The George Zimmerman Case!

Posted in the Columbus Forum

Comments (Page 76)

Showing posts 1,501 - 1,520 of7,670
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Oolongti

Austin, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1617
Jun 13, 2013
 
-Clayton Bigsby wrote:
<quoted text>Yet here you are, down in the proverbial muck with the rest of us. Unless you're doing research for a novel or a thesis, the "valuable information" you're so giddy about will get you a cup of coffee...with two dollars thrown in.
oh, don't flatter yourself george...
I am definitely not in the "proverbial muck" with the likes of you.
You are definitely in a class all your own...maybe even species. I won't know for sure until all the lab work is done...I'm pretty sure my hunch was right about you...heheheheh!

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1618
Jun 13, 2013
 
Oolongti wrote:
<quoted text>
Because it wasn't about Trayvon...it was about George needing to LOOK LIKE A HERO to the police department....he was a cop wannabe...he wanted the chief to give him an "atta boy", so he called the non emergency number....so that he could let them know it was GEORGE ZIMMERMAN going after the "bad suspicious guy".
It was ONLY George's suspicion, btw....a TRAINED police officer might have stopped Trayvon, asked what he was doing, and realized the kid was carrying a cell phone and skittles...and that he had a REASON to be in the subdivision since he lived there.
I don't think Zimmerman wanted to kill him....I think he wanted to be a hero in the eyes of his community....I think Mr. Zimmerman thought he could "catch" someone HE thought looked suspicious, and then he'd look good in the police department's eyes. He's a pathetic little wannabe....
and btw....if he wasn't guilty of killing an unarmed innocent teenager, then WHAT is he guilty of?
If he's going to declare he was just defending himself, then why didn't he wait for back up?
THE ANSWER: because if he had done that, HE wouldn't get to be THE HERO...
I have a question:
Why did his wife lie for him?
You've obviously never been married if you're asking that question. She lied about a PayPal balance...not the right thing to do, but she was protecting her husband. And let's not forget, since 1998, perjury hasn't been considered the crime it once was. Chalk that up to another "contribution" made by Bill Clinton to posterity.

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1619
Jun 13, 2013
 
Oolongti wrote:
<quoted text>
oh, don't flatter yourself george...
I am definitely not in the "proverbial muck" with the likes of you.
You are definitely in a class all your own...maybe even species. I won't know for sure until all the lab work is done...I'm pretty sure my hunch was right about you...heheheheh!
Your so-called hunch doesn't seem to be panning out. One has to wonder why someone who communicates as poorly as you do is so smug.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1620
Jun 13, 2013
 
Oolongti wrote:
<quoted text>
Ha...this coming from someone who liberally name calls, defames and insults anyone who disagrees with him,and psychoanalyzes them as well..
PROJECTION much?
Again,how is it that YOU have decided that I'm a manic angry human being? I have never been emotional with you...I have never called you names, or disrespected anyone here...YOU on the other hand seem to slap that on the table with every post 8 hours a day.
As for the principle of innocent until proven guilty...
What innocence until proven guilty did Mr. Zimmerman give Trayvon?
What REASONABLE DOUBT did Mr. Zimmerman give Trayvon?
Seems to me you're the one with the red face....maybe you should look into some Yoga...it will help your blood pressure, and it just might help you get in touch with your OWN issues....
I really don't give a flying rat's ass what YOU think...you're just a silly scared old man with nothing better to do with his life than argue with people you don't know in order to make yourself feel better. I'm here for reasons OTHER than what you think....heheheh! Thank you for the information you've given me so far...it will come in handy.
In the United States of America, it's innocent until proven guilty. And if you don't like THAT, go to another country where it's guilty and we don't have to prove it.

What you, and others here, fail to understand is that Zimmerman admitting killing Martin. But during the trial, he will have to be found guilty of the charges according to how Florida law is written. That's separate and apart from your emotionally charged rants.

It doesn't matter what any of us think - the justice system gets a chance to play out. Why that is so difficult to understand, I do not know. But I do know this: If it were your family member charged with a crime, you'd get the best attorney you could afford.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1621
Jun 13, 2013
 
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
via Miami Herald:
Experts who reviewed the [DNA] reports for The Miami Herald said it’s not unusual to find several people’s DNA on a firearm, particularly if the owner shared it at a gun range.
They also agreed that Trayvon wouldn’t necessarily get DNA under his fingernails, even if he had punched Zimmerman.
“What prosecutors want to prove is not going to be proven or supported by DNA findings,” said Lawrence Kobilinsky, a forensics professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.“I don’t see anything that differentiates between Trayvon being the aggressor or vice versa.”
...Florida International University biologist Martin Tracey, a DNA expert who often testifies for the prosecution in criminal cases, said that for Trayvon’s DNA to wind up on the weapon, he would have to have handled it “for a reasonable amount of time.” The absence of his DNA doesn’t mean much for the case, Tracey said.
“My suspicion is that the defense and the state will present the DNA, because jurors expect to see it, but neither will make anything of it,” Tracey said.“It doesn’t say,‘He did it!”
***
You've pinned your hopes on that DNA, Reader, but as you have been repeatedly informed...the DNA evidence fails to prove the state's case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Circumstantial evidence results in conjecture...not conviction.
The experts are going to cancel each other out, I'm fairly certain of it. And no eyewitnesses.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1622
Jun 13, 2013
 
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's already been brought up dear. EVERYBODY KNOWS. And then there's the opening statements.
Careful. It'd be a shame to mix up opening/closing arguments with....errrr...."facts ".
Wait what

Dublin, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1623
Jun 13, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Hey Reader,'splain this to me, would you?

http://www.5dca.org/Clerk/George%20Zimmerman%...

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1624
Jun 13, 2013
 
Oolongti wrote:
<quoted text>
Because it wasn't about Trayvon...it was about George needing to LOOK LIKE A HERO to the police department....he was a cop wannabe...he wanted the chief to give him an "atta boy", so he called the non emergency number....so that he could let them know it was GEORGE ZIMMERMAN going after the "bad suspicious guy".
It was ONLY George's suspicion, btw....a TRAINED police officer might have stopped Trayvon, asked what he was doing, and realized the kid was carrying a cell phone and skittles...and that he had a REASON to be in the subdivision since he lived there.
I don't think Zimmerman wanted to kill him....I think he wanted to be a hero in the eyes of his community....I think Mr. Zimmerman thought he could "catch" someone HE thought looked suspicious,
Glad to see you admit he thought that. That puts you slightly above the crowd that claims it was because of race.
and then he'd look good in the police department's eyes. He's a pathetic little wannabe....
and btw....if he wasn't guilty of killing an unarmed innocent teenager, then WHAT is he guilty of?
Not watching his back closely enough... to let someone sneak up on him like that. I'd have never made that mistake, and I'm half blind!
If he's going to declare he was just defending himself, then why didn't he wait for back up?
Did you listen to the tape? You can clearly hear him stop running when the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that" and he said "OK" there is absolutely no evidence that he was "going after" Martin after that time.
THE ANSWER: because if he had done that, HE wouldn't get to be THE HERO...
I have a question:
Why did his wife lie for him?
For the same reason Martin's parents claimed he was a darling little angel.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1625
Jun 13, 2013
 
Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
Careful. It'd be a shame to mix up opening/closing arguments with....errrr...."facts ".
Just saying how the jury will hear/have heard about the self-defense claim, without Zimmerman necessarily having to take the stand to claim it himself.
Oolongti

Austin, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1626
Jun 13, 2013
 
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Glad to see you admit he thought that. That puts you slightly above the crowd that claims it was because of race.
<quoted text>
Not watching his back closely enough... to let someone sneak up on him like that. I'd have never made that mistake, and I'm half blind!
<quoted text>
Did you listen to the tape? You can clearly hear him stop running when the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that" and he said "OK" there is absolutely no evidence that he was "going after" Martin after that time.
<quoted text>

For the same reason Martin's parents claimed he was a darling little angel.
truly....would you want a guy with a wannabe complex running around your neighborhood with a gun? aren't we supposed to be screening mentally ill people so they can't get a gun?
what if he shoots YOUR KID, and then declares: "well he looked suspicious, and then he attacked me and I had to defend myself"...
THis is lame beyond belief.
I don't buy his story...and I don't think a jury will either.
He knew what he was doing was "wrong", in that he never mentioned to the 911 operator that he had a loaded gun with him...did he?
Why do you suppose that is?
I do believe there was some racial overtones with this, simply because in George's mind anyone wearing a hoodie was a black hoodlum...that speaks to a racial 'profiling' in his way of thinking.
I also know Sanford FLorida has had a long history of racial problems between the police and the black community, and that whites in the community have expressed some racially charged statements. IT's not a stretch to believe this had racial overtones.
I don't think it was the motivating factor. I think the motivating factor was George's own psychological shortcomings. He operates from a low self esteem, and believed if he could be a hero in the community, he'd be somebody. IT's pathetic someone like him had access to a weapon. He operates on a psychological level like a teenager himself. He was the adult in the situation, and should have had better judgement. He obviously was turned down by other police departments for a reason. Its too bad so many want to make him out to be some poor schlump that got into an innocent wrangle with a teenager. He either is too stupid to cary a gun, or he lacks the capacity to understand possible outcomes of his own behavior and choices...either way, it smacks of immaturity and ignorance on his part. While that isn't a crime in and of itself, it sure doesn't bode well to have someone like him running around pretending to be a hero. I don't think self defense can even begin to apply here. He put himself in the situation and set himself up with a loaded gun. Either he is dumb as a brick, or he is delusional. I hope the jury can see through the maze. I don't think this should give citizens the right to open up on all "suspicious" looking people.
I have one question....
How can someone declare self defense when the bullet went in the back and exited the front...( this was one story I read...so I don't know if this is true..)

“Where did I put my tiara?”

Since: Dec 11

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1627
Jun 13, 2013
 
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
Oooh. I'll bring a rainbow color dog leash.
Hot diggety dog, that was fricken funny. No one else gets how funny that is...thanks for my laugh to start my day.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1628
Jun 13, 2013
 
Oolongti wrote:
<quoted text>
truly....would you want a guy with a wannabe complex running around your neighborhood with a gun? aren't we supposed to be screening mentally ill people so they can't get a gun?
what if he shoots YOUR KID, and then declares: "well he looked suspicious, and then he attacked me and I had to defend myself"...
My kid wouldn't be that stupid.
THis is lame beyond belief.
I don't buy his story...and I don't think a jury will either.
He knew what he was doing was "wrong", in that he never mentioned to the 911 operator that he had a loaded gun with him...did he?
Why do you suppose that is?
The dispatcher didn't ask?
I do believe there was some racial overtones with this, simply because in George's mind anyone wearing a hoodie was a black hoodlum...that speaks to a racial 'profiling' in his way of thinking.
"I think he's black", especially in response to a direct question, is not profiling.
I also know Sanford FLorida has had a long history of racial problems between the police and the black community, and that whites in the community have expressed some racially charged statements. IT's not a stretch to believe this had racial overtones.
Thinking and proving are two different things.
I don't think it was the motivating factor. I think the motivating factor was George's own psychological shortcomings. He operates from a low self esteem, and believed if he could be a hero in the community, he'd be somebody.
Armchair psychiatry.
IT's pathetic someone like him had access to a weapon. He operates on a psychological level like a teenager himself. He was the adult in the situation, and should have had better judgement. He obviously was turned down by other police departments for a reason. Its too bad so many want to make him out to be some poor schlump that got into an innocent wrangle with a teenager. He either is too stupid to cary a gun, or he lacks the capacity to understand possible outcomes of his own behavior and choices...either way, it smacks of immaturity and ignorance on his part. While that isn't a crime in and of itself, it sure doesn't bode well to have someone like him running around pretending to be a hero. I don't think self defense can even begin to apply here. He put himself in the situation and set himself up with a loaded gun. Either he is dumb as a brick, or he is delusional. I hope the jury can see through the maze. I don't think this should give citizens the right to open up on all "suspicious" looking people.
Not all... Just the ones who attack them.
I have one question....
How can someone declare self defense when the bullet went in the back and exited the front...( this was one story I read...so I don't know if this is true..)
Maybe you should research it so you can avoid asking questions that make you look foolish.

I'll save you some time. Here you go. It's on the first page...

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/1...

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1631
Jun 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's already been brought up dear. EVERYBODY KNOWS. And then there's the opening statements.
Ah, so you are relying on O'Mara's poisoning of the jury pool?

Why not just bring in a cast of good ol' white boys with NRA cards to play the part of the jury? I mean, after all, if presentation of the facts of the case don't make any difference?

But, that is not the way justice operates in this country, for all its weaknesses. And O'Mara will not be allowed to offer up in his opening statement a lot of the victim smear material that he has been flooding the 'net with in recent weeks, via his friends over at the Treehouse.

Apparently Zimmerman's father doesn't much trust the justice system (ironic, since that is how he earned his living). He has put out a book on the "malicious prosecution" of his son. Doubly ironic since the trial has not yet really gotten under way.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1632
Jun 14, 2013
 
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, so you are relying on O'Mara's poisoning of the jury pool?
Why not just bring in a cast of good ol' white boys with NRA cards to play the part of the jury? I mean, after all, if presentation of the facts of the case don't make any difference?
But, that is not the way justice operates in this country, for all its weaknesses. And O'Mara will not be allowed to offer up in his opening statement a lot of the victim smear material that he has been flooding the 'net with in recent weeks, via his friends over at the Treehouse.
Apparently Zimmerman's father doesn't much trust the justice system (ironic, since that is how he earned his living). He has put out a book on the "malicious prosecution" of his son. Doubly ironic since the trial has not yet really gotten under way.
Woman, you are such a willful idiot.

READ:

http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/T84UGU1AQ...

WW provided a legal brief for your perusal, wherein the Defendant asserts self-defense.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1633
Jun 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Wait what wrote:
Hey Reader,'splain this to me, would you?
http://www.5dca.org/Clerk/George%20Zimmerman%...
The deposition of attorney Crump has been a subject of contention. Judge Nelson ruled that his affadivit was sufficient, citing him as "opposing counsel" with protected work product.

Zimmerman's team appealed it to a higher court where Nelson was overturned with limitations. The higher court noted that it could not determine if the inability to depose Crump would have an impact on the Zimmerman trial. They allowed the deposition, however ruled that Zimmerman's team could not ask questions about how Crump located witness #8, or why he chose to interview her in the way that he did. They also cannot ask his opinion regarding what she stated.

In essence, they will be able to depose, but essentially on all the same information contained in the affadavit.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1634
Jun 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
...Doubly ironic since the trial has not yet really gotten under way.
Multiple motions/pleadings have been entered into the court record prior to trial.
This legal proceeding began when Zimmerman was charged.
It has been well under way for over a year.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1635
Jun 14, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

1

Oolongti wrote:
<quoted text>
perhaps you aren't at work today because in your little fantasy world, you are independently wealthy, a genius in all you do, and you are omnicient.
You do realize you have just dug yourself into a huge hole, don't you? have you considered no one believes anything you say?
you're just a speck of carbon dust in the universe...and topix isn't the universe.
George has had a lot of at-home time lately.

Maybe he's on administrative leave for some in-office harassment.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1636
Jun 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
via Miami Herald:
Experts who reviewed the [DNA] reports for The Miami Herald said it’s not unusual to find several people’s DNA on a firearm, particularly if the owner shared it at a gun range.
They also agreed that Trayvon wouldn’t necessarily get DNA under his fingernails, even if he had punched Zimmerman.
“What prosecutors want to prove is not going to be proven or supported by DNA findings,” said Lawrence Kobilinsky, a forensics professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.“I don’t see anything that differentiates between Trayvon being the aggressor or vice versa.”
...Florida International University biologist Martin Tracey, a DNA expert who often testifies for the prosecution in criminal cases, said that for Trayvon’s DNA to wind up on the weapon, he would have to have handled it “for a reasonable amount of time.” The absence of his DNA doesn’t mean much for the case, Tracey said.
“My suspicion is that the defense and the state will present the DNA, because jurors expect to see it, but neither will make anything of it,” Tracey said.“It doesn’t say,‘He did it!”
***
You've pinned your hopes on that DNA, Reader, but as you have been repeatedly informed...the DNA evidence fails to prove the state's case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Circumstantial evidence results in conjecture...not conviction.
The lack of DNA on the weapon is rather inconsequential. But, Z's claim is that Trayvon used both hands to smother him--covering both his mouth and (bleeding) nose. Unrealistic to suppose no transfer of blood/DNA to his hands with all those ready bodily fluids there.

The evidence which you consider circumstantial contradicts Z's story. It is much easier to rule out a story as impossible than it is to support one. Z. is lying and the evidence shows it.

What we are left with then is the gun, the body and the shell casing. And Zimmerman's admission that he shot him.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1637
Jun 14, 2013
 
-Clayton Bigsby wrote:
<quoted text>You've obviously never been married if you're asking that question. She lied about a PayPal balance...not the right thing to do, but she was protecting her husband. And let's not forget, since 1998, perjury hasn't been considered the crime it once was. Chalk that up to another "contribution" made by Bill Clinton to posterity.
And yet--Shellie has been charged with perjury.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1638
Jun 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
you are lame beyond belief.
when a neighborhood organizes a team to protect the neighborhood, I suppose that offends you.
you prefer your property to be robbed and money you earned stolen from your garage.
I forgot.....you don't own anything....you must steal yourself. Best hope you don't run into someone who does protect private property.
Wonder why new born babies and 80 year old women are not profiled?
does it take a rocket scientist to explain to you, who commits over half the violent crime in America.
let the Etrade baby show you his shocked face.
If such an organized team manages to take out a few neighborhood kids by mistake, that's OK by you, eh?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1,501 - 1,520 of7,670
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

55 Users are viewing the Columbus Forum right now

Search the Columbus Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Lois Lerner linked to another erased hard drive 3 min Male 19
500 march for Trayvon Martin in Columbus (Mar '12) 29 min They cannot kill a Spook 405
OH Who do you support for Governor in Ohio in 2010? (Oct '10) 30 min shooting blanks stepson 28,997
Is Barack Obama Doing a Good Job as President? (Aug '13) 34 min Go Blue Forever 2,892
No you agree with Israeli airstrikes into Gaza? 36 min They cannot kill a Spook 25
Do we need to impeach Obama to save America? 45 min They cannot kill a Spook 60
Ann Coulter: "White Guilt Has Produced Mistake ... (Sep '12) 1 hr d pantz 32
•••
•••
•••
•••

Columbus Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

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 ]
•••