WHAT IF ZIMMERMAN HADN'T GOTTEN OUT OF HIS TRUCK ????

A little slow on the up-take, but yeah, that's what i'm implying very well may be the case. Originally Posted by Doove

So far the "implying" about Zimmerman's "intentions" and "motivations" has gotten a "not guilty" verdict.

I'll go with a "not guilty" .... until someone has some direct evidence and a confession.

And who ever used the word ... "smear" ... fits with your "implying"!

What was the crime Zimmerman committed? Did I see you write .... "manslaughter"?

"! Originally Posted by LexusLover

He committed no crime beyond a reasonable doubt. That is wtf jury verdicts say. Nothing more, nothing less.

So far the "implying" about Zimmerman's "intentions" and "motivations" has gotten a "not guilty" verdict.

I'll go with a "not guilty" .... until someone has some direct evidence and a confession.

And who ever used the word ... "smear" ... fits with your "implying"! Originally Posted by LexusLover

Like you haven't tried to smear Martin and his family....

He committed no crime beyond a reasonable doubt. That is wtf jury verdicts say. Nothing more, nothing less.


Like you haven't tried to smear Martin and his family.... Originally Posted by WTF

Actually, since Zimmerman was not proven guilty, he's still innocent as far as the law.

Of course, whoever thought you would pay any attention to the law?

Smearing? Martin? His "family"?

Martin and his family smeared, and are now smearing, themselves. Unfortunately, it may be that the Martin's attorney is pushing the agenda on a lawsuit, which keeps the mud stirring. Hopefully, they don't think they will get a "free ride" in a civil case in which they are seeking damages for the loss of their "little angel" .... their knowledge of how he earned his "wings" will be the subject of much cross-examination and controverting evidence. It wouldn't be the first time that jury awarded a dollar for the value of someone's life. Like leaving a penny on the table as a tip. Many lawyers who are simply trying to boost the publicity they get neglect to give the downside to clients for fear they will decide not to sue.

Free publicity ... for the media hounds. Embarrassment for the losing client.

Smearing? Martin? His "family"?

. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Yes hypocrite, that is what you bitch about and then turn around and do.

Actually, since Zimmerman was not proven guilty, he's still innocent as far as the law. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Obama hasn't been "proven guilty" relative to...well....anything.

We'll see how long your intellectual honesty lasts. Anyone wanna lay bets?

Obama hasn't been "proven guilty" relative to...well....anything.

We'll see how long your intellectual honesty lasts. Anyone wanna lay bets? Originally Posted by Doove

Has Obaminable been charged with any crime, yet?

Being stupid isn't against the law, yet. Otherwise you and some of your fellow comrades wouldn't get internet access to post.

Has Obaminable been charged with any crime, yet? Originally Posted by LexusLover

Odumbo's constituents are complicit in a crime: DUI -- Dimotards Under the Influence!

Odumbo's constituents are complicit in a crime: DUI -- Dimotards Under the Influence! Originally Posted by I B Hankering

How about "Contributing to the Delinquency of a Bunch of Minors"?

They actually believe he is doing this country some good.

How about "Contributing to the Delinquency of a Bunch of Minions"?

They actually believe he is doing this country some good. Originally Posted by LexusLover

+1

Minions Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Looks like a perfect pic of you IB JD Whirlly Old fart and your ilk.

I'm so sick of a certain segment of the black community that wants to play the victim. Hell, our so-called fearless leader walked right into that trap when he said he had been profiled b/c he was black. Black people need to get the fuck over it. The trial is OVER. The law was followed precisely as it should have been. Hell, if it weren't for some chicken shit, weak ass GOP governor who felt some idiotic need to placate the black community, THERE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN A TRIAL. The police rightly determined no crime had been committed. Personally, I don't give a rat's ass for Zimmerman-- other than the fact he was rail-roaded. What pisses me off are politicians who VIOLATE the law to placate a certain segment of the community. What Rick Scott did was immoral while wasting tax dollars to put on a show trial that would have made Uncle Joe Stalin proud. Only difference, the outcome was NOT rigged. Rick Scott lost my vote for his re-election. As for Obama and Holder, Obama is worse than Carter, and Holder could give Barney Fife a few lessons on ineptitude. Originally Posted by Cpalmson

That is complete horseshit. A kid was shot to death under circumstances that many people believe were questionable at best. It is exactly the sort of scenario where a jury ought to decide. That's what happened and now it's over.

And, how do you know what the police "determined"? I can tell you from personal experience that decisions about charging people with crimes aren't necessarily made based on whether or not the police or the district attorney's office believe a crime was committed. Those decisions are based on whether or not the DA and/or police believe there is sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction. Two very different things.

And POLITICS; especially the politics of race baiting.................

....... I can tell you from personal experience that decisions about charging people with crimes aren't necessarily made based on whether or not the police or the district attorney's office believe a crime was committed. Those decisions are based on whether or not the DA and/or police believe there is sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction. Two very different things. Originally Posted by timpage

And POLITICS; especially the politics of race baiting................. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Has it occurred to you that your endless accusations of race-baiting are......race-baiting?

Halfwit.

And, how do you know what the police "determined"? I can tell you from personal experience that decisions about charging people with crimes aren't necessarily made based on whether or not the police or the district attorney's office believe a crime was committed. Those decisions are based on whether or not the DA and/or police believe there is sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction. Two very different things. Originally Posted by timpage

First, when the police don't "charge" someone involving an offense as serious as killing someone, it tells me (in my personal experience) that those investigating the incident reviewed the evidence they had gathered with the "intake" ADA and the "intake" ADA, perhaps after brainstorming with co-ADAs decided there was no crime (in this case because the evidence showed self-defense to a level they were unable to overcome) or there was insufficient evidence to prove that a crime had been committed. For your edification: Excusable Homicide in Florida is NOT A CRIME. In addition "justifiable homicide" is ALSO NOT A CRIME. (In my "personal experience")

Secondly, those are not two different things ... if there is insufficient evidence to prove a crime ... there is no crime legally ... and the rest is speculation between your ears .. and all those "other people" ...

All I can add .. is .... I hope you ... and all those "other people" who think like you do ... don't ever get investigated for "a crime" and have the charges NOT FILED, because then when you answer a question regarding whether you have ever committed a crime .. you will have to answer "yes" ... and then explain ... unless, of course, you are "special" ....

Now why was it that a "special prosecutor" had to be assigned to the trial of the "no crime"?