Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As it pertains to common sense, there's an argument there. However, to prove second degree murder, the proof needs to be there. My thinking is that perhaps the state simply exceeded the proper charge.
At first I thought that too, and I still think the jury might choose to convict him of the lesser charge of manslaughter, that is, unless he is found not guilty on all charges. In Florida a jury has the option to choose a lesser charge. Actually, I think it's unlikely he will be convicted of 2nd degree murder because this case has so much reasonable doubt, but he did kill someone. Maybe they'll choose involuntary manslaughter. I believe that's still an option here.
Still, Angela Corey has a very good reputation and, as Assistant State Attorney, tried hundreds of murder cases. So I really don't want to second guess her.
Out of curiosity, how do you suppose black Conservatives and white Liberals think?
Interesting you ask.
I work on weekends with an extreme, and I mean EXTREME to the max liberal. An old, white liberal. Did I mention he's a liberal?
We discussed this case today, after the first full week of trial. The man is leaning in George's favor. He's not completely there yet, but Mr. Good's testimony about the clothing and the pummeling really made him sit up and take notice. He was also sickened by CNN's erroneous ticker after Mr. Good's testimony.
There is also a black female liberal with a shop where mine is, but she wasn't there today. I was so disappointed since I wanted to hear her side. She doesn't watch a lot of news, so it's hard to say what she's seen so far. She has 2 boys, one 16, the other 20. They are well adjusted, highly intelligent, exceptionally respectful young men. I can't wait to hear her perspective, because she is the type of mother who, if she caught her boys saying "*****" or calling a white person a cracker, would knock them up side of the head from here to Norway!
I was wondering why they called the TMobile guy myself. Unless it was to verify that there were no stored messages from Tm's phone.
The only thing I can figure out about that is to verify the time and length of calls between Trayvon and DeeDee. We know what time the 911 calls started flooding dispatch. Now we need to compare the times of the calls and disconnects between Trayvon and her.
Liberals are for Martin, Conservatives for Zimmerman. I believe a factor in conservatives rallying around Zimmerman is the fact that Martin is black, similar to how they are rallying behind Paula Deen right now(white woman spouting the n word, wanting to host a slave wedding). I don't think conservatives, specifically white conservatives, care that Zimmerman killed Martin.
Conservatives (to generalize) support the right of an innocent person to defend himself from a violent criminal attack regardless of race. Liberals are for M, well, for two reasons. First, they can't accept that a young black male can commit a violent assault, in spite of many thousands of examples every year. It fits their dogma much better to blame the white guy....which had them beside themselves when they discovered that Z wasn't white. So they created the term white-Hispanic. And they hate the fact that a civilian successfully used a firearm to defend his life from a violent attack. Pokes holes in all kinds of little pet dogma. Oh, and since conservatives are "labeled" as supporting Zimmerman, it kind of pokes holes in the liberal argument that conservatives are opposed to criminal aliens because they "hate Hispanics". But of course that will be ignored.
I don't understand something though. In so many cases where guns are used for violent crime, it's always the fault of the gun, never the shooter. Instead of calling for criminals and the violently insane to be locked up, the proposed solution is always outlaw or restrict legal gun ownership. I wonder why the big switch here? Why is this somehow Zimmerman's fault? I mean, didn't that gun just jump out of the holster and fire without his input? The even odder thing is that we have liberals arguing for arming 17 year old teens with handguns for self defense. Maybe they are coming around and showing a bit of common sense after all.
There are some of us who don't stay glued to their computer day-after-day all day commenting drivel as you do.
Some people do have a life you know. And work. Jobs. Stuff like that.
Hmmm, you do know what jobs and work are don't you? Just wondering given the amount of time you post.
Retirement is wonderful. Thanks for contributing to my social security check. I plan to live long enough to use all of my contributions, and yours, too. Thanks so much.
I do read. I've read all the transcripts, medical reports. In short, everything available on-line re this case. Even a lot of the media reports. Plus several web sites in addition to this one.
So, question for y'all. Has anyone figured out WHY the prosecution called the TMobile guy or the IT guy from the security camera company??
I am wondering if there were calls between George and his buddy Frank. ..Maybe that's why George had his gun....maybe Frank called him to complain about the kid near his house when Trayvon first walked to the 7-11. I'm speculating....but Frank did say he had seen Trayvon in, or near his front yard before he went to the 7-11....Seemed quite coincidental imo
Did anyone else remember hearing that statement by Frank last night?
Also, it may support Janel testimony about still being on the phone w/ Trayvon when his bluetooth got bumped and knocked loose....it appears to be the moment the physical altercation started.
I heard them say there will be a few more videos to view...I am looking forward to those....The two shown were almost worthless.
Last edited by JanND; 06-29-2013 at 11:46 PM..
Reason: edit text
Retirement is wonderful. Thanks for contributing to my social security check. I plan to live long enough to use all of my contributions, and yours, too. Thanks so much.
Oh, I'm retired as well. The Army has a good pension. Plus social security as well. But I also have a part-time job. The hours vary - some weeks its mornings, some weeks afternoons. Its good to get out rather than glue yourself to a computer. Gives one a better perspective than being cooped up all the time.
Well, week one just concluded...We'll see what next week brings. But, given the things we do know, that George was following in his truck, that he then followed on foot...persued this teen...Even when asked not to. We know Trayvon ran...We heard George say so on the call. Geroge followed.... The best predictor of a persons actions......
Not sure all the things we know will be negated by the things we don't....afterall the reason we don't have the other firsthand account is because George shot him.
So, have you completely caught up on the trial? I know you were watching and trying to do so a couple of days ago.
I appreciate your perspective. This is one of those cases that for so many of us...there seems to be little grey area. We are either for or against the defense.
Yes, I am completely caught up. I must say, I keep waiting for the prosecution to get to the 'good' stuff, for lack of a better phrase. I feel like they haven't made the case thus far. I DO think Zimmerman is an idiot and likely a big time wimp. That's my impression of him thus far. The prosecution must have something else because some of the testimony seemed to directly contradict the charge against Zimmerman (like the Good testimony). So, I think next week might get interesting.
Thus far, here's my impression. I think it's very possible Zimmerman was at fault. However, I cannot say so without doubt so for me, the prosecution hasn't made the case. Jentel hurt the prosecution badly - she kept changing her story on the stand. Good hurt the prosecution badly - he was consistent with his statement that Zimmerman was on bottom from the initial statement (or that's the way it was presented in court).
All in all, I keep thinking there HAS to be something else because if this is the only evidence, Zimmerman would never be on trial.
Conservatives (to generalize) support the right of an innocent person to defend himself from a violent criminal attack regardless of race. Liberals are for M, well, for two reasons. First, they can't accept that a young black male can commit a violent assault, in spite of many thousands of examples every year. It fits their dogma much better to blame the white guy....which had them beside themselves when they discovered that Z wasn't white. So they created the term white-Hispanic. And they hate the fact that a civilian successfully used a firearm to defend his life from a violent attack. Pokes holes in all kinds of little pet dogma.
There was a violent video this week (which I'm not going to post) of a young Black kicking and beating the crap of a young white teen over his Basketball shoes. That boy would have been 100% within his right to use lethal force to stop that attack.
I would have called it self defense but can just imagine the outcry if he had and if the beating had not been caught on tape.
We all regardless of color have the right to defend our families and ourselves.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
