Based on your emotional irrational posts, I'd say you lost your mind. Exactly what proof do you have to imply that I am a racist? You're the one basing things on emotion. The facts were laid out in court. The most telling thing was when the Prosecution was speaking to the jury trying to play on their emotions. Yelling out words loudly that were not spoken that way. Telling jurors to think with their heart. Making a case that GZ had all this hate in his heart. It was stupid and so is anyone who buys in to all those antics. You got emotionally invested in this case, it started looking bad pretty quickly and you were too stubborn to turn back. Your side of this debate lost. You are looking like the dumbasses who were arguing about hanging chads in the 2000 election. TM was walking around in the rain after dark in a gated community. He wasn't taking a straight path home. He was lurking near houses. That's why GZ noticed him. TM had a phone if he felt threatened, he chose not to use it. He chose to confront Zimmerman. Bad **** happened after that. He chose to continue to beat GZ even after John Good told him he was calling the cops. Where is your proof that GZ did racially profile TM. The FBI is disagreed with that. Why don't you do some foot stomping in front of one of their offices if you disagree? The hard fact is that the FBI concluded TM was not racially profiled.
Exactly. The funny thing is if the verdict were guilty the sides would be flip-flopped and all those hailing the decision would be the ones crying. I'm with you, the jury made their decision regardless of whether you like it or not. Move on.
Hillary weighs in: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/07/16/hillary-clinton-addresses-martin-shooting-death/ Let's take a preppie youth group to Compton for some service work!
I think whoever swung first was just trying to swat a gnat. Who cares what somebody thinks? It is what you know and as I've already said what we know about that night which is little to nothing.
She was there and witnessed it? Did they Facetime each other? My only point is it really doesn't matter what she thinks it is what you know or can prove. The defense proved that Zimmerman was not guilty and in the end that is all that matters.
I second this. I didn't agree with the verdict but I doubt anyone in this country agrees with all of the verdicts rendered by our justice system.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/mYSGTPB7nD8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I didn't agree with the verdicts in high profile cases like OJ, Casey Anthony and Robert Blake but I didn't participate in any public protests about them. Those juries got those wrong.
This defendant will be convicted as charged (unless the prosecutors are completely incompetent). He will likely get the max. This is "cold blooded" murder, pure and simple. A heinous, unspeakable crime. The only possibility of another outcome is if the defendant is proven to be a mentally incompetent Alzheimer patient which from the picture looks like it might be a possibility.
In her area....they call smashing your opponent's head on the ground......whoop assssss Whoop ass has no legal limits, don't yall know. And Crackas are men of any color who look like security guards or police. Not sure why if Trayvon saw a cracka ie... security guard .... that TM didn't just clear up any misunderstanding that the cracka (security guard) who was checking him out may have had regarding his intents. Im sure her area handles those situations differently and we should all adjust to how things are done in her area.
There wasn't enough evidence to convict GZ - I think what people fail to understand is that the burden of PROOF is on the prosecution. There's not enough to PROVE GZ is a racist and to PROVE he unnecessarily killed TM. I suspect he didn't have to but there is reasonable doubt he did, and that's why the jury made the decision it did.
There was a man beaten up at the riot because he was Latino in Los Angeles. What do you think people would say if tea partiers were beating up people because of their race? ----------------- http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-zimmerman-crenshaw-attacks-20130716,0,6938859,full.story
I see this talkative juror is going to become Joe-the-Plumber-level annoying. I was a little surprised that more of the burden of proof of the self-defense claim doesn't fall on the defendant. But, yeah, if the state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that self-defense wasn't necessary, it'd be hard to win this case (or probably any case where a defendant has a good lawyer and a plausible story).
We understand it that is the stupidly of the law hopefully this will lead to a roll back of these laws. i must say one thing it is sad tad that jury seemed to right off jeantell from the beginning due to communication barriers . that is a problem in our justice system
