• 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 Zimmerman brave, subborn or stupid? [W: 218]

muciti said:
no the rich manipulive racist pieces of **** attempting to percecute him because of his financial status will fail.
Click to expand...

racist?

what makes you think he is being persecuted because he is half-white and half-mestizo?
 
sharon said:
If Judge Lester is recused.

Next Judge in line for this case is

Eighteenth Judicial Circuit Courts - Brevard and Seminole Counties Florida

Judge Nelson and her bio is at that link.

She comes with a BA in Psychology and a law degree,

She is also a child's advocate.
Click to expand...

Sharon, I think I figured out what your problem is. Why things don't line up sometimes.

You don't have to use the "reply with quote" button every time you want to add something to a thread. If you have something to say, on topic but not directly replying to someone's post, just hit "reply" and a blank window will come up. When you reply to a post about the like button not working and then start talking about the judge, that makes no sense. But, had you just posted the reply without the quote, it would be fine.

Just an idea.
 
dontworrybehappy said:
Sharon, I think I figured out what your problem is. Why things don't line up sometimes.

You don't have to use the "reply with quote" button every time you want to add something to a thread. If you have something to say, on topic but not directly replying to someone's post, just hit "reply" and a blank window will come up. When you reply to a post about the like button not working and then start talking about the judge, that makes no sense. But, had you just posted the reply without the quote, it would be fine.

Just an idea.
Click to expand...

OK............ will do.
 
Tucker Case said:
Now where on Earth did you get the phenomenally silly idea that having the legal right to do something prevents it from being dumb or a mistake?

For example, I have every legal right to take a **** on my own breakfast. It would be a very dumb to do so, though.
Click to expand...

So, Z staying in his car....Z was avoiding a dangerous situation?
 
whysoserious said:
Yes, I'd say stalking someone while carrying a gun is creating a dangerous situation.
Click to expand...

1 Z was not stalking

2 Z's CCW permit was legal and in order

3 Z leaving his vehicle didn't cause anything. Legally or otherwise. The question is.....who started the physical assault caused this.
 
ric27 said:
1 Z was not stalking

2 Z's CCW permit was legal and in order

3 Z leaving his vehicle didn't cause anything. Legally or otherwise. The question is.....who started the physical assault caused this.
Click to expand...

Following something stealthily is stalking.
 
ric27 said:
1 Z was not stalking

2 Z's CCW permit was legal and in order

3 Z leaving his vehicle didn't cause anything. Legally or otherwise. The question is.....who started the physical assault caused this.
Click to expand...

You have no idea how this case will proceed at trial because it doesn't matter who touched whom first. When GZ got out of his vehicle to chase TM he provoked the situation leading to the fight. If you ever bothered to actually read the law you would know it supports people who strike the first blow in response to being threatened and harassed.

Have you ever looked at the bond hearings? Prosecution pointed out GZ confronted TM by following him in his truck and then on foot.

In the very least, learn the applicable laws before making BS claims.
 
whysoserious said:
Yes, I'd say stalking someone while carrying a gun is creating a dangerous situation.
Click to expand...

Prove the elements of the crime stalking please......

Or, you can just shutup accusing him of a crime he didn't commit.
 
whysoserious said:
Following something stealthily is stalking.
Click to expand...

No. It isn't.

Crimes have things called "elements"... which are, conditions that have to be present in the facts of the incident in order for them to qualify as that crime.

Nothing in this scenario qualifies as stalking.
 
Furiounova said:
You have no idea how this case will proceed at trial because it doesn't matter who touched whom first. When GZ got out of his vehicle to chase TM he provoked the situation leading to the fight. If you ever bothered to actually read the law you would know it supports people who strike the first blow in response to being threatened and harassed.

Have you ever looked at the bond hearings? Prosecution pointed out GZ confronted TM by following him in his truck and then on foot.

In the very least, learn the applicable laws before making BS claims.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should prove the elements of the crime of stalking as well..

I fully expect to see the break down, using the actual text of the law, and then your demonstration of the exact facts (not guesses) that qualify this as stalking.

Thanks in advance.
 
Caine said:
Maybe you should prove the elements of the crime of stalking as well..

I fully expect to see the break down, using the actual text of the law, and then your demonstration of the exact facts (not guesses) that qualify this as stalking.

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

I didn't say he stalked TM. How about addressing what I actually said this time?

Thanks in advance.
 
Furiounova said:
I'm saying it is only difficult when you fabricate a story and try to make it fit the known evidence.
Click to expand...
And we already know that isn't true.
He had no idea how many witnesses there were or what they saw.

It is you trying to fabricate a story against Zimmerman to fit the evidence.
And you are failing.




