Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 06:43:54 am
Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
News: Brian Fein is now blogging weekly!  Make sure to check the homepage for his latest editorial.
+  The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums
|-+  TDMMC Forums
| |-+  Off-Topic Board
| | |-+  Trayvon Martin case
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 36 37 [38] 39 40 ... 46 Print
Poll
Question: Do you think Zimmerman is
Guilty   -5 (25%)
Not Guilty   -2 (10%)
Self Defense   -1 (5%)
You don't know enough to decide   -12 (60%)
Total Voters: 17

Author Topic: Trayvon Martin case  (Read 148973 times)
el diablo
Guest
« Reply #555 on: June 24, 2012, 01:25:23 pm »

The same could be said about Martin.

Seriously? Did Trayvon set up the PayPal account & instruct George & his wife how to transfer funds from the grave? Really? 
Logged
badger6
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 1218



« Reply #556 on: June 24, 2012, 07:06:54 pm »

Seriously? Did Trayvon set up the PayPal account & instruct George & his wife how to transfer funds from the grave? Really? 

What does any of that have to do with what I said. Credibility or lack of it does not only apply to the situation you cherry pick. A thugged out drug user that was expelled from school. Doesn't sound too upstanding or credible to me.
Logged
el diablo
Guest
« Reply #557 on: June 24, 2012, 08:29:38 pm »

No, I'm not arguing anything really. Just trying to illustrate the point that this is all just for show. None of it really has anything to do with the case.

Correct me, if I'm wrong. The reason why George's bail being revoked & why has everything to do with George's credibility. Trayvon's credibility won't be on trial, in that he is dead. He has no chance to testify. No chance to defend himself. No chance to perjure himself. Whether or not Trayvon was a "thug" as you put it, has no bearing in this case. Being a "thug" is not a crime. Shooting an unarmed teenager is. Having a trace amount of THC in your system doesn't qualify as being "drugged out" either. That's like saying you having a sip of a beer qualifies you as being "drunk off your ass".  George is caught on tape conspiring with his wife, in an attempt to mislead the court. That is what applies to his credibility. If his lawyer is able to keep that out of court, during the trial, then it won't affect his credibility.
Logged
badger6
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 1218



« Reply #558 on: June 24, 2012, 09:10:36 pm »

Correct me, if I'm wrong. The reason why George's bail being revoked & why has everything to do with George's credibility. Trayvon's credibility won't be on trial, in that he is dead. He has no chance to testify. No chance to defend himself. No chance to perjure himself. Whether or not Trayvon was a "thug" as you put it, has no bearing in this case. Being a "thug" is not a crime. Shooting an unarmed teenager is. Having a trace amount of THC in your system doesn't qualify as being "drugged out" either. That's like saying you having a sip of a beer qualifies you as being "drunk off your ass".  George is caught on tape conspiring with his wife, in an attempt to mislead the court. That is what applies to his credibility. If his lawyer is able to keep that out of court, during the trial, then it won't affect his credibility.

I actually said "drug user". Which technically he was. I think you made my point for me. If having a sip of beer doesn't make you "drunk off your ass", then attempting to mislead the court doesn't make you a murderer. Technically, no one has to believe Zimmerman's story. But they do have to prove otherwise, which is a totally different thing. No one has even acknowledged the fact that they were the ones that informed the court that the financial information wasn't correct and voluntarily put the money in escrow. The media doesn't want to report that part (and much more) of the "he killed the helpless innocent black guy" story.
Logged
Spider-Dan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15573


Bay Area Niner-Hater


« Reply #559 on: June 24, 2012, 10:19:11 pm »

Let's be clear about what we are talking about here.

George Zimmerman conspired with his wife to deceive the court about the state of his finances, which was extremely relevant to his bail hearing.  This action negatively impacts his credibility.

Trayvon Martin did not conspire or take any sort of action to deceive the court, because he is dead.  So no, the same cannot be said about Martin.
Logged

Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15559



« Reply #560 on: June 25, 2012, 09:30:20 am »

Shooting an unarmed teenager is.

Absolute statements like this are my issue entirely. Shooting an unarmed teenager in certain circumstances is a crime, in other circumstances it is not. That is what many of you need to get past.
Logged
EKnight
GameDay Trolls
Uber Member
*
Posts: 2955



« Reply #561 on: June 25, 2012, 12:04:46 pm »

Would it make you feel better if it were worded, "shooting an unarmed teenager you were told not to pursue further but you did anyway." Or is that also only a crime sometimes? -EK
Logged
Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15559



« Reply #562 on: June 25, 2012, 12:17:26 pm »

Have you guys seem Zimmerman retracing his steps with police? He has an explanation on why he was outside his vehicle. It has been quite some time since I listened to the recordings but I'm not sure if his explanation jives (I'm also not sure if those recordings had been altered as we all know the media has already done in some instances).

Also, it is an exaggeration to say he was told to stop following Martin. I believe the exact quote was "we don't need you to do that", but like I said I have not listened in a while.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2012, 12:54:09 pm by Phishfan » Logged
Spider-Dan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15573


Bay Area Niner-Hater


« Reply #563 on: June 25, 2012, 01:36:31 pm »

Have you guys seem Zimmerman retracing his steps with police? He has an explanation on why he was outside his vehicle.
Actually, he has two.  The first was that he was on his way back to his vehicle and was attacked from behind.  The second was that he looked down to figure out which pocket his cellphone was in, at which point Martin rushed him from the front.

