Steophan is an arrogant and amoral prick

The BBQ Pit
41

The one person I’ve met who is even vaguely aware of this case knows my view on it. I’m happy to share my views if anyone’s interested, and I’m sure most of my friends would know that I fully support the right to defends oneself against any passing thug. I don’t need to play a character on the internet, or hide my views, because I’m not a moral coward.

The fact that you even ask the question makes me think you’re not sharing your actual opinions - or as we tend to call it, trolling.

I’m also far from amoral. You may well disagree with my morality (it pretty much consists of “do anything, up to and including die, for my friends, and fuck everyone else”), but to pretend it doesn’t exist is fucking retarded. That said, all the views you’ve expressed so far have been fucking retarded, so I shouldn’t be surprised.

You are a small-minded, wilfully ignorant, unpleasant, jumped up little man, who has a tiny amount of familiarity with the legal system and thinks that makes you an expert, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

A theme there, believing things despite all the evidence to the contrary.

I don’t consider you on the other side. I think you’re on the side of Martin’s death being fully investigated, and Zimmerman receiving a fair trial under Florida law, based on the evidence available. I support all of that.

That doesn’t mean that I agree with you about everything, but if you say I’m wrong about something I’ll pay a hell of a lot more attention to it than to betenoire, dimmy, or any of the other idiots in that thread.

To anyone else who cares, my view is that Zimmerman did not commit a crime under Florida law, as it’s legal to defend against a serious enough attack, or threat therof, with lethal force even if one started the fight, if one has no other way to escape.

I have, separately from that, said that I don’t believe the evidence shows that Zimmerman did anything that could have given Martin cause to attack him, and that Martin attacked him anyway. I believe that anyone in that situation is entitled to defend themselves, and if they’ve already had their nose broken and are still being attacked, lethal force is not unreasonable.

Rather that show where I’m wrong about the evidence showing this, betenoire and his probable sock puppet dimmy pile on the insults, discuss various irrelevancies, and proclaim that Zimmerman should be arrested, tried, and punished no matter what the law in Florida is, and in dimmy’s case suggesting that his wife should be locked up because she might have committed a crime under English law…

Bunch of tards, basically.

42

Oh, I can be rather arrogant at times. Credit where it’s due, and all that.

43

Martin was no damned thug–enough with this shit.

He was on his way to his dwelling and Zimmerman had not right to profile him and take the actions he did against him. NONE. If you think that’s “retarded”, then I am a “retard” all the damned way.

Everyone around me knows my opinions–I am not insulting some dead boy or saying he was a thug and shit like that–because you’ve jumped to conclusions about him most likely based on his skin color. That is completely amoral in my opinion.

And likewise, I give more weight to what Bricker says than your bullshit.

Like other nuggets of wisdom when you said that it was possible that the edema Martin suffered caused him to behave irrationally and other shit you’ve written.

44

I never said I was an expert.

My contention all along is that there is enough evidence to send him to prison. You feel otherwise. We disagree.

You feel his story makes sense–I don’t.

You feel the law excuses Zimmerman–I feel otherwise.

45

You can’t even make an accurate sock accusation. I’d give up at this amateur detective lark, if I was you.

46

I see you have found an appropriate sig line.

Regards,
Shodan

47

Why don’t you try affixing the first part?

Or would that require honesty?

48

Listen, idiot boy. In that other thread I have to at least pay lip service to taking your nonsensical drivel seriously. Here, I have to do no such thing. As you should know, being an expert on law and the enforcement thereof, every one of Zimmerman’s actions was either demonstrably legal (that is, calling the police with his suspicions, following Martin, carrying a gun, stopping following Martin, parking his car, calling him an asshole under his breath, and talking to him), or have no evidence to show that they are illegal (shooting him, mainly).

No, you just want to lock away someone who’s not committed the crime they’re accused of. Anyway, I don’t think Martin was a thug because he was black, I think he was a thug because he lay in wait for someone, then beat the crap out of them. I’ve not jumped to any conclusions (unlike you), I’ve reasoned them out from the evidence. You should try it sometime, if your brain hasn’t completely atrophied.

Good call. He knows more about this than I do. Interestingly, he says that in his opinion Zimmerman cannot be convicted of the crime he’s accused of based on the evidence in the public domain (which, under Florida law, is almost all of it). I take it you concur with him?

