There was no justifiable reason for Zimmerman to shoot an unarmed teenager (who was doing nothing wrong). But Zimmerman didn't like a young Black man walking in "his" neighborhood, and he had a gun to back up his hatred. All Zimmerman had to do was obey the police, stop following, and stay in his car, and no one would have been hurt. But he couldn't do that, because that wouldn't feed his macho racism. This killing was totally Zimmerman's fault, and it was murder -- or manslaughter at the very least.
I worked in various aspects of law enforcement for over 25 years, but right now I am deeply ashamed of our justice system (if it can even be called that anymore).
So the jury system stinks, does it? Six good ladies and true listened to the evidence, ignored the malignant and highly dangerous interventions of the likes of Obama and Sharpton, neither of whom should have intervened and who should, therefore, face charges themselves for interfering with the judicial system, and came to a conclusion that the "white Hispanic" (Eh? What? When was that invented and by whom?) was *not* guilty of murder.
ReplyDeleteBut you, Ted, along with your (il)liberal pals insist that you all know better than the jury. Have you any idea just how dangerous that makes you sound?
No more dangerous than you sound. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
DeleteAt least George Zimmerman will have a VERY LARGE legal bill that might take many years to pay off. I guess that might be one alternate form of justice.
ReplyDeleteI know that it was totally unnecessary for anyone to die that day. All Zimmerman had to do was listen to the instructions from the police. And if you (who have told me you don't even live in this country) think I'm dangerous, then so be it. I have a right to my opinion of the justice system, and it blatant imperfections -- and so do the president and Rev. Sharpton. Do you really think it's OK to go around killing unarmed teenagers?
ReplyDeleteWhat I, or you, or Gr'ama Banana, thinks is beside the point. The only opinion worth a cent is that of the six people in the jury who heard *all* the evidence presented by prosecution and defence and came to a unanimous decision - not guilty.
ReplyDeleteThe POTUS is an absolute disgrace to his office! As the political leader of his country he has absolutely no business giving even a hint of his opinion on any judicial trial let alone one involving murder. If you, a fairly reasonable liberal Democrat, can't see that and the dangers that it entails then I really do fear for the future of the USA. It reduces Obama to the level of that rank, loud-mouthed agitator, Al Sharpton.
Go ahead and fear for our future then -- because every citizen in the U.S. has the right to have and state an opinion on anything, including the president and Rev. Sharpton. I guess you think you insulted Rev. Sharpton by calling him a "rank, loud-mouthed agitator", but he is just doing what's necessary to fight for justice for everyone. And this country was founded by rank, loud-mouthed agitators.
DeleteBy the way, when did they do away with the 12 person jury?
ReplyDeleteI think that is just a quirk of Florida law.
DeleteThe bottom line is that an unarmed teenage boy is dead because a man decided he didn't want to listen to sound advice.
ReplyDeleteGeorge Zimmerman may not be guilty in the eyes of Florida law and six jurors...he is guilty, however, of being a reckless fool who needlessly set into motion a series of tragic events.
Scary point is that he is a "reckless fool" and might go "on patrol" another night in the future. Let's hope he has a better sense of what to do and stay in his car next time, and there will be a next time.
DeleteWhat the GZ trial tells me is that there are at least 12 others who would do the same thing. And where there is 12 there are a lot more. Be afraid, very afraid.
ReplyDeleteOK I now know it is 6.
L. Long manages to stretch the facts of the matter into farce. Six women of, I believe, mixed ethnicities listened to ALL the evidence and came to a conclusion - NOT guilty. And yet in Long's fevered imagination that makes them potential murderers!
ReplyDeleteNo, Kellybee, a man is dead because he leapt out onto another man and began to beat his head against a concrete kerb not realising that his *victim* was armed. Next time that happens to you and you find yourself lucky enough to possess a weapon will you use it?
