- Joined
- Oct 3, 2013
- Messages
- 13,491
- Reaction score
- 7,308
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Sure you do.
You win
Sure you do.
So it is about winning for you?You win
The image is owned by shutterstock. Watch that loser get sued now for plagiarizing it. :lamohttp://www.free-wallpapers-free.com/wallpapers/preview/hd/hd-american-flag-1.jpg/img][/QUOTE]:doh
Wrong thread.
:lamo
Besides that, the art is different enough.
The image is owned by shutterstock. Watch that loser get sued now for plagiarizing it.
http://www.free-wallpapers-free.com/wallpapers/preview/hd/hd-american-flag-1.jpg/img][/QUOTE]Poor Leatherman and his followers have their panties in a wad over this.
I am surprised he still has followers with as wrong as he was about the Zimmerman case.
:doh
iLOL
[INDENT][INDENT]
[SIZE=1][COLOR="#330000"][B]Did George Zimmerman steal Hoch Sollst Du Leben’s photo?[/B]
Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Good morning:
Did George Zimmerman steal Hoch Sollst Du Leben’s photo?
I have to link to and cannot display the photograph because it’s copyrighted with all rights reserved, but you can see it by clicking on the link.
Here’s a link to George Zimmerman’s “original” artwork
I recommend opening 2 browser pages and display the two images side by side.
The current bid on his “original painting” is $100,000.
I posted a comment on Hoch Sollst Du Leben’s flickr page notifying him.
Fred[/COLOR]
[url=http://frederickleatherman.com/2013/12/17/did-george-zimmerman-steal-hoch-sollst-du-lebens-photo/]Did George Zimmerman steal Hoch Sollst Du Leben’s photo? | Frederick Leatherman Law Blog[/url][/SIZE][/INDENT][/INDENT]
Leatherman points to this online image by the photographer.
[url]http://farm1.staticflickr.com/104/306008086_22995cd80f_z.jpg[/url]
Which a follower then points out it is the same flag he use on his original donation site.
[url]http://wayback.archive.org/web/20120411205816im_/http://www.therealgeorgezimmerman.com/images/49096193.jpg[/url]
One of his followers has reported it to ebay. :doh iLOL
Leatherman has cross posted his announcement/discovery elsewhere and is getting torn to shreds by someone more knowledgeable than he is.
It is hilarious.
[url=http://my.firedoglake.com/mason/2013/12/17/did-george-zimmerman-steal-hoch-sollst-du-lebens-photo/]Did George Zimmerman steal Hoch Sollst Du Leben's photo? | MyFDL[/url]
One comment form a user on his blog.
[INDENT][INDENT][COLOR="#000033"][FONT=Comic Sans MS]Trent Sawyer revealed on his Twitter that he’s been bidding it up. Wouldn’t be surprised if others have as well.[/FONT][/COLOR][/INDENT][/INDENT]
You all remember Trent don't you.
What a bunch of asses.
More info.
[INDENT][INDENT][COLOR="#800000"][FONT=Comic Sans MS]Lol, George Zimmerman's artwork looks familiar
Last edited Tue Dec 17, 2013, 02:11 PM - Edit history (1)
Over a decade ago we purchased this image from PhotoDisc (now Getty Images) for about $20...
And used it on the T-shirts we gave to DU donors...
But if you zoom in a bit...
And give it a little photoshop magic...
Apparently it's now worth around $100,000!
EDITED TO ADD: just noticed that this seems to be getting a lot of attention so I wanted to add that it was Skinner who spotted the similarity between the images in the office this morning, I then put the post together. Credit where credit's due![/FONT][/COLOR]
[SIZE=1][url=http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024188920]Lol, George Zimmerman's artwork looks familiar - Democratic Underground[/url][/SIZE][/INDENT][/INDENT]
My statement is completely true without question. Your's is one witness's story, the other one is dead. Very questionalbe. Remember Z was not proven innocent, there was not enough evidence to convict him, that is all.
No such thing in US law. We start here with the presumption of innocence.
This is a very simple concept, a trial does not prove innocence. Even Zimmerman. I imagine this is about 4th or 5th grade level stuff...so I will just take the first link I come to. It is amazing how bat**** crazy you guys have gone over the Z man. He killed an unarmed kid and if he had used his head he could have avioded it. Not a great person for a RW hero.
"Juries never find defendants innocent. They cannot. Not only is it not their job, it is not within their power. They can only find them "not guilty."
Innocent v. Not Guilty Article | Duvall Law Office, P.C. | Eugene Oregon | Criminal Defense
At the end of the day only George and Trayvon knew what happened - arguing positions is useless. I wasn't there and you weren't so speculating on intent from either party is useless.
This is a very simple concept, a trial does not prove innocence. Even Zimmerman. I imagine this is about 4th or 5th grade level stuff...so I will just take the first link I come to. It is amazing how bat**** crazy you guys have gone over the Z man. He killed an unarmed kid and if he had used his head he could have avioded it. Not a great person for a RW hero.
"Juries never find defendants innocent. They cannot. Not only is it not their job, it is not within their power. They can only find them "not guilty."
Innocent v. Not Guilty Article | Duvall Law Office, P.C. | Eugene Oregon | Criminal Defense
This is a very simple concept, a trial does not prove innocence. Even Zimmerman. I imagine this is about 4th or 5th grade level stuff...so I will just take the first link I come to. It is amazing how bat**** crazy you guys have gone over the Z man. He killed an unarmed kid and if he had used his head he could have avioded it. Not a great person for a RW hero.
"Juries never find defendants innocent. They cannot. Not only is it not their job, it is not within their power. They can only find them "not guilty."
Innocent v. Not Guilty Article | Duvall Law Office, P.C. | Eugene Oregon | Criminal Defense
True. But he was not found innocent.
Still being dishonest I see.He killed an unarmed kid
True. But he was not found innocent.
True. But he was not found innocent.
No one is ever found innocent, in US courts. They can only be found guilty, or not - innocence is presumed until proven otherwise.True. But he was not found innocent.
No one is ever found innocent, in US courts. They can only be found guilty, or not - innocence is presumed until proven otherwise.
No one is ever found innocent, in US courts. They can only be found guilty, or not - innocence is presumed until proven otherwise.
innocence is presumed until proven otherwise. if it is not proven otherwise, you are innocent....
innocence is presumed until proven otherwise. if it is not proven otherwise, you are innocent....
Yet, legally, if not found guilty, the accused is by default innocent.Ok, this is where you are not getting it, if not proven otherwise you are found not guilty. It does not mean you are really not guilty, just that there is not enough evidence to convict the person. YOu cannot make the statement because someone is found not guilty they really did not do it (innocent).
What we have here, with Zimmerman, is a gun fetishist who sees the point of a gun as the solution to every conflict he encounters.
It is just a matter of time before he is killed, or locked up for a very long time.
Yet, legally, if not found guilty, the accused is by default innocent.
Personal opinions are another matter entirely.