Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Thedimon, Dec 4, 2019.
So Zimmerman should have just let Martin continue to beat his head against the concrete sidewalk?
Yep and diagrammed out at the trial.
My personal opinion is this guy should have minded his own business in the first place. If you were walking around would you really want some stranger getting in your business asking what you're doing? That's a job for the POLICE
I could see a moderate settlement, lawyers cost money, and a settlement might be cheaper than actually taking all the time to defend against him. That's more true the lower down the chain one goes. The Martin's can't afford to defend themselves as long as a giant liberal media outfit...
Zimmerman, once a sleaze, always a sleaze......killing a kid isn't good enough for him, now he wants to profit off of it....
You have a right to your own opinion but not your your own facts.The jury did not interpret the evidence as supporting murder. Manslaughter would have been the much better charge to make in front of this jury.
But wrong as the jury was the people have spoken and maybe someday somewhere Zimmerman will be judged fairly and suffer for his crimes.
No it does not but as I said the Zimmerman jury and the OJ jury screwed up.
Where did you get that fantasy? From Brietbart ? Zimmerman was told to STAY IN THE car but he disregarded the dispatcher.
Even if Martin danced around the car BFD that is not a threat, thatvis a goofy teen doing stupid. Do you expect us intelligent honest people believe that dancing around is a crime? Really? If Martin was committing a crime or going to commit a crime why would he dance around the Wannnabe's car and get noticed and then go Commit a crime! You need to find unintelligent people to peddle that BS to.
he doesn't stand a chance imo
Allegedl by the one who killed him
fact is, it was Zimmerman that left Trayvon dead and bloody
Especially if in a vehicle, then after you notice them they start stalking you by foot at night, and no clue if he pulled a gun on Travon or not or why he needed to defend himself
allegedly.... the only person that says that is Zimmerman, as he is the only one allowed to tell his side of the story, he killed the only other person that could speak to the matter
Trayvon was not found guilty of anything
listening to the jurors afterwards was sad, Zimmerman got lucky he got the jury he did imo - suing the family of the man he killed is also sad
yep, be like OJ writing a book or suing the family imo
no there's evidence and it's not alleged anymore there was already a court hearing.
I don't think he was on trial.
So you don't believe Justice was served? Why? Because trayvon Martin was killed? Despite the fact that the evidence pretty conclusively draws the picture that he was attacking Zimmerman?
still alleged, just cause not enough evidence to convict, doesn't mean innocent or OJ could sue too
did you listen to the jurors after the trial?
the only evidence is Zimmerman's word, which based on his conduct after the trial to date, I would not give much weight
It doesn't matter one iota who the dispatchers work for. 911 is a public utility used by the public as a call for help. Hence why they answer with "911, what is your emergency?"
In using 911 you are essentially asking for help and guidance. Zimmerman was given the proper guidance in being instructed NOT to follow Martin. He summarily dismissed that sage advice, and ruined his life in the process, not to mention murdering a teen with a bag of Skittles.
That guidance isn't legally binding. That is the point that you're falling to understand
Didn't you claim that al-Baghdadi was killed in 2014? That was a conspiracy theory.
but only did the evidence not existed suggest that was murder evidence existed to suggest that it was self-defense.
How often did his story change?
disagree, and per the jury's statements after, doesn't seem they agree either
So what evidence is presented? Keep in mind today saint Martin's body
I'm not failing to understand anything. Legally binding or not, that dumbass made the call to 911 and received advice that would have saved both his life and what's left of it, and the life of the teen he murdered.
Your dentist's advice to brush your teeth isn't "legally binding" either. Does that stop you from following it?
okay so what gives 911 dispatch The authority or the ability to advise someone in a situation like?
he didn't murder anybody who shot Martin in self-defense.
a dentist is an expert in oral hygiene. if you call the office and get a hold of his secretary his secretary is not an expert in oral hygiene so I would probably not take their advice.
Same thing here a dispatcher it's just somebody that answers the phone. Just because they dispatch police to a location does not mean they have any ability to give sound advice.
No "authority", but they certainly have the "ability" to advise someone who purposely dials 911.
Even if that obvious advice was to brush your teeth, or, conversely, not to follow someone?
I would remind you that it was this "just somebody" police dispatcher Tim TenEyck who detected that the caller was reporting domestic violence:
911 dispatchers aren't just "somebody", they are on the front line of actually emergencies.
Quit downplaying their importance.
Zimmerman ignored the sage wisdom given to him suggesting that he did not need to follow Martin.
Now he is a pariah, and Martin is dead.
All he needed to do was to heed the advice of 911.
That is their job. Quit pretending that their job is anything less than heroic.
Really? Prove that while Zimmerman was sitting in his car the dispatcher told him not to leave it. Cite it from the transcript of the 911 call.
It proved he did not feel threatened or endangered. And are you trying to differentiate me from intelligent and honest people? Answer that and we will continue.
Separate names with a comma.