100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Zimmerman Had Substantial Injuries........ | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
msharmony you continue to use words like boy, and child to describe Martin. He was neither. He was a man. 17 years old, 160 lbs @ 6 foot 3. It is clear you think of him as a boy becuase you see yourself as someone who could be his mom. I understand your empathy, but it is misplaced. There is no logic in claiming that Zimmerman started any fight. He had called the police on very similar circumstances, and the police were able to nab one of the people who were breaking into the houses in the area. Zimmerman KNEW that the police could be anywhere from 2 minutes out, to 20 minutes out, and given that you know they are coming to start a fight would be idiotic knowing an officer could be watching from a distance. Without some evidence to show how the start of the fight went down, it becomes completely irrational to assume Zimmerman started it. Given all of the evidence I agree that this should have never gone to trial. It was political, and it was to calm down the riotous nature of the thugs in the area. Plain and simple. he was a man,, really? could he legally enter into a contract on his own? could he support himself? did he own anything? was he self supportive? sorry dear, as a mother I recognize this was a boy ESPECIALLY in comparison to his shooter if the term bothers anyone, because he happened to weigh 160(pretty slight for his heigth actually), or was taller than the average boy thats a personal issue if it makes those people feel better, I will refer to him as the TEEN And the adult,, harder to refute those semantics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Fri 05/18/12 10:07 AM
|
|
The black man was high on weed and no telling what other kinds of halucinogens that were not tested for. Could have been crack or PCP. Probably so high like Rodney King, that only a bullet could stop him. Thank goodness Zimmerman stopped him before he could hurt others. actually, it was only THP found, no other drug, and the amount was small enough to have been from DAYS Before irrelevant or just as relevant as the fact that Zimmerman was operating a vehicle and carrying a loaded weapon while taking ANTI ANXIETY and SLEEPLESSNESS Medicine ,, if the defense opens those bags up,, they are going to be screwed,,basically there is no defense they can give to support their clients actions that wont open up the opportunity for the prosecution to lay out the same argument AGAINST Zimmerman,, as the adult,, who had EVERYTHING Wrong with his past that this boy did,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zimmerman had anti anxiety and sleeping meds in his system?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A 17 year old is NOT a man. He has no legal rights as an adult. He can not vote, he can not join the military, he can not have a beer...he is a minor, that makes him a child. A friend of my son's was over 6 foot in jr. high, he was still only 15. It's no more illogical to assume Zimmerman started this confrontation than it is to assume Martin was a thug, started it and deserved to die. this minor child was able to obtain an illegal substance. use said substance, and while under the affects of said substance, not only able to defend himself in a physical altercation, but apparently get the upper hand on a "grown man". had the grown man not been armed, who knows how far this minor child would have gone if the grown man had not had a gun who knows if he would have had the balls to continue pursuing this young man, or if an altercation happened whether he would have bothered to FIGHT like a man (after POSSIBLY starting a physical altercation with intimidating actions and words and a push) instead of just shoot the teen my brother was a boxer, I have seen someones face when they were 'pummeled' and this man was not having head banged aganst concrete would just as likely cause a concussion as the scrapes on this mans head merely having banged his own head on the concrete during the struggle could also have caused those injuries fearing for his life was just as likely to be because someone finally fought him BACK and he didnt know what to do than it was for any 'reasonable' explanation,,,, it needed to go to court to get justice for the dead who cant talk |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zimmerman had anti anxiety and sleeping meds in his system? adderal and temazepan had been prescribed to him, I dont know if they bothered to check for what was in HIS system though,, doubt it,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A 17 year old is NOT a man. He has no legal rights as an adult. He can not vote, he can not join the military, he can not have a beer...he is a minor, that makes him a child. A friend of my son's was over 6 foot in jr. high, he was still only 15. It's no more illogical to assume Zimmerman started this confrontation than it is to assume Martin was a thug, started it and deserved to die. I don't know about where you live but here in Texas at 17, you are an adult. no, you can be tried as an adult, but not considered as an adult... like lady said, 17 cannot vote, drink, smoke, or even get into an r rated movie... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Ladylid2012
on
Fri 05/18/12 10:21 AM
|
|
Zimmerman had anti anxiety and sleeping meds in his system? adderal and temazepan had been prescribed to him, I dont know if they bothered to check for what was in HIS system though,, doubt it,,,, adderal? legal meth!!!  and people are bringing up pot... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A 17 year old is NOT a man. He has no legal rights as an adult. He can not vote, he can not join the military, he can not have a beer...he is a minor, that makes him a child. A friend of my son's was over 6 foot in jr. high, he was still only 15. It's no more illogical to assume Zimmerman started this confrontation than it is to assume Martin was a thug, started it and deserved to die. this minor child was able to obtain an illegal substance. use said substance, and while under the affects of said substance, not only able to defend himself in a physical altercation, but apparently get the upper hand on a "grown man". had the grown man not been armed, who knows how far this minor child would have gone So what, a 17 year old got weed, that isn't hard to do. Doesn't make him an adult because he smokes pot. Doesn't matter. a 17 y/o will be treated the same as an adult. I personally don't agree with it. But in the legal world it is a fact. sorry, but in Florida (where this happened) the age of consent for SEX is even 18 this was not a 'man' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Fri 05/18/12 10:28 AM
|
|
