They should arrest and charge the people who called the witness during GZ trial

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by marbles87
 


So can you charge some one for contempt of court when they were never in the court room? Can you charge some one for contempt of court who is not even connecting to a computer in a court room? Remember the guy they contacted was not in a court room. His personal or school computer was not in the court room. Does the judge have rights over computers not in the court room? Would they need a court order to have rights over it? Would it still be breaking the law to ask to communicate with that computer? They did not hack it. The asked for permission and were denied.

What law did they break? Or do you wish to expand the powers of spying and control over the population? Do you like the NSA spying? Do you work for them and it is in your interest to expand there reach?




posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 


The point is the outside persons acted with malicious intent to disrupt a court room via any method. Would you not charge someone who threw a rock through the window to get attention. The rock was neve in the court room but by actions of their own they introduced the outside stone to the court room. Same for this. Find them and interrogate them. Ask them why the hell they called. Why they thought it was a good idea. They would all pretty much say they did it for fame and that's where they broke the law they interrupted the case. It's not like they skyped him to ask him a question about their homework they did it to be fools.

Is it illegal to talk to a cop while he working, nope perfectly normal. But how about you go bother a cop while he is trying to arrest a bank robber you deserve to be beat. Malicious self idolization. Ie. a person goes out of their way to be such a distraction for their own gain that it has grossly disrupted the flow of the proceeding. Pretty much. They stood up in court and screamed "look at me!!!"
edit on 4-7-2013 by marbles87 because: (no reason given)


Same for photo bombing. Like it should be illegal to photo bomb the president or cause purposeful harm to high value photos or testimony. What woul happen if someone photo bombed the president while he jus made world peace the person ruined the reputation of the photo or testimony.
edit on 4-7-2013 by marbles87 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by marbles87
 


So use a example of some one throwing a rock and breaking a window which is a example of criminal mischief and vandalism. Which is breaking the law no matter where they did it. Then you place them in a court room where they were not. Bad examples.

Asking permission to skype with some one is not illegal. And they did not DDOS his computer so they did nothing wrong. The judge has no control over skype or the person on the other end when they are not in the court room. The whole thing was a dog and pony show. And you got to see how much it was. The whole thing with the Zimmerman and Treyvon is a dog and pony show has been since the start.

edit on 4-7-2013 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I also think the witness should have been compelled to appear in person. I also think that in your Skype preferences there should be some way of turning off incoming calls.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 


Like I said question the people to get them to admit they did it for fame and throw them in jail. We are better than this. Now if the person was like. "whoa, hey hey hey I'm sorry I had no idea I was just asking him and question and I have his class" then sure no foul other than wrong place wrong time. But for 20+ people to call in seconds shows ill intent



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by marbles87
 


When they won't even question Georges father who was in contact with the State Attorneys office from the start while he was still at the scene? They won't question the State Attorney who traveled over 50 miles in the rain at night to show up on scene to interfere with the investigation. They won't question the Governor who signed several executive orders of the governor on this case including the only released one appointing a special prosecutor and removing the State Attorney who had personal connections to the father a judge and his wife who works as a translator for the courts. And they won't question the company that Zimmerman worked for Digital Risk, LLC who is a contractor who works for the government spying on mortgages. And they won't question the President who had Digital Risk, LLC boss come to the White House on March 22 for a interview and update. And then the President commented the next day on national TV about the case March 23 for the first time. They won't question Joe Oliver who did his TV interviews as Georges friend who worked for Digital Risk, LLC as the propaganda writer and news media spokesman. And they won't question the wife who was indicted on perjury and money laundering tied to this case.

But they must question a few people who asked permission to skype with a teacher?
edit on 4-7-2013 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 


Ugh. Yes the case was botched as hell from the get go but why are you bringing up points that had nothing to do with a bunch of fools intentionally messing with the case.

They never addresses that TM hands could have been protected by his hoodie when punching GZ so lack of damage to his hands is plausible. They never tested a lot of the theories they are pitching. I want to see a step my step walk through of GZ with someone playing as TM and they recreate the whole scene start to finish and match what they had. But nope just a lot of speculation which is good for the defense since it proves reasonable doubt. The state really messed this up even though I'm pretty confident GZ is being as truthful as he can to recall to what happened from memory.

