Bricker is a purveyor of misinformation; listen to him at your own risk

[John_Mace]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Uh… where?

For the record, Mr. Bright, can you state your occupation and which state you reside in?

[doorhinge]

@you_with_the_face

…For a Pit thread, this reads very mildly, I know. But I’d tired of seeing his crap in that other thread go unchallenged with the appropriate adjectives.

HAHAHAHA. So you are unable to make an proper argument in a general forum and now you feel the need to “swear” at someone in another as if that strengthens your lame red herrings.

How droll.

[Muffin]

@John_Mace

For the record, Mr. Bright, can you state your occupation and which state you reside in?

Win.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@John_Mace

For the record, Mr. Bright, can you state your occupation and which state you reside in?

Florida. Law student/paralegal.

[BlankSlate]

@Steophan

None of this is true. He had multiple injuries to his face and to the back of his head. If you have a scenario, consistent with the facts, that explains how he got them without Martin causing them, share it, but stop lying about the evidence that is there.

Bullshit. Why would I take your word over the investigators who were actually there? Why did they want to charge Zimmerman? Two vey simple concepts: 1) His “injuries” were inconsistent with the attack he described, and 2) They believed he was lying about specific statements he attributed to Martin, amongst other things.

So yeah, we’re supposed to believe a bunch of agenda-driven, internet yahoos over trained investigators who actually observed and questioned Zimmerman after the murder? I really don’t fucking think so.

[Hbns]

@monstro

She’s frustrated at blatant wrongness and being the lone fighter against it.

Fuck that. you with the face in that thread alienates and attacks anyone on either side that isn’t in foaming lock step with her.

I am absolutely certain had Zimmerman not been out to “get” (detain, question, physically restrain) the suspicious (because he was black) kid, there would have been no confrontation or shooting. But I get lumped in with all the other “Z apologists” because I won’t go along with the wacky interpretations of the law.

I’m sorry. I think an injustice has taken place, but twisting and bending the law to get the “correct” moral outcome is not the answer. That is the same kind of manipulation that has resulted in many African Americans getting unfairly punished under the law. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@BlankSlate

Bullshit. Why would I take your word over the investigators who were actually there? Why did they want to charge Zimmerman? Two vey simple concepts: 1) His “injuries” were inconsistent with the attack he described, and 2) They believed he was lying about specific statements he attributed to Martin, amongst other things.

So yeah, we’re supposed to believe a bunch of agenda-driven, internet yahoos over trained investigators who actually observed and questioned Zimmerman after the murder? I really don’t fucking think so.

Actually, the investigator who was actually there etc. and who wanted to charge Zimmerman says he was pressured to ask for an indictment by other cops (one African-American and one married to one) who were concerned about “community” reaction.

Does that change anything for you?

[gamerunknown]

@OP: logical disjunction may be the term you’re after.

@Rand Rover

because I believe discussing the “moral” aspect is a meaningless waste of time

Which’d put you beyond “Asperger’s” in terms of empathy and firmly into autistic. Or psychopathic. Take your pick.

[Boyo_Jim]

OP, Bricker should be pitting you for months of misinformed opinions, half-assed theories, and denial of facts about the Martin-Zimmerman case. You are without a doubt the most single-minded moron I have encountered on these boards.

This is coming from a guy who believes Zimmerman was completely unjustified in killing Martin.

[Shodan]

@BlankSlate

Bullshit. Why would I take your word over the investigators who were actually there? Why did they want to charge Zimmerman?

You are misrepresenting the facts of the case.

“They” didn’t want to charge Zimmerman. The Sanford Chief of Police said there was not enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman. (Cite.)

On March 13, 2012, Chris Serino sent a capias request to the state’s attorney recommending charges of negligent manslaughter against Zimmerman, though Serino maintains he did not believe they had the evidence to support those charges and that manslaughter was only included in the capias in order for the prosecutor’s office to continue with their own investigation.

Emphasis added.

@Chris Serino

“There is no indication that Trayvon Martin was involved in any criminal activity at the time of the encounter.”

His “injuries” were inconsistent with the attack he described

Please provide a cite of one of the investigators saying that Zimmerman’s injuries are inconsistent with his description of the attack.

Regards,
Shodan

[BlankSlate]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

Actually, the investigator who was actually there etc. and who wanted to charge Zimmerman says he was pressured to ask for an indictment by other cops (one African-American and one married to one) who were concerned about “community” reaction.

Does that change anything for you?

Serino alluded to pressure from both sides on whether to indict. He stands by his assessment of Zimmerman’s injuries and truthfulness.

So, no, it changes nothing.

