Treyvon Called George The N Word

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/06/26/3471243/alternate-juror-dismissed-in-trayvon.html

OH NO

 

[Saxon_Hart]

You want my thoughts on this trial? There shouldn't be one. Everyone wants to make this kid out to be an angel when evidece points the opposite way. Zim is being unjustly tried.

 

[lovecraft68]

You want my thoughts on this trial? There shouldn't be one. Everyone wants to make this kid out to be an angel when evidece points the opposite way. Zim is being unjustly tried.

I think you're right, but in the beginning was convinced he was going to be guilty to avoid another set of riots like in LA. The entire black community was licking their chops for a reason to cry racism.

But since then too much shit has come to light that the media was trying to make him guilty.

I mean showing a picture of Martin as a young boy instead of the football player sized person he was? The network deliberately editing the 911 tape to make it sound as if he was calling him out for being black.

Now, not only do I think Zimmerman is going to be seen as a victim enough to get off, but if I were him, right after not guilty is handed down I'd be gunning for the network(I think it was CBS) who defamed him with that tape.

What should come out of this is someone trying to get Florida to stop being the Wild west. Neighborhood watch guys getting to carry guns?

I'm all about the right to own guns, but people shouldn't be allowed to just wander around with them.

 

[colddiesel]

Hey Guys, how about hearing the evidence reaching a verdict?

 

[jomar]

You want my thoughts on this trial? There shouldn't be one. Everyone wants to make this kid out to be an angel when evidece points the opposite way. Zim is being unjustly tried.

Hardly. I don't know the Florida law, but in my state if you have a CCW license and use the pistol in self-defense, you lose protection if you have done anything to provoke the conflict.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Hardly. I don't know the Florida law, but in my state if you have a CCW license and use the pistol in self-defense, you lose protection if you have done anything to provoke the conflict.

That's what theyre trying to get at: What, if anything, did Zimmerman do that was criminal.

So far the states witnesses are hysterical and stupid.

What frosts my cake is this: When the trial started the video people let the state prosecutor quote Zimmerman's FUCKING ASSHOLES comment. Today, when the witness quotes Trayvon calling Zimmerman a CRACKER and a NIGGER, the video people turn off the sound.

 

[jomar]

That's what theyre trying to get at: What, if anything, did Zimmerman do that was criminal.

So far the states witnesses are hysterical and stupid.

What frosts my cake is this: When the trial started the video people let the state prosecutor quote Zimmerman's FUCKING ASSHOLES comment. Today, when the witness quotes Trayvon calling Zimmerman a CRACKER and a NIGGER, the video people turn off the sound.

In my state you don't have to do anything criminal, you can lose self-defense protection by behaving in a manner that could provoke a confrontation.

If the prosecution can demonstrate provocation by Zimmerman's actions then the shooting becomes criminal. At least that's how it would go where I live.

But yeah, media manipulation sucks. I've been catching it on Headline News, don't know if they did what your news did.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

In my state you don't have to do anything criminal, you can lose self-defense protection by behaving in a manner that could provoke a confrontation.

If the prosecution can demonstrate provocation by Zimmerman's actions then the shooting becomes criminal. At least that's how it would go where I live.

But yeah, media manipulation sucks. I've been catching it on Headline News, don't know if they did what your news did.

The court captures the audio-visual and feeds it to the networks, and I get it via my cable company; the cable company disclosed that they were concealing offensive comments and pictures from the feed.

In Florida, if youre acting lawfully you do not have to leave a confrontation to avoid violence. Whomever initiates the assault is the antagonist. That is, whomever makes the first threat or produces a weapon or commits battery, is IT.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/27/Zimmerman-trial-Jeantel

NOT RACIST

 

[2981notrohrm]

I don't think either of these people were angels. Evidence is coming out that Trayvon was a dick, but further evidence stated that Zimmerman started it. Of course, the question is this - self-defense or no. Or something in between, i.e. "imperfect" self-defense, as in Zimmerman behaved as if his life were in danger, but an outsider couldn't possibly see it that way or he had a hand in creating the situation.

Two observations independent from the fact that people calling other people racist is irrelevant to the facts of the trial:

1. George Zimmerman's attorney is an idiot.

2. It looks like both sides have just dug their heels in and are going all-or-nothing. This could be bad news for the prosecution, since "beyond a reasonable doubt" is a high standard, especially for murder, and if memory serves correctly, the Amadou Diallo case, a case of mistaken killing by NYPD officers, came down to "prosecution seeks murder, won't bargain down, jury buys the 'we fucked up' defense, cops get acquitted." This could turn into "prosecution seeks murder, won't back down, jury buys the 'kid was a punk' defense, Zimmerman gets acquitted." All because the prosecutor won't settle for manslaughter.

 

[jomar]

The court captures the audio-visual and feeds it to the networks, and I get it via my cable company; the cable company disclosed that they were concealing offensive comments and pictures from the feed.

In Florida, if youre acting lawfully you do not have to leave a confrontation to avoid violence. Whomever initiates the assault is the antagonist. That is, whomever makes the first threat or produces a weapon or commits battery, is IT.

I'm not talking about leaving a confrontation. Where I am you can't provoke a confrontation and be protected by law. You can step in, but you can't start it.

I couldn't find anything in Fla law about not provoking a confrontation. Hell, looks like I can purposefully piss someone off and if they come after me I could shoot them. Murder by self-defense!

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I don't think either of these people were angels. Evidence is coming out that Trayvon was a dick, but further evidence stated that Zimmerman started it. Of course, the question is this - self-defense or no. Or something in between, i.e. "imperfect" self-defense, as in Zimmerman behaved as if his life were in danger, but an outsider couldn't possibly see it that way or he had a hand in creating the situation.

Two observations independent from the fact that people calling other people racist is irrelevant to the facts of the trial:

1. George Zimmerman's attorney is an idiot.

2. It looks like both sides have just dug their heels in and are going all-or-nothing. This could be bad news for the prosecution, since "beyond a reasonable doubt" is a high standard, especially for murder, and if memory serves correctly, the Amadou Diallo case, a case of mistaken killing by NYPD officers, came down to "prosecution seeks murder, won't bargain down, jury buys the 'we fucked up' defense, cops get acquitted." This could turn into "prosecution seeks murder, won't back down, jury buys the 'kid was a punk' defense, Zimmerman gets acquitted." All because the prosecutor won't settle for manslaughter.

Zimmerman had the injuries, Trayvon did not. Zimmerman's lawyers are making the state's witnesses look like hysterical dolts. These people gave multiple statements with conflicting evidence, and no one really saw anything. One today said the guy on top was wearing a red or a black sweatshirt. True! One was red, and one was black.

 

[sr71plt]

Zimmerman had the injuries, Trayvon did not.

Not unless you consider death an injury.

(But don't get me wrong. I haven't been following it any more than the media forces on me, but what I see is a lot of reasonable doubt. We're not talking about the angels here. I think that evidence on either one of them being "chip on their shoulder" punks should have been admissible, because I think that's what is the basis for this--as exercised by them both.)