Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#27 Jul 19, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>Yep. And the fact is, Nelson was a clueless yet conniving b!tch when she gave the jury instructions, right down to "forgetting" them in her chambers when she came out to the bench.
Stand Your Ground was ruled out BEFORE the trial. This was a sel defense case.
--------
So, what exactly do Stand Your Ground laws have to do with Zimmerman and Martin? Absolutely nothing, of course. Outside your own home, common principles of self-defense dictate that unless you have reasonable fear of deadly force or harm, you must flee if possible rather than use deadly force. But a “duty to retreat” rests on the ability to retreat. And “duty to retreat” was irrelevant in Zimmerman’s case because — pinned to the ground with Martin on top of him, bashing his head on the concrete — he was unable to retreat.
The New York Times, for example, falsely claimed in an editorial preceding Holder’s speech that the jury “reached its verdict after having been asked to consider Mr. Zimmerman’s actions in light of the now-notorious Stand Your Ground provision in Florida’s self-defense law.” Rolling Stone made a similarly inflammatory claim, calling Martin a “victim of Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.”
All nonsense. The jury received standard instructions. Zimmerman did not invoke the Stand Your Ground provision. Zimmerman later waived his right to a pretrial immunity hearing under the Stand Your Ground procedures.
Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/201...
Follow us:@RCP_Articles on Twitter
From your Miami Herald article you posted a few minutes ago:

Zimmerman waived his right to the Stand Your Ground immunity hearing, a pre-trial event that's not spelled out in statute. But he was afforded the protections of Stand Your Ground, which is embedded in Florida's self-defense laws. Its language, found in statute 766.012, was tailored to the Zimmerman trial's jury instructions and said the following:

"If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/07/16/196867/...
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#28 Jul 19, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>Yep. And the fact is, Nelson was a clueless yet conniving b!tch when she gave the jury instructions, right down to "forgetting" them in her chambers when she came out to the bench.
Stand Your Ground was ruled out BEFORE the trial. This was a sel defense case.
--------
So, what exactly do Stand Your Ground laws have to do with Zimmerman and Martin? Absolutely nothing, of course. Outside your own home, common principles of self-defense dictate that unless you have reasonable fear of deadly force or harm, you must flee if possible rather than use deadly force. But a “duty to retreat” rests on the ability to retreat. And “duty to retreat” was irrelevant in Zimmerman’s case because — pinned to the ground with Martin on top of him, bashing his head on the concrete — he was unable to retreat.
The New York Times, for example, falsely claimed in an editorial preceding Holder’s speech that the jury “reached its verdict after having been asked to consider Mr. Zimmerman’s actions in light of the now-notorious Stand Your Ground provision in Florida’s self-defense law.” Rolling Stone made a similarly inflammatory claim, calling Martin a “victim of Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.”
All nonsense. The jury received standard instructions. Zimmerman did not invoke the Stand Your Ground provision. Zimmerman later waived his right to a pretrial immunity hearing under the Stand Your Ground procedures.
Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/201...
Follow us:@RCP_Articles on Twitter
Michelle Malkin? Really? Oy vey.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#29 Jul 19, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
From your Miami Herald article you posted a few minutes ago:
Zimmerman waived his right to the Stand Your Ground immunity hearing, a pre-trial event that's not spelled out in statute. But he was afforded the protections of Stand Your Ground, which is embedded in Florida's self-defense laws. Its language, found in statute 766.012, was tailored to the Zimmerman trial's jury instructions and said the following:
"If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."
Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/07/16/196867/...
So you're mad because SYG is "embedded" in the self defense laws? And you think that waiving the immunity hearing was no big deal?
And you think Nelson was a competent judge?
You have a screw loose.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#30 Jul 19, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Michelle Malkin? Really? Oy vey.
LOL! Your side uses Al Sharpton as an advocate!
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#31 Jul 19, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>So you're mad because SYG is "embedded" in the self defense laws? And you think that waiving the immunity hearing was no big deal?
And you think Nelson was a competent judge?
You have a screw loose.
No, no, and she seemed competent to me.

Your comment was that the Stand Your Ground law had nothing to do with the Zimmerman trial. The essence of Stand Your Ground is the elimination of the common law duty to retreat. A person who earned a 3.1 in undergraduate school should be able to infer the relationship between the elimination of the duty to retreat and the colloquial name of the law. When the duty to retreat was eliminated, people could, say it with me, stand their ground.