[Shodan]

@BlankSlate

Serino alluded to pressure from both sides on whether to indict. He stands by his assessment of Zimmerman’s injuries and truthfulness.

So, no, it changes nothing.

nm

Regards,
Shodan

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@monstro

Personally, I don’t care as much as she does. But I do understand how she’s feeling.

My impression, for whatever it’s worth, is that you’re very loyal to her, and that loyalty is manifesting as defending her. That’s admirable in a sense–but it also means you’re acting as something of an enabler for her. She’d benefit more from having you, whom she trusts, let her know that she’s off-base in this case, from having your loyalty manifest as helping her get her facts and logic straight, instead of manifesting in a defense of her really lousy argument.

It’s worth asking why the only person who’s defending her here is you. Sure, it’s possible because you’re the only people here who can see the truth, but it seems to me there’s a much likelier explanation.

[Shodan]

My bad - I posted entirely the wrong quote earlier.

It should be

On March 16, Serino told the Orlando Sentinel that his investigation had turned up no reliable evidence that cast doubt on Zimmerman’s account, that he had acted in self-defense. “The best evidence we have is the testimony of George Zimmerman, and he says the decedent was the primary aggressor in the whole event, everything I have is adding up to what he says.”

Cite is here, same as above. My apologies for the error.

Regards,
Shodan

[BlankSlate]

@Shodan

You are misrepresenting the facts of the case.

“They” didn’t want to charge Zimmerman. The Sanford Chief of Police said there was not enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman. (Cite.)
Emphasis added.

Please provide a cite of one of the investigators saying that Zimmerman’s injuries are inconsistent with his description of the attack.

Regards,
Shodan

How can anyone who has followed this case not know this?

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-06-21/news/os-george-zimmerman-police-interview-20120621_1_police-detective-george-zimmerman-injuries

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@BlankSlate

Serino alluded to pressure from both sides on whether to indict. He stands by his assessment of Zimmerman’s injuries and truthfulness.

So, no, it changes nothing.

Do you have a source for these claims?

What I’m going by are reports such as http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/12/v-print/2892510/more-evidence-released-in-zimmerman.html Relevant quotes include:

Telling the FBI that he was concerned that people inside the police department were leaking information, Serino cited Sgt. Arthur Barnes, officers Rebecca Villalona and Trekelle Perkins “as all pressuring him to file charges against Zimmerman after the incident,” an FBI report said. “Serino did not believe he had enough evidence at the time to file charges.”

Records released Thursday show that Sgt. Barnes, a 25-year veteran of the department, told the FBI that he believed the black community would be “in an uproar” if Zimmerman was not charged. “The community will be satisfied if an arrest takes place,” the FBI quoted him saying. Barnes “felt the shooting was not racially motivated, but it was a man shooting an unarmed kid.”

And even if it’s true that Serino was pressured by “both sides”, it still makes his decision to ask for charges less than an unbiased and neutral assessment of the facts.

[elucidator]

@sleestak

Strange, usually when you have nothing to say you post a long drawn out screed.

I like it this way better. Maybe you could try it more often.

Slee

Don’t have to read any of 'em, hoss. Won’t bother me none.

[John_Mace]

@elucidator

Don’t have to read any of 'em, hoss. Won’t bother me none.

Two-timer. I thought that was my insult, now you go sharing it with someone else!!

[elucidator]

Two-timer? Two? Oh, well, yes, come to think on it, two is about right! Yeah, sure, two.

[monstro]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

My impression, for whatever it’s worth, is that you’re very loyal to her, and that loyalty is manifesting as defending her. That’s admirable in a sense–but it also means you’re acting as something of an enabler for her. She’d benefit more from having you, whom she trusts, let her know that she’s off-base in this case, from having your loyalty manifest as helping her get her facts and logic straight, instead of manifesting in a defense of her really lousy argument.

It’s worth asking why the only person who’s defending her here is you. Sure, it’s possible because you’re the only people here who can see the truth, but it seems to me there’s a much likelier explanation.

Can I ask you something?

Do you know what they are arguing about?

Can you distill what you’s argument is and then Bricker’s?

Have you made the effort to wade through the last couple of a pages of that horrible thread?

If the answer is no to any of this questions, please don’t condescend to me in this manner.

I doubt anyone knows exactly what is being argued, mainly because the OP is not well-constructed. But I advise anyone who halfway cares about this to actually find out the facts before jumping on the hate bandwagon.

A citizen’s arrest is not justified until all the surrounding facts are evaluated in a court of law and it is deemed as such.

If Bricker agrees with this very basic, non-controversial fact, then I will take you to task for being unhinged and ask that she go take a sedative.

If he quibbles on it at least a little, I will continue to think he’s a jackass with an unfortunate number of fans.