• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

80% believe George Zimmerman is NOT guilty

mike2810 said:
Stats are great. What you failed to mention is the undecided/no opinion regarding guilt. over 50%. It shows at least half don't feel the whole story is told yet.
Click to expand...

Which is still substantially different than what the OP suggested...which was that 80% thought he was not guilty
 
Zyphlin said:
Which is still substantially different than what the OP suggested...which was that 80% thought he was not guilty
Click to expand...

Never said the original OP was correct. In general what I saw from the stats was the majority don't have enough info to decide on innocent or guilt.

But I agree ,I don't see 80% was not guilty from the poll data.
 
Last edited:
mike2810 said:
Never said the original OP was correct. In general what I saw from the stats was the majority don't have enough info to decide on innocent or guilt.

But I agree ,I don't see 80% was not guilty from the poll data.
Click to expand...

The defense of the major OP falsehood speaks for itself.
 
Furiounova said:
The defense of the major OP falsehood speaks for itself.
Click to expand...

since when does a poster have to address every point in a post? I cared not to address, but mearly pointed out the % of undecided.

So why do you continue to try and bait?
 
Last edited:
mike2810 said:
since when does a poster have to address every point in a post? I cared not to address, but mearly pointed out the % of undecided.

So why do you continue to try and bait?
Click to expand...

It isn't baiting to point out evidence countering a claim. That is called debating. Don't ask someone to debait while they are merely debating.
 
Furiounova said:
It isn't baiting to point out evidence countering a claim. That is called debating. Don't ask someone to debait while they are merely debating.
Click to expand...

Typical none answer from you. Did you not say, "The defense of the major OP falsehood speaks for itself. "

Since I did not address anything other that the undecided part of the poll, , prove I supported the rest of the OP? You also did not answer a simple question on post 54. Why is that?
 
Last edited:
mike2810 said:
Never said the original OP was correct. In general what I saw from the stats was the majority don't have enough info to decide on innocent or guilt.

But I agree ,I don't see 80% was not guilty from the poll data.
Click to expand...

But you were complaining simonn didn't point out the roughly 50% undecided

Why would he? He wasn't posting to give an overview of the poll. He was posting the poll to counter the claim of the OP.
 
Zyphlin said:
But you were complaining simonn didn't point out the roughly 50% undecided

Why would he? He wasn't posting to give an overview of the poll. He was posting the poll to counter the claim of the OP.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I will admit I posted in error as far as Simons post. In further review simons post is ok. I agree one can address only certain aspects of a post.

Now whats the odds Furiounova retracting the statement of "The defense of the major OP falsehood speaks for itself.", implying I was defending the majority of the OP., when I only addressed the undecided?.:lol:
 
Last edited:
mike2810 said:
What you failed to mention is the undecided/no opinion regarding guilt. over 50%.
Click to expand...
Just because you failed to read it, doesn't mean that I failed to write it.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/zimme...orge-zimmerman-not-guilty.html#post1060711915

Simon W. Moon said:
Most of us seem to think that we don't have enough info to tell. So that's an indicator of something positive, imho.
Click to expand...

Of course my post is open to interpretation I s'pose. But I feel I made teh same point you made. ymmv.
 
Last edited:
mike2810 said:
Typical none answer from you. Did you not say, "The defense of the major OP falsehood speaks for itself. "

Since I did not address anything other that the undecided part of the poll, , prove I supported the rest of the OP? You also did not answer a simple question on post 54. Why is that?
Click to expand...

You never addressed GZ's glaring contradictions and you never criticize GZ supporters that I have seen so your continued folly of being neutral is just embarrassing.
 
Furiounova said:
You never addressed GZ's glaring contradictions and you never criticize GZ supporters that I have seen so your continued folly of being neutral is just embarrassing.
Click to expand...

and you rarely ever answer with a straight answera to questions.
If you looked beyond your opinions, you would see why I respond to the type of post that I do,.

I also have stated I tend towards GZ. But you ignore that because of your selective reading. Your posts are a good example.
 
Keep in mind it will only take 16.67% of the Jury to stand firmly on not guilty.
One person in six, who can objectively look at the evidence, and decide reasonable doubt exists.
 
mike2810 said:
and you rarely ever answer with a straight answera to questions.
If you looked beyond your opinions, you would see why I respond to the type of post that I do,.