msharmony you continue to use words like boy, and child to describe Martin. He was neither. He was a man. 17 years old, 160 lbs @ 6 foot 3. It is clear you think of him as a boy becuase you see yourself as someone who could be his mom. I understand your empathy, but it is misplaced. There is no logic in claiming that Zimmerman started any fight. He had called the police on very similar circumstances, and the police were able to nab one of the people who were breaking into the houses in the area. Zimmerman KNEW that the police could be anywhere from 2 minutes out, to 20 minutes out, and given that you know they are coming to start a fight would be idiotic knowing an officer could be watching from a distance. Without some evidence to show how the start of the fight went down, it becomes completely irrational to assume Zimmerman started it. Given all of the evidence I agree that this should have never gone to trial. It was political, and it was to calm down the riotous nature of the thugs in the area. Plain and simple. its not plain or simple too many details that make it far from that starting with the man PURSUING The boy and the boy trying to AVOID the man its far from unreasonable to assume the one in AVOIDANCE was not interested in initiating a fight and the one in PURSUIT (scared that the ahole might get away) resorted to his usual PHYSICAL go to which was either grabbing or pushing the boy,,,or even displaying his gun to the boy after intimidating him through continued 'observation' all Z had to do to avoid this was A. Not follow him or B. Identify who HE was, as neighborhood watch, (Even a cop would be expected to do that), so he wouldnt just seem to be some loon/potential pervert/potentical klansman out to assault this boy who was alone in the dark,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
esebulldog
on
Fri 05/18/12 10:39 AM
|
|
if his mother would have been walking the boy until he turned 18 and was able to walk himself to the store, this never would have happened
(sorry i had to come back and edit this, i don't really believe this, but since other posts are ridiculous i'd thought i'd add one too) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if his mother would have been walking the boy until he turned 18 and was able to walk himself to the store, this never would have happened who walks their 17 year old boy to the store? was that a joke? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if his mother would have been walking the boy until he turned 18 and was able to walk himself to the store, this never would have happened who walks their 17 year old boy to the store? was that a joke? apparently in your world a 17 year old is able or not able to do certain things like an adult would depending on the circumstances |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The entire thread is ridiculous....
Seems most have already made up their minds as to what happened. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if his mother would have been walking the boy until he turned 18 and was able to walk himself to the store, this never would have happened who walks their 17 year old boy to the store? was that a joke? apparently in your world a 17 year old is able or not able to do certain things like an adult would depending on the circumstances uhhuh,, and what has this to do with walking to the store? is there an age of consent for that activity? are only adults permitted to do that? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The entire thread is ridiculous.... Seems most have already made up their minds as to what happened. yes, let the courts make their decision |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if his mother would have been walking the boy until he turned 18 and was able to walk himself to the store, this never would have happened who walks their 17 year old boy to the store? was that a joke? apparently in your world a 17 year old is able or not able to do certain things like an adult would depending on the circumstances uhhuh,, and what has this to do with walking to the store? is there an age of consent for that activity? are only adults permitted to do that? i guess the craving for tea and skittles was too much for the boy to wait for adult supervision, and he wondered off on his own. unless you think at 17 he was adult enough to walk to the store alone and handle any situation that could arise in an adult manner |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if his mother would have been walking the boy until he turned 18 and was able to walk himself to the store, this never would have happened who walks their 17 year old boy to the store? was that a joke? apparently in your world a 17 year old is able or not able to do certain things like an adult would depending on the circumstances uhhuh,, and what has this to do with walking to the store? is there an age of consent for that activity? are only adults permitted to do that? i guess the craving for tea and skittles was too much for the boy to wait for adult supervision, and he wondered off on his own. unless you think at 17 he was adult enough to walk to the store alone and handle any situation that could arise in an adult manner I dont live in the world you do apparently, our middle school children were able to walk to the store, the bus stop, and all types of places without an adult certainly our high school students were too,,,,and all the while, it never changed their legal 'minor' or 'dependent' status |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I dont live in the world you do apparently, our middle school children were able to walk to the store, the bus stop, and all types of places without an adult certainly our high school students were too,,,,and all the while, it never changed their legal 'minor' or 'dependent' status well here on earth, a 17 year old is adult enough to go places on his own, and expected to handle situations in an adult manner. they are not referred to as "boy" (or "girl" for that matter), but more as a young adult. they don't have much life experience, but are trusted and allowed to make adult decisions on their own |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Fri 05/18/12 10:57 AM
|
|
going places on their own is a matter of maturity,, some adults are still not mature as far as that goes
thats a subjective matter in terms of the law though, maturity is not what defines a child vs an adult, AGE is(unless emancipation has occured) in any case, I conceded already to change my terms for those who are for some reason disagreeable to the term child or boy I will use the legal term MINOR, instead and I think a case where a minor without a deadly weapon was shot dead by an adult who was armed deserves the scrutiny of a courtroom |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I will address Barry's comment on, if he had a son, it would look like the dead thug.
I would think any new son might look like the secret, secret service agent, no? 
|
|
|
|
|