But even as crappy the case the state has even if they went to the 9s they might not have proved anything different since there wasn't a lot to work with to begine with.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by marbles87
 


I would like them to bring up George Zimmerman's phone records like they have to Treyvon and the girl he was talking to. I think it would be interesting to see the can of worms that it would bring up. But they will not because it would interfere with the dog and pony show. This case is about justice or secrets. And the government has decided secrets are more important. And George has taken advantage in knowing that to avoid justice.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by marbles87


Tampering with evidence.

 


Luckily, you aren't governed by lynch mob rule. I thought by your OP someone somehow got into a Skype convo with a juror or something.

It's a witness.

And the witness wasn't tampered with, his Skype sessions was. They are really, really dumb for not making it private, or blacking out or obscuring the connection address.

You can't get mad at people making phone calls.

If they forcefully stopped or kidnapped the witness so he couldn't testify, fine. But calling someone does not show that intent.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 


I wish TM was still alive so I could see them both go to jail.

How come TM was ON TOP but wasn't screaming for help. Look at how close he was to hoses I would have let out blood curdling screams that would have woke the dead but nope. The only one that appears to be screaming is GZ and that TM had his mouth covered. That's how I know TM was an aggressor. Even if I was on top because I got the upper hand I would have never stopped screaming at the top of my lungs but NO ONE heard TM clearly scream even though he was on top with no obstruction to his face.

Zimmerman didn't keep a safe distance from TM if he didn't want to introduce himself as he stated. Following isn't illegal but the grey area is he might have followed to close.
edit on 4-7-2013 by marbles87 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by marbles87


Same for photo bombing. Like it should be illegal to photo bomb the president or cause purposeful harm to high value photos or testimony. What woul happen if someone photo bombed the president while he jus made world peace the person ruined the reputation of the photo or testimony.

 


The end of the world I'm sure..



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


So if obama posted the red phone number you would call it huh.

Idiots.

No one is saying calling someone is a crime. Calling someone during a case for the sole purpose of being a joke should be a crime. How else are we supposed to keep trials and stuff fair.
edit on 4-7-2013 by marbles87 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   
The entire thing is a massive circus to keep your mind away from stuff that actually matters. The "wasted" tax dollars don't even exist, they just conjure more from the fed reserve and keep the circus going 24/7. I'd bet they faked that entire thing just to keep the idiot watchers entertained.
edit on 4-7-2013 by zero1020 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by zero1020
 


This case matters. It will be basis for possible SYG reform or a change in the laws. Ie leaving your vehicle with a gun to scrutinize someone is a crime or something who knows.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by marbles87
reply to post by boncho
 


So if obama posted the red phone number you would call it huh.

Idiots.

No one is saying calling someone is a crime. Calling someone during a case for the sole purpose of being a joke should be a crime. How else are we supposed to keep trials and stuff fair.
edit on 4-7-2013 by marbles87 because: (no reason given)


Don't publicly broadcast the number to the red phone. Duh.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by marbles87
 




But hey I pay child support for my brother so I expect stuff like this from our (I'm American) legal system.


Wha? would you please explain that? You've got me curiosity piqued



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by marbles87
reply to post by zero1020
 


This case matters. It will be basis for possible SYG reform or a change in the laws. Ie leaving your vehicle with a gun to scrutinize someone is a crime or something who knows.


Highly doubtful, GZ didn't do anything wrong. This case never should have been prosecuted.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by tjack
That was nuts! I have no idea what he was even testifying about. Did the prosecution "call" this witness? The judge was way too nice. What a joke!



Yes, the state has not rested it's case yet.



posted on Jul, 4 2013 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by rival
 


Yeah thought I had a kid DNA says not mine. My dad has kid calls him dad and I'm his brother I have an order to pay him support. 5 years and 3 DNA test later. I still owe. I thought DNA evidence held weight in court.





new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join