Wonder how they'll feel Monday.

[JCliff]

It's quite amusing on here how anyone whose opinion is different from those in majority on here is labeled delusional, not in touch with reality, etc. Listen guys, I watched proceedings just like the rest of you did. The fact that I determined Zimmerman to be guilty doesn't mean I wasn't paying attention, am delusional, or anything else. I just happen not to agree with you guys' assessment that the correct verdict was reached. In my opinion, it was the wrong verdict.

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

.
While everyone is entitled to theirs, not all opinions are equal, not all are well considered and worthy of respect, in fact some are worthy of nothing more than contempt.
.
The requirement for conviction in our criminal justice system is BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
.
Your opinion is that the jury reached the wrong conclusion. If you expect that opinion to garner any respect you’re going to have to explain how the facts presented at trial clearly indicated, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, that GZ was guilty of something. What clear, unequivocal, unambiguous evidence was obviously missed by the jury that led to their collective error? I don’t think there was any, because it would have come out in the trial. The prosecution had almost nothing to start the case with, and it didn’t move from there. Many of the prosecution’s witnesses refuted the prosecution’s case, or simply introduced more ambiguity. Maybe I’m wrong. Enlighten me.
.
We will never know with absolute precision exactly what transpired that night. But ponder this: The preponderance of evidence is that instead of just going home, TM maneuvered to confront GZ. If this is not so, how do you explain the fact that he didn’t just go home, when he clearly had the time? The preponderance of evidence presented also indicated that TM both surprised and assaulted GZ (we don’t know this with absolute certainty either, just as we don’t/can’t know if it was GZ that initiated an assault, but the evidence that was available tended to corroborate GZ’s story). The tragedy is that this last act cost TM his life. In my opinion, GZ was foolish on several counts. But that alone doesn’t make him a murderer, or guilty of manslaughter, or a racist, or anything else. I wouldn’t want to see anyone of any race, color, or creed convicted on as little evidence (all of it subject to reasonable doubt) as the state brought against GZ.
.
Our justice system is not perfect in design or execution. But it WAS specifically designed with the intent to prevent people from being convicted based solely on opinion.

 

[AndeyHall]

.
While everyone is entitled to theirs, not all opinions are equal, not all are well considered and worthy of respect, in fact some are worthy of nothing more than contempt.
.
The requirement for conviction in our criminal justice system is BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
.
Your opinion is that the jury reached the wrong conclusion. If you expect that opinion to garner any respect you’re going to have to explain how the facts presented at trial clearly indicated, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, that GZ was guilty of something. What clear, unequivocal, unambiguous evidence was obviously missed by the jury that led to their collective error? I don’t think there was any, because it would have come out in the trial. The prosecution had almost nothing to start the case with, and it didn’t move from there. Many of the prosecution’s witnesses refuted the prosecution’s case, or simply introduced more ambiguity. Maybe I’m wrong. Enlighten me.
.
We will never know with absolute precision exactly what transpired that night. But ponder this: The preponderance of evidence is that instead of just going home, TM maneuvered to confront GZ. If this is not so, how do you explain the fact that he didn’t just go home, when he clearly had the time? The preponderance of evidence presented also indicated that TM both surprised and assaulted GZ (we don’t know this with absolute certainty either, just as we don’t/can’t know if it was GZ that initiated an assault, but the evidence that was available tended to corroborate GZ’s story). The tragedy is that this last act cost TM his life. In my opinion, GZ was foolish on several counts. But that alone doesn’t make him a murderer, or guilty of manslaughter, or a racist, or anything else. I wouldn’t want to see anyone of any race, color, or creed convicted on as little evidence (all of it subject to reasonable doubt) as the state brought against GZ.
.
Our justice system is not perfect in design or execution. But it WAS specifically designed with the intent to prevent people from being convicted based solely on opinion.

Exactly! Take any legal class and you'll learn that the motto of our CJ system is that we would rather 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man be locked up. Knowing only what was presented in the trial, had I have been on the jury, I'd rather lay my head down at night thinking I let a guilty man walk than I would thinking I might have locked up an innocent man for 25 years or more.

 

[tattedupboy]

.
While everyone is entitled to theirs, not all opinions are equal, not all are well considered and worthy of respect, in fact some are worthy of nothing more than contempt.
.
The requirement for conviction in our criminal justice system is BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
.
Your opinion is that the jury reached the wrong conclusion. If you expect that opinion to garner any respect you’re going to have to explain how the facts presented at trial clearly indicated, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, that GZ was guilty of something. What clear, unequivocal, unambiguous evidence was obviously missed by the jury that led to their collective error? I don’t think there was any, because it would have come out in the trial. The prosecution had almost nothing to start the case with, and it didn’t move from there. Many of the prosecution’s witnesses refuted the prosecution’s case, or simply introduced more ambiguity. Maybe I’m wrong. Enlighten me.
.
We will never know with absolute precision exactly what transpired that night. But ponder this: The preponderance of evidence is that instead of just going home, TM maneuvered to confront GZ. If this is not so, how do you explain the fact that he didn’t just go home, when he clearly had the time? The preponderance of evidence presented also indicated that TM both surprised and assaulted GZ (we don’t know this with absolute certainty either, just as we don’t/can’t know if it was GZ that initiated an assault, but the evidence that was available tended to corroborate GZ’s story). The tragedy is that this last act cost TM his life. In my opinion, GZ was foolish on several counts. But that alone doesn’t make him a murderer, or guilty of manslaughter, or a racist, or anything else. I wouldn’t want to see anyone of any race, color, or creed convicted on as little evidence (all of it subject to reasonable doubt) as the state brought against GZ.
.
Our justice system is not perfect in design or execution. But it WAS specifically designed with the intent to prevent people from being convicted based solely on opinion.

Apparently, according to you, every single person who believed Zimmerman was guilty believed so not on the basis of fact, but on emotion, while every single person who believed he was innocent did so on the basis of the evidence alone. Alrighty then.

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

 

[AndeyHall]

Apparently, according to you, every single person who believed Zimmerman was guilty believed so not on the basis of fact, but on emotion, while every single person who believed he was innocent did so on the basis of the evidence alone. Alrighty then.

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

I don't think he's saying that at all. He's saying that if you believed Zimmerman was innocent, it could be either by facts or by sheer opinion. However if you believe he's guilty, then it HAS to be by sheer opinion because their are no facts supporting that.

 

[tattedupboy]

I don't think he's saying that at all. He's saying that if you believed Zimmerman was innocent, it could be either by facts or by sheer opinion. However if you believe he's guilty, then it HAS to be by sheer opinion because their are no facts supporting that.

I beg to differ. Im going to bed now, so I'll explain my position further in the morning.

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

 

[tricolordad]

Wow, how did you come to that conclusion, sir?

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

Because you haven't offered a realistic argument in favor of your opinion. You avoid saying almost anything except that "GZ is guilty." I've been waiting to see if you'd ever elaborate and provide a valid argument, but everything you've offered has been pppffffttttt.

By the way, pppffftttt is the equivalent of a fart.

 

[vernsimpson]

And how else should Trayvon have responded to being followed in the darkness by a stranger whose intentions he wasn't able to ascertain?

What would it take for me to believe Zimmerman did the right thing? Well gee, that's a loaded question! I saw the proceedings and came to my own conclusion, just as I'm sure you saw them and came to your own. Based on the testimony I saw, George Zimmerman was wrong and the jury got this wrong.

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

If TM felt threatened and we know he had a cell phone on him that night. He could have called 911 and told the operator that he was fearful because he was being followed. Instead he talked to his girl friend.
I can not speak for everyone but that would be what I would do even if I was carrying at the time. I would NOT use the situation to be able to attack or shoot someone.

 

[kerb]

And how else should Trayvon have responded to being followed in the darkness by a stranger whose intentions he wasn't able to ascertain?

....

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

Oh for crying out loud... Are you for real?

Gee, I don't know... Go home? Call 911? Knock on a neighbor's door and ask for help?
Any of 1000 options other than initiating an assault.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

 

[kerb]

I assure I am not in my own reality! This is the determination I came to upon hearing all the testimony. Just because the conclusion I came to isn't the same as yours doesn't make me delusional!

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

I wonder which testimony you heard that proved to you beyond reasonable doubt that when gz pulled the trigger, he didn't feel he was in danger of serious injury or death?

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

 

[K7lvo]

I beg to differ. Im going to bed now, so I'll explain my position further in the morning.

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

Don't feel that you have to go to the effort on my account...

 

[DRNurse1]

tattedupboy:
You started this thread saying your opinion lead you to your conclusion. Then you have proceeded to malign others of differing opinions and, interestingly, have not presented any objective information, readily verifiable by the thread participants, in spite of your numerous posts. You have chosen to disagree with the jury, which is your right, but you have failed to present facts consistent with your opinion.

