I'm pretty sure most of the people in the world are good people. But it's like playing Russian Roulette when you're in a situation like that. Even if you know how to fight or have a tazzer and pepper spray.

I have actually had a good Samaritan help catch someone who stalked and attacked me

and another seemingly 'good guy' offer help when I was stranded out of town, just so he could help himself,,,

I would have done things differently in the latter case,,,but I lived to tell about it so no worries,,,,

That's cool the one guy helped you out like that. as for the other. Like I said it's like Russian roulette. That one was unfortunately the bullet.

I'm donating to the 'Help get Mr Z a higher capacity pistol fund.

Word has it, ferals want him dead.

I recall a show I watched on Netflix. I think it was wicked women. this one girl in her teens as I recall had been developing the fantasy of killing someone. She went and got a gun and then would go and shoot bottles pretending they were people. One day on the way home a guy who I think she knew offered her a ride home. He didn't do anything to her. But she took the opportunity to live out her fantasy and shot the guy in the head. When the cops got there she told them all about it as if it was nothing. Just her living out her fantasy.

If I can get clarification on something about the Zimmerman verdict. Searching for info it says the verdict was not guilty. Not that he was acquitted of all charges. But he was found not guilty. Is this correct?

He was acquitted on grounds of justified self defense.
Google Zimmerman acqitted

Well then acquitted isn't a not guilty verdict. Unless I am wrong and I am pretty sure I am right. Since it was him being acquitted that means in the future if new evidence comes to light that shows he was indeed guilty then he could be put on trial again and found guilty. Only when the verdict is not guilty would putting him on trial again be double jeopardy and against the law.

While that doesn't mean he will ever face another trial. It does mean he could. If I knew where my criminal justice books were then I could probably look that up and confirm it. But I'm pretty sure I am correct on this.

The prosecution is going to get sued for withholding evidence and other accusations.
I have a feeling Z could have a suit against her as well.

there words were 'we the jury find George Zimmerman, not guilty'

they didn't really reiterate what the charge was which is kind of strange,,but a not guilty is considered an acquittal and he cant be charged for the SAME crime in a CRIMINAL court

he can be charged in a civil court, or brought to a criminal court on a different charge

The terms used in the reports are acquitted and found not guilty.

Justified self defense.

His trials are over

the term in the TRIAL is 'not guilty'

he cannot be charged again in the same court (criminal) for the same crime (murder 2 or manslaughter)

he can still be brought on other charges or charged in a CIVIL court,,,

The word read from the jurors verdict of not guilty are what I was wondering about. If those words aren't what they used then he can be tried again. Since it was read not guilty that means it's over for his criminal charges. I remember a teacher who was a judge talking about that. It's probably the main reason I remember it.

Report I read,
not guilty by means of justified self defense.
If I was on a computer I would post the report.
All over the web.

Report I read,
not guilty by means of justified self defense.
If I was on a computer I would post the report.
All over the web.

And if anyone charges him in a civil court, he can counter sue them for malicious prosecution, and if that happens, I hope he counter sues them and wins.

FYI "Acquitted" and "not guilty" amount to the exact same thing.

You guys are still beating a dead horse I see.

And this thread was about giving something back. Look where you have taken it now.

Get a life.

Im just sharing the law with photo,,,,the law says that 'not guilty' of one charge does not restrict prosecution on a SEPERATE charge in a different court

the thugs who beat Rodney king were acquitted of excessive force, but then convicted of violating civil rights in federal court

OJ was acquitted of murdering Nicole and her lover, but then convicted of wrongful death in a civil case

he can sue them for malicious prosecution,, but its as hard to prove as his case was because it requires proving that there was not a 'reasonable' belief in the persons guilt,,,and if they felt Z 'reasonable' in his 'fear' of a teen

Im sure they can easily feel the parents of an unarmed teen had 'reasonable' belief in the adults guilt in shooting him dead...


speak to willing about where the thread has been 'taken',, as I recall I continue to respond to the posts and photo was posting on the topic at hand,,, giving back,,

Jury called it justified self-defense.

Again, prospector is under suspicion and whole bunch of folks could sue her

And, not to mention slander.

lol

jury called it 'not guilty'

anyone can sue anyone in this country,, what else is new?

I think I'll sue myself for being honest about being insane. Anyone else want to join in and sue themselves?