Would you say George Zimmerman is inn...

Would you say George Zimmerman is innocent or guillty after you read post #1

Posted in the Perry Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Abbeville Inquirer

Abbeville, LA

#1 Jul 16, 2013
Read all of this post #1 and think really well before you vote and reply because youíll will really have not considered the following true points of view.

1. If you were an actual Juror, how would you like to have your own child go to the store to buy candy minding his own business, not violating any law and not committing any crime, but when your child was walking on his way back home your child gets followed by a suspicious not identified unknown person.
2. Letís say your child tells someone from his cell phone that he was taking a short cut home trying to avoid the following person.
3. Letís say your child sees the following person continue to follow him.
4. Letís say the following person calls and spoke with a police dispatcher admitting he is following your child and was told to wait for the police to investigate and not to follow your child, but when the following person continues to follow your child it violated the police dispatcherís warning and constitutes the provoking stalking of your child which is a crime by the following person.
5. Letís say when your confronted child tries self defense trying to save his life from the stalking following person, your child is shot to death.
6. Question: Since the preceding actually happened, would you say the admitting killer such as a George Zimmerman is innocent and did not do anything wrong or was he guilty of at least manslaughter for shooting your unarmed innocent child to death when your child was in self defense trying to save his life up to the time that your child was shot to death?

*Iíve had what I have to say about this, so now youíll have at it because Iím done with this forever.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#2 Jul 16, 2013
Well I certainly hope you feel better getting all that off your chest. All I can say is they reached the correct verdict. Oh ummm by the way you were so overwhelmed with emotion that you forgot to put the poll. What were the choices again?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#3 Jul 16, 2013
This is nothing compared to the atrocities that go on everyday in this country. Why put this particular case in the spot light? That's what you need to ask yourself.
Mitchell

Oklahoma City, OK

#4 Jul 16, 2013
NOTFADEAWAY wrote:
This is nothing compared to the atrocities that go on everyday in this country. Why put this particular case in the spot light? That's what you need to ask yourself.
These kinds of people cannot see beyond the liberal media "headlight" that leads them to slaughter.
Where were the liberals and the sharptons and the jesses when that white kid was doused with gasoline and set on fire by black neighbors in california. All because they stole his bike and he did the right thing by turning them in. Where was justice then?
Where was liberal media, then?
Where is the media in the reporting or relieving the rampant black on black crime.
Where was the media when this innocent mother was pushing her baby in a stroller when she was approached by two young thugs who demanded money and shot the baby in the face when she explained she didn't have any money on her??!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-22989...

We may never know all the facts in this case but I'm siding with the FBI's statement that neither race nor hate was involved and that therefore precludes another waste of taxpayers money for another trial of any nature as guaranteed by double jeopardy.

“Own what you say, don't hide”

Since: Mar 12

Abbeville, La.

#5 Jul 16, 2013
He is not innocent, of course not... he killed someone in self defense who attacked him. But innocent is not what counts, a jury say's he is not guilty of 2nd degree murder or man slaughter. To convict this man because a mob wants justice is not justice or because some politicians want to incite racial tension to get media coverage is disgraceful. Some may like the verdict and others may not, Justice was served... you don't have to like it, live with it.
Mitchell

Oklahoma City, OK

#6 Jul 16, 2013
Abbeville Inquirer wrote:
Read all of this post #1 and think really well before you vote and reply because youíll will really have not considered the following true points of view.
1. If you were an actual Juror, how would you like to have your own child go to the store to buy candy minding his own business, not violating any law and not committing any crime, but when your child was walking on his way back home your child gets followed by a suspicious not identified unknown person.
2. Letís say your child tells someone from his cell phone that he was taking a short cut home trying to avoid the following person.
3. Letís say your child sees the following person continue to follow him.
4. Letís say the following person calls and spoke with a police dispatcher admitting he is following your child and was told to wait for the police to investigate and not to follow your child, but when the following person continues to follow your child it violated the police dispatcherís warning and constitutes the provoking stalking of your child which is a crime by the following person.
5. Letís say when your confronted child tries self defense trying to save his life from the stalking following person, your child is shot to death.
6. Question: Since the preceding actually happened, would you say the admitting killer such as a George Zimmerman is innocent and did not do anything wrong or was he guilty of at least manslaughter for shooting your unarmed innocent child to death when your child was in self defense trying to save his life up to the time that your child was shot to death?
*Iíve had what I have to say about this, so now youíll have at it because Iím done with this forever.
You should check Treyvon's phone records carefully. You'd be surprised what he and the prosecutions' "star" witnessed texted the night before. He was not a kid and was a known drug user.
Do you know what skittles and flavored drinks of the nature he had are used for?
They are mixed with dextromathoraphan (cough syrup) to make a potent phsychodelic drink.
Mitchell

Oklahoma City, OK

#7 Jul 16, 2013
It can be made with many things.
Codeine is the number one choice.
Dextromathoraphan is more widely available. Meet " LEAN":
http://youtu.be/ShblLN2VveE
Autopsy revealed Treyvon's liver had damage consistent with lean use.
MrsCuldesac

Evadale, TX

#9 Jul 16, 2013
I'll tell you this, from the whooping he gave on Zimmerman he looks like he would have been in a rage! Sorry, just the way I see it!
If he would of explained himself to Zimmerman, I don't think they would have had this at all happen! It's what and the way he acted what led Zimmerman to do what he had no other choice to do.
I mean come on he had drugs in his system, but they still portray him as all innocent! A person under the influence of drugs? Give me a break.