Thunder said:
GZ's angry pursuit and then deadly shooting of a minor, will send him to prison.
Click to expand...
There was no angry pursuit, let alone a pursuit.




whysoserious said:
Yes, I'd say stalking someone while carrying a gun is creating a dangerous situation.
Click to expand...
Since his action of following to be able to point Trayvon out to the police when they arrived, is not stalking, and is not creating a dangerous situation, you are wrong.
Trayvon was the only one who actually stalked and created a dangerous situation.


whysoserious said:
Following something stealthily is stalking.
Click to expand...
Zimmerman was not doing anything stealthily like Trayvon was.
So you are wrong!
 
joko104 said:
Now you are writing of yourself in 3rd person like you are a celebrity? You really are not the super big deal you often claim yourself to be.
Click to expand...
I think he is saying "****ing Newbie likes this.", in an attempt to continually pass himself off as being new.
LOL
:doh
 
Thunder said:
what does this have to do with Zimmerman being brave, stubborn, or stupid?

why do you turn EVERY one of these threads into an anti-Obama race-baiting rant?
Click to expand...
Probably for similar reason you keep being dishonest and baiting about my saying it was "Dusk", as a more accurate description, when it was.
 
Caine said:
No. It isn't.

Crimes have things called "elements"... which are, conditions that have to be present in the facts of the incident in order for them to qualify as that crime.

Nothing in this scenario qualifies as stalking.
Click to expand...

angrily pursuing someone in a car and on foot, is stalking.
 
If the prosecution has such a slam dunk case against Zimmerman, why is the Judge
limiting Zimmerman's ability to defend himself? (By taking away his funding.)
The Judge's role is to make sure both sides follow the law, not stack the deck for the
prosecution!
 
ric27 said:
So, Z staying in his car....Z was avoiding a dangerous situation?
Click to expand...

No, staying in the car would have avoided making a stupid decision. Regardless of what happened after he got out of the car, Z got out of the car believing that he was potentially putting himself in danger by doing so. That's just plain ****ing stupid.
 
longview said:
If the prosecution has such a slam dunk case against Zimmerman, why is the Judge
limiting Zimmerman's ability to defend himself? (By taking away his funding.)
The Judge's role is to make sure both sides follow the law, not stack the deck for the
prosecution!
Click to expand...

Why do GZ supporters keep tossing this garbage out there?
 
Excon said:
And we already know that isn't true.
He had no idea how many witnesses there were or what they saw.

It is you trying to fabricate a story against Zimmerman to fit the evidence.
And you are failing.




There was no angry pursuit, let alone a pursuit.




Since his action of following to be able to point Trayvon out to the police when they arrived, is not stalking, and is not creating a dangerous situation, you are wrong.
Trayvon was the only one who actually stalked and created a dangerous situation.


Zimmerman was not doing anything stealthily like Trayvon was.
So you are wrong!
Click to expand...

Try paying attention to context.
 
whysoserious said:
Yes, I'd say stalking someone while carrying a gun is creating a dangerous situation.
Click to expand...



The line "college of the galatically retarded" comes to mind as the Zimmerman haters again resort to using "stalking."

Its not like the statute on stalking has not be posted 25 TIMES! shows that GZ was NOT stalking.

But, like true pathological liars consumed by blind hatred dictated by the partisan overloads, they just use it over and over again.

The one who committed stalking by the definition of law was Trayvon Martin - and for violent, felony criminal intent.
 
Thunder said:
angrily pursuing someone in a car and on foot, is stalking.
Click to expand...



Trayvon Martin stalked George Zimmerman with angry, violent criminal intentions that he carried out.
 
Furiounova said:
Try paying attention to context.
Click to expand...
:lamo
And pray tell, what context are you referring to that I didn't pay attention to?
LOL
You fabricating evidence to fit a preconceived and biased narrative?
:doh

Or was it it in context of Thunder's false claim of "angry pursuit"?
:doh

Or was it whysoserious's claim of "stalking", "stealthily" or not, when there was no stalking.
:doh

Is that the context you are referring to? iLOL
 
Last edited:
joko104 said:
The line "college of the galatically retarded" comes to mind as the Zimmerman haters again resort to using "stalking."

Its not like the statute on stalking has not be posted 25 TIMES! shows that GZ was NOT stalking.

But, like true pathological liars consumed by blind hatred dictated by the partisan overloads, they just use it over and over again.

The one who committed stalking by the definition of law was Trayvon Martin - and for violent, felony criminal intent.
Click to expand...

I didn't get it before but now I do. This poster is against GZ but only pretending to be a GZ supporter to make GZ supporters look silly. Nobody would sincerely repeatedly make the most laughable claims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom