thing1 :

Not sure how exactly, but somehow I posted that last one in the other thread... Anyway, here's the one you were actually looking for.

A fail all right, but not the one i expected...
Double post

summon spree,watch as i fail:
Elara :
rcarter2 :
geeogree :
RequiemHaunt :
JigSaw :
AuraBlaze :
Markeith21 :
thing1 :
legacyme3 :
MissComical :
soxfan849 :
Annette :
catfight09 :
Hoochman :
Jordanv78 :
Arctic Wolf (SS82) :
pacman1755 :
smotpoker86 :
Invictis :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17691459
he has been arrested now (finally) and he is facing 2nd degree murder charges, which apparently, are seen as over ambitious.
whether or not he is actualy convicted remains to be seen

thenumberone : Why did you summon all of us to this?

Anyway yeah I saw this last night on the news. Really I think something weird is going on. Especially how his defense team treated him.

RequiemHaunt : so they could see the updated article
rcarter2 :
sadly im somewhat inclined to agree, justice will probably be subverted.

Oh that's some pretty good news. Maybe we will see some justice after all. I still can't believe that somebody like this would kill an innocent kid, but there he is in all of his glory. Being arrested for 2nd degree murder. Hopefully the trial goes in favor for us.

Yeah I heard that last night. I think that the DA is just trying to over charge him in hopes that they can either A. Get him to plead to Manslaughter (Which will never happen, unless strong evidence pops up all of a sudden) or B. That they can get the jury to agree on at least Manslaughter. I think he will wind up getting off with a slap on the wrist at most though.

Jordanv78 :
personally A is what i thought, the person leading prosecution claimed public opinion had nothing to do with the U turn but i dont believe that.  They went with the highest they could, hoped for some conviction, and will wipe there hands of it leaving the blame to the coutrts instead, and the justice, well, who knows where that is, under a rock with a bullet hole perhaps.

Justice, in my opinion has been broken in the US for a long time. Nowadays whether you did something or not, you cannot get a fair trial unless you are rich and can afford very expensive lawyers. The rich get off on technicalities after causing people's death, but poor people get arrested and go to jail for stealing bread.

(Mini-Rant over)

I don't think it's overly ambitions. He murdered him, but he didn't plan it in advance. And I don't really think it is Manslaughter based on Florida law, which is kind weird since it doesn't separate voluntary and involuntary manslaughter.

 In Florida, manslaughter, defined as: The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder . . . is a second degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in state prison regardless of whether the act may have been intentional or not.

And I have a feeling the Stand Your Ground law will not protect him since the men that wrote the law have condemned his actions and declared that he doesn't fall under its protection. So, unless they can produce some smoking gun that the kid actually was a threat to him, I don't think he will walk. He might plea, but he won't walk.

I knew someone like Zimmerman who was an authority figure in canada and shot a unarmed indian. It's pretty much identical to this trial. There was a robbery suspect that fit the description of the indian he confronted. The guy was drunk, refused to show identification, went for gun and he got shot over it. There was a lot of public outrage. The indian tribes were angry at whitey and thought it was all a race crime when in fact it had nothing to do with it.

Even though he was found innocent he had nightmares, drunk himself to death and someone stalked him for life until he died and made a book and tv movie on it. The guy who wrote book was a truth distorter who was so bad at research he couldn't get the details or the names of the people he stalked correctly.

The media and cults are sick people who will go great lengths to distort truth for a buck. Though I'm not calling zimmerman innocent, if the black kid went for gun he deserved to get shot. The race card or oh he was unarmed are easy excuses to point blame on authority figures. You have to look at the confrontation for the truth. Something obviously went sour during their chat and I believe there was a witness who said they saw the black kid on zimmerman so we will have to wait and see.

I definitely have to agree that this is a racial issue because the media made it a racial issue. NBC edited the audio to make it sound as though Zimmerman profiled Martin based on race (the edited tape made him say something along the lines of "this guy looks suspicious... he looks black"). CNN told viewers to listen for a racial slur that Zimmerman supposedly said under his breath, though now they've said he either said "cold" or "punks".

And for some information on that law being used to defend Zimmerman, the Stand Your Ground law has been used to defend people in similar circumstances before.

So even though Zimmerman was told that he didn't need to follow Martin, it doesn't matter. He had a legal right to be in the neighborhood. And if Martin attacked him, then he had the right to defend himself. I think the worst part of this case for Zimmerman is the screaming on the phone, since expert analysts are saying that it wasn't his voice. If Martin was really the one screaming then it seems hard to call it self-defense. Though if it was Zimmerman, then it seems pretty clear that it was self-defense. Which is why I find it odd that Trayvon's mother said she thought the killing was probably an accident. With the screaming on the phone call, I think it's either a case of necessary self-defense, or unnecessary murder.

JigSaw :
well there are only a few solid facts.
1. only zimerman had a weapon
2.the kid was walking away.
3.he realised he was being followed
4.
5.the kid was screaming until a single shot rang out and he stoped.

since only one witness survived #4 is hypothesis really.
id be interested where he was shot though, if he was attacked how exactly why exactly did the kid scream and how did he kill with 1 shot.
if there was a struggle the odds of him managing to shoot the kid were slim, and if its a clean shot to the head or heart the odds are in favour he aimed, hard in a struggle.
also if he was shot from behind or in front, if he screamed he could have turned to run, and that destroys a self defense claim.
if it were the uk it would probably have been caught on camera but since it apparently wasnt caught it'll need to be facts and theories.
Elara :
I certainly hope hes convicted but the men that wrote the law dont really get a say, it'll be a judge who gets to decide that, and who knows what could happen from there.
What confused me is why zimmer fled for 2 days then turned himself in when a warrant was written. One weird guy, id say hes an idiot more than a deliberate murderer, but maybe more will emerge after the trial.
I hope the police chief dosent quietly return once the dust settles, i think he's gonna try it.
Jordanv78 :
heh. kinda reminded me of lifestyles of the rich and famous by good charlotte. its true that some people seem to get treated differently in court, there cheque books clearly follow them in.
zimmer however is apparently hard up, hes got a site seeking donations for his defense. Aparntely its a 'leftist' 'media coup' and the kid was covered in 'bling' and 'getting up in zimmermans face.'
and yes, im quoting, people have been saying this trash.

soxfan849 : the bbc's coverage had him as saying these 'punks' keep getting away with it.
As for the screaming, the residents whos lines it could be heard on were adiment it was the kids, thats my main point of objection to z's claim.
I dont know what he hoped to gain, you can hear him running when he decides to go after him, so i can only asume some kind of confrontation (not neccesarily physical) was his plan as stealth was discarded.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17691459
travis's mum said it was murder, she defines what she meant accident in that article.
interestingly he claims travis broke his nose and knocked him to the ground, if its not noted in the police logs then either hes lying or the police again, failed to do there job.

thenumberone : Interesting point I also wonder where he got shot.

If zimmerman was in an unmarked car, wearing street clothes with no identification then followed him on foot I think he has much more problems to worry about. That really looks bad even if he his neighborhood watch how would the kid have known? More importantly, I wonder if zimmerman even stated who he was in their conversation before he shot him. Maybe the kid thought he was going to get mugged and socked zimmerman in face and he shot him.

thenumberone : Earlier I said that Zimmerman was no where to be found, and it may not be true any more (since he is in containment) it was true at the time. On CBC they showed a clip of his lawyer saying they didn't know where he was. A couple days later he is arrested, so it leaves 2 possible reasons. Either he went in to hiding and than decided against it shortly after, or there is some sort of misunderstanding between him and his lawyers. I will try to find the  clip I'm referring to sometime in the near future.

Now as far as the case goes, I too think the kid screaming as heard through the 911 call is the best evidence against Zimmerman's self defence claims. I mean honestly, if a 12 year old kid (or anyone for that matter) was threatening you to the point where you had to shoot him, would you expect said person to be screaming/crying for help and presumably begging for mercy?

Who knows maybe Zimmerman's lawyers will say he shouldn't go to jail because he isn't mentally stable. The way I see it he is either A) Lying or B) Delusional

This dude better be conviced. In my opinion, he should have been arrested without a second thought. I heard that racism had a big point in this situation (that particular area could be racist at times, a lot of times).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17809994
out on bail. i think he should have to report to a police station every day, not every 3...
he already did a bunk

I'm not familiar with the phrase "did a bunk". Are you refering to his going into hiding? Because he hasn't missed anything that he has a legal responsibility to attend yet. At this point, I don't think he's going to run. And there isn't really too much of a reason to think that he will. Three days is still pretty frequent, and they'll be able to keep an eye on him.