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.
Its pretty bad that the obvious folks who want Zimmerman found guilty are as bad or worse than the prosecution. You know there is no evidence to PROVE guilt of 2nd degree murder. You speculate which is all you can do, but claim it as fact. You have a problem with the law, that's one thing. But to continue to cheer and hope for a guilty verdict when no evidence is there and it seems the State gave up after opening statements on trying to even prove it.
The case should be dismissed and you all know it. If he is found guilty off of the sort of crap the prosecution has presented, that is a miscarriage of justice because you know as well as I do that the State hasn't and can't meet the burden of proof.
I agree he isn't guilty of second degree murder but I think he is guilty of negligent homicide or manslaughter. I don't think he had reason to believe a 150lb 16 year old was going to kill him that night. You can't shoot someone just for beating you up...especially someone who felt threatened because you were pursuing them and never said why.
People have engaged in conjecture, and some have given their opinions...what's on C-D certainly won't affect the jury. The prosecution hasn't rested its case yet; people who've seen and read Zimmerman's versions of his stories know that there are several lies contained in them yet to be addressed. In what way is claiming Zimmerman's innocence less heinous than stating an opinion on Martin's death? In fact, those who would like to see some punishment for Zimmerman are basing our opinions solely on the evidence,
not on self-serving lies. What reasonable person would base their beliefs on the word of a proven liar?
And that's an argument that can be debated. Should we trust Zimmerman's account of what happened? However, I do believe some people have gone well beyond that on here.
Personally, I think Zimmerman was wrong. However, I also think he shouldn't be convicted. He made some horrible decisions which could have avoided this situation completely. However, if I look at the evidence, I have not seen the state prove murder 2 beyond a reasonable doubt.
Not so fast is correct. You probably are unaware this silly woman never saw George in person. She based her opinions on photographs. When pressed by the defense, she had to admit pretty much anything was possible.
Would you want your doctor to diagnose you without seeing you? You could just email pictures, I guess.
No reputable doctor or medical examiner would do that and expect to be believed. But that didn't stop this hideous woman who washes her feet in the autopsy sink. She's seriously off in the head.
According to letters sent to the the city, "Rao has been seen touching cadavers with her bare hands, washing her feet in the autopsy sink, and performing unnecessary autopsies on inmates to create a revenue stream."
Its pretty bad that the obvious folks who want Zimmerman found guilty are as bad or worse than the prosecution. You know there is no evidence to PROVE guilt of 2nd degree murder. You speculate which is all you can do, but claim it as fact. You have a problem with the law, that's one thing. But to continue to cheer and hope for a guilty verdict when no evidence is there and it seems the State gave up after opening statements on trying to even prove it.
The case should be dismissed and you all know it. If he is found guilty off of the sort of crap the prosecution has presented, that is a miscarriage of justice because you know as well as I do that the State hasn't and can't meet the burden of proof.
The Prosecution knows they don't have a case, they want the jury to decide in order to get the monkey off their back.
In the mean time, the media have many so stoked up, they won't listen to reason. I wish the citizens of this country would recognize what the media is doing - driving the narrative any which way they want it to go. How in the world do we even find them credible anymore is beyond me.
I heard a teacher talking about how his students can't differentiate between what is reality and what is not because of their continued viewing of MTV and other cable shows of that nature. That is just plain scary.
I agree he isn't guilty of second degree murder but I think he is guilty of negligent homicide or manslaughter. I don't think he had reason to believe a 150lb 16 year old was going to kill him that night. You can't shoot someone just for beating you up...especially someone who felt threatened because you were pursuing them and never said why.
I would have been interested to see the state try a case of negligent homicide. That might have changed the narrative completely.
I think this case has highlighted the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives - emotion. The liberals were the first and loudest to shout for 'justice'. Why? They are told an unarmed black child is shot by a vigilante white guy.
...and shown over and over a picture of an innocent child wrapped up in a white fleece hooded blankie onesie thingy.
I agree he isn't guilty of second degree murder but I think he is guilty of negligent homicide or manslaughter. I don't think he had reason to believe a 150lb 16 year old was going to kill him that night. You can't shoot someone just for beating you up...especially someone who felt threatened because you were pursuing them and never said why.
The penalty for aggravated manslaughter in Florida is nearly identical to the penalty for second-degree murder. It's aggravated manslaughter because Trayvon was a child.
I think this case has highlighted the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives - emotion. The liberals were the first and loudest to shout for 'justice'. Why? They are told an unarmed black child is shot by a vigilante white guy. In that instant, they formed an emotional opinion and even though evidence has surfaced to counter that argument, their emotions overrule them. Fundamentally, the liberal is ruled by emotion and while that may have usefulness in certain scenarios, it can hinder their judgement, rendering them unable to see the lack of logic in their position even when presented.
Maybe it's a left brain, right brain thing. I cannot be certain but I can tell you that almost each and every argument with a liberal shows this predilection to base their opinions upon emotion. As with anything, there is a time and place for emotional decisions. This case is not one of them.
I thought that you were going to wait until the trial was over, yet you've made a decision before the Prosecution has even rested its case. That was a short experiment. My logic tells me that if someone is telling stories that differ, that person is a liar. That's how liars are found out: They can't remember what they said or to whom...like George telling Hannity that he'd never heard of SYG, for example.
Sorry; you posted while I was typing. However, I stand by my belief that Zimmerman is a liar. I don't believe that that opinion is based on emotion.
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.
