Nanker Posted July 18, 2012 Share Posted July 18, 2012 Oh good. So there won't be any posts by the loonies until MSComcastNBC updates their website overnight with the proper talking points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Hannity gets first interview with Zimmerman tonite at 21:00 on the network many of you love to hate  http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/hannity-gets-first-interview-with-george-zimmerman_b138015  Megyn Kelly on O'Reilly saying it hurt. Said some inconsistencies there than what he said previously (human nature to have those the more you talk) and God's plan not good. Shame on attorney although if George was hell bent on speaking then what can you do... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Gods plan huh  What sort of !@#$ing plan was that? Dude should of never followed him, unfortunately the DA is an over zealous dumbass, and he will be found innocent of second degree murder. She should of pressed for manslaughter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Megyn Kelly on O'Reilly saying it hurt. Said some inconsistencies there than what he said previously (human nature to have those the more you talk) and God's plan not good. Shame on attorney although if George was hell bent on speaking then what can you do... Â I still don't claim to know what happened - too few facts, those clouded by the usual asinine media frenzy. Â But I'm becoming more convinced with time that Zimmerman ain't the sharpest knife in the drawer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I still don't claim to know what happened - too few facts, those clouded by the usual asinine media frenzy. Â But I'm becoming more convinced with time that Zimmerman ain't the sharpest knife in the drawer. Â Â He's behaving like a man who wants to clear his name. He needs to behave like a man who wants to avoid a murder conviction. Then he can clear his name. I don't know if he's guilty but he's cracking and he'll end up guilty if he doesn't go into the defendant shell he should be in the entire trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 He's behaving like a man who wants to clear his name. He needs to behave like a man who wants to avoid a murder conviction. Then he can clear his name. I don't know if he's guilty but he's cracking and he'll end up guilty if he doesn't go into the defendant shell he should be in the entire trial. Â Stop and think. He's pilloried in the MSM and with the Faux Black Ministers. His life is in danger no matter what. He'll be exonerated. With that said, he'll be looking over his shoulder for the rest of his life. His interview last night was a self protection type of thing. You may have the legal part down, but you're not facing the reality that he is trying to navigate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 (edited) Stop and think. He's pilloried in the MSM and with the Faux Black Ministers. His life is in danger no matter what. He'll be exonerated. With that said, he'll be looking over his shoulder for the rest of his life. His interview last night was a self protection type of thing. You may have the legal part down, but you're not facing the reality that he is trying to navigate. Â As his attorney I wouldn't be insensitive to that. But I would attempt to convince him to fight one battle at a time. Right now there's a handful of people he needs to convince within a framework of rules designed to protect him. If he can win that, he wins his freedom. Then he can go on defending himself in the eyes of millions w/ no rules. One battle at a time I would try to convince him. Merging the mob w/ no rules with the jury w/ rules isn't going to help him in my eyes I would attempt to reason with him. Edited July 20, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 As his attorney I wouldn't be insensitive to that. But I would attempt to convince him to fight one battle at a time. Right now there's a handful of people he needs to convince within a framework of rules designed to protect him. If he can win that, he wins his freedom. Then he can go on defending himself in the eyes of millions w/ no rules. One battle at a time I would try to convince him. Merging the mob w/ no rules with the jury w/ rules isn't going to help him in my eyes I would attempt to reason with him. Â Schit, there's a bounty out on him that even the government won't show any balls about. He's in preservation mode. The case against him appears so wrong that he's going to be acquited no matter what. His problem is what comes next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Schit, there's a bounty out on him that even the government won't show any balls about. He's in preservation mode. The case against him appears so wrong that he's going to be acquited no matter what. His problem is what comes next?  Hey whoever is representing him ... he's in way better hand than me there's no doubt and I'm sure he's tried to talk to him. And ultimately he works for him. But it's his job to manage his defense, and to some degree you can't do that if you can't manage George. Everything said comes in. If everything is going good then don't let anything else in. And don't assume your murder trial is air tight until the verdict comes back. Got to try (I'm sure is attorney did) to manage him throughout the process and keep in him focused not on some bounty but on his trial. Jury first. America second. The bounty is crazy George the bounty isn't coming off b/c of a Hannity interview George. Think George. Listen to your lawyer George. ETc...  Gods plan huh  What sort of !@#$ing plan was that? Dude should of never followed him, unfortunately the DA is an over zealous dumbass, and he will be found innocent of second degree murder. She should of pressed for manslaughter.  