Quote
Also, it is an exaggeration to say he was told to stop following Martin. I believe the exact quote was "we don't need you to do that", but like I said I have not listened in a while.
Direct transcript:

[2:24] 911 dispatcher: Are you following him?
[2:25] Zimmerman: Yeah.
[2:26] 911 dispatcher:  OK.  We don’t need you to do that.
[2:28] Zimmerman: OK.

You have to do some pretty serious twisting of language to interpret that exchange as anything but dispatcher advises Zimmerman to cease pursuit, Zimmerman acknowledges.
Logged

Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15559



« Reply #564 on: June 25, 2012, 02:06:34 pm »

Actually, he has two.  The first was that he was on his way back to his vehicle and was attacked from behind.  The second was that he looked down to figure out which pocket his cellphone was in, at which point Martin rushed him from the front.
Direct transcript:

[2:24] 911 dispatcher: Are you following him?
[2:25] Zimmerman: Yeah.
[2:26] 911 dispatcher:  OK.  We don’t need you to do that.
[2:28] Zimmerman: OK.

You have to do some pretty serious twisting of language to interpret that exchange as anything but dispatcher advises Zimmerman to cease pursuit, Zimmerman acknowledges.

You guys are the ones doing some serious twisting. Being advised against something is not the same as being ordered don't do it. One is advice the other is an order.

Also, I have seen the video where Zimmerman says he is looking for his cell phone. He says Martin approached from behind him in that video. As for the other story you say he has, I have not seen it. The way you twist being advised of something is a direct order to not do something, I think I should check it out on my own before commenting. Especially since the one I have seen also mentions an element of Martin being behind him at a point.

I don't need you to comment (though I am sure you will). See there is no order in that statement at all.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2012, 02:14:59 pm by Phishfan » Logged
CF DolFan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 16870


cf_dolfan
« Reply #565 on: June 25, 2012, 02:10:41 pm »

Twisted to say ordered or told to stop following? Neither happened. He also didn't advise him to stop. He said " We don't need you to do that."  In every since of the word I believe that it was an informative response. Legally there is a huge difference in shall and should and I don't see this as any different. He didn't say "you shouldn't do that" "you aren't allowed to do that" or anything close. The 911 operator said following was not needed by the department.  

I sure wish officers who pulled me over said "we don't need you to do that" instead of saying you were/are break the law and I have to issue a citation.
Logged

Getting offended by something you see on the internet is like choosing to step in dog shite instead of walking around it.
Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15559



« Reply #566 on: June 25, 2012, 02:12:49 pm »

I guess you are right CF. I used the word advised, but he really didn't give advice or an order. He just simply said, "We don't need you to do that."
Logged
Spider-Dan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15573


Bay Area Niner-Hater


« Reply #567 on: June 25, 2012, 03:08:30 pm »

What do you think the difference between "advised" and "ordered" is?

The dispatcher advised him to stop following.  He said, "OK."  What is your argument, here?  That he wasn't required by law to comply with the dispatcher's advice to stop following?  That's true.  But you'll never see him present that defense, because it's his position that he did cease pursuit directly after the dispatcher's statement.  Perhaps your argument is that the dispatcher was just making a completely unrelated comment that was not intended to apply to the situation at hand?  Again, that's a tough argument to make, given that Zimmerman himself acknowledges the (obvious) intent behind the dispatcher's statement.

You (both) seem to be arguing for some sort of version of events where the dispatcher's statement is parsed without context or by someone who is not fluent in English.  If you're really that intent on parsing words without context, why jump through all those hoops?  Just do this:

[2:24] 911 dispatcher: Are you following him?
[2:25] Zimmerman: Yeah.
[2:26] 911 dispatcher:  OK.  We don’t need you to do that.
[2:28] Zimmerman: OK.

Read literally, when the dispatcher says "OK" at 2:26, he must be giving Zimmerman clearance to pursue Martin, right?  Isn't that what "OK" means?  So by a literal reading, Zimmerman was fully cleared by the dispatcher to chase Martin.

No court/jury in the world will accept the parsing of English that you are trying to present.  They are all native speakers of English and can understand the obvious intent of the dispatcher.  Zimmerman himself acknowledges this intent.  You are going down a dead end.
Logged

Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15559



« Reply #568 on: June 25, 2012, 03:29:49 pm »

because it's his position that he did cease pursuit directly after the dispatcher's statement. 

You are again putting words into Zimmerman's mouth (I think). I would need to go back and look at things again as there is quite a bit of time between when this started, but Zimmerman's story while walking police through the event is nowhere near what you are claiming here.

You really are stretching things on our end also. Looking back in this thread several of you have stated Zimmerman was "ordered" to not follow Martin. That is an outright misrepresentation. We are not saying he was given clearance. I'm not sure where you get that from? We are saying he was never told not ordered to stop pursuit. He was simply told it was not necessary. That is completely different.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2012, 03:37:14 pm by Phishfan » Logged
Phishfan
Global Moderator
Uber Member
*****
Posts: 15559



« Reply #569 on: June 25, 2012, 03:36:38 pm »

You are misunderstanind me. His story is that he was trying to find the address to give to the dispatcher. That is different than following Martin as you claimed. If you see the walkthrough, he is headed in the same direction Martin was in an effort to find a street address. He was not able to see one and was then returning to the car (after failing to find the address).

That is different than you picture that was painted by saying he ceased pursuit immediately and was headed to his car.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2012, 03:42:00 pm by Phishfan » Logged
Pages: 1 ... 36 37 [38] 39 40 ... 46 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

The Dolphins Make Me Cry - Copyright© 2008 - Designed and Marketed by Dave Gray


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines