Zimmerman Verdict: Guilt or Not Guilty? Vote now!

[LEAPup]

Quote from peilthetraveler:

Proof Zimmerman didnt racially profile him.


Does anyone in their right mind think Zimmerman would've follow Trayvon Martin if he was in a suit & tie and carrying an umbrella?

Lets go further. Would he have followed him if he was a 70 year old black man? Would he have followed Martin if he was a black woman who looked like she just got back from church? What if it was 5 year old black child? If you said "No, he wouldnt have followed any one of those" then it obviously was not about race. It was about some punk kid with pants hanging off his ass and a hoodie covering his face as if he was going to commit a crime. Obviously Georges senses were right about Martin though. Its been proved Martin was a drug using, violent thief. If you dress like a thug/criminal, its pretty evident that you ARE a thug/criminal.

This is a tremendous post! And no, there isn't anyone with half a brain cell who would follow a black child, black old lady from Church, or black Man in a suit n tie with umbrella. Zimmerman spotted a thug in his neighborhood ACTING like a thug, and wanted to know what his intentions were.

Zimmerman got punched in the face for asking what traythug was doing, then went down with the thug on top of him beating his brain back and forth on a sidewalk, and trying to smother him. On top of that Zimmerman was smaller than the thug, and was out of shape. Did he think he would die if it kept going? Absolutely, as would I if I were small, and out of shape and about to go unconscious...

 

[LEAPup]

Quote from pspr:

Other words for profiling = common sense.

Yes, but the pc police have already taken the common out of common sense. Best thing Zimmerman could have done was go home, collect a check for nothing, and all would be "good" so to say.

 

[LEAPup]

Quote from Grandluxe:

The most they should find him guilty of is illegally discharging a firearm in public, punishable by:
Up to twelve (12) months probation and/or
Up to a $1000 fine

I'll say, I think they should find him guilty of littering as posted by another member here.

 

[LEAPup]

Quote from nonlinear5:

Obama didn't say that. He did make a brief statement about the case in March 2012, which he should not have done, because it's not the President's job to try the case in front of the American people, especially considering that the facts of the case were little known at the time.

Well, that's what the parasites and the illegal voters "voted" for...

 

[LEAPup]

Quote from kut2k2:

Great argument, nonlinear5, but your appeals to logic may as well be expressed in Vulcan as far as getting across to the foaming-at-the-mouth bigots and reactionaries that infest this particular forum.

Their minds were made up once they found out the races of the parties and facts just confuse them.

Don't think so. Had the little thug been white, you KNOW deep in your twisted mind there would have been no trial. Hell, it would have been a blip on the 11:00 news if the thug had been a white boy.

 

[BSAM]

Hung jury?
State won't retrial?
Zimmerman walks?

 

[bigarrow]

Quote from nonlinear5:

Obama didn't say that. He did make a brief statement about the case in March 2012, which he should not have done, because it's not the President's job to try the case in front of the American people, especially considering that the facts of the case were little known at the time. [/QUOTE]

It must be Florida I think I remember president Bush talking about the Teri Schiavo case.

 

[Maverick74]

Quote from bigarrow:

Quote from nonlinear5:

Obama didn't say that. He did make a brief statement about the case in March 2012, which he should not have done, because it's not the President's job to try the case in front of the American people, especially considering that the facts of the case were little known at the time.

It must be Florida I think I remember president Bush talking about the Teri Schiavo case. [/QUOTE]

One teeny tiny difference there. Nobody was being charged with a crime in the Terry Schiavo case. That is not the case here. See, we have this thing called the constitution. And in that constitution there is this thing called the first amendment. And inside that first amendment is the right to a fair trial. What that means is that every single man, woman and child in this country has a right to be tried in a court of law, without their case being tainted by the press and certainly not by the Presidency. When Obama spoke on this case, he was violating Zimmerman's first amendment rights to a fair trial. So to wrap up, no, the two cases have absolutely nothing in common. Thanks for coming out.

 

[bigarrow]

Quote from Maverick74:

It must be Florida I think I remember president Bush talking about the Teri Schiavo case.

One teeny tiny difference there. Nobody was being charged with a crime in the Terry Schiavo case. That is not the case here. See, we have this thing called the constitution. And in that constitution there is this thing called the first amendment. And inside that first amendment is the right to a fair trial. What that means is that every single man, woman and child in this country has a right to be tried in a court of law, without their case being tainted by the press and certainly not by the Presidency. When Obama spoke on this case, he was violating Zimmerman's first amendment rights to a fair trial. So to wrap up, no, the two cases have absolutely nothing in common. Thanks for coming out. [/B][/QUOTE]

Quit being such a condescending cunt mav. What the hell is up with you anyway.

 

[Spike Trader]

all kinds of things are said right here on ET , won't that taint the case ?
since when did judge and jury start listening to anyone but the evidence produced in court.