That reply has nothing to do with the question I asked.
Frankenstein never scared me. /Christopher Walken
I understand,…the fact that I do not agree with you does not mean I don’t understand. Justifiable homicide is not the act gz committed that day. It was murder.
That’s not relevant to the question I asked, either. You said there were cases where justifiable homicide is murder. I asked which you didn’t understand, as that’s clearly a false statement, and (unlike some people in this lovely little chat) I don’t immediately assume people I dislike are lying. So, I assume you don’t understand one concept or the other.
Which is it?
:p.
Oops, you forgot about the police officer who arrested gz for battery…so, lets see, the fiancee, the coworker and the police officer that gz assaulted, they were all lying, and gz was innocent…gz sure does bump into alot of people over the years that results in him being accused of battery or murder…is it a conspiracy?
Charges. Were. Dropped.
Dropped, as in bye-bye, don’t exist no more, no trial, no plea, no conviction, no guilt.
Either you misunderstood what I said, or I didnt express what I meant correctly. I was saying that yes, I know justifiable homicide is different from murder. Ok? But…what gz did that night was NOT a case of justifiable homicide, it was straight up murder.
I hope that clear it up for you, I dont know how much more clear I can make it.
Ah, I see now. It’s Florida law and the nature of evidence and proof you don’t understand.
He was not found innocent or exonerated of the battery, they offered him the chance to enter an alcohol program in lieu of dropping the charge. Perhaps due to his age, or whatever, but hardly a case where the police said " oh, sorry, we screwed up, you didnt assault the officer."
But I know, nothing gz does is his fault, its all a big conspiracy
What don’t YOU understand? I stated that I KNOW the charge and nature of justifiable hom. is different than a murder charge. I KNOW THAT…DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
I see what you’re saying. Loudly.
You claim murder. Now prove it.
Of course he wasn’t found innocent, he is innocent until proven otherwise. He was, in fact, exonerated. The charges were dropped. The arrest was expunged. It was determined by those who actually get to make the decision that there was no reason to follow up on the allegation, and there is, legally speaking, no stain on his record. He was not proven guilty of assaulting the officer - so, legally (the sense that actually matters), he did not assault him.
Again, you simply don’t understand what happened. It seems like you are confusing the dropping of the charges with a similar situation which sometimes happens where one admits guilt in exchange for a lighter punishment, which could be an alcohol program. Whilst superficially similar, this would be the opposite of what actually happened.
Much like in the Martin shooting. Whilst it may superficially look like murder, it is in fact the opposite - Zimmerman is the victim of a crime here, not Martin.
Steophan, don’t you know that if Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must convict!?
I understand that you still don’t get that killing someone in self defence is justifiable homicide, that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, and that baseless speculation in defiance of the evidence is not sufficient proof to overcome that presumption.
Also, justifiable homicide is not a charge. Seriously, figure out what you’re talking about before pressing keys.
That’s the most coherent argument in this thread tonight for his guilt.
Definitely the latter.
That sentence doesn’t state what you think it states.
Hahaha. Your “penchant” for the truth could never be considered a pain in the arse. It kills time while waiting for the jury to reach a verdict. This is the “trial” thread and neither TM’s violent and criminal past or GZ swapping charges with his ex or the confrontation with the undercover officer was admitted in evidence.
Did you happen to notice that Guy lied to the jury during the rebuttal when he told them that it was GZ who turned TM over (from face down to face up)? It was testified to in court that the 2nd officer on the scene rolled TM over TM’s left shoulder in order to begin CPR/attend the wound. How could Guy forget such an obvious fact. It’s obvious that Guy must be found guilty.
Tollhouse just wants Zimmerman on the stand so he can demand to know whether he did, in fact, order the Code Red.
That’s a relief! I was afraid I wasn’t going to be able to use the ‘liar, liar, pants-on-fire’ defense.
- Lt. Daniel Kaffee