G. Zimmerman

RandyDaytona said:
I think it's all for show - just because people are screaming for it, DOJ is saying they're "looking into" the possibility.

If they were actually going to charge him with a federal crime, they would have done so already.
Click to expand...

I hope you're right.

And that's Petite Policy, not Petit (sic) as mentioned above.
 
VERY hesitant to post this given who said it.....

An unexpected word from Jimmy Carter: The Zimmerman jury was right

By Jim Galloway and Daniel Malloy

In an interview with Eden Godbee of 11Alive last night, former President Jimmy Carter swam upstream against many other Democrats, declaring that the jury that refused to convict George Zimmerman for the death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was right.

The former president put the blame on the prosecution. Said Carter:

"I think the jury made the right decision based in the evidence presented, because the prosecution inadvertently set the standard so high that the jury had to be convinced that it was a deliberate act by Zimmerman and that he was not defending himself and so forth. It's not a moral question, it was a legal question and the American law requires that the jury listens to the evidence presented."

On the racial aspects of the trial:

“I can’t allege that the six jurors, all of whom are women, are not just as sensitive about the race issue as I am. Or that you are. I don’t know them. But the judge warned them over and over that they had to listen to the evidence only, not to their own feelings about race. And since neither side [was] willing to bring in the race issue, I think – as far as the jury was concerned – they could not consider that.”

"....I've seen outbreaks of this before, in California when a man was beaten up by police and when Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated. There were terrible race riots. And I think, eventually, no matter how deep the moral feelings and personal feelings might be among African-Americans or others -- with time passing, they start seeing what we can do about the present and the future and put aside the feelings about the past. I think that’s what’s going to happen in our country."
Click to expand...
 
Wow, that is the smartest thing President Carter has said in decades!!
 
Last edited:
So, I heard the AG is saying we should re-examine "stand your ground" laws. My understanding is that without these laws the victim has to prove that they had no "reasonable means of escape" to justify use of deadly force.

I really have to question whether this would have changed the outcome of the Zimmerman case? If someone allegedly has you pinned to the ground as Zimmerman claims, what would be his reasonable means of escape?

Again....I personally feel Zimmerman is at least partially responsible for what happened and would have been found guilty if the prosecution wasn't over-aggressive in their charges. However, I don't see how the absence of a SYG law would have changed the legal aspects of the case. It just seems like a very bad/ misguided idea that could put others in danger and I wonder why the AG wants to focus on this? Anyone?

I'm also curious if the SYG laws and "Castle Doctrine" are one in the same or separate?

*Edit* I'm looking for a legal argument here, not looking to discuss whether GZ is a a$$hole, biggott, etc.
 
Last edited:
KCcarguy said:
So, I heard the AG is saying we should re-examine "stand your ground" laws. My understanding is that without these laws the victim has to prove that they had no "reasonable means of escape" to justify use of deadly force.

I really have to question whether this would have changed the outcome of the Zimmerman case? If someone allegedly has you pinned to the ground as Zimmerman claims, what would be his reasonable means of escape?

Again....I personally feel Zimmerman is at least partially responsible for what happened and would have been found guilty if the prosecution wasn't over-aggressive in their charges. However, I don't see how the absence of a SYG law would have changed the legal aspects of the case. It just seems like a very bad/ misguided idea that could put others in danger and I wonder why the AG wants to focus on this? Anyone?

I'm also curious if the SYG laws and "Castle Doctrine" are one in the same or separate?

*Edit* I'm looking for a legal argument here, not looking to discuss whether GZ is a a$$hole, biggott, etc.
Click to expand...

These are the same - just different terms depending upon the state you find yourself in.

Why are we talking about SYG though - this was a self defense case and the SYG principles were not invoked due to the testimony that Z was on his back during the scuffle, i.e. he had no way to retreat.
 
Well, SYG didn't apply in this case- the defense didn't use, the state did mention it. It was a case of whether or not GZ was justified in using self-defense and the jury found he was since that allowed that to stand as a basis for not convicting him either murder or manslaughter.

The thing about Mr. Holder is, he's a political appointee with an agenda. His agenda follows closely his bosses agenda- Mr. Obama. I'm not surprised the Ag would make a statement (in front of Howard University AND the NAACP), but that's what you do when your a political appointee with an agenda.

As for whether or not there should be a change in Stand Your Ground Laws. Those are not for the Feds to decide as those are state laws. And the Feds can say what they want, but they can't change those laws. They can review them to make sure they don't trump any federal laws, but they can't change those laws.

As for Zmmerman being partially responsible for TM's death. I completely agree, but not on the act he committed, but the choices he made prior to the shooting itself. As I said earlier, being stupid isn't against the law...
 
The throngs of news links and "interviews" in the news legitimizing the verdict have really made me confident in how legitimate this verdict was because every they told me so.
 
ndcent said:
The throngs of news links and "interviews" in the news legitimizing the verdict have really made me confident in how legitimate this verdict was because every they told me so.
Click to expand...

Just curious how you think it went down that night and what specific crime Zimmerman was guilty of.....1st, 2nd degree murder, manslaughter, etc.? You know my opinion, but you seem to feel stronger about it than I do.
 
RunninInGA said:
These are the same - just different terms depending upon the state you find yourself in.

Why are we talking about SYG though - this was a self defense case and the SYG principles were not invoked due to the testimony that Z was on his back during the scuffle, i.e. he had no way to retreat.
Click to expand...

I thought we talked about this earlier where castle doctrines apply to home/business whereas SYG laws apply in public spaces?

I'm not sure why the defense didn't go with SYG law in conjunction with self defense. Maybe you can't do that, I don't know.
 
zopperman said:
I thought we talked about this earlier where castle doctrines apply to home/business whereas SYG laws apply in public spaces?

I'm not sure why the defense didn't go with SYG law in conjunction with self defense. Maybe you can't do that, I don't know.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought as well.
 
zopperman said:
I thought we talked about this earlier where castle doctrines apply to home/business whereas SYG laws apply in public spaces?

I'm not sure why the defense didn't go with SYG law in conjunction with self defense. Maybe you can't do that, I don't know.
Click to expand...

KCcarguy said:
That's what I thought as well.
Click to expand...

We did - I guess I should have clarified further. They are used interchangeably in general conversation, but there are some nuances/differences as you guys have just stated.
 
Having not really followed this story from the very beginning, I must say that all the attention this is getting and how it is being blown completely out of proportion is ridiculous.

An event happened, a kid got killed, and a jury heard the case and made a decision based on the law and how this was presented to them by a prosecutor and a defendant. That is all.

Now we hear about all that wrong in this COUNTRY, the racism that exists in this COUNTRY, blah, blah, blah. What??!! Anything good or bad across this country that is here today was also there yesterday. "Commentators" are making grand generalizations and are talking out their asses. This trial means nothing and I'm tired of hearing about it.
 
hikenbike said:
Having not really followed this story from the very beginning, I must say that all the attention this is getting and how it is being blown completely out of proportion is ridiculous.

An event happened, a kid got killed, and a jury heard the case and made a decision based on the law and how this was presented to them by a prosecutor and a defendant. That is all.

Now we hear about all that wrong in this COUNTRY, the racism that exists in this COUNTRY, blah, blah, blah. What??!! Anything good or bad across this country that is here today was also there yesterday. "Commentators" are making grand generalizations and are talking out their asses. This trial means nothing and I'm tired of hearing about it.
Click to expand...

These are NOT MY words:

Epic clash between Larry Elder and Piers Morgan; Libs unleash torrent of haterade | Twitchy

Epic clash between Larry Elder and Piers Morgan; Libs unleash torrent of haterade
Posted at 11:35 pm on July 17, 2013 by Twitchy Staff | View Comments
1.4K

COON ASS HOUSE ****** COON ASS HOUSE ****** COON ASS HOUSE ****** COON ASS HOUSE ****** COON ASS HOUSE ****** @larryelder
—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

Yesterday, CNN host Piers Morgan challenged conservative talk radio host Larry Elder to a debate. Elder accepted, and the result — televised earlier tonight on Morgan’s show — was a riveting debate about race in America. Elder blasted the host’s patronizing treatment of Rachel Jeantel (in particular, Morgan’s characterization of Jeantel as “one smart cookie”), and spoke hard truths about the prevalence of white-on-black vis-a-vis black-on-black violence in America. Not only that, but he triggered some of the most vitriolic Twitter attacks on a minority conservative that we’ve seen since actress Stacey Dash endorsed Mitt Romney for President.

The response? Well there was a lot, but one unhinged critic stuck out:

Look at this coon ass house ****** on CNN. Nigga so brainwashed.—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

YOU ARE A PATHETIC PIECE OF SHIT YOU ****ING HOUSE ****** @larryelder—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

Dude I want to break Larry Elder's ****ing face with a bat.—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

HOUSE ****** HOUSE ****** HOUSE ****** HOUSE ****** HOUSE ****** HOUSE ****** HOUSE ****** HOUSE ****** HOUSE ****** @larryelder—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

@crosstradamus ****ing faggot that was just on CNN tryna get hype.—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

TURN YOUR ****ING LOCATION ON ***** @larryelder—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

TURN YOUR ****ING LOCATION ON ILL SMACK THE BLACK OFF YOUR LIPS YOU CRUSTY ASS MUSTY MOTHER****ER @larryelder—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

DO YOU APPLY LIP CHAP BEFORE OR AFTER YOU'RE DONE KISSING YOUR PEERS ASS WHO LOOK DOWN ON YOU AS ANOTHER ****** @larryelder—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

KEEP GETTIN ON CNN MAKING THOSE DUMBASS STATEMENTS AND SOME NIGGAS GONNA LEAVE YOUR ASS WET UP @larryelder #300—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

TALK SHIT GET HIT NOW TURN YOUR LOCATION ON ***** @larryelder—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

I HOPE YOU HAVE A MASSIVE HEART ATTACK AND DROP DEAD YOU MONKEY MOUTH SELF HATING UNCLE TOM @larryelder—
Trilla Bella きょあく (@RaeiaTheVillain) July 18, 2013

Elder, of course, responded to all the bigotry with his usual grace:

Unfortunately, Raeia was not alone in her sentiments.

Larry Elder is the quintessential white man's ******. #PiersMorganLive—
Lindani Mazibuko (@Queer123Lindani) July 18, 2013

Damn man, @larryelder is a house ****** blaming Blacks for their own problems and calling Rachel stupid—
Adam Rage (@abdirmo) July 18, 2013
Click to expand...
 
Piers Morgan... I stopped reading right there.

He has never had an opinion worth listening to, or reading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 1,615 (members: 3, guests: 1,612)

Forum statistics

Threads
278,312
Messages
3,554,085
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Share this page

Trending content

Back
Top