- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 5,967
- Reaction score
- 1,530
- Location
- Somewhere in Dixie
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Yea! George Zimmerman walks free and justice is served!
Now what?
Now what?
Still don't give a **** and go out of my way to not pay attention to it. But at least this isn't as bad as when the media was incessantly masturbating over that pederast's corpse.
Oh look, I still don't give a ****.
How do you go out of your way to not pay attention to it, but comment on a thread about it? :dunno:
And so, there was this Trial.
And so, even though Z was correctly found to be NOT GUILTY ......it was still a TRAVESTY of JUSTICE.
I am deeply disappointed with America.
Cobblers! Whatever one thinks of Zimmerman's actions (and I reserve my opinion on those) he was tried in a properly convened court of law, and the charges against him were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If the evidence was unconvincing, or left doubt, the result was as it should be. In the words of William Blackstone "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer". The presumption of innocence is the golden thread which runs through English Common Law (upon which the laws of most US jurisdictions are based,) and unless his guilt were proven beyond all reasonable doubt, George Zimmerman must be found 'not guilty' (which is subtly different from 'innocent').
Unlike yourself, and irrespective of the findings, I congratulate American jurisprudence for examining this controversial and very public case. It was quite the reverse of travesty of justice - it was justice seen to be done.
I must make my quote clear.
I think this Z/M Trial was a TRAVESTY of JUSTICE because there NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE TRIAL.
There never should have been the Trial because it was brought on not by the FACTS as CORRECTLY found by the Police.....but by th BLack Racists led by their Professional Black Racist Leaders such as the Al Sharptons, Jesse Jacksons, et al. And, by the Black Racist Obumster, with his alter ego Erik Holder, the Racist Head of the Dept of Justice who sent out his minions to incite the crowds, and threaten the Nation with riots.
Also, by the Black Racist Enablers, the Dem Lib/Gay Artistes who typically inundate the Forums with OBFUSCATIONS, DISTORTIONS, and OUTRIGHT LIES in ALL the Political and/or Racist events.
Please refer to my thread: FINAL ANALYSIS of the ZIMMERMAN/MARTIN TRIAL.
Even after all that? That really is something.
I must make my quote clear.
I think this Z/M Trial was a TRAVESTY of JUSTICE because there NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE TRIAL.
There never should have been the Trial because it was brought on not by the FACTS as CORRECTLY found by the Police.....but by th BLack Racists led by their Professional Black Racist Leaders such as the Al Sharptons, Jesse Jacksons, et al. And, by the Black Racist Obumster, with his alter ego Erik Holder, the Racist Head of the Dept of Justice who sent out his minions to incite the crowds, and threaten the Nation with riots.
Also, by the Black Racist Enablers, the Dem Lib/Gay Artistes who typically inundate the Forums with OBFUSCATIONS, DISTORTIONS, and OUTRIGHT LIES in ALL the Political and/or Racist events.
Please refer to my thread: FINAL ANALYSIS of the ZIMMERMAN/MARTIN TRIAL.
You are, of course, entitled to your views upon the various people involved, but, in my opinion, (and I am not an American, nor am I concerned with your race relations) the actions of a man who shot dead an unarmed teenager under circumstances which are still not entirely clear, should have been examined by a court of law.
I see the bigot has woken up ... Is this part of a con playbook? Accuse the victims of racism of being racist? There should have been a trial from the beginning ... an unarmed young man is dead and we know next to nothing about how it happened, so instead of letting a jury of their peers decide, a handful of cops decide? Where are you from? The lynching days are over. We try people now. And can you curb your hate just a tad? Also, how old are you? Hopefully old ... the sooner the Bull Connors of this country kick the bucket, the better off this country will be ...
Oh look, I still don't give a ****.
you apparently give enough of a **** to post in this thread.......
Posting about not giving a **** is not evidence of actually giving a ****. It's evidence of taking a piss at those who do.
Even after all that? That really is something.
WOWEE.....I am so impressed that I'll lay awake all night thinking about your profound thought on this matter !!!
Thanks for your input. This may be how it works in your country but not here. An investigation was completed. No charges were filed. Then the "race baiters" got involved. No one can control the "race baiters" so it's not surprising they got involved. A special prosecutor was hired. I still don't have a challenge with it at this point. However, the special prosecutor, after reviewing the case and deciding to bring charges, SHOULD have taken it to a grand jury, as is COMMON practice, NOT a trial. Had NORMAL procedures been followed, the grand jury would not have indicted George Zimmerman. The evidence of all the wild claims made in this case were NOT there. Thus the not guilty verdict.
You are, of course, entitled to your views on the case. As a non American and one NOT concerned with race relations I'd take exception to your opinion of "examination by a court of law". That's simply not how it works here. You also seem to proffer an opinion on the clarity of the case. You are, of course, entitled to your views. They just happen to be inaccurate, in this case.
Thank you for your perspective.
I'm not quite sure to what you appear to be taking exception, (in a post which was not addressed to you). You repeat that I am entitled to a view upon the matter, but then appear to be berating me for giving one. What exactly is the problem? Is it that I am not an American and am not fully familiar with procedures in your society? Not everyone is in the same situation.
I made no claims as to the propriety or otherwise of the process which ensued, I gave the opinion that the actions of an armed man who shoots and kills an unarmed teenager, under circumstances which were not entirely clear, should be examined by an impartial body. If not by a court of law, then by another competent authority. You have advised me as to what you think should have occurred in your system, and I am the better informed for that. My views are not incorrect because they do not coincide with yours, particularly as I was speaking of a matter of principle, not a geographically-specific legal convention. Your response was uncalled for.
My response was uncalled for? You are here giving your opinion, which is not based on law. You say things that are completely incorrect and when I point out same you say my response is "uncalled for"?
You again, in this post make incorrect statements. "under circumstances which were not entirely clear" They were as clear as the law could manage. An investigation was completed by an impartial body. Yet you still claim there should be ...what?? another because you don't like the first? Again, not how it works here.
"my views are not incorrect because they do not coincide with yours"......... I never said they were. I said your views are incorrect because they are based on your system not ours.
I never took exception to your view based on your country and your legal system, in fact I thanked you for it. Does "thank you for your perspective" have a different connotation in your country?
I apologize if you feel I "berated" you. I would hope that in your country pointing out while it's valid to hold and present a perspective from another country, that doesn't mean you are correct, especially when you admit you're not familiar with how things work.
This case was examined thoroughly by the SPD. They found no evidence of a crime. It should have ended there. It didn't. It didn't because the "race baiters" got involved. It should have ended there. It didn't. A special prosecutor got involved. If she was competent, it should have ended there. It didn't. Her next step should have been to take it to a grand jury. She, for whatever reason, just decided to skip that part. I believe it will be examined from a legal standpoint why she skipped this important step in our legal system. So, after all these steps where it SHOULD have ended, the state of Florida files charges against George Zimmerman, why?? Not because they had enough evidence to prove a crime, but because of the "race baiters". It was an attempt at "lynching" You should be able to acknowledge that much based solely on the fact they had to INVENT a new term "White---Hispanic".
This case should never have been brought to trial. It really is that simple. I'm sorry that based on your filters, from your country, you have a different personal opinion.
Again, thanks for sharing your perspective from your country and your legal system. It does help us to see and experience through exchange here, different countries would allow public "lynchings".