It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Zimmerman Trial

page: 288
25
<< 285  286  287    289  290  291 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:37 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Yep, being ethical about the local government being unethical gets you fired. What does that say about that government.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
Uhhhgg...butterflies...

Give us our INNOCENT verdict already


I bet you the '2 loose screws ' are starting all of their sentences off with "Well maybe....."

This should be enough to get them to see that the Prosecution never give them this clear picture.
edit on 13-7-2013 by ButterCookie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:42 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


I imagine the longer it takes the more it points to hung jury or guilty verdict.

But with 25 pages of instructions that could be taking up some time.


Peace



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   
I FOUND THIS INTERESTING ...

Zimmerman Judge Life Long Democrat ... Zimmerman Lawyers Contributed to her Campaign


Years before they would endure a televised pummeling in the Florida courtroom of Judge Debra Nelson, the two lawyers representing accused murderer George Zimmerman actually donated money to the prickly jurist’s first election campaign, records show.

In 1999, Republican Governor Jeb Bush appointed Nelson, a lifelong Democrat, to fill a vacancy in the 18th Judicial Circuit (covering Seminole and Brevard counties). When Nelson ran the following year for a full six-year term, she donated 85 percent of her campaign’s $151,000 war chest.

The balance of Nelson’s contributions came that year from scores of Florida attorneys and law firms. Division of Elections records show that the judicial candidate’s financial supporters included Zimmerman lawyers Mark O’Mara and Don West, both of whom have felt the 59-year-old Nelson’s wrath over the past several weeks.


She took donations from the lawyers when running for her position. I didn't realize that was legal. People running for judge-ship can take donations from lawyers that he or she will be having to deal with in the court room? Huh .... being a conspiracist that kind of tickles my brain.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
being a conspiracist that kind of tickles my brain.



How long does/can conflict of interest last? Indefinitely? (evidently not? lol)

What would the implications be if they were working behind the scenes? Simply being there in the first place?
Or post-case $$ possibilities?



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Thanks. I remem ber you making a similar safari comment haha, but I was afraid to say it and sound racist, but as I stated earlier in the thread when ivan called me a racist I don't have a racist bone in my body and my last serious relationships were with a mexican girl, a puerto rican, a half peurto rican half jew (jewrican : P) and black girl I had a crush on but I got the feeling her parents were opposed which I was bmmed about for a good 6 months and dint date anyone.. the same thing happened with the jewish girl thoughwe still went out (jewish parents reaaaally donnt like their daughters dating non jews ll)

Not meaning to make an aw shucks post, but just felt the need to put it out there because I've been called racist multiple times in this thread with no basis.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


this is so they can have wiggle room to get out of any type of appeal.

'We took responsibility and fired the person.'

I think it would be called Plausible deniability.
edit on 7/13/2013 by ugie1028 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I've heard several people say the judge might be promised a higher position if she plays it right.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


this is so they can have wiggle room to get out of any type of appeal.

'We took responsibility and fired the person.'

I think it would be called Plausible deniability.
edit on 7/13/2013 by ugie1028 because: (no reason given)


Not so sure. Firing the person exposing a wrong, if there was one, seems to be on the opposite side.

edit:

IE: Firing an employee who show you committed a crime does make one innocent of the crime.
edit on 7/13/2013 by roadgravel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


I hade heard 12 pages. It is a little concerning with the time, but I just can't see how they cold possibly come up with anything other than not guilty. I will have real concerns that jurors are saying "but he was achild" back there.

I have no doubt he would be free on first appeal, but he deserves even better than that.

Also keep in mind we saw the evidence that was withheld so they may have to do more considering. If they knew Trayvons passed ad other things it might go faster. Maybe we are considering what OUR deliberation time would be.

I have a real bad feeling there was a covert juror that will make it a hung jury.
edit on 13-7-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by roadgravel
 


still can be used as an excuse. they could say 'I did an internal investigation and we found that this IT guy didn't label the data correctly so the defense could have access to it.'
edit on 7/13/2013 by ugie1028 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ugie1028
 


Got ya. Hopefully he made no mistake in this.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   
The mob mentality mindset of those protestors outside the Sanford Courthouse ....

New Black Panthers ... "justice means death for Zimmerman"

Demonstrators outside the George Zimmerman murder trial have been carrying signs demanding “Justice for Trayvon,” and chanting, “No justice, no peace.”

