Wait what

Dublin, OH

#1845 Jun 15, 2013
Reader, I mentioned earlier in the thread that that guy was controversial and you ignored me and continued to cite him. Maybe now you will recognize that things are not quite as you would like, and they're certainly never as they seem.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1846 Jun 15, 2013
Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm sure you wouldn't. It might expose an agenda. Oh well, they're put away somewhere in case they are needed.
Do you understand how jury selection works?

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1847 Jun 15, 2013
Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
Not in outline format - I picked one.
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinion...
And the controversy would be ...
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#1848 Jun 15, 2013
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
And the white supremacists who post comments to your NRA apologist's site?
YOU ARE CITING THE PROFESSIONAL OPINION, TO DEFEND YOUR POSTINGS HERE, OF ONE WHO HAS DEFENDED WHITE SUPREMACISTS.

That you argue this by questioning me blows my mind, though maybe that was your intent.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#1849 Jun 15, 2013
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
And the controversy would be ...
Ah, you don't know how to search within a document. Hit Control F and type in Leatherman. You'll find it that way.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1850 Jun 15, 2013
Wait what wrote:
The ACLU has also defended the free speech rights of the Klan.

(only saw one article)
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#1851 Jun 15, 2013
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
The ACLU has also defended the free speech rights of the Klan.
(only saw one article)
Which has nothing to do with you citing a questionable source.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1852 Jun 15, 2013
Wait what wrote:
Reader, I mentioned earlier in the thread that that guy was controversial and you ignored me and continued to cite him. Maybe now you will recognize that things are not quite as you would like, and they're certainly never as they seem.
In fact earlier in the thread you cited someone and I posted Leatherman's response to them. That particular "controversy" came about directly as a result of Leatherman's opinions on the Zimmerman case.

So--you have presented a lawyer whose opinions are pro-Zimmerman, and not coincidentally consistent with his views on gun ownership and the use of guns for self-defense.

You don't seem comfortable in looking at the legal issues they bring to the table and comparing them. You seem to think that a citation is a means by which to bang the other side into submission to your point of view.

I am entitled to an opinion and entitled to air that opinion. As I am not on the jury there is no crime is my expressing that opinion. It happens that I consider my opinion to be pretty well founded because I have been following the case and put time into reading a lot of the interviews, reports and so forth. The trial will reveal what the trial reveals and the jury will render a decision.

But the folks who are swearing up and down that Zimmerman are innocent can claim no high ground by claiming that he is innocent until proven guilty. I am willing to bet that most will be unwilling to cede their ground with a verdict of guilty.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1853 Jun 15, 2013
that Zimmerman IS innocent.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1854 Jun 15, 2013
Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU ARE CITING THE PROFESSIONAL OPINION, TO DEFEND YOUR POSTINGS HERE, OF ONE WHO HAS DEFENDED WHITE SUPREMACISTS.
That you argue this by questioning me blows my mind, though maybe that was your intent.
I accept no responsibility for your blown brain.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1855 Jun 15, 2013
Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, you don't know how to search within a document. Hit Control F and type in Leatherman. You'll find it that way.
I did so.

And now I ask you--what is the controversy?

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1856 Jun 15, 2013
Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
Which has nothing to do with you citing a questionable source.
Does the ACLU's defense of the Klan (or Terry Jones, for that matter), make them questionable in your opinion?
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#1857 Jun 15, 2013
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
In fact earlier in the thread you cited someone and I posted Leatherman's response to them. That particular "controversy" came about directly as a result of Leatherman's opinions on the Zimmerman case.
So--you have presented a lawyer whose opinions are pro-Zimmerman, and not coincidentally consistent with his views on gun ownership and the use of guns for self-defense.
You don't seem comfortable in looking at the legal issues they bring to the table and comparing them. You seem to think that a citation is a means by which to bang the other side into submission to your point of view.
I am entitled to an opinion and entitled to air that opinion. As I am not on the jury there is no crime is my expressing that opinion. It happens that I consider my opinion to be pretty well founded because I have been following the case and put time into reading a lot of the interviews, reports and so forth. The trial will reveal what the trial reveals and the jury will render a decision.
But the folks who are swearing up and down that Zimmerman are innocent can claim no high ground by claiming that he is innocent until proven guilty. I am willing to bet that most will be unwilling to cede their ground with a verdict of guilty.
1. Leatherman defended white supremacists in the violent killing of Alan Berg. Astonishing that you throw out a flippant remark, all the while questioning the controversy. Where's the outrage for THAT killing, Reader?

2. If you don't like "innocent until proven guilty", I will help pay for a ticket out of here. Maybe you can go to one of the other countries you so quickly support and defend, the ones who treat women unkindly and wouldn't give you any mere morsel of a doubt when accused of a crime.

3. Zimmerman admitted killing Martin. The question is, can the State prove it beyond a reasonable doubt based on the charges?

4. Following a story in the media doesn't make your opinion "pretty well-founded", except in your mind. No lawyer worth his/her salt would show the media all their cards at this point.

5. Like it or not, most of America is long past caring about this trial. People young and old, of all colors, are killed every day in this country. When was the last time you got so enraged about a case in Columbus, Ohio?

6. You are not a victim, so stop acting like one.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#1858 Jun 15, 2013
PS - I will never forget that you defended (where's the controversy?) your use of the words of a lawyer who defended white supremacists. Never.
Wait what

Dublin, OH

#1859 Jun 15, 2013
Where's the controversy? Here it is, and remember - in order to defend your position above on this thread, you have on multiple occasions decided to quote the lawyer who took up the defense for this case. Now tell me your opinion is "well-founded". Here's the controversy:

_________

The murder of Alan Berg in Denver: 25 years later

Read more: The murder of Alan Berg in Denver: 25 years later - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/commented/ci_126156...
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
Follow us:@Denverpost on Twitter | Denverpost on Facebook

http://www.denverpost.com/commented/ci_126156...

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1860 Jun 15, 2013
Wait what wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Leatherman defended white supremacists in the violent killing of Alan Berg. Astonishing that you throw out a flippant remark, all the while questioning the controversy. Where's the outrage for THAT killing, Reader?
2. If you don't like "innocent until proven guilty", I will help pay for a ticket out of here. Maybe you can go to one of the other countries you so quickly support and defend, the ones who treat women unkindly and wouldn't give you any mere morsel of a doubt when accused of a crime.
3. Zimmerman admitted killing Martin. The question is, can the State prove it beyond a reasonable doubt based on the charges?
4. Following a story in the media doesn't make your opinion "pretty well-founded", except in your mind. No lawyer worth his/her salt would show the media all their cards at this point.
5. Like it or not, most of America is long past caring about this trial. People young and old, of all colors, are killed every day in this country. When was the last time you got so enraged about a case in Columbus, Ohio?
6. You are not a victim, so stop acting like one.
1. Your article did not cite Leatherman as defending one of the killers of Berg.

2. I have great respect for the legal concept of innocent until proven guilty. This does not, however prohibit me from forming my own opinions. Nor does it make those who form their opinions in favor of innocence of any higher moral fiber.

3. I am well aware of the charges. And yes, I believe that the state can put on a case that demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman not only killed Trayvon Martin, but did so within the parameters of Murder Two.

4. Where did I say that my knowledge of the case comes from "following the media"? Florida allows for an unusually transparent definition of public documents, meaning that almost all discovery (except those specifically ruled on by the court to be withheld), as well as all court documents (again, with the exception of those specifically withheld by the court) are public. Due to the interest in this case, there are a number of websites where these documents have been published by folks (including the defendent) who have gone to the trouble of obtaining them. It happens that I don't mind, even enjoy at times, reading through such things. In addition, I have followed commentary from a wide variety of sources, including at times the Conservative Treehouse and the American Spectator.