So well done posting an article that explained the Stand Your Ground contributions to the Zimmerman jury instructions to support your assertion that Stand Your Ground had nothing to do with the Zimmerman case.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#32 Jul 19, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>LOL! Your side uses Al Sharpton as an advocate!
You and your "sides." I have never cited Al Sharpton for any purpose, but the last thing I would ever cite him for would be an opinion on the law. But you just keep right on citing Malkin. She has as much legal education as both Sharpton and you.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#33 Jul 19, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You and your "sides." I have never cited Al Sharpton for any purpose, but the last thing I would ever cite him for would be an opinion on the law. But you just keep right on citing Malkin. She has as much legal education as both Sharpton and you.
You are on one side of the case, little girl. Stop lying about being a neutral observer.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#34 Jul 19, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You and your "sides." I have never cited Al Sharpton for any purpose, but the last thing I would ever cite him for would be an opinion on the law. But you just keep right on citing Malkin. She has as much legal education as both Sharpton and you.
And you, it would seem.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#35 Jul 19, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>You are on one side of the case, little girl. Stop lying about being a neutral observer.
Seems like you are running away from your bold assertion.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#36 Jul 19, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>And you, it would seem.
Second reply to the same post and yet another attempt to divert attention from your error.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#37 Jul 19, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Seems like you are running away from your bold assertion.
My posts and links speak for themselves. You're on acid today, kid.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#38 Jul 19, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Second reply to the same post and yet another attempt to divert attention from your error.
I made no error and I'm posting directly to your posts, little girl.
You have no more legal training than anyone else here.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#39 Jul 19, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>My posts and links speak for themselves. You're on acid today, kid.
Yes, they certainly do. Your links prove your posts to be wrong. Brilliant.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#41 Jul 19, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>I made no error and I'm posting directly to your posts, little girl.
You have no more legal training than anyone else here.
You are posting directly to my posts except for the one that proves you wrong. That one you conveniently ignore. It's almost like I am on the school board or something.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#43 Jul 19, 2013
RU_Kiddingme wrote:
<quoted text>
So you just conceded the point.
U R mad, right?
There's nothing to concede. Read Malkin's article.
Then try and convince yourself that waiving SYG before the trial meant nothing.

“Paper Or Plastic?”

Since: Nov 11

Albakoikee

#44 Jul 19, 2013
RU_Kiddingme wrote:
<quoted text>
So you're saying that we should all be armed and ready to fire at all times.
Got it.
However, I don't believe that most Americans wish to live in a society where one must live in a perpetual state of vigilance for one's life.
Of course we don't all want to live like this, but society is demanding it more and more, day by day.
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#45 Jul 19, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>There's nothing to concede. Read Malkin's article.
Then try and convince yourself that waiving SYG before the trial meant nothing.
There you go again, Georgie. You are moving the ball. No one said that waiving the stand your ground hearing meant nothing. The premise that started this discussion was your unequivocal claim that the "Stand Your Ground law wasn't an issue in the case." So how about you read the Miami Herald article YOU posted and try and convince yourself that the SYG law wasn't an important part of the jury instructions.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#46 Jul 19, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
There you go again, Georgie. You are moving the ball. No one said that waiving the stand your ground hearing meant nothing. The premise that started this discussion was your unequivocal claim that the "Stand Your Ground law wasn't an issue in the case." So how about you read the Miami Herald article YOU posted and try and convince yourself that the SYG law wasn't an important part of the jury instructions.
Fail.
Every time you get frustrated you accuse everyone else of "moving the ball," "deflecting," or "running away."
Che Reagan Christ

Lodi, OH

#47 Jul 19, 2013
Diamond Eugene wrote:
<quoted text>Fail.
Every time you get frustrated you accuse everyone else of "moving the ball," "deflecting," or "running away."
Not true. All one has to do is read this thread. You declare that SYG had nothing to do with Zimmerman. I point out that the very article that you posted that you think supports your position in fact proves your position wrong. All of the sudden, you are insisting that someone claimed that Zimmerman waiving his immunity hearing was insignificant. It's a psychosis with you.

Since: Jun 13

Hilliard, OH

#48 Jul 19, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Not true. All one has to do is read this thread. You declare that SYG had nothing to do with Zimmerman. I point out that the very article that you posted that you think supports your position in fact proves your position wrong. All of the sudden, you are insisting that someone claimed that Zimmerman waiving his immunity hearing was insignificant. It's a psychosis with you.
You're doing it again...looking like a butthurt little girl.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Is Barack Obama Doing a Good Job as President? (Aug '13) 2 min Male 3,570
Bennett Smith gate stories from the victims poi... (May '13) 10 min truth 2,447
Somali immigrants fight for improvements to Nor... 27 min truviz 14
OH Who do you support for Governor in Ohio in 2010? (Oct '10) 33 min Canton 31,504
Lobbyist pleads guilty to federal corruption ch... (Dec '13) 1 hr Swedenforever 24
Catman Dave 1 hr Pope Che Reagan C... 4
Armed Contractor on Elevator with President 1 hr Pope Che Reagan C... 58
Two fish were swimming upstream.... 2 hr Reality Speaks 386
Xenos Christian Fellowship is a CULT! (Jul '12) 3 hr Concerned Brother 961
Dear Duke (Got a problem, I've got your solution) 11 hr d pantz 90

Columbus Jobs

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Columbus News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Columbus

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]