Ted, of course you are entitled to voice your opinion, er, but not on anything. For example, you are not allowed to voice your hostile opinion on people of a different ethnicity to yours. Nor on people with a different sexual orientation from yours - unless you are homosexual and wish to cast aspersions on heterosexuals. Nor, apparently, can you voice your opposition to the Democrat party without the risk of incurring close inspection by the IRS. Nor can you stand trial on a murder charge without the POTUS attempting to influence the result. Nor as an American citizen can you raise the banner of revolution against your government (allegedly an ancient tradition in America!) because you are likely to get a drone down your chimney. "Land of the Free"? You must be joking!
I find it strange that although you live where guns are more restricted, you seem to want to belittle those (like L Long) who bemoan the fact that nuts like Zimmerman pose a danger in this country. And this was NOT self-defense by any stretch of the imagination. Zimmerman was the aggressor -- not Trayvon.
DeleteAnd bringing up the false IRS "scandal" and homosexuality is just an attempt to change the subject -- since neither has anything to do with the subject being discussed.
The bigot was told to stop! he did not. He was heavily armed.
DeleteLets see, David is obviously the type of person who when followed by a suspicious big black person when you have done nothing to be followed, would just turn around and say nice friendly stuff and smile, cuz you are so nice and trusting. And you would know the stalker meant no harm but just wants to meet you.
Martin was simply standing his ground.
DeleteAnd lo and behold, here is your President Bigmouth attempting yet again to influence the judicial system - with ham fisted results:
ReplyDelete"When President Obama proclaimed that those who commit sexual assault in the military should be “prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court-martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged,” it had an effect he did not intend: muddying legal cases across the country.
In at least a dozen sexual assault cases since the president’s remarks at the White House in May, judges and defense lawyers have said that Mr. Obama’s words as commander in chief amounted to “unlawful command influence,” tainting trials as a result. Military law experts said that those cases were only the beginning and that the president’s remarks were certain to complicate almost all prosecutions for sexual assault."
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/14/us/obama-remark-is-complicating-military-trials.html?_r=0
The man is a dangerous buffoon!
Don't change the subject. Sexual assaults in the military have nothing to do with the Zimmerman trial. And personally, I approve of the president's leadership on that subject. Sexual assault in the military may not be a problem where you live, but it is a serious problem in the United States -- and strong leadership is needed.
DeleteTypical of your type to shift the discussion by electing a straw man. But you are also VERY wrong about what was said as HE IS the military commander in chief and has every right to speak on any subject dealing with the military.
DeleteI am angry and ashamed. Zimmerman started a fight with the kid AFTER being told NOT to approach him by the police. He did it anyhow and when he couldn't win physically he killed the man; somehow a self-defense defense when you are the AGGRESSOR seems terribly out of place.
ReplyDelete"Next time that happens to you", Dave? Actually, I don't make a habit of agressively confronting people; I especially wouldn't if I had been told by the police not to do anything.
ReplyDeleteSpin it any way you choose...but a young man is dead, and he wouldn't be if another guy hadn't made a stupid decision.
"Zimmerman was the aggressor -- not Trayvon."
ReplyDeleteNow remind me, who jumped out of the bushes on who? And who broke who's nose? And who smashed who's head against a concrete curb not once but continuously?
And I am most definitely not changing the subject, Ted, your President has made a habit of interfering in the justice system including an attempt to influence the outcome of a murder trial. If 'Dubya' had done that you would have had a baby! And if a Prime Minister had said what Obama said he would have been forced to resign. And now I read that the Feds are considering ways and means of charging Zimmerman under Federal laws. I wonder where the orders for that came from? And still none of you can see the danger of this man and his politically corrupt administration.
You will be relieved to hear that I am away for a couple of days so this will probably be my last word on the subject.
Sorry, one more comment before I depart. Obama was hot to ensure that Zimmerman faced a murder charge but shouldn't he, himself, be facing multiple murder charges? I have lost count of how many **American citizens** have been executed by him **without benefit of trial**! None of them killed in a face-to-face fight, mind, but instead by means of long-distance drones.
ReplyDelete'First they came for the Muslims . . . '