Unarmed black 17 year old shot by Neighborhood watch captain in gated community...

Page 1562 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
We've been through this a few times now. Just like the request for recusal, the affidavit was accepted with the facts within taken at face value.

Why else do you think derschowitz was tearing it apart?

Just proves my point the law is subjective to interpretation not spideys black and white version of it.
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
It wasn't Judge Lester who accepted the affidavit. Judge Mark Herr ruled that the affidavit was legally sufficient to charge GZ.

I thought about that after, good point.

So Herr not Lester thought the affidavit was sufficient.
 

JKing106

Platinum Member
Mar 19, 2009
2,193
0
0
We've been through this a few times now. Just like the request for recusal, the affidavit was accepted with the facts within taken at face value.

Why else do you think derschowitz was tearing it apart?

Because Dershowitz is a right wing stooge and corporate bitch? He'll say anything, and defend anyone, if he's paid enough. Kind of like more than one poster on this thread. It's understandable why you'd bring him into this.

http://www.capecodtoday.com/blogs/index.php/2012/05/23/guilty-as-charged?blog=214
 
Sep 7, 2009
12,960
3
0
Because Dershowitz is a right wing stooge and corporate bitch? He'll say anything, and defend anyone, if he's paid enough. Kind of like more than one poster on this thread. It's understandable why you'd bring him into this.

http://www.capecodtoday.com/blogs/index.php/2012/05/23/guilty-as-charged?blog=214



ROFL... come on.... Do you really not realize why crumponite and crew have grabbed this case as a crown jewel of "race issues" in America?

Talk about stooges and little bitches... your group is the worst I've seen in years.
 

airdata

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2010
4,987
0
0
Originally Posted by spidey07
How it started doesn't matter. Martin on top after beating zimmerman restraining him and/or still beating him = OK to shoot in self defense according to law. This is fact, proven by evidence.

LOL


You keep saying that, yet he is charged with murder 2. It's obvious the state doesn't agree with your interpretation of the law.

Most people are waiting for all of the evidence prior to making a final determination. You and the merry band of bigots from both sides are the only folks that aren't.

To be honest, /thread right there. Spidey is one of the most staunch idiots on the pro zimmerman side... and here he is saying it doesn't matter how everything started.

That's really enough to end the thread since how the altercation came to be is EVERYTHING in this case.

If things went down like DeeDee claims in her interview, which clearly states that Zimmerman caught up to Trayvon and in an obviously angry tone asked " What you doing around here?!'' and then she hears ' Get off, Get off ' it's not hard to connect the dots.

Not after Zimmerman ignored reason and regulations of the group he was leading in order to chase after that 17 year old kid he'd just referred to as a fucking punk...

That all fits together perfectly. We have him on recording saying " these assholes always get away." Then we have him on recording getting out of his car and chasing after trayvon while muttering " fucking punk ".

Then we have DeeDee saying that Trayvon thought he'd lost him but he catches up to trayvon. Trayvon asks why he's following him. George Zimmerman inquires what he's doing around there and grabs him because he's already in the middle of an addrenaline dump from playing police officer. And then at that point Trayvon is well within his right to defend himself against this aggressor.

Beyond that point Zimmerman doesn't get to claim self defense. At that point he's chased down a minor and put his hands on him as if he was an authority figure there.
 
Last edited:

JKing106

Platinum Member
Mar 19, 2009
2,193
0
0
He was guilty? You were there?

The officer he assaulted was. You know, the one who arrested him. The two women he assaulted, and had TPOs placed against him were also there for those incidents. The immigrant co-worker Zimmerman bullied and hazed for months was also present in that incidence.

Where YOU fucking there?
 
Sep 7, 2009
12,960
3
0
The officer he assaulted was. You know, the one who arrested him. The two women he assaulted, and had TPOs placed against him were also there for those incidents. The immigrant co-worker Zimmerman bullied and hazed for months was also present in that incidence.

Where YOU fucking there?


Not even getting into how you're wrong in what happened, but this was 7 years ago..

Where's your concern for the homeowners trayvon robbed? The bus driver he assaulted? The families of the people was selling drugs to? ...All of these major issues were within months of his assault on zimmerman.
 

airdata

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2010
4,987
0
0
He was guilty? You were there?

God... are you an idiot? He was arrested for a crime which he admittedly committed. They pled it to a lower charge to avoid the felony for which the actions he committed warrant under the law.

If he did nothing they would have simply dropped the charges all together, smart guy.
 

airdata

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2010
4,987
0
0
Not even getting into how you're wrong in what happened, but this was 7 years ago..

Where's your concern for the homeowners trayvon robbed? The bus driver he assaulted? The families of the people was selling drugs to? ...All of these major issues were within months of his assault on zimmerman.

To which none of that stuff is on record. He wasn't arrested for any of that stuff.

Run and tell that, homeboy.
 
Sep 7, 2009
12,960
3
0
To which none of that stuff is on record. He wasn't arrested for any of that stuff.

Run and tell that, homeboy.


Typical crumponite response... He's a minor, thus the records are sealed, thus it just 'magically' never happened.


Like it or not, it's a huge factor in this situation. Trayvon was a thug, he had a violent history including theft and myriad of other issues. The schools knew it, his parents knew, the neighborhood knew it.
 

airdata

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2010
4,987
0
0
Typical crumponite response... He's a minor, thus the records are sealed, thus it just 'magically' never happened.


Like it or not, it's a huge factor in this situation. Trayvon was a thug, he had a violent history including theft and myriad of other issues. The schools knew it, his parents knew, the neighborhood knew it.

And all of that means jack shit if we have Zimmerman on a recording calling him a fucking punk, and then chasing after him and grabbing him, then losing a fight, then shooting him and killing him out of rage.

Then lying to the police and claiming he was walking back to his car when he was attacked because he had no idea somebody heard him catch up to Trayvon.

Look.. .you keep defending this guy. He's a scum bag. He's a liar. I don't get how you can't see that.

That's why they're making the case about everything but the case. Zimmerman is all they have to prove his case and he's a fucking liar, therefore they have no case. That's why the Zimmerman defense is purely about getting a mis trial or hung jury and not about proving innocence.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
LOL! Still with the must prove your innocence bullshit I see.

Has anybody yet been able to provide a single shred of evidence zimmerman committed a crime? No. Is there an overwhelming preponderance of evidence he acted in self defense? Yes.

Dismiss this travesty of justice by fucking racist piece of shit parents.
 

JKing106

Platinum Member
Mar 19, 2009
2,193
0
0
LOL! Still with the must prove your innocence bullshit I see.

Has anybody yet been able to provide a single shred of evidence zimmerman committed a crime? No. Is there an overwhelming preponderance of evidence he acted in self defense? Yes.

Dismiss this travesty of justice by fucking racist piece of shit parents.

You're speaking of your parents, or Zimmerman's. I agree, in both cases they most obviously were pieces of shit, judging from what they produced.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
That's why the Zimmerman defense is purely about getting a mis trial or hung jury and not about proving innocence.

Last time I checked, there is no requirement to prove innocence. Innocence is presumed under the law. It is up to the state to prove guilt.... but you'd know that if you weren't a complete idiot.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
God... are you an idiot? He was arrested for a crime which he admittedly committed. They pled it to a lower charge to avoid the felony for which the actions he committed warrant under the law.

If he did nothing they would have simply dropped the charges all together, smart guy.

So much fail. No, he did not admit to assaulting an officer. The officer was in plain clothes, and fucking with his friend. It's amazing watching you fools completely ignore context when it suits you, and then cry about it when it doesn't. You have proven time, and time again that you have zero clue how the justice system works, so much ignorance in such a small package.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
And all of that means jack shit if we have Zimmerman on a recording calling him a fucking punk, and then chasing after him and grabbing him, then losing a fight, then shooting him and killing him out of rage

That's just your fantasy.
 

airdata

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2010
4,987
0
0
Last time I checked, there is no requirement to prove innocence. Innocence is presumed under the law. It is up to the state to prove guilt.... but you'd know that if you weren't a complete idiot.

I'm an idiot for stating facts? interesting... interesting indeed. All you people do is change the subject, defend lies, divert divert divert.

No wonder you guys back zimmerman... you're all lying scum bags as well.
 

airdata

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2010
4,987
0
0
So much fail. No, he did not admit to assaulting an officer. The officer was in plain clothes, and fucking with his friend. It's amazing watching you fools completely ignore context when it suits you, and then cry about it when it doesn't. You have proven time, and time again that you have zero clue how the justice system works, so much ignorance in such a small package.

Plain clothes or not, his actions warranted his arrest and charge for the crime as the guy he assaulted was an officer.

You're clearly a fucking idiot. Back to my ignore list fuck face.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
LOL..

You're calling documented facts fantasy. Run along fuck face. Grown ups talking here.

Nothing you wrote there is a "documented fact", except that he says fucking punks. Beyond that everything else is nothing more than your fantasy of what happened.

Sorry, anyone that calls that crap "facts" is not even worth the time to respond to, so yes, I am wasting my time writing this.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
I thought about that after, good point.

So Herr not Lester thought the affidavit was sufficient.

All the affidavit states was that the stare said they had sufficient evidence to justify M2.

the judge has to go based on what the paper stated; he was not privy to the information that led to the affidavit.

The State says they were telling the truth; the judge says OK; the paper has the proper words - good to go