On Friday, one ranking member of the New Black Panther Party made clear outside the Seminole County Courthouse exactly what his group means by “justice” for shooting victim Trayvon Martin. ...

But what about a harsher sentence? Like Zimmerman’s killing at the hands of a prison vigilante?

“Praise be to God,” Kayrallah said of the prospect.


Maybe that's why Greta Van Sustern said she was 'concerned' and was nervous last night when she was broadcasting from there.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


But you should NEVER EVER feel that you need to silence yourself in fear that you will be called a 'racist', when that's not your intent.

Guess what? Since this trial, I have a relative or two who won't speak to me and a friend that has totally disrespected me. Why?

Because I don't follow the "Black Script".

Firstly, I left the 'Democratic Plantation' a few years ago, when I decided to think for myself and vote the way that makes the most since for me. I don't wear my hair straight- I wear it in a beautiful Afro.

One of the BIGGEST reasons I've shed some friends long the way is because I am no longer religious-never really was; I was more-so 'going through the motions' to pretend to believe 'like the others'.

So this Trayvon Martin/ George Zimmerman Case has totally done it.

I chose to think rationally and logically about the case and use FACTS, rather than be sucked in racial tension. I even had a friend say to me "(ButterCookie), I know you want to use all the "facts" in the case but..."

This was a text message and they put the word FACTS in quotes, mocking me for using "facts", instead of going by the 'Black Script'.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:10 PM
link   
I have not seen it anywhere.... but does anyone know what video game TM and his friend were playing all day on the PS3 before TM went to the store as it started getting dark outside? Just really curious here...

Whether people choose to admit it or not.... just like watching movies.... the video games can really put someone in the frame of mind as the theme of the game. So many video games are of a violent nature and that might help to explain why TM was so prone to violence that night.
(in addition to his desire of being a better fighter, gansta, etc, as proven by his texts)



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ButterCookie
I know you want to use all the "facts" in the case but..."

WOW ... they actually put the word 'but' on the end of that? There is no 'but'. The court of law clearly states that this is to be a verdict based on facts and that emotion should not play a part in it. Otherwise, we go to a rule by mob mentality situation. Good for you for rejecting the 'but' .....



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by firemonkey
reply to post by seabag
 



1) Where is the evidence that Trayvon initiated the attack? If Zimmerman started the confrontation, then it doesn't matter if he is getting his butt kicked, Trayvon has a right to defend himself as well.

2) I swear, have people not been in fights before? Those are not serious injuries...no matter who much people try to sensationalize it...those are not serious injuries at all.


So, where is the proof?


TM punched him, straddled him, pounded on him some more, reached for GZ's gun and said "You're gonna die tonight". That would make any person fear for their life.


And all that except for the straddling part is testimony from Zimmerman, which should be taken with a grain of salt.

You still haven't proved that Trayvon STARTED the confrontation...if Zimmerman did, than Trayvon has every right to defend himself.



posted on Jul, 13 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow

Originally posted by firemonkey
reply to post by FlyersFan
 



What we DO know ..... Zimmerman shot Martin when Martin was on top of him, beating the stuff'n out of him. Eyewitness and forensic evidence say this is a fact. Zimmerman was in his legal rights to defend himself in this manner.


Not if he started the fight, which you already admitted we don't know who started the fight. Starting the fight doesn't have to be throwing the first punch...it can be as little as grabbing someone's arm, or putting your hand on someone's chest to attempt to hold them back.

We don't know who started the fight, so the "self defense" argument is out the window.


We also know that Zimmerman was screaming for help there was no way to know who started it, but all evidence suggests Martin. Then we know that the Neighbor Good spoke to them and despite someone being there Martin kept beating him. If we can't know who started it, but do know Martin was beating him profusely and the self deense was justified how could you possible convict. You want to put a man away for his life because you don't know if he grabbed at Martin (we know he didn't hit him) and al evidence points to martin as the aggressor and was proven as the one that initiated contact?


Yes, if I was on the Jury I would convict him without a doubt.

There is ZERO evidence that Martin was the aggressor. The person who finishes the fight isn't always the one who started it. And that is all you are going on, that Martin was winning the fight.

One kid walking home, one over zealous neighborhood watch man who quite clearly has anger issues packs a gun and goes out looking for "criminals". The kid is dead...all he did was walk to the store.

Zimmerman should be in jail for life.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 285  286  287    289  290  291 >>

log in

join