Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 61 FirstFirst ... 89101112131421 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 1213
Like Tree82Likes

Thread: If the demographic fits, hope they don't acquit

  1. #201
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Yup. I profile based on the statistics regarding blacks and crime as presented by law enforcement. And I have no issues saying it.

    However, that has nothing to do with this case.

    It does now because of your racist implications. I love how guys like yu cry and whine over the left and the media playing the race card and here you are in all your racist profiling glory palying it, not only clearly but proudly.

    I have never blamed race in this incident at all. I just believed it was Zimmerman wanting to be the big hero that got in over his head and was getting his *** beat for being stupid. The law clearly states yu have a right to defend yourself, I don't believe anyone is disputing that fact. The simple truth you and all the others that believe as you won't accept is Zimmerman by his actions set up the confrontation. It is that simple.


    Zimmerman was doing nothing illegal. We know that Martin made the choice to confront Zimmerman when he had the option of simply not doubling back. We know that Zimmerman was on the ground and had injuries consistent with such. We know that Martin was on top and that a majority of the witnesses identified Zimmerman's voice as calling for help.

    I never said Zimmerman was doing anything illegal. YOU and NO ONE ELSE can prove anything other than at the time Zimmerman shot him Trayvon was kicking his ***.

    Yet not a single one of those witnesses intervened to try and stop the fight. Interesting.
    You can quote whatever sources you wish, including the trial transcripts. the fact is we only truly have Zimmerman's version of the events. The only other witness that knows exactly what happened is dead.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate


  2. #202
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    Never advocated that he intervene, however it is somebody's right to follow somebody if they believe that they are suspicious or simply "don't belong".

    AND it is the right of the party being follwed to expect privacy and to be able to question whomever is following them. The sad part of this is now you have turned it even more blatantly racial than was necessary by making it about Trayvon being black and wearing a hoody, both of which supposedly made him suspicious. Geezus man you are a racist through and through.

    The fact is that the "car incident" has nothing to do with the current discussion.

    It clearly points to your level of hypocrisy.
    This is another instance where every time you post you look more and more idiotic and pathetic.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  3. #203
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,562

    Default

    I have never blamed race in this incident at all. I just believed it was Zimmerman wanting to be the big hero that got in over his head and was getting his *** beat for being stupid. The law clearly states yu have a right to defend yourself, I don't believe anyone is disputing that fact. The simple truth you and all the others that believe as you won't accept is Zimmerman by his actions set up the confrontation. It is that simple.

    And maybe he did. But there are voices that are not admitting that Martin was EQUALLY guilty by doubling back after he had lost Zimmerman, likely to confront him. Had HE not made that choice, there would have been no confrontation.

    I'll admit that it was Martin's right to do that if you and SC will admit that it was Zimmerman's right to follow Martin.


    I never said Zimmerman was doing anything illegal. YOU and NO ONE ELSE can prove anything other than at the time Zimmerman shot him Trayvon was kicking his ***.

    What we do know is that Martin doubled back. Had he not done that there would not have been a confrontation.

    And yes, Zimmerman was having his butt kicked. And he responded in a justified manner.


    Yet not a single one of those witnesses intervened to try and stop the fight. Interesting.

    I would suspect most folks would not.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  4. #204
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    I have never blamed race in this incident at all. I just believed it was Zimmerman wanting to be the big hero that got in over his head and was getting his *** beat for being stupid. The law clearly states yu have a right to defend yourself, I don't believe anyone is disputing that fact. The simple truth you and all the others that believe as you won't accept is Zimmerman by his actions set up the confrontation. It is that simple.

    And maybe he did. But there are voices that are not admitting that Martin was EQUALLY guilty by doubling back after he had lost Zimmerman, likely to confront him. Had HE not made that choice, there would have been no confrontation.

    I'll admit that it was Martin's right to do that if you and SC will admit that it was Zimmerman's right to follow Martin.


    I for damn sure would if a what I perceived as a creepy looking dude was following me for no apparent reason.

    I never said Zimmerman was doing anything illegal. YOU and NO ONE ELSE can prove anything other than at the time Zimmerman shot him Trayvon was kicking his ***.

    What we do know is that Martin doubled back. Had he not done that there would not have been a confrontation.

    And yes, Zimmerman was having his butt kicked. And he responded in a justified manner.


    Assuming that he didn't actually start the fight. Which can't be proved or disproved.

    Yet not a single one of those witnesses intervened to try and stop the fight. Interesting.

    I would suspect most folks would not.

    Did you train them in the "No one is more important than you are" school of public mindedness?
    Nothing new from you...
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  5. #205
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    By citing statistical data?

    Again, I have many friends that are black. Arte we "tight"? No. And that has more to do with differing interests and color, but positive social interaction is an issue.

