1621 replies to this topic

[Recliner Pilot]

That picture says it is "enhanced". So...

Enhanced, not photoshopped you fukking moron. They zoomed in on his head.

Looks like your conviction is falling apart.

[IGotWorms]

So.... it looks like more than a boo boo and also supports Zimmerman's story.

If you take a picture of a boo boo and enhance it then clearly it will look like more than it was. That's what "enhanced" means.

[Recliner Pilot]

If you take a picture of a boo boo and enhance it then clearly it will look like more than it was. That's what "enhanced" means.

Dude, you should bow out of this discussion. The more you post, the more you expose yourself as an idiot.

[Herbivore]

Dude, you should bow out of this discussion. The more you post, the more you expose yourself as an idiot.

You're the idiot

[Recliner Pilot]

You're the idiot

Lessee.

Grainy police video realeased where you can't see sh!t. Worms and others jump on it as proof he had no injuries.

Someone zooms in on his head showing a gash on the back of his head.

This would make Worms and his ilk the idiots, not someone who has said the investigation needs to play out.

[Herbivore]

Lessee.

Grainy police video realeased where you can't see sh!t. Worms and others jump on it as proof he had no injuries.

Someone zooms in on his head showing a gash on the back of his head.

This would make Worms and his ilk the idiots, not someone who has said the investigation needs to play out.

Not proof, just questionable. The zoom is inconclusive as well. And it seems every Repub type here keeps confusing charges with conviction. Nobody wants to see an innocent wrongly convicted. There is considerably more in this thread that seem to want to believe self defense sounds good..why even question that when there are definitely things to be questioned. You have kids RP. Would this sit well with you if it was your kid?

[Strike]

WRONG. Google "affirmative defense"

Ok. I did. Here is what it says about burden or proof:

Burden of Proof

Because an affirmative defense requires an assertion of facts beyond those claimed by the plaintiff, generally the party who offers an affirmative defense bears the burden of proof.[6] The standard of proof is typically lower than beyond a reasonable doubt. It can either be proved by clear and convincing evidence or by a preponderance of the evidence. In some cases or jurisdictions, however, the defense must only be asserted, and the prosecution has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defense is not applicable

So basically it supports what I said. But seriously, let me ask you something. If you think the defense has to PROVE self defense how does that work in a jury setting? They assert self defense and the jury decides whether they believe it, right? But the whole burden of proof in a criminal trial is for them to believe what the prosecution says beyond a reasonable doubt. So if they give any credence to a defense claim of self defense you've got reasonable doubt. Which is what I said.

[GobbleDog]

I've got a $50 bet with a friend that he won't be found guilty of any type of manslaughter or murder charges!



Stand Your Ground Beitch!

[Recliner Pilot]

Not proof, just questionable. The zoom is inconclusive as well.

Much, much more conclusive than the original that had Worms and others proclaiming the video as proof there was no injuries.

I know you aren't very smart, but smarten up and distance yourself from Worms on this. At the very least stop fighting his fight he already threw in the towel on.

[nikki2200]

I'm assuming the actual police took actual pictures of Zimmerman and his head wound the night of the incident. So we shouldn't have to rely on interwebs enhancers to see what actually was on his head. I hope.

[Herbivore]

Much, much more conclusive than the original that had Worms and others proclaiming the video as proof there was no injuries.

I know you aren't very smart, but smarten up and distance yourself from Worms on this. At the very least stop fighting his fight he already threw in the towel on.

You dont know much...Sport.

[Recliner Pilot]

You dont know much...Sport.

I know you aren't smart, which is enough for this conversation.

[Herbivore]

I know you aren't smart, which is enough for this conversation.

Right

[GobbleDog]

Strange this story has become a big American controversy. A Latino shoots a black teenager in the (lower income) city of Sanford, Florida. Not a cold blooded killing or hate crime, but essentially a confrontation turned deadly.

Whether the dude is guilty of manslaughter or not... this is the headline story in the nation? All because a Latino was suspicious of the black dude in little ass Sanford.?.

Wow. Slow news month. Oh well, next mass-shooting somewhere and it'll all be forgotten.

[Mungwater]

I'm assuming the actual police took actual pictures of Zimmerman and his head wound the night of the incident. So we shouldn't have to rely on interwebs enhancers to see what actually was on his head. I hope.

They had to, I guess we will see those once they release the investigation.

[IGotWorms]

So basically it supports what I said. But seriously, let me ask you something. If you think the defense has to PROVE self defense how does that work in a jury setting? They assert self defense and the jury decides whether they believe it, right? But the whole burden of proof in a criminal trial is for them to believe what the prosecution says beyond a reasonable doubt. So if they give any credence to a defense claim of self defense you've got reasonable doubt. Which is what I said.

No the jury is asked whether it is more likely than not that the defendant acted in self defense. I think Zimmerman would have a helluva time meeting that burden.

Now the question of self defense might become entwined with reasonable doubt if we are talking about murder--if the jury thinks that Zimmerman may have been defending himself to some extent (but not so much that the killing was justified) then it is likely that they would not find intent to murder. Which means he would probably be convicted of manslaughter instead.

[Strike]

No the jury is asked whether it is more likely than not that the defendant acted in self defense. I think Zimmerman would have a helluva time meeting that burden.

Now the question of self defense might become entwined with reasonable doubt if we are talking about murder--if the jury thinks that Zimmerman may have been defending himself to some extent (but not so much that the killing was justified) then it is likely that they would not find intent to murder. Which means he would probably be convicted of manslaughter instead.

I disagree based upon what we know now. And that's ignoring the fact that if the defense brings up evidence in an affirmative defense case the prosecution is then required to disprove that evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Put Zimmerman, the only witness, on the stand. Assuming his story is relatively consistent the government may have a hard time disproving it.

http://www.fd.org/pdf_lib/beneman_affirmative_defenses_materials.pdf

[IGotWorms]

I disagree based upon what we know now. And that's ignoring the fact that if the defense brings up evidence in an affirmative defense case the prosecution is then required to disprove that evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Put Zimmerman, the only witness, on the stand. Assuming his story is relatively consistent the government may have a hard time disproving it.

http://www.fd.org/pdf_lib/beneman_affirmative_defenses_materials.pdf

Do you really think the defense would want to put Zimmerman on the stand? That's extremely dangerous. Who knows what's going to happen when the government starts cross examining him. Plus the government could probably bring up a lot of the stuff he may have said and done in the past as it would be made relevant by his assertion of self-defense.

[kutulu]

Strange this story has become a big American controversy. A Latino shoots a black teenager in the (lower income) city of Sanford, Florida. Not a cold blooded killing or hate crime, but essentially a confrontation turned deadly.

Whether the dude is guilty of manslaughter or not... this is the headline story in the nation? All because a Latino was suspicious of the black dude in little ass Sanford.?.

Wow. Slow news month. Oh well, next mass-shooting somewhere and it'll all be forgotten.

It's because of the stand your ground law. Eventually there was going to be a case like this that questioned aspects of it. Thrown in race, the ages, etc and you could tell this story was going to hit a nerve with purple. The media had done it's part to highlight certain aspects of it that shouldn't really matter, but increases interest...so theres that to.

[Strike]

Do you really think the defense would want to put Zimmerman on the stand? That's extremely dangerous. Who knows what's going to happen when the government starts cross examining him. Plus the government could probably bring up a lot of the stuff he may have said and done in the past as it would be made relevant by his assertion of self-defense.

Maybe or maybe not. Apparently the dude was credible enough that the DA didn't want to press charges the night of the incident and here we are a month plus later and they still haven't pressed charges. You and Nikki seem to think they should have enough to prosecute him and you even said last night that you don't think the defense could meet their burden under an affirmative defense. So you must think he's guilty. And you're basing that on what you've heard through the clearly biased media? Either way this discussion was about what that burden is. And you've just conveniently ignored the main point of my last post which was that even in an affirmative defense, if the defense presents evidence that negates any of the prosecutions case the prosecution is then again put on the spot to disprove that evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Again, assuming Zimmerman has been telling the truth the defense is going to be able to demonstrate his injuries, and common sense tells us that he wasn't just stalking this kid to kill him since he called the cops. No one would call the cops when they were about to commit murder. So, if I'm on that jury the government had better be able to PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt what happened and WHY he called the cops if he was about to do something illegal. Clearly something happened that caused that confrontation. We don't know what, which is the crux of this case. And if the government can't provide an answer to that question BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT I don't see how this guy gets convicted.

[DankNuggs]

Its not what you know, its what you can prove.

[cyclone24]

Dear George Zimmerman....

Thanks for taking the heat off me.....im back in business baby!! Youre dumbarse country thinks youre an activist if you repost a video or knock out a couple tweets......new story comes a long and you're all over it, and have forgotten all about me. THANKS!!



Sincerely,

KONY 2012

[Phurfur]

I haven't really followed this story, do I have this right?

A child walks to the store to buy some candy. On his way home a vigilante shoots him because he is black. The child dies.

[phillybear]

So, I was listening to the original 911 call by Zimmerman this morning. Upon reporting a person of suspicious nature in the neighborhood, the operator tried to get more details. "is the person black, white or Hispanic"? How interesting. Three separate, distinct choices. Well, well, well.

phillybear wins again. phillybear wins again.

[jerryskids]

So, I was listening to the original 911 call by Zimmerman this morning. Upon reporting a person of suspicious nature in the neighborhood, the operator tried to get more details. "is the person black, white or Hispanic"? How interesting. Three separate, distinct choices. Well, well, well.

phillybear wins again. phillybear wins again.

One of the major networks, I forget which, showed on their screen a transcript of saying "He looks suspicious... he looks black." The "..." is the part where the 911 operator asked the question you stated. Great job being unbiased MSM

[TimmySmith]

No the jury is asked whether it is more likely than not that the defendant acted in self defense. I think Zimmerman would have a helluva time meeting that burden.

Wrong. Zimmerman has no burden to meet, the prosecution has to meet the burden of proving that Zimmerman was not trying to prevent great bodily harm to himself. Basically, the prosecution needs a plea bargain.

[Vikings4ever]

https://fbcdn-sphoto...639897509_n.jpg

[parrot]

phillybear wins again. phillybear wins again.

You realize that winning that debate is like winning at the Special Olympics, right?

[Strike]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/s720x720/536564_390049937681645_100000299268371_1432150_639897509_n.jpg

Wait. Dark Knight? I thought we had determined that he is a White Knight?

[IGotWorms]

Wrong. Zimmerman has no burden to meet, the prosecution has to meet the burden of proving that Zimmerman was not trying to prevent great bodily harm to himself. Basically, the prosecution needs a plea bargain.

No, Zimmerman must first establish the burden. Only then does it shift to the prosecution. I do agree that the prosecution would be wise to seek a plea though. Involuntary manslaughter is probably what it would come down to.

[Mike Honcho]

The voice heard crying for help on a 911 call just before Trayvon Martin was shot to death was not that of George Zimmerman according to 2 experts.

[Recliner Pilot]

NBC News rears it's biased head again.

NBC told this blog today that it would investigate its handling of a piece on the “Today” show that ham-handedly abridged the conversation between George Zimmerman and a dispatcher in the moments before the death of Trayvon Martin. A statement from NBC:

“We have launched an internal investigation into the editorial process surrounding this particular story.”

Great news right there. As exposed by Fox News and media watchdog site NewsBusters, the “Today” segment took this approach to a key part of the dispatcher call:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.

Here’s how the actual conversation went down:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?

Zimmerman: He looks black.

The difference between what “Today” put on its air and the actual tape? Complete: In the “Today” version, Zimmerman volunteered that this person “looks black,” a sequence of events that would more readily paint Zimmerman as a racial profiler. In reality’s version, Zimmerman simply answered a question about the race of the person whom he was reporting to the police. Nothing prejudicial at all in responding to such an inquiry.

In an appearance on Fox News’s “Hannity,” Brent Bozell, president of the conservative Media Research Center, called this elision on the part of ”Today” an “all-out falsehood” — not just a distortion or misrepresentation.

And it’s a falsehood with repercussions. Much of the public discussion over the past week has settled on how conflicting facts and interpretations call into question whether Zimmerman acted justifiably or criminally. That’s a process that’ll continue. But one set of facts in the is ironclad, and that’s the back-and-forth between Zimmerman and the dispatcher. To portray that exchange in a way that wrongs Zimmerman is high editorial malpractice well worthy of the investigation that NBC is now mounting.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/nbc-to-do-internal-investigation-on-zimmerman-segment/2012/03/31/gIQAc4HhnS_blog.html?hpid=z6

[nikki2200]

The voice heard crying for help on a 911 call just before Trayvon Martin was shot to death was not that of George Zimmerman according to 2 experts.

Uh oh.......



Also, FINALLY!! I didn't understand why this didn't happen earlier.

[redtodd]

The voice heard crying for help on a 911 call just before Trayvon Martin was shot to death was not that of George Zimmerman according to 2 experts.

As I said somewhere buried in this thread, this will be the key for me. If it turns out it is Zimmerman, I think he will have a good case for self defense. If it turns out to be Trayvon, it should be easy to put Zimmerman away form Manslaughter/Murder.

The only issue I have with this link is that it is from MSNBC who I do not trust at all. I think they make Fox News seem reputable.

[Mike Honcho]

As I said somewhere buried in this thread, this will be the key for me. If it turns out it is Zimmerman, I think he will have a good case for self defense. If it turns out to be Trayvon, it should be easy to put Zimmerman away form Manslaughter/Murder.

The only issue I have with this link is that it is from MSNBC who I do not trust at all. I think they make Fox News seem reputable.

The link was just a retelling of story from the Orlando Sentinel.

[Cdub100]

The burden of proof has gotten so far out of control there is no way Zimm is convicted. It wouldn't suprise me if the jury let him off because defense used the old MAYBE an alien spaceship landed and they shot TM.

...ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

Why would a Wookiee, an 8-foot-tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of 2-foot-tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.

[Recliner Pilot]

Why have Trayvon's parents not provided a sample of his voice to compare to the tape? Seems to me if it matches his voice it helps their case.

[Patriotsfatboy1]

The burden of proof has gotten so far out of control there is no way Zimm is convicted. It wouldn't suprise me if the jury let him off because defense used the old MAYBE an alien spaceship landed and they shot TM.

...ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

Why would a Wookiee, an 8-foot-tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of 2-foot-tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests.

Uh oh. He using the Chewbacca defense.

[penultimatestraw]

Why have Trayvon's parents not provided a sample of his voice to compare to the tape? Seems to me if it matches his voice it helps their case.

Where do you keep your recordings of friends and loved ones?

[Recliner Pilot]

Where do you keep your recordings of friends and loved ones?

There's this newfangled contraption called a video cam. Some people actually video their kids.