• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Bodyguards sue George Zimmerman, Mark O'Mara

hawke812 said:
Yeah, usually when someone can't argue facts, they use a cop-out like "too far out there for me":lol:
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised that you get that a lot.
 
Your post had a tone of familiarity.
 
hawke812 said:
but being used is another story.
Click to expand...

What's this to do with anything? I don't want to hear about such. Let's get back on topic.
 
Deciding that your "facts" are crap is not a cop-out. It's a statement of fact, real fact.
 
A security company does not provide security detail on their own. They do it at the request of the client. And they do inform the client about how much it will cost them. At least that is how it is done here in California. If AIS has records of the requests, I don't see how Zimmerman can squirm out of this.

The company provided a detail for Zimmerman's second bond hearing on June 29, according to the complaint, and the arrangement stepped up into 'nearly constant' watch on Zimmerman's family.

[I]He said the company no longer provided protection to George and Shellie Zimmerman, partly because at one point it was billing them $7,000 per week, whereas they are now paying $700 a week for protection.

The AIS complaint acknowledges the $40,000 paid and also says the company warned O'Mara the amount of security he requested was 'excessive'.[/I]

Now George Zimmerman is SUED over 'failing to pay his bodyguard': Trayvon Martin killer and his wife accused of withholding $27,000 | Mail Online
 
505 said:
All makes perfect sense now. Thanks for clearing that up.
Click to expand...

I did not claim GZ killed TM because he was black. It looks pretty clear when you snip the post, and omit the rest of it? You take out the entire context of what I posted. That does not clear up anything. I CLEARLY used that as an EXAMPLE of exercising one's own 1st amendment right in reference to RabidAlpaca's post in which I quoted (post #27).
 
The Official Complaint. Not sure why news media can't link this in their articles, unless I missed it.

http://dothprotesttoomuch.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/complaintfilestamped-complaint-file-stamped.pdf

  • Telephone/Text and Email Communications used to set up Security Detail
  • AIS billed O'Mara Law Group, then was advised by MOM toward the end to address unpaid services to GZ, not O'Mara Law Group
  • O'Mara Paralegal "Kelly" signed off on invoices
  • Payments made in $15,000, $15,000, $10,000 checks
  • Further payments promised by MOM via texts & emails
  • Agreement provided the scope of security would be determined by MOM & consulting with GZ
  • AIS paid for hotel rooms, meals, etc. Sometimes multiple rooms/hotels to move Zimmermans from one room/hotel to another

*Edit: Forgot to mention AIS was also hired for "investigative services". This may refer to investigating TM social media, school records (if they can), etc, maybe his family too.
 
Last edited:
hawke812 said:
I did not claim GZ killed TM because he was black. It looks pretty clear when you snip the post, and omit the rest of it? You take out the entire context of what I posted. That does not clear up anything. I CLEARLY used that as an EXAMPLE of exercising one's own 1st amendment right in reference to RabidAlpaca's post in which I quoted (post #27).
Click to expand...

Oh bull****. You change your tune so much it's ridiculous. It's all right there for anyone to see.

Let's go ahead and take a look at the whole thing.

"If a reporter asks me, "Do you believe George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin in self defense?", I can exercise my 1st amendment right and say, "No I believe he killed Trayvon Martin because he was black." The media can then exercise their 1st amendment right and play my opinion on the air."

Your opinion. You said it clear as day right there in bold. Also, your posting history on this topic backs up the fact that YOUR OPINION is, wait for it... "he killed Trayvon Martin because he was black".

Game, set, match. Now go kick rocks.
 
505 said:
Oh bull****. You change your tune so much it's ridiculous. It's all right there for anyone to see.

Let's go ahead and take a look at the whole thing.

"If a reporter asks me, "Do you believe George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin in self defense?", I can exercise my 1st amendment right and say, "No I believe he killed Trayvon Martin because he was black." The media can then exercise their 1st amendment right and play my opinion on the air."

Your opinion. You said it clear as day right there in bold. Also, your posting history on this topic backs up the fact that YOUR OPINION is, wait for it... "he killed Trayvon Martin because he was black".

Game, set, match. Now go kick rocks.
Click to expand...

Pay attention to the words "If", "I can" and "The media can then". I used those specific words to help me describe a hypothetical situation. I used the extreme, "he killed Trayvon Martin because he was black", as an example that even though the belief was outrageous, one has a right to even say that as their opinion here in the United States.
 
hawke812 said:
Pay attention to the words "If", "I can" and "The media can then". I used those specific words to help me describe a hypothetical situation. I used the extreme, "he killed Trayvon Martin because he was black", as an example that even though the belief was outrageous, one has a right to even say that as their opinion here in the United States.
Click to expand...

Yup. Exactly. Your opinion. Gotcha. Thanks for verifying.
 
505 said:
Yup. Exactly. Your opinion. Gotcha. Thanks for verifying.
Click to expand...

"My opinion" one has a right to free speech in the United States of America??? When the **** did the 1st Amendment, a right, become an opinion????

Wow:shock:
 
hawke812 said:
"My opinion" one has a right to free speech in the United States of America??? When the **** did the 1st Amendment, a right, become an opinion????

Wow:shock:
Click to expand...

Dodge noted... Mr "thinks Z killed M 'cuz he's black, yo".
 
505 said:
When are you going to update your avatar with a more accurate picture of no_limit_nigga?
Click to expand...

When GZ is convicted.. That was the agreement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom