RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option

RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 10:52:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD But there has to be something. Martin did not have a weapon, did not have Zimmerman in a position to actually kill him intentionally and was not using sufficient force to do any significant damage (this is according to the Zimmerman version of events which the prosecutor showed yesterday is a lie). Are you kidding , he was in a position to kill Zimmerman accidently, let alone on purpose. But that fails the reasonable man standard. If we say that anything one person does to another that may accidentally kill them is reason to use lethal force then a hug or backslap qualifies. The point is that if he could kill him accidentally he could easily do it on purpose, the only way Zimmerman could be sure he wouldn't was if he was a mind reader your not claiming he was are you?

Phydeaux -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 11:05:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b A note on the side discussions about "polite reponses." I agree that in some circumstances a polite response is not only the civilized thing to do but the tactically sound thing (in that you don't piss somebody off) as well. What offends me about racerjim's post is his obvious belief that in similar circumstances (IE following somebody without justification and confronting them on somebody else's property) he is owed (mother fucking *owed*) a polite response. The fucking arrogance behind that mindset is both incomprehensible and offensive to me. I disagreed with your original post and I disagree with your reformulated-to-appear-more-reasonable post. I owe you the same thing that you owe me. Its ridiculous to suppose that every transaction should start off with yelling. Case in point. My property abuts a street. Person had pulled over and parked on my property. He was smoking and dumped the butt on my grass. At which point I asked him politely to pick it up. To which he yelled obscenities at me. Reasonable? Of course not. You owe me (and I owe you) politeness. Part of civics, if not law.

mnottertail -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 11:30:33 AM)
Civics in some fairytale world, not law whatsoever. Well, I wonder if they have instructions finalized, cuz I guess I would were I the prosecutor, have the instruction that not testifying on his own behalf (the 5th amendment) should be an indication that he is guilty according to recent SCOTUS case law.

Raiikun -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 11:30:58 AM)
During Bernie's closing, he asked jury if they thought an innocent man was sitting over there....one of them nodded yes. (ETA: according to a tweet by Baez).

Phydeaux -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 11:31:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle It all is going to hang today on how the Judge instructs the Jury. There's no cut and dried definition of 'provoked', and Zimmerman's following of Martin certainly meets my standard for it -- given the reasonable fear any black male would have walking alone in the south and being followed and chased by an UNIDENTIFIED person at night. I really hate liberal, ignorant new yorkers. Saying Florida is part of the "south" is like saying the bronx is part of the south, just because its south of albany. Florida has nothing in common with georgia, alabama, virginia et.al. And frankly Miami was known as New York's 6th borough until the Marial Boatlift made it Havana's borough. We are a tourism economy with trade and entertainment ties to most of the world - not a plantation / mfg mentality. Canada not the confederacy. So much for the accuracy of the word "south". And the statement "given the reasonable fear that any black male would have walking alone in the south" - is racist and ignorant beyond belief. I roomed with black men while in college. I work in a predominantly black and hispanic factory now. Never, in more than 40 years has a black man said anything about being afraid to walk anywhere alone. Not in Miami, not in Atlanta. Perhaps thats a problem in New York. And Zimmerman's testimony (corroborated by the dispatch call) was that at the time of the incident he had lost sight of Travon and was heading back to his car. Also corroborated by two witnesses. So much for the "chase" theory. For that matter so much for "all Z had to do was identify himself" theory. Martin was a thug. Others have educated you that you are wrong that there is not a cut and dried meaning for provoked. About the only thing I agree with you on is that much will depend on the jury instruction.

Marc2b -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 11:35:42 AM)
quote: He is responsible because he initiated the violence Maybe he did or maybe he didn't, what does that have to do with all that other shit you brought up?

Kirata -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 11:51:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b People may not be saying he deserved to be killed but I'm willing to bet that many are thinking it. Trayvon is responsible for his own death because he couldn't get along with his mother or didn't do well in school? This is classic "blame the victim" bullshit. Funny you should mention that. It's all over the news. People everywhere, all of them white racists of course, shouting that he should have been shot sooner for not getting along with his mother. I think I hear a bunch of them outside right now. K.

Marc2b -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 11:57:58 AM)
quote: I disagreed with your original post and I disagree with your reformulated-to-appear-more-reasonable post. I owe you the same thing that you owe me. Its ridiculous to suppose that every transaction should start off with yelling. Case in point. My property abuts a street. Person had pulled over and parked on my property. He was smoking and dumped the butt on my grass. At which point I asked him politely to pick it up. To which he yelled obscenities at me. Reasonable? Of course not. You owe me (and I owe you) politeness. Part of civics, if not law. Nothing was reformulated to appear more reasonable (I am, in fact, beginning to realize that I've made the mistake of thinking I could reason with unreasonable people). The fact that racerjim thinks he is OWED a POLITE explanation in those circumstances is what offends me. Go back and read post 488 and maybe you'll see that this time around. Since you and others didn't, I felt a clarification was in order. Apparently further clarification is still needed since you and others keep concocting fantasies in which someone trespasses on your property. Yeah, sure, if someone was trespassing on my property and being a dick, I'll be expecting an explanation... and it would behoove them to be polite about. But what the hell does that or your's or anyone else's fantasy have to do with the Zimmerman case? Trayvone was not on Zimmerman's property. Zimmerman did not come out of his own house to confront someone trespassing on his property. Zimmerman was following Trayvon with no justification for doing so. If you and all the others honestly feel you have the right to follow someone who is simply walking down the street and minding their own business, and then are OWED a POLITE explanation from that person... Well, I don't want to get moderated so I'll hold my tongue. Suffice it to say, if I'm ever walking down the street, minding my own business, and you try to pull that arrogant shit on me... my response will not be polite.