5. I don't really care whether the rest of America is still interested or not. I am.

6. Victim? Get over it.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1861 Jun 15, 2013
Wait what wrote:
PS - I will never forget that you defended (where's the controversy?) your use of the words of a lawyer who defended white supremacists. Never.
Add it to your list.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#1862 Jun 15, 2013
Wait what wrote:
Where's the controversy? Here it is, and remember - in order to defend your position above on this thread, you have on multiple occasions decided to quote the lawyer who took up the defense for this case. Now tell me your opinion is "well-founded". Here's the controversy:
_________
The murder of Alan Berg in Denver: 25 years later
Read more: The murder of Alan Berg in Denver: 25 years later - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/commented/ci_126156...
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
Follow us:@Denverpost on Twitter | Denverpost on Facebook
http://www.denverpost.com/commented/ci_126156...
I am still not seeing what you see, that is Leatherman in a murder or assault defense--in either of your articles.

However, I know from reading him that his career interest has been in defending capital cases due to his opposition to the death penalty. Career defense attorneys are very likely to end up defending some unsavory, even guilty, parties. That's how it works.

Hence my analogy to the ACLU. As a group dedicated to the defense of the freedom of speech, they end up defending some folks who don't even believe in extending that right to others with whom they disagree. I have no love for the KKK, or for Terry Jones. But, I fully understand why the ACLU has made the choice to defend the freedom of speech regardless of what that speech is.

Has your NRA defense attorney ever defended any murderers?
Oolongti

Austin, TX

#1863 Jun 15, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
My kid wouldn't be that stupid.
<quoted text>
The dispatcher didn't ask?
<quoted text>
"I think he's black", especially in response to a direct question, is not profiling.
<quoted text>
Thinking and proving are two different things.
<quoted text>
Armchair psychiatry.
<quoted text>
Not all... Just the ones who attack them.
<quoted text>
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...
do you also masturbate while putting people down?
gawd you must feel so good about yourself.
I already knew the answer to the question I asked you...
Obviously you came from the shallow end of the gene pool...and your father's swimmers were missing a few millimeters of flagellum...
you're the foolish one...
I read the original autopsy report a long time ago...idiot.
Oolongti

Austin, TX

#1864 Jun 15, 2013
FOR TONY D2
Please explain to the class how this does not show racism in the Trayvon Martin shooting:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57579510/...

Please explain to the class how someone who PLANNED to use a loaded weapon in the course of his self appointed "neighborhood watch", can declare 'self defense' when: 1) his victim was un armed, 2) his victim had only one small 1/4 inch abrasion on his ring finger 3) his victim had just as much right to confront his stalker as Zimmerman had to confront Trayvon...

Finally, Please explain to the class how Zimmerman is justified in using deadly force, when
1) he is not a police officer
2) he was not protecting his own property or person
3) he was told to stay in his own vehicle and wait for the REAL POLICE OFFICERS to arrive
4) he had no probable cause other than his own "suspicions"?
....

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
Update: dangerous Muslim travels 4 min tranpsosition 63
Anti islam protesters in TEXAS 8 min Daves not here man 48
Spook....fox report 10 min Daves not here man 32
Could Columbus schools data scandal sink mayora... 8 hr They cannot kill ... 1
Fugitive treasure hunter nabbed in Florida afte... 11 hr They cannot kill ... 3
Review: Moroccan Steam Spa 13 hr Big Johnson 14
Gang leader reportedly dead in officer-involved... 13 hr proud american 3
homosexuality is a "lifestyle choice" 17 hr They cannot kill ... 191
Is Barack Obama Doing a Good Job as President? (Aug '13) 18 hr Reality Speaks 5,585
Columbus Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 8:43 am PST

NFL 8:43AM
Jimmy Haslam: Browns have to get a QB in 2015
Bleacher Report 9:17 AM
Jimmy Haslam Speaks on Browns' 2015 QB Situation
Bleacher Report12:23 PM
Manziel's Teammates Discuss QB's Rookie Season
Yahoo! Sports12:24 PM
Report: Cleveland Browns 'wrecked' by Johnny Manziel's rookie season
NBC Sports12:46 PM
Teammate: Manziel was a "100 percent joke" as a rookie