    The problem with liberals is that like you, you seem to simply not be able to admit that the fear that many whites have of blacks and crime is justified by the stats. I would love to not have to look over my should and be concerned with black youths, but that's simply not realistic as black crime is an issue. And unfortunately there are many, though certainly not all, in the black community that refuses to accept this reality, and more importantly, accept the responsibility for their actions that have allowed this problem to continue.
    All that may well be true in generalities. However, you've stated that Zimmerman was justified in following Martin because he was a black man wearing a hoodie walking through a predominantly white neighborhood. That it was Zimmerman's right. Especially since Martin was acting "suspicious." A term you or anyone else has yet to define as it relates to Martin's actions.

    You also stated:

    Unless you believe that when Martin doubled back and confronted Zimmerman, he threw the first punch, and yes, committed the first illegal act of the incident.
    A.) We don't know why Martin doubled back. But we do know he also had that right. He was on a public street.

    B.) We also don't know if he threw the first punch. We do know he threw the last one before Zimmerman shot him. More importantly, we also know that of the two individuals, Zimmerman is the one with a history of violence.

    So your claims of Zimmerman's justifications just don't hold water.

    Especially when one considers that Zimmerman was able to free a family of four from an overturned truck, but couldn't get a 160# man off him.
    Last edited by scfire86; 07-22-2013 at 07:21 PM.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  6. #206
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,820

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    A.) We don't know why Martin doubled back. But we do know he also had that right. He was on a public street.

    B.) We also don't know if he threw the first punch. We do know he threw the last one before Zimmerman shot him. More importantly, we also know that of the two individuals, Zimmerman is the one with a history of violence.
    Given the verdict, the prosecutor could not have proven that Martin did not throw the first punch. Given decades of case law, we know that the defense had to show that Zimmerman was not the initial aggressor of the physical altercation so that he would be eligible to use justifiable means of deadly force as his defense. Again, over and over the court has found those who are the initial aggressor have no right to self defense.

    All other BS aside: For those who are unhappy with the verdict, what would you change that would have resulted in a different outcome in court? We continue to hear all the complaints, but how about some realistic answers as to how this might be prevented in the future?

  7. #207
    Forum Member snowball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Just North of South Central
    Posts
    2,740

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post

    I read years ago the majority of powder cocaine users were white males living in the suburbs. I guess I can now start looking at my neighbors as cocaine abusers (hence lawbreakers) since the statistics make that a high probability. I'm sure you'll believe that profiling is also acceptable.
    I never used that stuff, but I sure liked the way it smelled!
    IAFF

  8. #208
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    780

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    Given the verdict, the prosecutor could not have proven that Martin did not throw the first punch. Given decades of case law, we know that the defense had to show that Zimmerman was not the initial aggressor of the physical altercation so that he would be eligible to use justifiable means of deadly force as his defense. Again, over and over the court has found those who are the initial aggressor have no right to self defense.

    All other BS aside: For those who are unhappy with the verdict, what would you change that would have resulted in a different outcome in court? We continue to hear all the complaints, but how about some realistic answers as to how this might be prevented in the future?
    You've posted several times about what the defense had to prove or what they had to show. They didn't have to do either of those things. Hell, they barely had to show up. Their job would be to refute the evidence presented by the prosecution. Near as I can tell there was almost no real evidence presented by the prosecution. The not guilty verdict is not an indication that the defense proved ANYTHING (nor did they have to). It's just an indication that the prosecution didn't prove anything either, and they DID have to (but couldn't).

  9. #209
    Forum Member GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,056

    Default

    11 pages of this BS and pretty much no activity here in the last month:

    http://www.firehouse.com/forums/f293/

    Pure awesomeness.
    RFDACM02 and ATFDFF like this.
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.

  10. #210
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    Given the verdict, the prosecutor could not have proven that Martin did not throw the first punch. Given decades of case law, we know that the defense had to show that Zimmerman was not the initial aggressor of the physical altercation so that he would be eligible to use justifiable means of deadly force as his defense. Again, over and over the court has found those who are the initial aggressor have no right to self defense.
    The verdict proves none of those things.