My daughter opined that TM would have been better served by observing the Eddy Eagle Rules: Stop; Don't Touch; LEAVE THE AREA [my emphasis]; Tell an Adult. That is an example of opinion backed up by objective information. She is 11.

You need to act at least her age, or suffer the consequences of any flamer with an ax to grind and no evidence to support that opinion. Your post count suggests you can manage the former, but this thread leads me to suspect the latter.

Good Luck.

 

[tattedupboy]

Zimmerman lied about Trayvon seeing his gun;
He lied about not knowing the Stand Your Ground law;
He lied about Trayvon jumping out of some bushes on him;
He lied about not knowing the name of the street he was on (in a neighborhood in which he had lived for 4 years);
He lied when he said Trayvon was covering his mouth and squeezing his nose shortly before Trayvon tried to grab for his gun.

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

 

[Nightmare45]

Zimmerman was doing nothing illegal as a neighborhood watch guy, Trayvon was doing nothing illegal walking through the neighborhood, things changed when Trayvon instead of taking his skittles and tea and walking to wherever he was going did not keep going and told his girlfriend he was being followed by a cracker and turned and went for Zimmerman and became the aggressor. Sad but true. And now hate fueled by DOJ and Obama will make carry more important.

 

[tricolordad]

Zimmerman lied about Trayvon seeing his gun;
HD

OK, I'll give you that. Zimmerman's gun was the very last thing Martin saw.

 

[Lakeland Man]

On what do you base your assertion that Zimmerman lied about those things. Were you there to witness it? If so, then you failed in your civic duty by not coming forward and testifying. If you weren't there, then your statement are not backed up by any evidence.

It appears to me that you just decided that Zimmerman was guilty and disregarded any and all evidence to the contrary.

 

[tricolordad]

On what do you base your assertion that Zimmerman lied about those things. Were you there to witness it? If so, then you failed in your civic duty by not coming forward and testifying. If you weren't there, then your statement are not backed up by any evidence.

It appears to me that you just decided that Zimmerman was guilty and disregarded any and all evidence to the contrary.

He did! And you wanna know why?? Because deep down, he is a liberal using the race crutch.

Still, tattedupyeeeaaaabooooiiii, your input is the equivalent of a fart. Maybe even a wet fart. Check your pants.

 

[BC1]

Zimmerman lied about Trayvon seeing his gun;
He lied about Trayvon jumping out of some bushes on him;
He lied about not knowing the name of the street he was on (in a neighborhood in which he had lived for 4 years);
He lied when he said Trayvon was covering his mouth and squeezing his nose shortly before Trayvon tried to grab for his gun.

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

And do you definitively know this? Anytime you're carrying a gun and someone hits you the gun is involved. You cannot be beat-up while armed. Your attacker may eventually discover the gun and..... this conversation is ridiculous. Your opinion no longer matters.

 

[tricolordad]

Zimmerman lied about Trayvon seeing his gun;
He lied about not knowing the Stand Your Ground law;
He lied about Trayvon jumping out of some bushes on him;
He lied about not knowing the name of the street he was on (in a neighborhood in which he had lived for 4 years);
He lied when he said Trayvon was covering his mouth and squeezing his nose shortly before Trayvon tried to grab for his gun.

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

This is the side you've chosen. Need I say more about who the liars are?

Link RemovedLink Removed

It speaks volumes to your character.

 

[tattedupboy]

And yet no one wants to get on tricolordad's case for suggesting that my sympathies for Trayvon Martin are racially motivated.

Sent from my A200 using Tapatalk HD

 

[Lakeland Man]

OK...I'll bite. TCD, you are a bad person for suggesting such a thing. The only possible reason tattedupboy could possible have for thinking Trayvin was innocent and Zimmerman was guilty was a thorough examination of the evidence. Of course, it wasn't the examination of the evidence in THIS case, but still...

Tattedupboy, you still haven't shown any evidence to back up your claims that Zimmerman lied. I have lived in my neighborhood for almost 8 years and I still don't know the street names of most of the roads in it. Most people have a tendency to not see details that don't directly affect them. Even as gun owners and carriers, who's SA should be on a higher level, we tend to ignore the details that are not right in front of us, an which we deem (consciously or unconsciously) to be irrelevant to our lives.

Trying to deflect the attention onto TCD just shows the weakness of your argument. And be certain of this...I an no fan of TCD. But when he is right, I am adult enough to admit it.