unbillievable

I really don't know which outcome would be better: letting this innocent man go, or sending him to jail to avoid the riots (knowing he'll be freed on appeal)

Is it me or is the prosecution trying to prove that no one knows for sure what happened that night? They seem to be trying to make the jury doubt all of the evidence and testimony (even their own) When did this case get reversed? Why is the state trying to make it seem like it's the Defense's job to prove their case?

Despite all the facts, I believe this jury of six women will convict Zimmerman based solely on the fact that they will identify more with Trayvon's mom and will use emotion instead of logic.

The way things are going, we're basically extending the public school system another 4yrs; and we all know how that system works. His opinion is that we need to improve schools by kicking out the idiots, instead of letting the Jeantel's stave off the real world a few more years at taxpayer expense.

that map clearly shows that GZ got out of his car; which is a crime punishable by death!

This is an interesting idea. What would the world look like if we used the "man code" to govern the people; where "keeping it real" is the law!

Seeing as how we know for a fact that Zimmerman lost sight of Martin, can we now say that Trayvon is probably the one who went back to confront George and in reality is actually the person who "stalked" him looking for a confrontation?

He doesn't have to prove it. Zimmerman is the defendant. He doesn't even have to prove he's telling the truth. It's the prosecution job to show what happened, NOT what a dozen other scenarios could also have occurred that night.

The idea that doing something legally should be used to convict someone of a crime on the basis that it "initiated a chain of events" is not only ridiculous, but should end any doubt that your opinion on the subject should be ignored from this point on.

She's lucky she didn't get out of her car... that would have given the cops the right to beat her senseless for initiating a confrontation..

Clearly, people who are getting assaulted must take their beating graciously, because they initiated it by getting out of their car.

If the goal is to destroy the American system in order to re-build it anew: The People's republic of America!

This thread has turned into a battle between people who have kept up with all the facts of the case vs those who stopped paying attention during last year's media blitz.

I have doubts that the jury will keep their discussions only to evidence that they saw in court.

This is why he will... http://cdn.glockforum.com/forum/attachments/f15/14000d1342746496-george-zimmerman-case-baby-trayvon-predator-zimmerman.jpg

Is there any proof that it was Zimmerman's gun? I know George said it was his but, he's a proven liar, so we can't trust what he says...

Do you think that Trayvon was equally negligent for ignoring Jeantel's order for him to run to the house rather than confront Zimmerman?

Everyone is calling you an "idiot" because you're basing your bad opinion on falsehoods instead of facts. ie: Everyone knows the moon is made of cheese. I believe the moon landings were faked. They didn't bring back any cheese. just rocks.

Is it possible that the obviously anti-Zimmerman judge will see that the prosecution isn't trying and toss them (and the trial) out so the state can redo it all again?

Actually, it would make him a skinny Asian.

Ever heard of Communism?

The kids were high on Skittles.

How to understanding Birdog's logic: -ie: Four people who work the same job and are paid the same wages. week 1 Person 1 invests $100 in stock and it's now worth $200 Person 2 buys a new phone for $100 Person 3 throws a party and buys a keg of beer for $100 Person 4 invests $100 in stock and loses it all week 2 Person 1 buys himself a phone and a keg for $200 Person 2 wants to buy a keg but there are none left this week Person 3 wants to buy a phone but there are none left this week Person 4 blames person 1 , then decides to occupy his lawn. Now extend this model over several generations. Despite having the same job and getting paid the same salary, person 1 will eventually dwarf the wealth of person 2,3 & 4 to the point where he will be able to deny them access to any and all resources if he so chooses. So even if they started out the same, at the end, person 1 can offer to pay $101 for the phone and keg thus pushing the same product out of reach of person 2,3 & 4; theoretically making them poorer since their salary will no longer be able to buy the same products as before. The eventual goal of Birddog is to take Person 1's invested $100 profit and give it person 4, then take person 2's phone and give everyone access to it; thus restoring the balance of wealth. (or simply prohibit the acquisition of wealth like in Star Trek)

While I applaud the kid's convictions to his beliefs, this is the kind of person you don't want to entrust with military secrets.

I have no problem giving these guys luxury vacations on tax payer money. They work hard doing a job that everyone hates them for. (If you're reading this IRS, i fully support anything and everything you feel you must do. All hail the republic!)