Justice and Security: Neighborhood Watch Captain Attacks, Kills Unarmed Teenager

Why does this NEED to be about race for you?

Notice she is also presumed by you to be innocent and george zimmerman is presumed by you to be guilty.

You sir acted on the bait I left in my article to prove the point that you and indeed others are not commenting from a neutral point of view.

I don't have all of the evidence in this case either and neither do you.

Notice you skipped the meat of the message and once again went straight to the bait. You are obviously conditioned to do so and can not form an opinion that is neutral.

I would guess this woman is likely within her rights and may be wrongfully charged. But that is my heart talking. I hope she is innocent of any crime, for her sake as I would have expected my wife to do the same. But there may be facts here again that are unknown. Your link is not to a site that anyone can claim is neutral and also continues to push the media focus on the APPEARANCE of racial injustice. You are a consumer of the propagandists. Try to think for yourself. She will have her day in court, and there is a system for legal recourse she can and will use if it is in fact a case unjust imprisonment. YOUR problem is you have decided that she is innocent and Zimmerman is guilty based on YOUR want for race to be the cause of both of these incidents. You need to get past it because making race an issue where it isn't the issue is just the same as a hate crime.

IF you cant be neutral and clinical in your evaluation of a case you really should just be quiet.
 
She had her day in court, and she's about to do 20 years for defending herself in a non-lethal manner in her own home. While Zimmerman will probably walk. I realize I wasn't a juror, but that's how it appears to me. Same prosecutor, by the way.
 
Why use something as an argument you know nothing about?

spidergoat said:
She had her day in court, and she's about to do 20 years for defending herself in a non-lethal manner in her own home. While Zimmerman will probably walk. I realize I wasn't a juror, but that's how it appears to me.
Click to expand...

Get the full evidence and the basis for the ruling of the jury then you can use it as an argument, IF there is still a reason she should have been found innocent. AND DONT DARE say its a racial issue if there was even one person of color on the jury, because it takes all 12 members to agree on a verdict.

Why will Zimmerman walk? If he is innocent he will.

If he's guilty he should be punished harshly.

Zimmerman had his case looked at and the authorities decided it was a case of self defense based on the evidence that was available.

Now he has to go to trial and has had his life ruined even if found innocent to satisfy a purely political need. IS THIS JUSTICE?

The New Black Panther Party put a contract out on his life, PUBLICLY, this is a crime, have they been charged?

Putting him on a hit list dead or alive. Is this the justice you want?

We have a system, it isn't perfect but the law only seems to apply when politically convenient. THAT is true injustice. THINK ABOUT IT.

OMG even look at the title of this thread and tell me its created by a neutral person.

Neighborhood Watch Captain Attacks, Kills Unarmed Teenager

REALLY?
 
Last edited:
The New Black Panthers are like, what, 3 guys in their parent's basement somewhere? You seem to have complete faith in the fairness of Florida's judicial system. The police chief already offered his resignation due to this case, which tells me that he made a big mistake.
 
And again you prove your lack of neutrality.

spidergoat said:
The New Black Panthers are like, what, 3 guys in their parent's basement somewhere? You seem to have complete faith in the fairness of Florida's judicial system. The police chief already offered his resignation due to this case, which tells me that he made a big mistake.
Click to expand...

As of 2009, the NBPP claimed a few thousand members organized in 45 chapters.

So a crime wasn't committed then? Because they aren't BIG enough for you?

He offered his resignation. Which tells YOU he made a mistake BASED ON WHAT?

Its possible he resigned because he thinks this is a case of politics and not justice and doesnt want to be a part of it.

AGAIN you make up things in YOUR own HEAD to further your pre-conceived notions.

YOU SIR are just proving my point.

I bet you think you are double-plus-good.

IF you can even understand the reference.....
 
Seems you only have faith in systems that agree with your wants every time. That's childish.

Also, you haven't said you have the courage to apologize for slandering Zimmerman if he's found innocent.

I WOULD most certainly apologize to ANY person found to be innocent for having to endure any trial, or any person wrongly convicted and proved later to be innocent, and i have never taken public stand on anyone's guilt before it was proven in court.

So do you have the fortitude to commit? OR are you just more sound and fury signifying nothing?
 
Keep it coming sycophants.

spidergoat said:
No charge = no crime, right?
Click to expand...

Not according to your side.

No charge meant you had to butcher a man's character based on little, no or slanted information until you were able through threats of violence and unrest able to force the system to charge Zimmerman with a crime.

And by the way. You didn't answer the question. Not so sure of your position anymore?
 
If he's found innocent, I wouldn't apologize to that murderer for killing an unarmed teenager, no. The fact that he killed an unarmed teen is beyond dispute.
 
If I was the one that approached you, then it would still be my fault if I were hit by it. The teen also has a right to stand his ground. Anything can be a weapon.
 
spidergoat said:
If I was the one that approached you, then it would still be my fault if I were hit by it. The teen also has a right to stand his ground.
Click to expand...

There isn't a self defense "stand your ground" argument to be made if Zimmerman didn't attack or threaten and you have no way of knowing if he did.
 
We know he made the choice to follow him. I say following someone is inherently threatening.
 
spidergoat said:
We know he made the choice to follow him. I say following someone is inherently threatening.
Click to expand...

It certainly could be viewed that way, though I doubt that will stand up in court. Though just because we don't yet know if Zimmerman directly threatened Martin, it doesn't mean therefore that Zimmerman did not.
 
Phlogiston said:
Also, you haven't said you have the courage to apologize for slandering Zimmerman if he's found innocent.

I WOULD most certainly apologize to ANY person found to be innocent for having to endure any trial, or any person wrongly convicted and proved later to be innocent, and i have never taken public stand on anyone's guilt before it was proven in court.
Click to expand...

Courts in the USA do not find people "innocent." The options are "guilty" and "not guilty" (and "mistrial"). "Not guilty" is not the same thing as "innocent." This distinction has been done to death in this very thread, already.

Also, nobody is going to be impressed with your record of not saying certain things, since you only have 12 posts to your name (all of which are in this very thread?). Especially when you did say the things you claimed not to, in those 12 posts and in this very thread, when you - falsely - stated that the New Black Panther Party was guilty of a crime.
 
Last edited:
Phlogiston said:
Zimmerman had his case looked at and the authorities decided it was a case of self defense based on the evidence that was available.
Click to expand...

You understand that it is the responsibility of those very same authorities to gather sufficient evidence, right? This whole passive-voice weasel wording, "was available," is highly suspicious.

Phlogiston said:
Now he has to go to trial and has had his life ruined even if found innocent to satisfy a purely political need. IS THIS JUSTICE?
Click to expand...

Given that the "purely political need" is exactly "the cops and justice system need to actually be seen to be credibly, thoroughly doing their job," I'm inclined to say yes. If you kill another human being in anything but the most clear-cut, readily-verified-by-independent-parties instance of self-defense, you should have to answer to a judge (and/or jury). That's prudent, reasonable and just.

Phlogiston said:
The New Black Panther Party put a contract out on his life, PUBLICLY,
Click to expand...

No they didn't. They offered a reward for anyone who performed a "legal citizen's arrest" on Zimmerman.

Phlogiston said:
Putting him on a hit list dead or alive.
Click to expand...

Tell us: which right-wing media outlet fed you this particular bit of disinformation, and why are you in such a hurry to derail this thread into it?

Phlogiston said:
OMG even look at the title of this thread and tell me its created by a neutral person.

Neighborhood Watch Captain Attacks, Kills Unarmed Teenager

REALLY?
Click to expand...

Exactly which part of that title is anything other than plain, undisputed fact? The word "attacks?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top