R.I.P Trayvon

[gllahone84]

If I'm Trayvon...you really don't have to ask me ****. 

That's what you fail to understand, don't even question me if I haven't done anything worth being suspicious of. 

Keep it moving, and it's raining dog, I'm trying to get home, that's why I'm rocking this hoodie. 

Dumb ***.

 

[duba169]

it's pretty evident that in this guy's warped mind he was the one who was gonna save his neighborhood from the evils of black teenage boys and ingratiate himself with the gated-community crowd. he created a reason via his prejudices, exacerbated the situation through his aggression and ended up playing vigilante



this juror is a terrible person. she really is

He could have easily called the cops and went home. But there wouldn't have felt good about himself. He wouldn't have been art of the action

That's what I truly think it comes down to. He wanted to be a cowboy. A cop. A vigilante.

 

[water]

why does GZ have a right to stop TM?

He doesn't have the right to stop him, but I'm sure TM would have just stopped anyway to tell him he just went to 711 for some candy as he himself knows he was innocent, and most likely knows there had been burglaries in the area. 

 

[hand2handking]

 

[keko jones]

This thread is just a big circle - everything has been discuss and yet people are still divided.

GZ can be tried X amount of times and I truly believe that he would either walk or the jury would be hung but in no way, will he ever be convicted.

 

[gllahone84]

It's ******g raining bruh...

****** don't even like standing around in the rain...Trayvon prb had the munchies and needed a snack.

When I was 17 that was typical...plus I Ioved skittles back then. Until I found out about the gelatin, then they dropped the gelatin free.

 

[00david00]

Nah, see I never said that in any of my posts.


What I did say is that, in court, he was not proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt in court. That's not hiding behind the law. I have nothing to hide, that's just how the law works.


I don't need to sympathize with Zimmerman or agree to his actions to see that.


Laws and morality don't always line up perfectly http://www.philosophyetc.net/2004/08/law-morality.html

so what do you think is more important, or holds greater value? being "legal" or being right and moral?

I believe that morality is one of the most important of goods.

Absolutely morality is more important.

 

[Fresh Like Will]

i dont see how break ins are justification for anything.  are you saying it was his belief that TM broke into every house previously?  were those other perps caught?
and ultimately if a house gets broken into, its material possessions, things that can be replaced.  the victims of the other break ins didnt move did they?  and ultimately, those houses were broken into on his watch no?

Apparently the perpetrators were already caught. But if Zimmerman was such a good neighborhood watchman, why were there so many burglaries? Maybe they were embellishing how many there actually were.

 

[water]

This thread is just a big circle - everything has been discuss and yet people are still divided.

GZ can be tried X amount of times and I truly believe that he would either walk or the jury would be hung but in no way, will he ever be convicted.

So your main goal is to convict a man where there is not enough evidence to find him guilty. 

 

[hand2handking]

GZ can be tried X amount of times and I truly believe that he would either walk or the jury would be hung but in no way, will he ever be convicted.

i believe it

 

[gllahone84]

I'm good Keko...I have life, and you're blessed to have a life as well. 

 

[hand2handking]

this thread is going in circles because no one can come up with a legal AND moral justification for what happened.

we have to decide whether lives should be judged legally or morally

 

[gllahone84]

this thread is going in circles because no one can come up with a legal AND moral justification for what happened.

we have to decide whether lives should be judged legally or morally

 

[water]

this thread is going in circles because no one can come up with a legal AND moral justification for what happened.

we have to decide whether lives should be judged legally or morally

The law said he was not guilty. 

 

[lyonbc1]

YO I said before b37 was an idiot but WOW after hearing some of part 2....are you serious?!? I saw that she was one the prosecution wanted to be replaced but the defense argued for her...can certainly see why, she's a Zimmerman fan girl. It's no different than having someone on there who was convinced he was guilty pretrial. Her dumb *** making conclusions and putting her own story together with things the defense didn't even bring up! She may be "educated" but she sounds dumb as a sack of bricks.

 

[pdino]

Zimmerman will still be tried in Civil court and will more than likely get sued for all he's worth.

 

[keko jones]

So your main goal is to convict a man where there is not enough evidence to find him guilty. 

I don't understand your question? 

i believe it

Just by looking at how divided this thread is, I don't see how can you find a jury that will agree with a guilty. So at most, the jury would be hung.

I'm good Keko...I have life, and you're blessed to have a life as well. 

My comment has nothing to do with what transpire - I do also believe it was tragic and I do believe that it never should of have happened. I also believe that by listening to the tapes and looking at the evidence it's just to damn hard to say convincingly that GZ had murder all over his mind before it even happen. BTW, I'm not saying he wasn't thinking it - I'm just stating that it's hard to prove it with the evidence provided.

 

[00david00]

YO I said before b37 was an idiot but WOW after hearing some of part 2....are you serious?!? I saw that she was one the prosecution wanted to be replaced but the defense argued for her...can certainly see why, she's a Zimmerman fan girl. It's no different than having someone on there who was convinced he was guilty pretrial. Her dumb *** making conclusions and putting her own story together with things the defense didn't even bring up! She may be "educated" but she sounds dumb as a sack of bricks.

word I haven't seen part 2 yet part 1 was already :x

 

[hand2handking]

BTW, I'm not saying he wasn't thinking it - I'm just stating that it's hard to prove it with the evidence provided.

this is what i meant by legal and moral, the moral part being his mindset and the legal part being the evidence

 

[hand2handking]

The law said he was not guilty. 

Just by looking at how divided this thread is, I don't see how can you find a jury that will agree with a guilty. So at most, the jury would be hung.

maybe we put GZ in front of a jury of 6 blacks?

 

[water]

GZ can be tried X amount of times and I truly believe that he would either walk or the jury would be hung but in no way, will he ever be convicted.

So your main goal is to convict a man where there is not enough evidence to find him guilty. 

I don't understand your question? 

Based on your quote above, it sounds like you want GZ to be found guilty. 

But, there isn't enough evidence to find him guilty. 

 

[keko jones]

this is what i meant by legal and moral, the moral part being his mindset and the legal part being the evidence

Now let me ask you something ..

If you was ever arrested for anything period 

Would you rather be judge by morals/assumptions/speculations or by the evidence?

I rather be the latter because I know I never done anything - so prove that it was me!

 

[hand2handking]

hasnt this juror pretty much already admitted that she wasnt lookin at no evidence?

 

[00david00]

this thread is going in circles because no one can come up with a legal AND moral justification for what happened.

we have to decide whether lives should be judged legally or morally

That's the thing, we've already decided that in court lives are judged legally.

It's not hiding behind a legal argument acknowledging that.

 

[water]

this is what i meant by legal and moral, the moral part being his mindset and the legal part being the evidence

Now let me ask you something ..

If you was ever arrested for anything period 

Would you rather be judge by morals/assumptions/speculations or by the evidence?

I rather be the latter because I know I never done anything - so prove that it was me!

Reason why he was found not guilty. If there was enough evidence to prove it, he would have been convicted.