Kirata -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 12:02:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b Well, I don't want to get moderated so I'll hold my tongue. No shit, does that really work? Can the Mods see you doing it or something? K.

tazzygirl -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 12:06:13 PM)
quote: OWED a POLITE explanation from that person... Polite society indicates civility among its members. Having said that, there wasnt anything civil that night. Definitely isnt civil to watch someone go about their own business, it isnt civil to follow someone thinking they are doing something wrong, it isnt civil to assume someone is up to no good because of what clothes they are wearing, nor is it civil to approach someone demanding to know what they are doing there without introducing themselves first.

Marc2b -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 12:06:44 PM)
quote: Funny you should mention that. It's all over the news. People everywhere, all of them white racists of course, shouting that he should have been shot sooner for not getting along with his mother. I think I hear a bunch of them outside right now. Well what are you waiting for? Grab your video camera and record them... then post it on you tube. I mean, this is a rare occurrence, racists actually having the courage to show their true colors. Although I suspect that most of them don't care about Trayvon's relationship with his mother or his grades at school (it was what's his face that brought up all that blame the victim nonsense). Just the fact that he is black is reason enough for them to declare him the guilty one.

Marc2b -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 12:10:39 PM)
quote: No shit, does that really work? Can the Mods see you doing it or something? It is what they don't see on the screen, because I didn't put it there, that should keep me out of trouble. Suffice it to say, the level of arrogance and ignorance, combined with the total lack of compassion for the victim (which would be the dead kid, people, not the guy on trial - just in case some of you need reminding) has me sorely tempted to let loose with some serious invective.

Moonhead -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 12:19:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: OWED a POLITE explanation from that person... Polite society indicates civility among its members. Having said that, there wasnt anything civil that night. Definitely isnt civil to watch someone go about their own business, it isnt civil to follow someone thinking they are doing something wrong, it isnt civil to assume someone is up to no good because of what clothes they are wearing, nor is it civil to approach someone demanding to know what they are doing there without introducing themselves first. Most polite society frowns upon starting a fight and shooting your opponent if he looks like winning as well.

Kirata -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 12:28:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b quote: Funny you should mention that. It's all over the news. People everywhere, all of them white racists of course, shouting that he should have been shot sooner for not getting along with his mother. I think I hear a bunch of them outside right now. Well what are you waiting for? Grab your video camera and record them... then post it on you tube. I mean, this is a rare occurrence, racists actually having the courage to show their true colors. Although I suspect that most of them don't care about Trayvon's relationship with his mother or his grades at school (it was what's his face that brought up all that blame the victim nonsense). Just the fact that he is black is reason enough for them to declare him the guilty one. Marc, I hate to tell you this but one of us is crazy. K.

Marc2b -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 12:40:22 PM)
quote: Marc, I hate to tell you this but one of us is crazy. I admire your courage. You've taken the first step and admitted that you have a problem. Help is available but you have to want to change.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 12:55:09 PM)
Yes, I brought up high carry, and low carry (weapon pointed up, or down, finger along the slide), which any police academy graduate would be familiar with... and you claimed that was a threat of deadly force, just like pointing the weapon directly at someone. Which is of course, nonsense. The comment about my height and weight was about my service in the US military and law enforcement. In other words, federal. So your links to pictures of local cops are purely an evasion. You were working with federal law enforcement, and they were pretty crappy at 'hand to hand combat'? When was this WWI? Its been def-tac for decades. In any case, I can think of one AFGE case of a federal employee filing a grievance over the standards, and his basis was that he had originally been hired as a guard under a set aside for retired military, and the entry law enforcement standards were arbitrarily added to the position description later. As I recall, he won that one because he was not in a law enforcement position. quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Aren't you the one who had no clue about HC, and LC? And in fact claimed that those were legally identical to pointing a gun straight at someone? Pardon me if I take my information from my actual colleagues. Aren't you the one with no reading comprehension? I never mentioned HC or LC, you did[8\|] I was working with them on advanced hand to hand. They were pretty crappy at the beginning of the summer. Now, back to my comments about portly police. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGIrIjeeNKk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niZP6WuGkq4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o4_iYl310g http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1EOHmqxCgQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qk3Qh9wml4 So much for law enforcement requiring their members to adhere to those guidelines. They got the Union going to bat for them.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 12:57:20 PM)
Errrrrmmm.... Trayvon Martin isn't on trial. George Zimmerman is... You know, the brown skinned guy that some people have been busy declaring to be a racist on the basis of zero evidence. quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b Well what are you waiting for? Grab your video camera and record them... then post it on you tube. I mean, this is a rare occurrence, racists actually having the courage to show their true colors. Although I suspect that most of them don't care about Trayvon's relationship with his mother or his grades at school (it was what's his face that brought up all that blame the victim nonsense). Just the fact that he is black is reason enough for them to declare him the guilty one.

kdsub -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 12:58:15 PM)
Those in a polite society wait for a verdict of peers before making assumptions of guilt. Butch

Moonhead -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 12:59:48 PM)
Hey, if he can claim that the dead thug attacked him on zero evidence, then turnabout is fair play: he's a racist. [:D]

Powergamz1 -> RE: Zimmerman III - Should the jury have a manslaughter option (7/11/2013 1:04:15 PM)
Please stop making up absolute bullshit lies like that. There was no such ruling, and you are distorting what was said in the real ruling beyond belief. But, anything to derail, hmmm? quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Civics in some fairytale world, not law whatsoever. Well, I wonder if they have instructions finalized, cuz I guess I would were I the prosecutor, have the instruction that not testifying on his own behalf (the 5th amendment) should be an indication that he is guilty according to recent SCOTUS case law.

Page: << < prev 31 32 [33] 34 35 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625