I haven't seen the charging document but there's always lesser included crimes. Dude is on trial for manslaughter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Hey whoever is representing him ... he's in way better hand than me there's no doubt and I'm sure he's tried to talk to him. And ultimately he works for him. But it's his job to manage his defense, and to some degree you can't do that if you can't manage George. Everything said comes in. If everything is going good then don't let anything else in. And don't assume your murder trial is air tight until the verdict comes back. Got to try (I'm sure is attorney did) to manage him throughout the process and keep in him focused not on some bounty but on his trial. Jury first. America second. The bounty is crazy George the bounty isn't coming off b/c of a Hannity interview George. Think George. Listen to your lawyer George. ETc... Â Well, it's certainly a strange case in that all the info is coming out ahead of the trial. It's like both the prosecution and defense wants to poison the jury pool. I just hope that after the verdict, it doesn't become Rodney King all over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Well, it's certainly a strange case in that all the info is coming out ahead of the trial. It's like both the prosecution and defense wants to poison the jury pool. I just hope that after the verdict, it doesn't become Rodney King all over. Â Energize the base! Team Obama! lol Let's do this Obama! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Well, it's certainly a strange case in that all the info is coming out ahead of the trial. It's like both the prosecution and defense wants to poison the jury pool. I just hope that after the verdict, it doesn't become Rodney King all over. Why does it have to be Rodney King? The situation was entirely different. Â King was breaking the law, attacked by officers of the peace, and it was video taped with clear evidence showing the attack. Â Trayvon Martin died without witnesses, after breaking no laws before the physical altercation began with a civilian. Â Maybe I am in rose colored glasses but if anything this is going to change the country for the better reminding us that there are still racists out there and hopefully we can change that with intollerance of those that judge by race. There is a strong push to support the LGBT community right now, I hope we can embrace all people without singling anyone out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Why does it have to be Rodney King? The situation was entirely different. Â King was breaking the law, attacked by officers of the peace, and it was video taped with clear evidence showing the attack. Â Trayvon Martin died without witnesses, after breaking no laws before the physical altercation began with a civilian. Â Maybe I am in rose colored glasses but if anything this is going to change the country for the better reminding us that there are still racists out there and hopefully we can change that with intollerance of those that judge by race. There is a strong push to support the LGBT community right now, I hope we can embrace all people without singling anyone out. Â Â Jboys I here they stab people for that kind of talk in NC I would be careful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 I still don't claim to know what happened - too few facts, those clouded by the usual asinine media frenzy. Â But I'm becoming more convinced with time that Zimmerman ain't the sharpest knife in the drawer. It's taken you this long to figure out that dupty dog who shot an unarmed kid isn't very bright? The neighborhood watch gig didn't give it away to you? Maybe if he had dressed as the fist of justice you might have got an idea he wasn't too bright early on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 It's taken you this long to figure out that dupty dog who shot an unarmed kid isn't very bright? The neighborhood watch gig didn't give it away to you? Maybe if he had dressed as the fist of justice you might have got an idea he wasn't too bright early on. Â what an azz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 It's taken you this long to figure out that dupty dog who shot an unarmed kid isn't very bright? The neighborhood watch gig didn't give it away to you? Maybe if he had dressed as the fist of justice you might have got an idea he wasn't too bright early on. I had no idea that people who volunteer for community watch are stupid people. Thanks for that insight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PushthePile Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Why does it have to be Rodney King? The situation was entirely different. Â King was breaking the law, attacked by officers of the peace, and it was video taped with clear evidence showing the attack. Â Trayvon Martin died without witnesses, after breaking no laws before the physical altercation began with a civilian. Maybe I am in rose colored glasses but if anything this is going to change the country for the better reminding us that there are still racists out there and hopefully we can change that with intollerance of those that judge by race. There is a strong push to support the LGBT community right now, I hope we can embrace all people without singling anyone out. No witnesses you say? How do you know that no laws were broken? How do you know that "physical altercation with a civilian" wasnt a life threatening assault on a civilian? On the otherhand, we don't know if Zimmerman initiated the physical contact. We don't know schit. Â Still, its sad watching people expose their agendas in such a stupid manner. Race baiting and racists from all walks of life emerge and prove that we dont value eachother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Why does it have to be Rodney King? The situation was entirely different. Â King was breaking the law, attacked by officers of the peace, and it was video taped with clear evidence showing the attack. Â Trayvon Martin died without witnesses, after breaking no laws before the physical altercation began with a civilian. Â Maybe I am in rose colored glasses but if anything this is going to change the country for the better reminding us that there are still racists out there and hopefully we can change that with intollerance of those that judge by race. There is a strong push to support the LGBT community right now, I hope we can embrace all people without singling anyone out. No witnesses you say? How do you know that no laws were broken? How do you know that "physical altercation with a civilian" wasnt a life threatening assault on a civilian? On the otherhand, we don't know if Zimmerman initiated the physical contact. We don't know schit. Â Still, its sad watching people expose their agendas in such a stupid manner. Race baiting and racists from all walks of life emerge and prove that we dont value eachother. Has there been a witness for the incident that saw the events transfold? No, and if there were witnesses that saw the event unfold we would know of it even if we did not know all of what they saw. Â Zimmerman did not chase Martin down a street after committing a crime. Even if he was looking in car windows and causing "riffraff" it was no illegal. Isn't a life threatening assault on a civilian considered a physical altercation? The exact verbage could vary - but I did not imply nor did I state that one attacked another - merely that there was an altercation. Â Again, maybe I have rose colored glasses but I do not just see the problem with racism. I see it as judgements upon each other on all levels. From race, class, education, sex, sexual orientation, etc - we cast judgements. It is unfortunate but it is reality and we will always be this way. Being judgemental, though, is a whole lot different then being racist or intolerant. As a society we are no different then anyone else - flawed at best, but too often we use our rights to propogate the agendas of intolerence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PushthePile Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 (edited) Â Has there been a witness for the incident that saw the events transfold? No, and if there were witnesses that saw the event unfold we would know of it even if we did not know all of what they saw. Â Zimmerman did not chase Martin down a street after committing a crime. Even if he was looking in car windows and causing "riffraff" it was no illegal. Isn't a life threatening assault on a civilian considered a physical altercation? The exact verbage could vary - but I did not imply nor did I state that one attacked another - merely that there was an altercation. Â Again, maybe I have rose colored glasses but I do not just see the problem with racism. I see it as judgements upon each other on all levels. From race, class, education, sex, sexual orientation, etc - we cast judgements. It is unfortunate but it is reality and we will always be this way. Being judgemental, though, is a whole lot different then being racist or intolerant. As a society we are no different then anyone else - flawed at best, but too often we use our rights to propogate the agendas of intolerence. Â Whether or not Martin committed a crime prior to the altercation has nothing to do with anything. Â The last paragraph is certainly true for some of us. Hatred spreads like a wildfire and various groups love to light those fires every chance they get. Before you know it, normal tolerant people become divided in their thoughts. The Us v.s. Them mentality is an epidemic. Edited July 22, 2012 by PushthePile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Whether or not Martin committed a crime prior to the altercation has nothing to do with anything. Â The last paragraph is certainly true for some of us. Hatred spreads like a wildfire and various groups love to light those fires every chance they get. Before you know it, normal tolerant people become divided in their thoughts. The Us v.s. Them mentality is an epidemic. We were comparing King vs Martin. King was fleeing the scene among other things on his high speed chase from law enforcement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 Nice screw up. Â Â http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/george-zimmerman-records-mistakenly-released-684512 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 Nice screw up. Â Â http://www.thesmokin...released-684512 Â "We can't win this case, so let's go for the mistrial, so we don't lose it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Zimmerman gets new judge: Â Â http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/29/13553403-appeals-court-grants-george-zimmermans-request-for-new-judge?lite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 New judge named: Â Â http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/30/13572398-tough-minded-judge-assigned-to-take-over-george-zimmerman-case?lite&t1=43001 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Die Thread! Â Â DIE!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Die Thread! Â Â DIE!!!!! Â Â I put a feather in front of its mouth and it fluttered. I then felt for a pulse and I think there was one. By the time the trial comes around the defibrillator will do its job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Die Thread! Â Â DIE!!!!! Â RACIST Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 RACIST "Thread" will be added to the list of unacceptable hate speech in what is certainly a proud day for all you Monday-lovers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Pulse strengthening. A little color back in cheeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 I put a feather in front of its mouth and it fluttered. I then felt for a pulse and I think there was one. By the time the trial election comes around the defibrillator will do its job. Fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 The patient is miraculously still breathing: Â Â http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/49088862 Â Â Another round of evidence was released Wednesday in the second-degree murder case against George Zimmerman, including forensic tests that show Zimmerman's DNA was the only one that could be identified on the grip of the gun used to shoot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. Â Zimmerman's DNA also was identified on the gun's holster. The tests were inconclusive as to whether Martin's DNA was on the gun's holster. Â The evidence includes a few diagrams from witnesses the defense noticed that were not included in the original evidence, along with som event logs and photographs of key areas. Â Zimmerman's medical records are still in question after prosecutors subpoenaed the records for treatment he received the day after the shooting. Prosecutors are waiting for a judge to make a decision on those. Â Martin was shot to death by Zimmerman, a volunteer neighborhood watchman, in a Sanford townhouse complex. Zimmerman said the shooting was self-defense. Â Zimmerman said Martin was on top of him, slamming his head against the ground when he grabbed his gun from a holster before Martin could get it. Â Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 It is incredibly insensitive for the President to be campaigning with his son's killer on trial... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 (edited) The question of whose DNA is on the gun and holster could play a role in Zimmerman's defense. Â Zimmerman says Martin had been on top of him, slamming his head against the ground and smothering his mouth and nose with his hand and arm when he grabbed his gun from a holster on his waist before Martin could get it. He shot the teenager once in the chest. Â Â Â Â uh oh. He must have misremembered that fact Edited September 20, 2012 by BillsFan-4-Ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 The question of whose DNA is on the gun and holster could play a role in Zimmerman's defense.  Zimmerman says Martin had been on top of him, slamming his head against the ground and smothering his mouth and nose with his hand and arm when he grabbed his gun from a holster on his waist before Martin could get it. He shot the teenager once in the chest.     uh oh. He must have misremembered that fact  You make no sense whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 (edited) can you stop being an idiot Gary? Â If Martin's DNA was not on the gun How the F can GZ claim he grabbed for it? Â Gz "thought" TM was out to cause trouble. Â As a gun owner, if I approached a suspected criminal, my gun would be in my hand at the ready to use. Edited September 20, 2012 by BillsFan-4-Ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 can you stop being an idiot Gary? Â If Martin's DNA was not on the gun How the F can GZ claim he grabbed for it? Â Gz "thought" TM was out to cause trouble. Â As a gun owner, if I approached a suspected criminal, my gun would be in my hand at the ready to use. Â GZ never said TM grabbed it, he said he pulled it before TM could. The important point is that GZ was bleeding, which means TM assaulted him. Self defense, case closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 The question of whose DNA is on the gun and holster could play a role in Zimmerman's defense.  Zimmerman says Martin had been on top of him, slamming his head against the ground and smothering his mouth and nose with his hand and arm when he grabbed his gun from a holster on his waist before Martin could get it. He shot the teenager once in the chest.     uh oh. He must have misremembered that fact   can you stop being an idiot Gary?  If Martin's DNA was not on the gun How the F can GZ claim he grabbed for it?  Gz "thought" TM was out to cause trouble.  As a gun owner, if I approached a suspected criminal, my gun would be in my hand at the ready to use.  Edited by BillsFan-4-Ever, Today, 08:12 AM.  It is my right of free speech to offer my opinion, I could be wrong, but then again I could be right.      You posted this in another thread with the exception that in the other thread you said nothing about Martin grabbing the gun. You are a completely dishonest puke not deserving of having an honest discussion with anyone else here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 You posted this in another thread with the exception that in the other thread you said nothing about Martin grabbing the gun. You are a completely dishonest puke not deserving of having an honest discussion with anyone else here. That's why most people here just ignore him. Â But you gotta love the entertainment value in the frothing, left wing hatred for the guy. They have no idea what really happened but the fact that a white guy shot a black guy is enough to send them into hysteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 That's why most people here just ignore him. Â But you gotta love the entertainment value in the frothing, left wing hatred for the guy. They have no idea what really happened but the fact that a white guy shot a black guy is enough to send them into hysteria. No, a hispanic man with a "white" sounding last name shot a black man, and thats all the media needed to declare a hate crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 If his name was Jorge Rodriguez, would we even know about this case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts