Self Defense Killing in Florida...Geeks got an opinion?

[parrot 789]

 

Case in point.

[MDC 7,151]

 

Case in point.

From what little I've read ... Seems like, etc. yeah I really had him tried and convicted. Also I was laughing at your editorial commentary not the report.

[Sho Nuff 720]

 

Well see, already this morning I've been accused by Worms of seeing what I want to see to fit my own personal narrative of the case (there are not enough on the internets to fully convey my feeling of on that front) and laughed at by MDC for quoting the police transcript, one of the few incontrovertible pieces of evidence available in this case. So I figured it was worth pointing out how early in the case, and on what flimsy information, these two had made up their minds about what occurred. Of course they have slowly been forced to change their opinions, until the character assault on Zimmerman is all they have left to work with.

 

You mean someone on the internet came to a possibly incorrect conclusion based on limited information and shared their opinion on a message board?

 

Oh, the horror!!!

[parrot 789]

 

You mean someone on the internet came to a possibly incorrect conclusion based on limited information and shared their opinion on a message board?

 

Oh, the horror!!!

 

Yeah, and then later tried to bust someone else's balls for "seeing what you want to see". Maybe you can see the irony there.

[parrot 789]

From what little I've read ... Seems like, etc. yeah I really had him tried and convicted. Also I was laughing at your editorial commentary not the report.

 

The editorial commentary where I pointed out the simple fact that at no point was Zimmerman given any kind of directive or order not to follow, just a simple "we don't need you to do that" ? Go ahead and laugh I guess. I realize you don't have much to work with at this point.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Why do Dems wanted Guilty and Reps wanted innocent?

 

You people are focking monkees.

Reps tend to base things on substantive things like facts, while demwits base everything on emotion and wanting to whip up the latest faux racism.

[MDC 7,151]

 

The editorial commentary where I pointed out the simple fact that at no point was Zimmerman given any kind of directive or order not to follow, just a simple "we don't need you to do that" ? .

Yes, that was the funny part.

[Phurfur 70]

Why do Dems wanted Guilty and Reps wanted innocent?

 

You people are focking monkees.

Of all forms of slavery there is none that is so harmful and degrading as that form of slavery which tempts one human being to hate another by reason of his race or color. - Booker T. Washington

[IGotWorms 4,057]

Wow, some of you guys really need to get me put of your head. It's flattering and all, but seriously it's getting a little weird too.

 

Anyway, like I said in the other thread--the one that didn't have to be bumped from months ago--I admit I was wrong per the jury's verdict. I still think Zimmerman was guilty in the grand sense but there was plenty of reasonable doubt as evidenced by the jury's decision.

 

HTH

[parrot 789]

Wow, some of you guys really need to get me put of your head. It's flattering and all, but seriously it's getting a little weird too.

 

Anyway, like I said in the other thread--the one that didn't have to be bumped from months ago--I admit I was wrong per the jury's verdict. I still think Zimmerman was guilty in the grand sense but there was plenty of reasonable doubt as evidenced by the jury's decision.

 

HTH

 

Uh yeah, everyone I engage in discussion on a discussion bored is clearly in my head.

 

But just so we're all on the same page; that "other thread" would be the one where you, already having formed a strong opinion based on very limited information very early in the process, only to have your theory to be shown repeatedly to be way off base, accused me of seeing what I wanted to see to fit my "narrative", even though I've said very little about the case that doesn't fit with the available evidence. Is that about right?

[IGotWorms 4,057]

 

Uh yeah, everyone I engage in discussion on a discussion bored is clearly in my head.

 

But just so we're all on the same page; that "other thread" would be the one where you, already having formed a strong opinion based on very limited information very early in the process, only to have your theory to be shown repeatedly to be way off base, accused me of seeing what I wanted to see to fit my "narrative", even though I've said very little about the case that doesn't fit with the available evidence. Is that about right?

That's the one. Although, again, you're distorting the facts to fit your agenda.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Reps tend to base things on substantive things like facts, while demwits base everything on emotion and wanting to whip up the latest faux racism.

 

Hah...funniest thing you have said in a while.

[parrot 789]

That's the one. Although, again, you're distorting the facts to fit your agenda.

 

Which facts, specifically?

 

I don't have an agenda.