Yep, I did a bit of research and found out that, if the edema was a preexisting condition then it could have caused Martin’s behaviour. If you want to dismiss that out of hand, we’re back to him being a thug, as Zimmerman did nothing to justify Martin’s attack on him - indeed, as far as I can tell, there’s nothing Zimmerman could have done to justify such an attack.

But I forgot, you’re a lying, trolling moron, who has never been nearer a jury box than a bad TV show, and who’s knowledge of the law is gained from the comments sections of bad newspapers, and whose morality comes from, as far as I can tell, up your own arse.

So come on, dumbfuck. Back up your arguments. Show your reasoning. Explain why I’m wrong. Shut the fuck up with appeals to emotion, and with your pathetic whining that the world doesn’t work the way you want. If you’re so sure, bring it.

49

Nothing to do with feelings on my part. That’s kinda the point. I suspect that’s why you think I’m amoral, because I actually use my brain occasionally.

You and dimmy make a funny pair. The drug dealing football hooligan and the “but it’s the feelings man” hippie moron.

50

Are you recanting your sock claim here, or are you hedging your bets? Come on, be as committed as you are in your support of the SYG poster boy, Georgie “One Shot” Zimmerman, and go all in… sock or not a sock, that is the question?

51

Go sell drugs to schoolchildren then punch a foreigner, you useless twat.

Sock, troll, or general all purpose fucktard, it makes no real difference to me.

52

Mom! The Martin-Zimmerman thread is getting all over!

53

So if you make a claim that the you were abducted by Martians and I don’t disprove you (to your liking), then I am a moron and you were in fact abducted by aliens?

So you’re saying that it’s MY responsibility to DISPROVE that you were abducted by martians rather than your responsibility of actually PROVING that you were?

What a load of illogical bullshit.

I will let you research what fallacy you are committing, and you do commit several of them–even Bricker pointed this out. You love the excluded middle fallacy…love it, but that’s to be expected with black-and-white thinkers.

In this case, you presented an argument of why you feel Zimmerman will not go to jail.

I presented reasons why I think he will go to jail.

Part of it has to do with inconsistencies in his story. Part of it has to do with my understanding of the jury instructions and HOW THEY DELIBERATE. Part of it has to do with my understanding of the very same laws that you’re talking about. Part of it also has to do with statements Zimmerman himself made.

You keep on harping about second-degree murder, but as I (again, and Bricker) have tried to tell you, it is common practice to charge someone with something that they THINK they might be able to prove. There is a reason for this: to put the defendant on the defensive and hopefully reach a favorable resolution.

But the THOUGHT that a defendant MIGHT get charged with the maximum is usually enough for them to settle (like a plea bargain) unless they have a good lawyer and a rock solid defense–either that or a stubborn defendant like Zimmerman.

But yes, the ingredients are there for a manslaughter charge, at the least. Even two lawyers chimed in and stated this.

You don’t have to accept this, but unfortunately, that’s the way it is.

Zimmerman might still get off–this is America–shit like that happens.

But for you to say that there is NO CASE and that there is NO EVIDENCE and the other shit you have said is very mildly, mind-boggling.

54

Make it stop!!

55

let’s look at the meanings of “feel”:

feel (fēl)

v. felt (fĕlt), feel·ing, feels
v.tr.
1.
a. To perceive through the sense of touch: feel the velvety smoothness of a peach.
b. To perceive as a physical sensation: feel a sharp pain; feel the cold.
2.
a. To touch: reached out and felt the wall.
b. To examine by touching: felt the fabric for flaws. See Synonyms at touch.
3. To test or explore with caution: feel one’s way in a new job.
4.
a. To undergo the experience of: felt my interest rising; felt great joy.
b. To be aware of; sense: felt the anger of the crowd.
c. To be emotionally affected by: She still feels the loss of her dog.
5.
a. To be persuaded of (something) on the basis of intuition, emotion, or other indefinite grounds: I feel that what the informant says may well be true.
b. To believe; think: She felt his answer to be evasive.

I see nothing wrong with using the word 'feel".

56

I thought the Dooley verdict would have been instructive, somewhat.

57

I liked your first sig line better.

Regards,
Shodan

58

That you believe such a tired old piece of propaganda, speaks volumes.

I’ve punched a fair few people, but never a foreigner, funnily enough. Not that I’d have any objection to doing so if one got in my face aggressively enough.

Yep, you’re wrong whatever you say, near enough, so a few more instances aren’t going to fuck your rep up.

59

You’re like a canary, Bricker. We float a thought, and if you fall for it it we know it’s tainted.

60

don’t you have a computer to hack?

since screen-names speak to what people do…