TakeYouToTasker Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Yeah...but I don't think it's inaccurate. I haven't decided yet, though that's partially because what you've said is a bit ambiguous. Are you stating that our court system, as it was intended; and reporting to our body of law established bi-camerally, through a republican system, and ultimately run through a comprehnsive system of checks and balances is mob rule? Or are you saying that this praticular trial is reporting to mob rule? Or are you saying that our system has regressed to a system of mob rule? Or something else entirely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 according to me, Zimmerman portrayed T martin as a criminal element it doesn't mean he was one... He became a criminal when he started bashing GZ's nose, and his head into the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 It's not illegal to follow someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 according to me, Zimmerman portrayed T martin as a criminal element it doesn't mean he was one... This is why it's impossible to treat you like an adult. I haven't decided yet, though that's partially because what you've said is a bit ambiguous. Are you stating that our court system, as it was intended; and reporting to our body of law established bi-camerally, through a republican system, and ultimately run through a comprehnsive system of checks and balances is mob rule? Or are you saying that this praticular trial is reporting to mob rule? Or are you saying that our system has regressed to a system of mob rule? Or something else entirely? The second, as part of an evolution to the third that many people seem to desire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 This is why it's impossible to treat you like an adult. Because the sentence is totally unintelligible or because even if we contort his gibberish and ramblings into something that resembles a point its still totally invalid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 second, as part of an evolution to the third that many people seem to desire. Ah, yes. Then I agree entirely. Though this is a bit scarier than what you're proposing, as it this isn't so much mob rule as it is rule via executive fiat through a manipulated mob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Because the sentence is totally unintelligible or because even if we contort his gibberish and ramblings into something that resembles a point its still totally invalid? Speaking of which, anyone watching the States closing arguments ( Bernie de la Rionda) have new respect for the terms "rambling" and "disjointed" They've got nothing. but its still 50/50 IMHO . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Speaking of which, anyone watching the States closing arguments ( Bernie de la Rionda) have new respect for the terms "rambling" and "disjointed" They've got nothing. but its still 50/50 IMHO . This is the best tweet I saw about their case: The state appears to be trying to create doubt about #Zimmermanon9 's story rather than proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 This is the best tweet I saw about their case: The state appears to be trying to create doubt about #Zimmermanon9 's story rather than proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt. I could not agree more. They can't prove it themselves, so they are trying to put off the jury with multiple strawmen. Its totally backwards (except to some confused canines) . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 3rdnlng, on 11 July 2013 - 07:46 AM, said: You should give her credit for her own work rather than just plagiarizing it. It is ironic that you post it in direct conflict with its premise. Now explain to me what examples of racism here that she "pulled out of the woodwork". Go ahead, you altered my post to state that, now back it up. You really shouldn't have come down here and voiced your "opinions". You're as rudderless as BDLR and his team and incapable of forming an opinion on fact, let alone employ any critical thinking and intellectual curiosity. You're the kind of person that spends all his time talking rather than listening. Continue to spew your nonsense though, some here want the target practice. I get that... Demonstrating DC Toms idiocy So, you refuse to respond to my question about the rampant racism here but give a petulant answer crying about the persecution you receive here? Don't forget to dvr Nancy Grace's show for your opinions for tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Because the sentence is totally unintelligible or because even if we contort his gibberish and ramblings into something that resembles a point its still totally invalid? Let's just keep it simple and go with "because he's a !@#$ing idiot." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Prosecutor BDLR:George Zimmerman "profiled a 17-year-old boy that had Skittles." Shows jurors Skittles each time he mentions them. Geez.................Tom was right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Prosecutor BDLR:George Zimmerman "profiled a 17-year-old boy that had Skittles." Shows jurors Skittles each time he mentions them. Geez.................Tom was right. Taste the rainbow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Taste the rainbow. Since this whole thing went down I have had an insatiable appetite for skittles. Cannot get enough. Most tragically effective case of product placement ever. Would make for a very interesting case study. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Prosecutor BDLR:George Zimmerman "profiled a 17-year-old boy that had Skittles." Shows jurors Skittles each time he mentions them. Geez.................Tom was right. No way! You're joking, right? Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Does BDLR know he has to present affirmative evidence of guilt, not merely cast doubt on defense? Discrepancies don't prove facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Does BDLR know he has to present affirmative evidence of guilt, not merely cast doubt on defense? Discrepancies don't prove facts. Does it matter? Despite all the evidence and observations which full under the jurisdiction of common f@#$ing sense, half the country still thinks an evil white man shot and killed a black cherub to relieve him of his skittles and tea. If this case is being tried in front of a jury of our peers I don't think legal procedure and other "technicalities" are going to matter much in the outcome. May as well let the masses text their vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Prosecutor BDLR:George Zimmerman "profiled a 17-year-old boy that had Skittles." Shows jurors Skittles each time he mentions them. Geez.................Tom was right. If I'm the defense...I'm showing Starburst, Snickers, M&Ms, and saying "What if Martin was carrying these? What would have happened? Would things have been different? Of course not. That's how incapable the prosecution is of making their case, that they have to distract you with candy." Does it matter? Despite all the evidence and observations which full under the jurisdiction of common f@#$ing sense, half the country still thinks an evil white man shot and killed a black cherub to relieve him of his skittles and tea. If this case is being tried in front of a jury of our peers I don't think legal procedure and other "technicalities" are going to matter much in the outcome. May as well let the masses text their vote. I think Paula Abdul might make a better judge in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Does BDLR know he has to present affirmative evidence of guilt, not merely cast doubt on defense? Discrepancies don't prove facts. Out of curiosity, how much access to media does the jury have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Out of curiosity, how much access to media does the jury have? None, theoretically. The jury was sequestered specifically to avoid that sort of influence. http://news.yahoo.com/zimmerman-jurors-begin-life-sequestration-134044980.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts