• 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.

Is this Florida case like Zimmerman?

Grim17 said:
You can be a smart ass all you want, but it doesn't change the fact you insinuated something that the evidence just doesn't support.
Click to expand...

Okay, I will deny logic so I can believe walking/running AWAY from the other party is starting/escalating a confrontation:lamo

Give me more man:lamo
 
hawke812 said:
It said he grabbed his hand in the article. What were you saying again
Click to expand...
Dude! Are you clueless to what you asked? As clueless as you were about the gun being drawn?
I helped you out there by showing that the gun had been drawn, so let me help you out again by showing what you said.


hawke812 said:
how the hell you go for someone's gun without "grabbing" them?
Click to expand...

I showed you how they go for the gun first.
Or didn't you realize that?

hawke812 said:
GZ also said he was "going in the same direction as TM", not following him AFTER the fact
Click to expand...
And?
That does not negate that Trayvon skipped away, which is a tell as to the message he was trying to convey, and a far cry from running because one is scarred.

Nor does it negate that he headed in the same direction with a different intent. Which is not following. Duh!


Nor have you been able to explain why Tracy Martin thought Trayvon had made it home and was sitting on the porch when this occurred.
 
hawke812 said:
Okay, I will deny logic so I can believe walking/running AWAY from the other party is starting/escalating a confrontation:lamo

Give me more man:lamo
Click to expand...

You can play games all you want, but you know damned well that there would not have been a confrontation if Martin had run away and continued home, like you seem to be implying.
 
Grim17 said:
You can play games all you want, but you know damned well that there would not have been a confrontation if Martin had run away and continued home, like you seem to be implying.
Click to expand...

So when a Lion/Tiger/Cheetah chases down it's prey, it's the prey's fault for not being able to outrun the hunter...and NOT the hunter's thirst for blood....yeah I get what you are saying...

Please continue:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
 
Excon said:
Dude! Are you clueless to what you asked? As clueless as you were about the gun being drawn?
I helped you out there by showing that the gun had been drawn, so let me help you out again by showing what you said.


​

I showed you how they go for the gun first.
Or didn't you realize that?


And?
That does not negate that Trayvon skipped away, which is a tell as to the message he was trying to convey, and a far cry from running because one is scarred.

Nor does it negate that he headed in the same direction with a different intent. Which is not following. Duh!


Nor have you been able to explain why Tracy Martin thought Trayvon had made it home and was sitting on the porch when this occurred.
Click to expand...

Yet James did not go for the gun...but grabbed his hand...reality versus a Youtube video with no relation to this incident...

Yeah, he said TM ran when GZ was not in trouble, but then says he was not running AFTER he killed him. I would say that too if I murdered an unarmed kid:lol:
 
hawke812 said:
Yet James did not go for the gun...but grabbed his hand...reality versus a Youtube video with no relation to this incident...

Yeah, he said TM ran when GZ was not in trouble, but then says he was not running AFTER he killed him. I would say that too if I murdered an unarmed kid
Click to expand...
:doh:lamo:doh:lamo:doh
If you do not want to pay attention to what you say, that is your fault. Not mine.
Going for the hand is not going for the gun. Or are you going to continue to play obtuse?

And we already know you would say anything to defend yourself. It has been apparent since you started posting.
Just because you do it, doesn't mean all others would do it.


Secondly, Trayvon approached Zimmerman and immediately began his assault. He is the aggressor.
 
Excon said:
:doh:lamo:doh:lamo:doh
If you do not want to pay attention to what you say, that is your fault. Not mine.
Going for the hand is not going for the gun. Or are you going to continue to play obtuse?

And we already know you would say anything to defend yourself. It has been apparent since you started posting.
Just because you do it, doesn't mean all others would do it.


Secondly, Trayvon approached Zimmerman and immediately began his assault. He is the aggressor.
Click to expand...

Stop jumping into conversations you know nothing about.

It started like this:

CalGun said:
It isn't the walking away part that is relevant. Dooley claimed he was grabbed and choked; no witnesses testified to that but him. You shouldn't get shot for yelling at someone.
Click to expand...

I knew CalGun to be wrong, because there was some grabbing going on. James and Dooley grappled with each other, one on top of the other. Physical contact came BEFORE the gun was drawn. It states so in the article.

Then you come in with an irrelevant video that has nothing to do with this case or ou8r discussion.
 
hawke812 said:
Stop jumping into conversations you know nothing about.

It started like this:



I knew CalGun to be wrong, because there was some grabbing going on. James and Dooley grappled with each other, one on top of the other. Physical contact came BEFORE the gun was drawn. It states so in the article.

Then you come in with an irrelevant video that has nothing to do with this case or ou8r discussion.
Click to expand...
I obviously knew more about this case than you did as shown.
The gun was drawn. He went for his hand, not the gun.

The Video was relevant to what you were saying about going for the gun.
Whether you like it or not, does not matter. It was relevant to what you had said.

You were wrong (all over the place wrong), and were called on it.


And what you quoted of CalGun and your reply does not make him wrong.

The claim of "grabbed and choked" is not substantiated by just being grabbed. Or by grabbing of the hand. Do you not know that?
 
hawke812 said:
So when a Lion/Tiger/Cheetah chases down it's prey, it's the prey's fault for not being able to outrun the hunter...and NOT the hunter's thirst for blood....yeah I get what you are saying...

Please continue:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
Click to expand...

Now you are implying 2 things the evidence doesn't support.

First, that Zimmerman was attempting to hunt Martin down and catch him, rather than simply keeping an eye on where he went, as the evidence indicates... And you are still implying that Martin ran but was caught by Zimmerman who chased him down.

It's obvious you think Zimmerman is guilty of murder, but it's sad that you have to lie to support that belief.
 
Excon presented it accurately which you did not. You simply jumped to a conclusion in support of the guilty man based on the guilty man's own comments. I'm curious do you accept Zimmerman's comments as significantly as you do Dooley's? Or is there some kind of bias there going on?


hawke812 said:
Stop jumping into conversations you know nothing about.

It started like this:



I knew CalGun to be wrong, because there was some grabbing going on. James and Dooley grappled with each other, one on top of the other. Physical contact came BEFORE the gun was drawn. It states so in the article.

Then you come in with an irrelevant video that has nothing to do with this case or ou8r discussion.
Click to expand...
 
Whether or not he had the gun legally should make no different on the manslaughter charge, only on the gun charge.
 
Grim17 said:
Now you are implying 2 things the evidence doesn't support.
Click to expand...

Oh I am sorry Judge/Juror Grim17. I did not realize the evidence does not support this. Why even have all these proceedings than:lol:

You internet lawyers amuse me:lamo
 
CalGun said:
Excon presented it accurately which you did not. You simply jumped to a conclusion in support of the guilty man based on the guilty man's own comments. I'm curious do you accept Zimmerman's comments as significantly as you do Dooley's? Or is there some kind of bias there going on?
Click to expand...

There is no bias.

All four witnesses testified James was yelling and approached Dooley. He then initiated the first physical contact. That is all anyone needs to know.

Case closed.
 
Excon said:
I obviously knew more about this case than you did as shown.
The gun was drawn. He went for his hand, not the gun.

The Video was relevant to what you were saying about going for the gun.
Whether you like it or not, does not matter. It was relevant to what you had said.

You were wrong (all over the place wrong), and were called on it.


And what you quoted of CalGun and your reply does not make him wrong.

The claim of "grabbed and choked" is not substantiated by just being grabbed:lol:. Or by grabbing of the hand. Do you not know that?
Click to expand...

Yeah keep thinking that is all the grabbing he did. Like the scuffle did not go to the ground:lamo
 
hawke812 said:
Nope, I do not follow someone and then gun them down.

Zimmerman does though
Click to expand...

Z was struggling to get up and out from under M, right before the shot went off and no witnesses saw anything different.
 
hawke812 said:
Oh I am sorry Judge/Juror Grim17. I did not realize the evidence does not support this. Why even have all these proceedings than:lol:

You internet lawyers amuse me:lamo
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about evidence that might be presented at the trial, I'm talking about the evidence that's been made public thus far, none of which to my knowledge by the way, supports your statements/insinuations.

The recording of Zimmerman's call to police makes it very clear that he was just trying to keep an eye on where Martin went, so he could inform police when they arrived... Not that he was hunting Martin down in order to catch and confront him, as you imply. There's also nothing that I've seen that suggests that the confrontation between the two took place when Zimmerman confronted Martin as he was running away from the scene.

Now if you have some other evidence that supports your beliefs/insinuations, then please present it... If you don't have any such evidence, then let me say again just how sad it is that you would resort to lying in order to prop up your beliefs.
 
Grim17 said:
I'm not talking about evidence that might be presented at the trial, I'm talking about the evidence that's been made public thus far, none of which to my knowledge by the way, supports your statements/insinuations.

The recording of Zimmerman's call to police makes it very clear that he was just trying to keep an eye on where Martin went, so he could inform police when they arrived... Not that he was hunting Martin down in order to catch and confront him, as you imply. There's also nothing that I've seen that suggests that the confrontation between the two took place when Zimmerman confronted Martin as he was running away from the scene.

Now if you have some other evidence that supports your beliefs/insinuations, then please present it... If you don't have any such evidence, then let me say again just how sad it is that you would resort to lying in order to prop up your beliefs.
Click to expand...

I am not lying. What you are doing is cherry-picking evidence to believe, and dismissing the evidence you do not want to believe.

Not my fault your bias is blinding you to the truth:lol:
 
hawke812 said:
I do not follow someone and then gun them down.

Zimmerman does though:lol:
Click to expand...

Since, no one saw the beginning of the confrontation or struggle....Just where is your *evidence* that Z "gun them down". You aren't interested in discussing the available factual evidence. Your priority is to troll....nothing more, nothing less
 
hawke812 said:
I am not lying. What you are doing is cherry-picking evidence to believe, and dismissing the evidence you do not want to believe.

Not my fault your bias is blinding you to the truth:lol:
Click to expand...

What evidence have I dismissed and don't want to believe? Could you please post it for me?

Doing so will not only validate your beliefs and show you aren't lying, but it will prove that I'm either dishonest and guilty of cherry picking evidence, or I'm totally uninformed and have no idea what I'm talking about...

It's a Win, Win, Win for you, if you post it... If you don't, sadly It means you are exactly the person I've said you were and are lying to prop up your beliefs.
 
Last edited:
hawke812 said:
The shooting happened in front of James' then-8-year-old daughter, Danielle, who was called as a defense witness last week. The child said Dooley tried to walk away from the confrontation, and that her father was loud.

Damn, his own daughter testified against him, and still they get the black man:lamo:lamo:lamo

You should have titled this thread, "Stand Your Ground is a White Man's Law, Darkies Go Away"

:lamo:lamo
Click to expand...

Obviously by your messages you are EXTREMELY uncomfortable with African-Americans and you see African-Americans as a different species than you - then transpose that on everyone else. Maybe you can get your kicks by calling African-Americans "darkies."

The only person who calls African-Americans "darkies" is specifically YOU. Then you laugh hysterically at YOUR racial slur that YOU posted. No surprise there. In this instance, YOU hysterical laugh at YOUR racial slur - then try to take those words out of your own mouth and put them into the mouths of others to justify your using such a slur.

By my reading of the story not knowing minute details I would have voted not guilty. But I have seen nothing that implies racism was involved in the verdict. From the FACTS - rather than the PARANOIAC and demeaning view YOU personally express about African-Americans in your messages - it appears the reason for the guilty verdict was a combination of the testimony of many adult witnesses and that it appears he had a habit of harassing and threatening people.
 
hawke812 said:
Yeah keep thinking that is all the grabbing he did. Like the scuffle did not go to the ground
Click to expand...
Do you have any idea what the hell you are talking about?
Did I say that was all the grabbing there was? Did I say they didn't go to the ground? What was that? I didn't on both counts? Go figure.
:lamo

And you might want to familiarize yourself with this case as the witnesses said that he was not choked.

Did you get that?

The witnesses made it clear that he was a liar, and the jury believed them.



hawke812 said:
Nope, I do not follow someone and then gun them down.

Zimmerman does though
Click to expand...
No dude!

That is clearly your logic , as it is not what Zimmerman did.

Since it is not something Zimmerman did, but something you want to say he did - it is your logic (or lack there of).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom