Anonymous wrote:Completely bias I heard about 16 sentences of adnasseum of how wonderful the martins and their dead boy was and maybe 1 sentence about a fair trial for zim.

Exactly.

Did anyone catch the "sweet boy" comment the prosecutor said about Martin? Just sounded like she was out for blood. Then again the prosecutor's job is to pursue a conviction, not present a balanced view.

My guess? He'll be acquitted and their will be riots, murders, violence against police, etc. The country will learn to fear 'rage' and not its not going to be pretty.

Anonymous wrote:If someone is on top of you attacking you in the way the police report and zimmerman described you are allowed to protect yourself with lethal force using a firearrm. Thats the law.

What if Zimmerman attacked him first? Isn't Martin allowed to "Stand His Ground" and fight back?

I really don't think the law says that you can pick a fight with someone, and once you start getting your ass kicked, you can then shoot that person.

Anonymous wrote:I hate the gentrification going on in DC. I'm all for putting a (nonviolent) end to it.

Yes, of course you're right. DC in the 80s - those were the salad days. Just like Paris in the springtime.

I hate the gentrification going on in DC. I'm all for putting a (nonviolent) end to it.

He will be found not guilty and dc and la will be burned to the ground reversing dcs positive gentrification.

As a resident of one of those gentrifying neighborhoods, I can't say I haven't worried about this a bit. Actually, I was afraid charges wouldn't be filed at all. It's not out of the realm of possibility that, if Zimmerman is found not guilty, there will be protests/demonstrations that turn ugly.

Anonymous wrote:The prosecutor in this case reminds me of the prosecutor in the Duke Univ. Lacrosse incident; she's hoping to become a household name and run for higher office. I think, ultimately, the state will waste a lot of money, give her a lot of publicity, and he will be acquitted if it actually goes to trial. This whole thing was media oriented.

I think there's little chance that it will come out during the investigation that Trayvon made up being killed, but I've been wrong before.

Completely bias I heard about 16 sentences of adnasseum of how wonderful the martins and their dead boy was and maybe 1 sentence about a fair trial for zim.

Anonymous wrote:He will be found not guilty and dc and la will be burned to the ground reversing dcs positive gentrification.

The prosecuter is really contradictory , she says they will enforce the law and fight stand your ground, but isnt stand your ground a law she is supposed to defend. Can someone provide a book of which laws the state will defend and fight? This prosecuter was completely bias talking a out the sweet sweet family of martin and vilifying zimmerman.

Oh come on! She didnt say that. She said she would challenge his claim of self defense under the stand your ground law. That's like her challenging some killers claim of temporary insanity. Should she shrug her shoulders and say "oh you say you are crazy. I guess the trial is off"

Anonymous wrote:To me this seems like a dog and pony show setup to make it look like the state tried to prosecute zimmerman to appease the media influenced population even though they knows he will get off. If it was any other case and this happened they wouldn't even prosecute the case.

I don't get these dog and pony show posters. Here is to all of you feeling the identical anguish of the Martin parents. Perhaps you will not have to wait too long. And, if and when, you feel the pain of placing your DC in a mausoleum, please tell the prosecutors, no need to seek justice. It will only be a dog and pony show. Besides, my son wasn't worth a damn.

Is GZ under a suicide watch? His lawyer said something about his emotional state??

Anonymous wrote:If someone is on top of you attacking you in the way the police report and zimmerman described you are allowed to protect yourself with lethal force using a firearrm. Thats the law.

You mean that if Zimmerman is telling the truth then he is innocent.

How long did it take you to figure that out?

Anonymous wrote:If someone is on top of you attacking you in the way the police report and zimmerman described you are allowed to protect yourself with lethal force using a firearrm. Thats the law.

The police report is based on the words of the shooter, who kinda has an incentive to lie to make himself look better.

If someone is on top of you attacking you in the way the police report and zimmerman described you are allowed to protect yourself with lethal force using a firearrm. Thats the law.

Has Zimmerman submitted any evidence that he was actually hurt by TM? The supposed broken nose eg?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still believe that no one had to get shot here. A fist fight doesn't have to escalate to murder. It's manslaughter at the very least.

While I totally agree with your point, in Florida, apparently, the rule is that a fist fight CAN end in the death of one combatant, and it's not a crime/not a murder. That't the lunacy of this "stand your ground" law. If someone is hitting you, you get to shoot and kill them. So, if TM started the fist fight and GZ killed him in the course of that fight, GZ is innocent (or not guilty).

I'm still trying to understand the "stand your ground law". If someone accidentally knocks on your door, can you shoot them and say you were standing your ground with no other provocation? When there was that road rage incident on Rockville Pike a few years ago and the person shot the other driver, if this was Florida instead of MD, would the shooter not be charged because he was standing his ground? I'm just trying to understand where the line is being drawn between it being the wild west and someone looked at you funny so you draw your weapon versus a situation like the mom in Oklahoma with someone trying to break into her house.