On his way Home eating skittles!
Ask yourself why his witness cannot read script?
Maybe she eats too much skittles too!
Mysterymix

Crowley, LA

#10 Jul 16, 2013
George Zimmerman deserved all the suffering he experienced over the last 18 months. He pulled the trigger out of fear. He could have decided to keep his distance and not confronted Trayvon. I myself have walked out my front door and confronted a stranger in the neighborhood. I do not confront them with aggression. I confront them with an open mind. I walk up to them, all the while paying attention to their body movements. When I get close, I notice their facial expression. I listen to the tone of their voice. Once I interact, I sometimes determine they are harmless. I do not determine that they are dangerous or innocent from a distance. That is usually hard to do. It also requires a bit of courage to approach an unknown potential danger. George Zimmerman did not have this kind of courage. He seems to have had some predisposed notion that Trayvon was a bad boy. We the public, will never know if Trayvon was a bad boy. It is quite ignorant of us to even seek an answer to that question, as the Answer will come from Fox news or CNN. And we really can't trust either one when it comes to a highly charged story.
Trayvon is partly responsible for his death. He is not an innocent boy just walking the street. George spotted a suspicious person. He approached Trayvon. Trayvon had the opportunity to pause and appear harmless. Instead he took umbrage at the notion that someone wrongly suspected him. He could have paused and answered a few question from a concerned resident. And then possibly George would have been given a certain degree of assurance that Trayvon meant no harm. Then everyone would have lived happily every after.

The 90 percent of the people have one of two opinions. Some believe Trayvon was a completely innocent boy walking the streets and got shot for nothing. Some believe George was only acting in self defense. If you have one of these two opinions, you are part of the problem in America. You really need to start thinking on your own. You really look dumb in the eyes of the few independent thinkers left on the planet.
Lets Say

New Orleans, LA

#11 Jul 16, 2013
Let's say this.....out of all the killings and wrong doings on this earth. Why is this Trevon case so important. Cause it's a race thing. Pay no attention and move on. You will be better off for it. Pay no attention to the Mass Media Presstitutes. Go watch your Jerry Springer instead, I'm sure you miss it.
ummmm

Kaplan, LA

#12 Jul 16, 2013
Having served on a jury before, the first thing that the judge informed us of was that we were not there to judge the character of the defendant nor were we there to judge what if it were me.
A jury's only purpose is to judge facts and facts alone.
lemonjello

Crowley, LA

#13 Jul 16, 2013
Lets Say wrote:
Let's say this.....out of all the killings and wrong doings on this earth. Why is this Trevon case so important. Cause it's a race thing. Pay no attention and move on. You will be better off for it. Pay no attention to the Mass Media Presstitutes. Go watch your Jerry Springer instead, I'm sure you miss it.
Someone recently said something intelligent to a reporter. He said "this past weekend, there were 10 black on black murders in Chicago. This is terrible. Why doesn't this make the national news?"
Mitchell

Oklahoma City, OK

#14 Jul 17, 2013
lemonjello wrote:
<quoted text> Someone recently said something intelligent to a reporter. He said "this past weekend, there were 10 black on black murders in Chicago. This is terrible. Why doesn't this make the national news?"
Because it will make Holder and BHO look like the hypocrites they really are.
Pretty Lies

Abbeville, LA

#15 Jul 17, 2013
Abbeville Inquirer wrote:
Read all of this post #1 and think really well before you vote and reply because youíll will really have not considered the following true points of view.
1. If you were an actual Juror, how would you like to have your own child go to the store to buy candy minding his own business, not violating any law and not committing any crime, but when your child was walking on his way back home your child gets followed by a suspicious not identified unknown person.
2. Letís say your child tells someone from his cell phone that he was taking a short cut home trying to avoid the following person.
3. Letís say your child sees the following person continue to follow him.
4. Letís say the following person calls and spoke with a police dispatcher admitting he is following your child and was told to wait for the police to investigate and not to follow your child, but when the following person continues to follow your child it violated the police dispatcherís warning and constitutes the provoking stalking of your child which is a crime by the following person.
5. Letís say when your confronted child tries self defense trying to save his life from the stalking following person, your child is shot to death.
6. Question: Since the preceding actually happened, would you say the admitting killer such as a George Zimmerman is innocent and did not do anything wrong or was he guilty of at least manslaughter for shooting your unarmed innocent child to death when your child was in self defense trying to save his life up to the time that your child was shot to death?
*Iíve had what I have to say about this, so now youíll have at it because Iím done with this forever.
Well when you put it that way he is definitely guilty of murder. However you, along with mainstream media, seem to have left out all of the "evidence", to support your theory. Evidence is what is used in criminal cases, not speculation. It is a travesty that a young man lost his life, however lets not forget the evidence shows that there was a fight, and the only person that sustained injuries in this fight was the one who fired the gun. There is absolutely 0 evidence to suggest that the defendant laid a single hand on the deceased. Also in your bullet item 4 you have stretched the truth. The defendant was never told wait for police, he was told police were on their way. There is also 0 evidence that he continued to follow the deceased after being told they didn't need him to follow him. We are all entitled to our own opinions of what happened, but we are not entitled to our own facts. Self defense only applies if an altercation takes place, it is not self defense if you punch someone in the face then mount them and bang their head on cement. The state needed to prove that Zimmerman started the altercation. Simply following someone isn't against the law, punching someone in the face is against the law. By your logic, I can simply walk down the street and punch someone and claim they were "following" me and it should be completely legal. We have the benefit of hindsight, those two individuals that night didn't have this luxury.
Mitchell

Oklahoma City, OK

#16 Jul 17, 2013
Abbeville Inquirer wrote:
Read all of this post #1 and think really well before you vote and reply because youíll will really have not considered the following true points of view.
1. If you were an actual Juror, how would you like to have your own child go to the store to buy candy minding his own business, not violating any law and not committing any crime, but when your child was walking on his way back home your child gets followed by a suspicious not identified unknown person.
2. Letís say your child tells someone from his cell phone that he was taking a short cut home trying to avoid the following person.
3. Letís say your child sees the following person continue to follow him.
4. Letís say the following person calls and spoke with a police dispatcher admitting he is following your child and was told to wait for the police to investigate and not to follow your child, but when the following person continues to follow your child it violated the police dispatcherís warning and constitutes the provoking stalking of your child which is a crime by the following person.
5. Letís say when your confronted child tries self defense trying to save his life from the stalking following person, your child is shot to death.
6. Question: Since the preceding actually happened, would you say the admitting killer such as a George Zimmerman is innocent and did not do anything wrong or was he guilty of at least manslaughter for shooting your unarmed innocent child to death when your child was in self defense trying to save his life up to the time that your child was shot to death?
*Iíve had what I have to say about this, so now youíll have at it because Iím done with this forever.
Here you have the REAL Treyvon Martin and the illegally suppressed evidence by the prosecution.

http://www.newsmax.com/US/Zimmerman-prosecuto...
MrsCuldesac

Jasper, TX

#17 Jul 17, 2013
Pretty Lies, explained very well...
Get This

Abbeville, LA

#18 Jul 17, 2013
Get This

Abbeville, LA

#19 Jul 17, 2013
my opion

Kaplan, LA

#20 Jul 17, 2013
I just buy this compute third hand and I not to good at my one finga type and my spell of word so as my firs post please forgive me not expert at this. Now bout post #1 I think none of yous smart peoples smarter than me answered post 1 proply. Post 1 as said is not bout that zimerman. It is bout if your son or daughter wents to the store buys some candy, a soda pop or ice crem and was tryin to walk back to your house not doing anything wrong. After the incident it could actually happen again to you as a parent, so what would your verdict be if anyone killed your son or daughter really just for walkin tryin to get back to your house from the store? I sure would vote the killer definitely guilty of wrongly murderin my son or daughter. Agains this is not bout that zimerman, so would all of yous say guilty if it was your own son or daughter who was wrongly murdered? Also before killing anyone I am sure that the killer should have identified himself and ask who are you, what or you doing in this neighborhood and where or you going since it would have saved wasting a human life.
Aware

Abbeville, LA

#21 Jul 18, 2013
He never got the chance to indentify himself. He said Martin jumped him. Anyone here would defend themself if their head was being hit on concrete. Keep yourselves armed some are out for revenge.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Perry Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll Why are Indians so ugly and jealous of white pe... (Jul '13) 2 hr Busted in Calcasieu 312
In need of a good attorney (Dec '11) 21 hr Do it 57
Poll Who win for sheriff Fri Best post 14
Looking for Shane Leblanc aka Shane Romero (Apr '13) Thu in the kneaux 141
Zeus in Youngsville Sep 1 Tluiana 1
Poll Would the citizens of Abbeville be interested i... Sep 1 U ahole 3
Crystal Broussard (Dec '14) Aug 31 dew 3
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Perry Mortgages