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    All other BS aside: For those who are unhappy with the verdict, what would you change that would have resulted in a different outcome in court? We continue to hear all the complaints, but how about some realistic answers as to how this might be prevented in the future?
    I would have had the prosecutor go for the lower level manslaughter charge.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  11. #211
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,820

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by captnjak View Post
    You've posted several times about what the defense had to prove or what they had to show. They didn't have to do either of those things. Hell, they barely had to show up. Their job would be to refute the evidence presented by the prosecution. Near as I can tell there was almost no real evidence presented by the prosecution. The not guilty verdict is not an indication that the defense proved ANYTHING (nor did they have to). It's just an indication that the prosecution didn't prove anything either, and they DID have to (but couldn't).
    True enough, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, but the defense must prepare it's case based on the charges levied and defend accordingly. I doubt very much the defense withheld anything because the state didn't bring their A game. The facts are the state likely didn't have an A game to start with as the evidence was never conclusive enough to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

    It is that evidence and Zimmermans' story that lead Sanford PD not to hold him on murder charges. Here is where the SYG statutes play a role, they allow the police who know someone fatally shot another to not place them in custody when they feel the story and evidence support the claim of self defense. It never meant the prosecutor couldn't charge him, merely grounds to allow him to not be held until such a decision was made.
    Last edited by RFDACM02; 07-22-2013 at 10:18 PM. Reason: keyboard caused misspelled words

  12. #212
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,820

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    The verdict proves none of those things.
    The verdict most assuredly proves that prosecutor could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman threw the first punch, or was the initial aggressor. If this is true, then given there was only two of them, there must be some reasonable doubt that Martin did throw the first punch. One of the two of them started teh physical altercation, see how that works: if not A then B, if not 100% A and not 100% B, then you have reasonable doubt. It doesn't prove who did, just that they couldn't prove GZ did beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I would have had the prosecutor go for the lower level manslaughter charge.
    The jury was given the option to find Zimmerman guilty of manslaughter and did not. See the jury instructions they're everywhere on the web. Again, according to FL law per the jury instructions, one cannot be guilty of manslaughter if the person is found to have been justified in the use of deadly force for self defense. He clearly was as this is what prevented the guilty verdict on the 2nd degree murder charge.
    Last edited by RFDACM02; 07-22-2013 at 10:17 PM. Reason: keyboard caused misspelled words

  13. #213
    Forum Member DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,583

    Default Trayvon and Zimmerman....enough is enough....

    Nothing we do and nothing we post here will change the fact that Trayvon Martin is dead and George Zimmerman has been found not guilty.

    Instead of dwelling on that, here is a heartwarming story....

    On a sunny Saturday in July, Rachel Wolf was preparing for the day she always dreamed of, complete with wedding gown, makeup, and guests.

    But there was one thing missing: a groom.

    Instead, the day was about her dad. Rachel's father, Dr. James Wolf, is dying of pancreatic cancer. He likely has less than three months to live.

    So to make sure that he would be there on her wedding day, Rachel, 25, came up with an unusual idea: she would create and record her own father/daughter dance. The venue, Auburn Recreation Park in Auburn, Calif., the limo and the D.J. were all donated.

    "I just was flabbergasted," Dr. Wolf told TODAY in an interview that aired Monday.

    "There are a lot of things that I would've liked the girls to experience with me being there," Dr. Wolf said while choking back tears. "And I'm not going to be there."

    Just hours before the big moment, he was in the hospital. Later, he was so exhausted that he could barely get dressed without help from his wife, Jeanine.

    "I don't know what to expect,” she said. “I'm hoping that he's feeling well enough to be able to get that dance in."

    He was.

    A limo pulled up around 7 p.m., and Rachel stepped out in a white dress that sparkled in the evening sun.

    Dr. Wolf locked eyes with his little girl. "Hi honey!” he yelled. “You look gorgeous!"

    "Thanks Daddy!" she cried.

    Their embrace swallowed any sadness, conquered all worries. This bond was not yet ready to be broken.

    Especially not before one last dance.

    The song they chose was "Cinderella" by Steven Curtis Chapman. The crowd, which included Jeanine, Rachel's sister Lauren, and a group of Dr. Wolf's patients, looked on as father and daughter glided across the gazebo.

    Though a man in the thralls of chemo probably shouldn’t exert himself, the dancing continued after the song ended: he danced with Lauren, and then with his wife. And just when you thought they were finished, the whole family joined in.

    It was a celebration – perhaps not like Rachel ever imagined her wedding day was going to go, but an evening she will never forget.

    "Each and every day, we have a choice,” Dr. Wolf said. “We have a choice to either love that person that's in front of us or not. It's the relationships that you build over the years that is the most important thing in life.”

    “Everything else is just an illusion."
    link here....

    http://www.today.com/news/dying-fath...ter-6C10703525

    Webteam, feel free to close thr thread.. it isn't going anywhere...
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  14. #214
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTRider245 View Post
    11 pages of this BS and pretty much no activity here in the last month:

    http://www.firehouse.com/forums/f293/

    Pure awesomeness.
    I didn't see your name there starting a new exciting topic to converse about.

