George Zimmerman juror: Trial ruined my life.. She says she lost friends & a full-time job...
Options
Comments
-
damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book. -
damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
I do think the prosecution did but them in a bind... but I also think if they looked/ read how the manslaughter law was wrote it was obviously that..
nothing about zimmerman post shooting trayvon showed Zimmerman's injuries was life threatening... and he was " too calm" after shooting trayvon 2 really think his life was in danger.. -
damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book.
There was more evidence saying Zimmerman was in greater danger than Trayvon than the adverse. -
lol..I believe you MsJ, but I also keep in mind that everybody doesn't have the same strength. Some are more easily pressured, they're more weak minded.
I don't feel like she should be punished for life as though she was the one that was holding the gun. She didn't ask for any of this ? . She was put in a tough spot and she folded under pressure.
I think the memories she will take from this entire ordeal is punishment enough for any possible transgression on her part. -
damobb2deep wrote: »Stopitfive wrote: »
The law states that he must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The absence of evidence meant that the altercation between Zimmerman and Trayvon preceding the shooting was a mystery.
The woman who was speaking with Trayvon on the phone alleged that Trayvon hit Zimmerman first. Zimmerman said that Trayvon hit him first. Two witnesses allege that Zimmerman was getting his ass handed to him.
His self defense argument could not be refuted beyond a reasonable doubt to the jurors. How did you interpret the laws which would result in a different verdict?
ol girl aint say trayvon hit zimmerman 1st.. she said she heard zimmerman talkin 2 trayvon .. the phone dropping and them fighting in wet grass..
"I believe Trayvon hit first"
Inconsequential. -
damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book.
There was more evidence saying Zimmerman was in greater danger than Trayvon than the adverse.
Danger that could have been averted of Zimmerman did not put himself in a precarious position.
The fact is, Zimmerman went looking for a fight, knowing full well that he had a loaded weapon. He did not anticipate Trayvon standing his ground, thus committing a cowardly act. How much of a danger was it, when he went headfirst into the fire? -
damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book.
There was more evidence saying Zimmerman was in greater danger than Trayvon than the adverse.
That's what happens when you go around starting fights. You might lose and be forced to use a gun. -
i'm not reading all that ? but any way ? that hoe
-
The case was lost after they picked an all white jury with the exception of a black woman that doesn't identify as black. They knew what kind of black woman she was. Slam dunk case after that. Prosecution didn't give a ? about winning either.
-
-
lol..I believe you MsJ, but I also keep in mind that everybody doesn't have the same strength. Some are more easily pressured, they're more weak minded.
I don't feel like she should be punished for life as though she was the one that was holding the gun. She didn't ask for any of this ? . She was put in a tough spot and she folded under pressure.
I think the memories she will take from this entire ordeal is punishment enough for any possible transgression on her part.
? her and the rest.You made my point with the first paragraph. -
I don't want anything to do with this trial anymore but I will say this:
It's nobody's fault she feels all that guilt for letting Zimmerman walk, she cracked under pressure knowing full well it was wrong and now she has to live with the shame.
I'm also sure that he decision wasn't the reason she lost her job, may have been the reason she lost friends though.
And also the death threats are unnecessary but that's what happens when people get too emotional about things. If they didn't ? Zimmerman she has nothin to fear. -
damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
If you black and get pressured the 1st thing you do is ? and ask for a lawyer loldamobb2deep wrote: »Stopitfive wrote: »
The law states that he must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The absence of evidence meant that the altercation between Zimmerman and Trayvon preceding the shooting was a mystery.
The woman who was speaking with Trayvon on the phone alleged that Trayvon hit Zimmerman first. Zimmerman said that Trayvon hit him first. Two witnesses allege that Zimmerman was getting his ass handed to him.
His self defense argument could not be refuted beyond a reasonable doubt to the jurors. How did you interpret the laws which would result in a different verdict?
ol girl aint say trayvon hit zimmerman 1st.. she said she heard zimmerman talkin 2 trayvon .. the phone dropping and them fighting in wet grass..
"I believe Trayvon hit first"
Imma wack you just cause u find it ok a kid got killed fck the being black part u don't kll kids bru -
damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book.
There was more evidence saying Zimmerman was in greater danger than Trayvon than the adverse.
Danger that could have been averted of Zimmerman did not put himself in a precarious position.
The fact is, Zimmerman went looking for a fight, knowing full well that he had a loaded weapon. He did not anticipate Trayvon standing his ground, thus committing a cowardly act. How much of a danger was it, when he went headfirst into the fire?
Can you prove he went looking for a fight? His story is he believed the kid might be up to no good and he was protecting his neighborhood.
Following trayvon and asking him questions was not an infraction of the law. -
Lol @ her getting it far worse then Zimmerman after all that talk from ? about Zimmerman not being able to walk the streets.
-
damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book.
There was more evidence saying Zimmerman was in greater danger than Trayvon than the adverse.
Danger that could have been averted of Zimmerman did not put himself in a precarious position.
The fact is, Zimmerman went looking for a fight, knowing full well that he had a loaded weapon. He did not anticipate Trayvon standing his ground, thus committing a cowardly act. How much of a danger was it, when he went headfirst into the fire?
Can you prove he went looking for a fight? His story is he believed the kid might be up to no good and he was protecting his neighborhood.
Following trayvon and asking him questions was not an infraction of the law.
U do know the difference in 'follow' and 'harassing'
When the cops/911 tell you not to do the "following" thing and you still do it...Was he really not trying to provoke something?? u leaving alot of things out playboy trying to defend your view -
damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book.
There was more evidence saying Zimmerman was in greater danger than Trayvon than the adverse.
Danger that could have been averted of Zimmerman did not put himself in a precarious position.
The fact is, Zimmerman went looking for a fight, knowing full well that he had a loaded weapon. He did not anticipate Trayvon standing his ground, thus committing a cowardly act. How much of a danger was it, when he went headfirst into the fire?
Can you prove he went looking for a fight? His story is he believed the kid might be up to no good and he was protecting his neighborhood.
Following trayvon and asking him questions was not an infraction of the law.
Getting out of your vehicle, running up and confronting an unknown individual, questioning why they are where they are and then to further continue to follow said person could be seen as a threat, ESPECIALLY if you aren't in some type of uniform.
Yes, he did go looking for trouble. He went in full speed in assuming he had the upper hand, and could control the situation. Yep, he went looking for a fight. -
damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book.
There was more evidence saying Zimmerman was in greater danger than Trayvon than the adverse.
Danger that could have been averted of Zimmerman did not put himself in a precarious position.
The fact is, Zimmerman went looking for a fight, knowing full well that he had a loaded weapon. He did not anticipate Trayvon standing his ground, thus committing a cowardly act. How much of a danger was it, when he went headfirst into the fire?
Can you prove he went looking for a fight? His story is he believed the kid might be up to no good and he was protecting his neighborhood.
Following trayvon and asking him questions was not an infraction of the law.
You really should not be speaking if you don't know the facts.The operator told him not to follow.He later changed his story and.claimed he never followed him.I don't know about you but if a stranger follows me we have a problem.He can say he whatever but he could be lying.He.could have been a child.abductor. -
Raging Raven wrote: »damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book.
There was more evidence saying Zimmerman was in greater danger than Trayvon than the adverse.
Danger that could have been averted of Zimmerman did not put himself in a precarious position.
The fact is, Zimmerman went looking for a fight, knowing full well that he had a loaded weapon. He did not anticipate Trayvon standing his ground, thus committing a cowardly act. How much of a danger was it, when he went headfirst into the fire?
Can you prove he went looking for a fight? His story is he believed the kid might be up to no good and he was protecting his neighborhood.
Following trayvon and asking him questions was not an infraction of the law.
You really should not be speaking if you don't know the facts.The operator told him not to follow.He later changed his story and.claimed he never followed him.I don't know about you but if a stranger follows me we have a problem.He can say he whatever but he could be lying.He.could have been a child.abductor.
The operator has zero authority. Their words are meaningless. If it was a cop then there could be a claim of obstruction and he would be wrong.
The operator is just a person you do not have any legal obligation to do what they say. Disregarding what they say is not a crime.
-
SiccoLoccJay wrote: »damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
If you black and get pressured the 1st thing you do is ? and ask for a lawyer loldamobb2deep wrote: »Stopitfive wrote: »
The law states that he must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The absence of evidence meant that the altercation between Zimmerman and Trayvon preceding the shooting was a mystery.
The woman who was speaking with Trayvon on the phone alleged that Trayvon hit Zimmerman first. Zimmerman said that Trayvon hit him first. Two witnesses allege that Zimmerman was getting his ass handed to him.
His self defense argument could not be refuted beyond a reasonable doubt to the jurors. How did you interpret the laws which would result in a different verdict?
ol girl aint say trayvon hit zimmerman 1st.. she said she heard zimmerman talkin 2 trayvon .. the phone dropping and them fighting in wet grass..
"I believe Trayvon hit first"
Imma wack you just cause u find it ok a kid got killed fck the being black part u don't kll kids bru
I gave you feelings because I never said I think killing kids is justifiable. I am saying the law is flawed and Zimmerman acted legally according to that faulty set of laws. -
elward is a zimmerman supporter
you on the ? list -
This is usually the part of the argument where all reason abandoned.
-
Raging Raven wrote: »damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book.
There was more evidence saying Zimmerman was in greater danger than Trayvon than the adverse.
Danger that could have been averted of Zimmerman did not put himself in a precarious position.
The fact is, Zimmerman went looking for a fight, knowing full well that he had a loaded weapon. He did not anticipate Trayvon standing his ground, thus committing a cowardly act. How much of a danger was it, when he went headfirst into the fire?
Can you prove he went looking for a fight? His story is he believed the kid might be up to no good and he was protecting his neighborhood.
Following trayvon and asking him questions was not an infraction of the law.
You really should not be speaking if you don't know the facts.The operator told him not to follow.He later changed his story and.claimed he never followed him.I don't know about you but if a stranger follows me we have a problem.He can say he whatever but he could be lying.He.could have been a child.abductor.
The operator has zero authority. Their words are meaningless. If it was a cop then there could be a claim of obstruction and he would be wrong.
The operator is just a person you do not have any legal obligation to do what they say. Disregarding what they say is not a crime.
Sometimes the operator is a police officer. But that's beside the point. -
can'tyoutell wrote: »Raging Raven wrote: »damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book.
There was more evidence saying Zimmerman was in greater danger than Trayvon than the adverse.
Danger that could have been averted of Zimmerman did not put himself in a precarious position.
The fact is, Zimmerman went looking for a fight, knowing full well that he had a loaded weapon. He did not anticipate Trayvon standing his ground, thus committing a cowardly act. How much of a danger was it, when he went headfirst into the fire?
Can you prove he went looking for a fight? His story is he believed the kid might be up to no good and he was protecting his neighborhood.
Following trayvon and asking him questions was not an infraction of the law.
You really should not be speaking if you don't know the facts.The operator told him not to follow.He later changed his story and.claimed he never followed him.I don't know about you but if a stranger follows me we have a problem.He can say he whatever but he could be lying.He.could have been a child.abductor.
The operator has zero authority. Their words are meaningless. If it was a cop then there could be a claim of obstruction and he would be wrong.
The operator is just a person you do not have any legal obligation to do what they say. Disregarding what they say is not a crime.
Sometimes the operator is a police officer. But that's beside the point.
I didn't know that. Do they still have the same authority in that case or does the law treat them as off duty / civilians "? -
damobb2deep wrote: »I would hate to be a juror in a high profile case like that.
I'm too emotional and they're required to go by the law, which is ? in itself, especially in Florida.
imo that whole trial was up to interpretation... zimmerman didn't even follow directions and he did say " they always get away"
btw we gotta remember trayvon was a super strong super high " super thug" with 8 arms
You don't think the prosecution put the jury in a position where their hands were basically tied?
The only thing she really could have done is held out for a hung jury.
Hung jury would have been better than letting an obviously guilty person walk free and clear. His ass would have been on pins and needles until the next episode.
Retrial, ya bish.
Maybe she should have done that, but none of us know how we'd react in that situation until we've actually experienced it.
It's one thing to be pressured, but it's another to be pressured with the backing of the law.
I'm sure they worked her over, and I don't think she deserves to ostracized any more then what's been done.
Focus on the REAL problem..which was George Zimmerman and wack ass state laws.
Uhhh.....
I am very much aware of how I would have reacted if I were put into that situation.
An unarmed teenager that presented no obvious suspect behavior, is confronted, forced to defend himself, and then murdered.
Just as Zimmerman claimed the right to stand his ground, Trayvon had the same equal right to do so as well. Zimmerman was fully aware of the fact that he had a gun, and consciously made the decision to confront him. He (Zimmerman) put himself in that position, acting totally in line with his ? nature, and need for control.
Naaahhhhh. Race aside, he would be guilty in my book.
Hold up did Zimmerman even tell trayvon he had a gun on him. Isnt it required that if u have a gun license and get into a confrontation with someone u have to tell them u have a gun on u before u can shoot them or else ur the one at fault?
