Breaking News! George Zimmerman found not guilty.

reply to post by bruteforce13


There would be some sort of evidence if Zimmerman had attacked. Bruises, cuts, scrapes, ect. There were no physical injuries on Martin other than the gunshot. There were numerous injuries on Zimmerman.

Had Zimmerman attacked at all, there would have been something on Martin showing this. We have no evidence at all that Zimmerman attacked Martin in the first place. We have plenty of evidence that Martin attacked Zimmerman.

It's not Zimmerman's word that swayed the jury, it was the physical evidence. The injuries. The 911 phone call that did it.

reply to post by RealTruthSeeker


Casey anthoney is innocent too.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Martin started the fight. Martin has no fight injuries. All the evidence backs Zimmerman. DNA on Martin's knuckles, from what I have read, of Zimmerman's. Stop trying to make this out to be something it isn't. Every single person alive has a right to self defense. Do you think that is a bad thing?

I'd ask you to point to any evidence for the bolded part. Which is kind of the whole point. But since the only evidence is a statement from a stalker who shot a teen I won't even bother.

I already provided all that. I stated martin had NO fight injuries. NONE. Zimmerman had plenty. Witnesses saw Martin on top. Martin's friend on the phone even states Martin spoke first. Martin spoke, when before he was practically back to where he was staying. He had to leave that safe location and go back to confront Zimmerman, to speak first.

Now, how about an answer? Do you believe people should have a right to self defense or not?

Well actually you didn't provide any evidence. Yes people have the right to try to disarm gun toting stalkers who follow them in an area known for burglaries. So Trayvon was in the right there. Too bad he didn't carry a gun too so he could've been more succesfull in excersising his right to stand his ground.

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


BS not necessarily a punched could been ducked, a simple push or shove would not necessarily leave any bruises. There are a dozen or so ways this could have went down other than what zimmerman said. None of the evidence points to it and that is way he is not guilty. But im not saying it coudlnt have went down that way.

Originally posted by RealTruthSeeker
reply to post by votan

 

Yeah, your right. Whatever the jury comes back with is always right huh. Off topic, but did O.J commit murder? Or was it a free pass. Don't be so blind to the system. Shady things happen all the time in the court system. The guilty get let go all the time.

The evidence in that OJ case lead me to believe he did, he got a free pass.

In this case I saw nothing that lead me to believe they let zimmerman off. it would have been easier to just put him in jail and be done with it. our justice system has done this in the past.


seeing that they actually followed the evidence and not just public opinion literally shocked me.. I was expecting a manslaughter charge just to appease the masses.

It was ballsy to do the right thing.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
reply to post by bruteforce13

 

There would be some sort of evidence if Zimmerman had attacked. Bruises, cuts, scrapes, ect. There were no physical injuries on Martin other than the gunshot. There were numerous injuries on Zimmerman.

Had Zimmerman attacked at all, there would have been something on Martin showing this. We have no evidence at all that Zimmerman attacked Martin in the first place. We have plenty of evidence that Martin attacked Zimmerman.

It's not Zimmerman's word that swayed the jury, it was the physical evidence. The injuries. The 911 phone call that did it.

Just to make a slight correction, there was injury to Martin's knuckles, that supported the fact he beat Zimmerman's face in. Then there was zimmerman's face right after the incident (which most people haven't seen because the MSM didn't show it):



ALL the evidence agrees with not only Zimmermans testimony, but the witness testimony.

reply to post by PsykoOps


Yeah a THUG who didnt pack heat, imagine that. All the thugs ive ever known have at least a knife on them lol

Originally posted by brick38
After the election of Barack Obama their was a huge rush to by guns and ammo.
After this verdict their will probably be a rush from people of color to acquire guns and ammo too.
I'm going to be sick.Then I'm going reluctantly to get a gun and some ammo.

Pretty tough right now to do that legally.

Just hit the black market that was created by all the new state anti-gun laws like everyone else.

Let me know your contact for ammo. Shelves have been bare since January.

Originally posted by bruteforce13
reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

 

BS not necessarily a punched could been ducked, a simple push or shove would not necessarily leave any bruises. There are a dozen or so ways this could have went down other than what zimmerman said. None of the evidence points to it and that is way he is not guilty. But im not saying it coudlnt have went down that way.

and maybe santa claus and the easter bunny were backing up tre but they ran off before the witness came out..

i mean it is totally possible that that happened you just don't know.

reply to post by DeadSeraph


Injurys not life threatining. Seen Dozens of injurys way worse than that when I was a bartender in a college bar. Fights every weekend. noone got shot though.

reply to post by PsykoOps


That is really what you believe happened?

Originally posted by bruteforce13
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

Injurys not life threatining. Seen Dozens of injurys way worse than that when I was a bartender in a college bar. Fights every weekend. noone got shot though.

Way to disregard the entire case. This wasn't a bar fight, was it?

reply to post by bruteforce13


Apples to oranges. There was no bouncer there to pull Martin off him now was there? No bystanders to say "hey enough already". Oh wait, one bystander did tell him to stop, didn't help though.

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
Martin started the fight. Martin has no fight injuries. All the evidence backs Zimmerman. DNA on Martin's knuckles, from what I have read, of Zimmerman's. Stop trying to make this out to be something it isn't. Every single person alive has a right to self defense. Do you think that is a bad thing?

I'd ask you to point to any evidence for the bolded part. Which is kind of the whole point. But since the only evidence is a statement from a stalker who shot a teen I won't even bother.

I already provided all that. I stated martin had NO fight injuries. NONE. Zimmerman had plenty. Witnesses saw Martin on top. Martin's friend on the phone even states Martin spoke first. Martin spoke, when before he was practically back to where he was staying. He had to leave that safe location and go back to confront Zimmerman, to speak first.

Now, how about an answer? Do you believe people should have a right to self defense or not?

Well actually you didn't provide any evidence. Yes people have the right to try to disarm gun toting stalkers who follow them in an area known for burglaries. So Trayvon was in the right there. Too bad he didn't carry a gun too so he could've been more succesfull in excersising his right to stand his ground.

I listed the evidence. Martin was back where he was supposed to be. The incident didn't take place close to there, but at the far end of that section. The only way a confrontation occurred was for Martin to go back there. Even Martin's friend didn't make ANY mention of Martin thinking that Zimmerman had a gun. Even if he did believe Zimmerman had a gun, you can't go around punching someone for legally carrying a weapon. That's called assault, and it's a felony.

So, I guess we have your answer. You only believe in self defense if the person is in certain groups.

Final note before sleep.

For those claiming that Zimmerman is some sort of wimp, or whatever, because he used a gun instead of fighting, are you stating that if he'd turned the tables and beat Martin to death, or even simply hit him till he stopped attacking, you would be alright with that? An adult, striking a teen? We all know it would be the exact same mess, without the gun issues involved.

As for the OJ and Casey Anthony cases, in both of those, the prosecution failed to prove their case. So, in the system, they both walked. The OJ case was, from the little I have read, mostly mishandled evidence and mistakes. The Anthony case, they couldn't even prove a cause of death, much less a murder or who did it. Neither of those is anything like this case. Here, we have ample evidence that this was self defense, and no evidence that it was anything else. In those cases, the prosecution messed up. In this one, there was no valid case.

Now, if some people can actually review the real evidence, and stop playing "what if" games, maybe we could discuss the possible fallout and implications of the case, if any.

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress
Well this thread turned as expected... I for one and the rest of my family and probably most of my comunity applaud this unbiased, interracial, fact finding jury. I give them my depest gratitude for their service and for upholding law. This case was so much larger than most really gave it credit for, not due to racial sentiments but due to the simple fact that Americans right to defend themselves was on trial itself. Our right to defend ourselves was upheld when put to the test.

Not so fast!! These chickens haven't hatched!
The folks ruling our nations and banks and all that...
They set this 'deck of cards' up nice, for a fall.
Check it out:

Freedom = Racist Murderer
(according to the propaganda as I interpret 'between the lines' and 'boil it down' to it's base constituent)

This one's a curve ball. We are likely just entering the first real phase of this psy-op.
*Allegedly according to my conspiracy based hypothesis..*

There are apparently those who have been convinced 100% by a series of repeated conditioning courses that "Self-Defense" is evil essentially, and that you should actually let your assailants just beat you up. This is a very advanced system of programming and it will take very intelligent counters to remedy.

That's why I want to talk about it in these terms because I think a lot of you folks are really smart and can figure out what is going on and really out-of-the-box ways to counter this force and help bring balance to our system.

reply to post by bruteforce13


Sure. Aliens from Niburu could have beamed murderous suggestions into both men's minds. However, once again, other than the gunshot, Zimmerman had not inflicted any physical injury on Martin. Yet Martin had inflicted physical injury on Zimmerman. Given everything else in the case, it seems unlikely that Zimmerman attacked Martin first. Could Zimmerman have been pushy, mouth, or rude to Martin in a way that made the kid mad? Sure. Still does not give him the right to attack. Unless someone can provide physical, or even a convincing circumstantial argument that Zimmerman attacked first, and Martin was defending himself, then as far as I am concerned, its not worth speculating on.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
...
I propose BOTH SIDES are being associated with and perceived to be led by WOLVES.
...
It's a scam "Divide and Conquer".
...

There's probably alot of truth in this. This encounter, with a little proding, a couple firings, etc ... blossomed into a tailor made black vs white TPTB wet dream.

I'll admit to looking at the case through a 2A prism. Had Zimmerman been convicted of any of the charges, it could/would have been used as precedent to weaken or dismantle Florida's SYG laws. It's idle speculation, but it's also something that may have had implications reaching beyond Florida ... we have all seen how willing some of our law makers are to infringe on the 2nd.

The ongoing and ramped up race-baiting since Zimmerman's aquittal is exactly as you mentioned, and it has the potential to get worse with all the planned demonstrations. Motivated people sitting on a powder keg...

In all it was a win/win for TPTB ... regardless if it was orchastrated or not, but it was ...

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


Let that be the reason their kids stay coming home crying when they get they ass beat. The parents are to lazy to teach anything these days unless it deals with some sort of technology. Let's go back a hundred years when kids actually respected their parents. Why did the kids have so much respect back then? Because the parents would not put up with any of that kind of BS. Nowadays, kids can call their mom's #$&^% and mom wont' do nothing about it but try to give them time out or counseling. It's sad. Kids laugh at their parents these day's because they know they have the upper hand.

Anyway, I got to make some pork chops for my daughter. It's all good, it was fun discussion and I've learned alot. Thanks.

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Yes people have the right to try to disarm gun toting stalkers who follow them in an area known for burglaries.

Technically false!

No one ever follow this advice it's Illegal 100% to "attempt to disarm someone walking in an area known for burglaries".

That is not true.

You have NO RIGHT to attempt to disarm anyone just merely walking around even if they are following you.