• 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.

Uninformed people talking about the trial

ttwtt78640 said:
Again, you simply ignore what was said on the record; she changed her sworn statement about the only words that she claims GZ uttered. Do see any difference between "get off", "get off of me" and "get off my case"? I am questioning the reliability of her "blow by blow account" when even the words, which she states that she heard clearly, are subject to alteration upon recall. We do not need her "later interpretation" of words/events. You constantly point out "inconsistancies" in the statements of GZ, yet give a pass to those that support your anticipated (desired?) version of events.
Click to expand...


 
sharon said:
She heard something. She interpreted what she heard as a "bump" because the earbuds fell and then she could barely hear, "get off".

I don't think we can dismiss her testimony.
Click to expand...
Yes we can, because she is a compulsive liar.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Again, you simply ignore what was said on the record; she changed her sworn statement about the only words that she claims GZ uttered. Do see any difference between "get off", "get off of me" and "get off my case"? I am questioning the reliability of her "blow by blow account" when even the words, which she states that she heard clearly, are subject to alteration upon recall. We do not need her "later interpretation" of words/events. You constantly point out "inconsistancies" in the statements of GZ, yet give a pass to those that support your anticipated (desired?) version of events.
Click to expand...

Get off in the South is also used to say "turn me loose". Would YOU forget if you were on the phone with a friend when he was killed?
 
sharon said:
She doesn't hold a candle to George.
Click to expand...
BS.

The only relevant thing that was believable in her testimony is that NLN made a racial slur against GZ.
 
Crosscheck said:
At my work which involves contact with a large number of people I have not heard one person mention this trial. Maybe it is regional but nobody I have ran into has said a word about this trial.

I think some people become so infatuated with trials like this that they can't leave the tv set/computer for one minute. There are some posters here who may post 20-30 times in one day about this trial and it almost becomes the point of an unhealthy obsession.

Admittedly it does become the "wreck along the hiway" that you have to turn and gawk at it but eventually you move on.
Click to expand...

It's just the newest drama in people's lives. Gives people something to argue about with one another I guess. I just keep wondering when is it going to be over? It seems like this thing has been dragging on forever. :roll:

All the armchair attorneys are amusing though. ;)
 
sharon said:
Get off in the South is also used to say "turn me loose". Would YOU forget if you were on the phone with a friend when he was killed?
Click to expand...

Is it easy twisting into that pretzel shape sharon?
 
ChrisL said:
It's just the newest drama in people's lives. Gives people something to argue about with one another I guess. I just keep wondering when is it going to be over? It seems like this thing has been dragging on forever
Click to expand...
The trial is very important. Racist blacks and anti-USA "activists" took to the streets in droves threatening violence.
 
Muhammed said:
The trial is very important. Racist blacks and anti-USA "activists" took to the streets in droves threatening violence.
Click to expand...

It's not any more important than any other trial. The only reason some people think it's so important is because they want to use it to try to say it's all about racism, when in reality it's more about two ignorant dumb asses.
 
ChrisL said:
It's just the newest drama in people's lives. Gives people something to argue about with one another I guess. I just keep wondering when is it going to be over? It seems like this thing has been dragging on forever. :roll:

All the armchair attorneys are amusing though. ;)
Click to expand...

We do love drama....

 
Rainman05 said:
So I am not slamming the people who debate the facts of the case or the politics of the case.
Click to expand...

followed by

I do say that debating such an issue is stupid and pointless.

if that's the scope of ones' intelligence and interests, fine by me. Blabber on.
Click to expand...

the prosecution rests
 
ChrisL said:
It's not any more important than any other trial. The only reason some people think it's so important is because they want to use it to try to say it's all about racism, when in reality it's more about two ignorant dumb asses.
Click to expand...

I grew up watching Matlock. I love watching trials. :)

And yes, it does sound like they were two ignorant dumb asses.
 
This seems to be the consensus among Twitter members who appear to be very young:

Shero @_misscourt2u

They wasting all us taxpayers money on this court hearing when George Zimmerman should be behind bars. No trial no nothing.
 
Josie said:
This seems to be the consensus among Twitter members who appear to be very young:

Shero @_misscourt2u

They wasting all us taxpayers money on this court hearing when George Zimmerman should be behind bars. No trial no nothing.
Click to expand...

"they wasting all us taxpayers money" ? :lol:
 
Ugh. It just happened again! I said "The prosecution has rested and the defense is asking for an acquittal." From a friend of mine who isn't watching the trial at all -- "GASP! What???? After all of that stuff on TV about how that one guy barely had anything wrong with him?? He shot that poor kid for no reason! He shouldn't have had a gun at all!!"

:sigh:

I'm just gonna stop talking about this to people who aren't watching the trial. They don't have a clue.
 
Superfly said:
"they wasting all us taxpayers money" ? :lol:
Click to expand...

Looks as if taxpayers' money is being wasted on education too. Scary that these folks can't cannot the dots between charges>trial>verdict>acquittal/conviction and...sentencing.
 
Josie said:
Ugh. It just happened again! I said "The prosecution has rested and the defense is asking for an acquittal." From a friend of mine who isn't watching the trial at all -- "GASP! What???? After all of that stuff on TV about how that one guy barely had anything wrong with him?? He shot that poor kid for no reason! He shouldn't have had a gun at all!!"

:sigh:

I'm just gonna stop talking about this to people who aren't watching the trial. They don't have a clue.
Click to expand...

True evidence of the widespread low information crowd. People see how it was presented by the blamestream media and NO fact will ever change their mind. If Al Sharpton said it, it's undeniable truth.
 
Oceandan said:
True evidence of the widespread low information crowd. People see how it was presented by the blamestream media and NO fact will ever change their mind. If Al Sharpton said it, it's undeniable truth.
Click to expand...


That is part of the problem, yes...But we do have to cut the public at large some slack. After all, in here we tend to think that we are the norm, when in the real world we are the "geeks" of society. Most people don't keep on on news and politics nearly to the degree that we do. In some sense we have the obligation to put the truth out there with the spin of Al 'not so Sharp'ton...
 
Josie said:
I grew up watching Matlock. I love watching trials. :)

And yes, it does sound like they were two ignorant dumb asses.
Click to expand...

The thing about Matlock that always puzzled me was how he went from being sheriff to criminal defense attorney. I would just assume with his law enforcement background he would have worked as a prosecutor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom