRC the original police chief lost his job over this as well.

[Ryry4]

Originally Posted by deanmc

Agreed and if IRC the original police chief lost his job over this as well.

He was fired because he would not bring charges against Zimmerman. He wouldn't bring charges because the evidence wasn't there. Politics simple as that.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by Ryry4

He was fired because he would not bring charges against Zimmerman. He wouldn't bring charges because the evidence wasn't there. Politics simple as that.

Actually there was evidence, but because of the stand your ground laws, there was some dispute as to what to charge him with.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...orge-zimmerman

Report: Sanford cops initially wanted Zimmerman charged with 2nd-degree murder
They downgraded that to manslaughter.
January 8, 2013|By Jeff Weiner and Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel

On the day Sanford police turned over the Trayvon Martin shooting investigation to prosecutors, they changed their final report at least four times over five hours and downgraded the charge they recommended from second-degree murder to manslaughter, newly-released records confirmed.

In the first version on March 13, lead Investigator Chris Serino and his bosses recommended that George Zimmerman, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer who killed Trayvon, be charged with murder. But they changed that about four hours later, according to paperwork made public Tuesday by defense attorney Mark O'Mara.


The Orlando Sentinel reported those changes Dec. 12 when Special Prosecutor Angela Corey made public a list of evidence that she had just released to O'Mara. It included only a few sentences but made clear there was an initial draft plus four revisions.

O'Mara on Tuesday released each version. Corey's office is expected to release them in the next few days.

They reveal that Serino and his supervisors, made several changes but only two major ones.

The first was the change in the charges.

The second was a strongly-worded paragraph condemning Zimmerman's actions, pointing out that there was no need for a confrontation with Trayvon.

"The encounter between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was ultimately avoidable by Zimmerman if Zimmerman had remained in his vehicle and awaited the arrival of law enforcement or conversely if he had identified himself to Martin as a concerned citizen and initiated dialog (sic) in an effort to dispel each party's concern. There is no indication that Trayvon Martin was involved in any criminal activity at the time of the encounter."

In that same new paragraph, added in the third of the five drafts released Tuesday and left in each version thereafter, Serino and his bosses faulted Zimmerman for assuming that Trayvon was about to break into a home.

"Zimmerman … made it clear that he had already reached a faulty conclusion as to Martin's purpose for being in the neighborhood," the revised report says.

Ultimately, the revisions made no difference. A special prosecutor took over the case and had 29-year-old Zimmerman arrested on a charge of second-degree murder.

Zimmerman shot the unarmed 17-year-old high school junior from Miami Gardens on Feb. 26. in Sanford after calling police and describing him as suspicious. Zimmerman says he acted in self-defense and fired one shot only after Trayvon knocked him to the ground, climbed on top of him and began banging his head on a sidewalk.

Prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda says Zimmerman is guilty of profiling Trayvon, falsely assuming the teenager was about to commit a crime, then murdering him.

Zimmerman is currently free on $1 million bail, awaiting a trial that's schedule for June 10.

The newly-released evidence also includes a new, slightly more audible copy of a recording in which Trayvon's girlfriend describes what she heard the night of the shooting.


The girl, identified by officials as "witness 8," told Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump in the recording that she was on the phone just before the shooting and heard Trayvon being pursued and confronted by a man. Her account to Crump, with federal investigators listening in, largely matches what she would later tell de la Rionda in his recorded interview.

[Kurt505]

Well..... I'm glad this one is over.

I hope the Tyrone Zimmermans of the world can move on now.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by Ryry4

He was fired because he would not bring charges against Zimmerman. He wouldn't bring charges because the evidence wasn't there. Politics simple as that.

Not exactly the case either.

The Sanford P.D. report did actually categorize the incident as “Homicide-Negligent Manslaughter-Unneccessary Killing to Prevent Unlawful Act.” No prosecutor ever came to the scene of the crime, and the first detective to question Zimmerman after the shooting was a narcotics officer rather than a homicide detective.

It is not uncommon for prosecutors to wait a few days before they make an arrest, because they would want to have enough evidence to charge a suspect with a crime. It was initially reported that Sanford police did not arrest Zimmerman due to lack of probable cause under Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” statute. But the Herald report suggests that the department could not move forward after sending the case to Wolfinger’s office and waiting for him to make a determination. Since then, a grand jury was requested to meet April 10, and Corey has been put on the case. Police Chief Bill Lee has temporarily stepped down.

Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/03/29/...#ixzz2Z2dfuz2w


And this is an interview with Lee, where he makes it clear he wanted more direction from the prosecution's office on what to charge him with, and wanted to do a good investigation to ensure the charges where correct for the crime. It was this decision which caused his dismissal, not his refusal to charge Zimmerman, because he and his office wanted to charge Zimmerman from the start.

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/10/ju...-lee-exclusive

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Well..... I'm glad this one is over.

I hope the Tyrone Zimmermans of the world can move on now.

Who?

[ali#1]

Originally Posted by leeaspell

I said they started off as poor innocent petty thugs, never did I say he was a home invading crackhead. Maybe try making the letters bigger, then people might believe the words you are trying to twist on what I said.

Let stick to the facts.

He was walking home from the store with skittles have the laws changed suddenly and that has become an illegal act ?.
Your projecting something upon him that is pure speculation and utterly disgusting, half of us probably have similar stories am records as Martin at his age, apparently you were a perfect child and wore suits and ties to the store ?

To say good riddance to the loss of life of a young man proves a lot about you and none of it good, too bad the mods here only ban people who disagree with the masses.

[DiabeticKripple]

Whenever a white kills a black, or black kills a white, it will be another Zimmerman/Martin case.

[hillbillyreefer]

The media conveniently omits the part that Zimmerman is 1/2 Peruvian(Hispanic). Same old blame whitey racism we've seen in the past.

[Kanonfodder]

Originally Posted by ali#1

Let stick to the facts.



To say good riddance to the loss of life of a young man proves a lot about you and none of it good, too bad the mods here only ban people who disagree with the masses.

Membership here is optional, if you don't like the way the volunteer mods do their job feel free to post elsewhere