I also have stated I tend towards GZ. But you ignore that because of your selective reading. Your posts are a good example.
Click to expand...

Show us where you said you tend towards GZ.

You have never addressed GZ's contradictions so that is not "tending towards him."
 
longview said:
Keep in mind it will only take 16.67% of the Jury to stand firmly on not guilty.
One person in six, who can objectively look at the evidence, and decide reasonable doubt exists.
Click to expand...

Anyone objectively looking at the evidence will find him guilty which is why not a single GZ supporter on here has ever addressed all known facts. They simply dismiss the ones they don't like and pretend they don't exist.
 
Furiounova said:
Show us where you said you tend towards GZ.

You have never addressed GZ's contradictions so that is not "tending towards him."
Click to expand...

it was on another thread. Do you own research please.
 
so, less than 50% of America believes he is not guilty.

The fact is, GZ angrily pursued TM, refused to answer his question when asked why he was following TM, and then reached into his pocket...justifying GZ acting in self-defense.

GZ is going down.
 
Found an online poll saying 81% think he will not be convicted of M2 and found it curiously high until I began reading the comments. The first one says:

"Zimmerman was defending himself against a juvenal delinquent that was twice his size and in excellent physical condition."

Idiot jackasses making such a blatantly false claim have no valid opinion. The rest are pretty racist.

Poll Results: Will George Zimmerman be found guilty of second-degree murder for the shooting death of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin? - Washington Times
 
Furiounova said:
Anyone objectively looking at the evidence will find him guilty...
Click to expand...
Guilty of what exactly?
I am convinced that he has lied about what happened. But that's not the same as saying that I am sure he's guilty of murder 2.

I am inclined to believe that he was reckless and is responsible for his behavior. But that's different than saying that he definitely fulfilled the criteria for murder 2.

I am waiting for the prosecution to make their case. I am simply not motivated enough to evaluate all of the evidence on my own--there's just so much of it.

I guess I shouldn't've responded. That was really just a throw-away line of yours anyway. w/e
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Guilty of what exactly?
I am convinced that he has lied about what happened. But that's not the same as saying that I am sure he's guilty of murder 2.

I am inclined to believe that he was reckless and is responsible for his behavior. But that's different than saying that he definitely fulfilled the criteria for murder 2.

I am waiting for the prosecution to make their case. I am simply not motivated enough to evaluate all of the evidence on my own--there's just so much of it.

I guess I shouldn't've responded. That was really just a throw-away line of yours anyway. w/e
Click to expand...

In the very least Manslaughter. It will be M2 if the prosecution can convince all jurors he lied about almost everything that happened. With M2 having lighter standards in Florida versus many other States it seems people are not understanding prosecution does not need to prove as much as other places.

It's pretty clear he chased someone with a gun. Someone who did nothing but run away from the stranger pursuing him. That will be one of the points showing a depraved mind.
 
7% of the USA say he is definitely/probably not guilty.

52% say they have no idea either way.

which poll was the OP reading?
 
Thunder said:
7% of the USA say he is definitely/probably not guilty.

52% say they have no idea either way.

which poll was the OP reading?
Click to expand...

Who knows. He wont come back and admit his colossal error like most GZ supporters.
 
Furiounova said:
It will be M2 if the prosecution can convince all jurors he lied about almost everything that happened.
Click to expand...
That's not how it works. Demonstrating that GZ lied is not the same as proving beyond a reasonable doubt that GZ's action fulfilled the conditions of m2.
the prosecution has to show that it was impossible for any set of circumstances to exist where GZ is not guilty of m2.

I think that GZ has lied about what happened that night. I don't think everything he said was a lie. But I can't distinguish the truth from lies I do not have the info to check for myself. So, if I were a juror, I would treat all of GZ account as suspect and rely on the evidence other than GZ account.

But there's still a positive duty on the prosecution to show that there's no reasonable explanation wherein GZ did not commit murder in the second degree.

That is a high bar, but it's serious charge and should be seriously proven before someone faces the serious consequences for it. Seriously...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom