Alan Dershowitz: Drop George Zimmerman’s murder charge

Your posts are sick pandering sleaze. Innocent my ass. Thug and nothing else.

 

It hasn't yet.

 

Yeah! Let us know if they ever make being stupid a crime. We'll go after every ******* in the country.

 

Thanks for confirming your thug lynch mob mentality.

 

NO! My posts are truth, your posts are nothing but pro murder simply because Zimmerman is A WHITE HISPANIC! Face it he's (*)(*)(*)(*)ed and its going to be good to watch him and his families lives ruined forever.

 

I'm sure that the jury will consist of KKK, neo-Nazis, and White Citizens Council members or 12 illegals from Peru.

 

NO THEY CAN'T!

"nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb"

Amendment V US Constitution.

 

I'm not sure, but I think they don't allow lesser included charges in Florida.

 

Bravo! Nobody calls the cops and then goes on to kill somebody intentionally as if the cops are just there to clean up after him.
Insanity from *******s is legendary though.

 

Too bad the punk didn't have a split-open skull and crushed testicles.

Role play this for a minute:

You're walking home and some dork you don't know is following you in a vehicle and talking on a cell phone.. You try to avoid him and he makes a move that suggests that he is far more interested in you than he has any right to be. So you take off along a route on which he cannot follow you in the vehicle. And justwhen you think you've lost him, he has interdicted your route to safety. You know you are not getting home without dealing with this dork, so you do the first thing to possibly defuse the situation. You ask why he is following you. He answers like he is some kind of banger staking out his turf, then tries to take away your cell phone so that you cannot describe him to somebody else. Maybe he thinks you're talking to the cops.

Now ask yourself whether you might have reason to fear that this piece of crap is going to put some kind of hurt on you. I thin any rational person would conclude that this is a fear-inducing situation, possibly deadly. Once somebody has made it clear that he is not backing down, I see no requirement to give him further warning before forcing him to do so.

Per the girlfriend's account of what she heard, this seems to be what had happened. At this point, martin was utterly within his rights to punch that beligerant twit's lights out.

So, you now have that slob on the ground and he is screaming for help. Help from whom? The homies who will use deadly force to secure their turf? Maybe best to shut him up now, then run.

But, at this point, you notice that he has a weapon. He's screaming like a little nancyboy, utterly humiliated, and he has a weapon. Do you really believe that, if you stop whumping on him, he will just go on about some other business, or will he do the one thing that can assuage his injured delusion of manhood and shoot you?

My guess is that he is going to try to butch up and bust caps. No way am I going to let him get up off the ground with that weapon, even if I have to grab the gun in one hand and his danglies in the other and offer him a trade. (Of course, having secured the weapon, I would have probably done a few finger exercises anyway just to drive homew that fact that the dork is not a man and should not try to act like one.

There is not way that trigger **** had any superior right to defend himself than did martin. He initiated contact, he doesn't get to plead SYG.

Bull flops. Martin didwhat any man is supposed to do when threatened.

There is no evidence of that, so stop it. He did what I wouldl have done, except that I might have cause trigger **** more intense suffering.

Horse feathers. Z is a sociopath and needs twenty years of attitude adjustment and needs to be kept away from weapons for the rest of his life. The maggot can't be trusted to act responsibly around them.

 

No way does the bullet pass directly from front to back if Martin is on top of him whumping on him.

 

I too, had the same thought, with the release of the information.

...hardly seems plausible.

 

Explain why. I'd like to hear an expert's opinion on this.

 

A child? Then a child should not have been allowed out at the time this happened…if at all. Love how you add white…to hispanic. Which color did the killing?

 

You don't know that. Thats the whole point.

Not sure how many other ways this can be said. You can't prove murder. Period.

 

Not sure how many other ways this can be said. You shoot someone in the chest, you intend for them to die.

 

https://www.google.com/search?sugex...UTF-8&q=florida+murder+lesser+included+charge

The top link is "Schedule of lesser included offenses" for Florida. It's a WORD document. This document is outdated but still gives you the general idea. The judge can include the logical lesser charges in his charge to the jury.

http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/Chapter782

 

If someone is attacking you and pounding your head on a concrete sidewalk, you have the perfect right to kill them to make them stop. The law has been this way for centuries.

By the way, if the bullet had entered TM's chest a little more to the left or to the right it would have missed his heart and he would be alive today. I doubt if GZ took time to carefully aim his pistol before he pulled the trigger.

 

That was my point. You are just like Martin....violent. So a house fell on him. I thought all you homos were familiar with The Wizard Of Oz.

 

Okay...wow. Just...wow. I'd say that was stupid and homophobic, but I have a feeling it won't matter.

 

So everyone who walks around with a gun deserves to get their ass beat? Even if they are legally carrying around a gun?

 

No anyone who stalks and attacks unarmed kids deserve to get their asses beat.

 

People keep bringing the words vigilante. Do they know this is they media feeding them words to further stroke their emotions. This whole thing is a game of words and emotions, and not of facts. Stalker, Predator, Vigilante.... All over used and over stated purposely to stoke emotion and public sentiment. To use these to define Zimmermans actions, you would have to define so many other actions and people as the same which you would never do. Not all cops are stalkers and vigilante's. Not all concerned adults are stalkers and predators.. Certainly, neighborhood watchmen are not stalkers, predators and vigilante's. They are concerned citizens who were appointed as such because many other cetizens were also concerned. Playing with words here will not change the FACTS of the case. They only serve to make certain individuals in the media lots and lots of money..

 

That is not what you said earlier. Either way, there is no evidence at all that Zimmerman attacked Martin. He has no marks on his hands at all. All he did was shoot Martin after being attacked. LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE and stop being a tool of the media.

 

Nope, in context he intended to prevent himself from being maimed or killed. All physical and eyewitness evidence points to Martins aggression and Zimmermans self defense. Zimmerman was the victim....he bore all the marks of being victimized. An eyewitness testified that Zimmerman was being victimized by Martin. When are you people gonna acknowledge reality and cease creating fantastical scenarios from completely unsubstantiated imaginary possibilities? Martins attitude and conduct got him killed. And if you can't distinguish the difference between Zimmermans conscientiousness and Martins thuggish mentality, then you have as much caused Martins death as Martin himself.