    Why do you give a schitt about what people want to talk about? if you don't like the topic turn the page and look at something else.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  15. #215
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyChiefGonzo View Post
    Webteam, feel free to close thr thread.. it isn't going anywhere...
    If you are going to use that as a measuring device for closing threads no thread would last more than a page or 2 here before being closed because they ALL end up the same damn way.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  16. #216
    Forum Member ladder9volley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    All other BS aside: For those who are unhappy with the verdict, what would you change that would have resulted in a different outcome in court? We continue to hear all the complaints, but how about some realistic answers as to how this might be prevented in the future?
    i agree they should have gone for a manslaughter charge... but beyond that, we should begin a certification program for dispatchers, if they are given certain details of a 911 call, they can give specific directions that should be followed.. for example in this case the dispatcher told zimmerman "we don't need you to do that." when they were told that he was following martin. if a dispatcher says "we don't need you to do that." that should be considered an order to be followed.. if you disobey that order then you are then taking it into your own hands and feel the situation is not dangerous enough to warrant deadly force if you use it..

    its kind of like the self defense case where the lady shot her gun into a wall because her b/f threatened to kill her... the judge said, because you left the house, and then re-entered it, you must not have feared for your life enough to use deadly force.

    so because zimmerman decided not to listen to the dispatcher he entered a situation that he must not have thought would endanger his life.. so "stand your ground" self defense argument would not have held...

  17. #217
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    635

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    If you are going to use that as a measuring device for closing threads no thread would last more than a page or 2 here before being closed because they ALL end up the same damn way.
    GOOD! Let's ****ing close them. We have been having LITERALLY the same two or three debates with LA for two years now....and nothing has changed. I'm 100% positive we could cut & paste replies from any of the hundreds of old "LA-Vs.-The-World" threads and nobody would notice. There's practically no productive discussion in this place anymore.

    I can predict the future of the next 100 threads:

    1) firefighting topic brought up
    2) direct/indirect reference to LA within the first dozen posts
    3) bashing LA for inserting his two cents
    4) COWARD!!
    5) SAFETY!!!
    6) YARDBREATHER, INCOMPETENT!!!
    7) EVERYONE GOES HOME!
    8) YOU WOULDN'T SAVE YOUR OWN FAMILY FROM A CAR FIRE!
    9) NO INSURANCE OFF DUTY!!!
    (repeat 4-9 until a new thread is posted)

  18. #218
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,131

    Default

    I"m pretty much done.

    A young man is dead who shouldn't be, and an idiot with a gun is still out there.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  19. #219
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,562

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I"m pretty much done.

    A young man is dead who shouldn't be, and an idiot with a gun is still out there.
    I agree the young man should not have died.

    Maybe he should have made a better choice.

    And actually last I heard Zimmerman hasn't gotten his gun back yet from the Samford PD, at the request of the DOJ.

    Violation of civil rights anyone?
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  20. #220
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,820

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ladder9volley View Post
    i agree they should have gone for a manslaughter charge... but beyond that, we should begin a certification program for dispatchers, if they are given certain details of a 911 call, they can give specific directions that should be followed..
    As soon as you use the word "should" you eliminate and legal obligation to follow. I doubt any training can prepare a dispatcher to understand every situation fully enough via a phone to always give the proper instructions, thus this would likely open dispatch centers to huge liability.
    Quote Originally Posted by ladder9volley View Post
    for example in this case the dispatcher told zimmerman "we don't need you to do that." when they were told that he was following martin. if a dispatcher says "we don't need you to do that." that should be considered an order to be followed.. if you disobey that order then you are then taking it into your own hands and feel the situation is not dangerous enough to warrant deadly force if you use it..
    There was nothing about the dispatcher's conversation with Zimmerman that allowed the use of deadly force. Nothing about his following Martin justified the use of force. Only applying deadly force when he felt his life or limb was threatened was grounds for justifiable use of deadly force.
    Quote Originally Posted by ladder9volley View Post
    its kind of like the self defense case where the lady shot her gun into a wall because her b/f threatened to kill her... the judge said, because you left the house, and then re-entered it, you must not have feared for your life enough to use deadly force.
    Clearly if I understand the situation from what you describe, she has no right o self-defense under the law, because she already felt threatened, retreated to safety, then went back with a gun. Also shooting into the wall could easily be reckless conduct and endangering others if she wasn't absolutely certain there was no one on the other side of the wall or in that direction. Clearly she fired to scare her B/F which shows that had she truly feared for her life, she'd have reacted with a shot at the threat. These aren't my rules, their court proven legal opinions that shape case law for these situations.
    Quote Originally Posted by ladder9volley View Post
    so because zimmerman decided not to listen to the dispatcher he entered a situation that he must not have thought would endanger his life.. so "stand your ground" self defense argument would not have held...
    SYG was not part of his defense, it's been a political and media smoke screen. Read the FL SYG subsection of the Justifiable Use of Deadly Force, read the Instructions to Jurors in the Zimmerman case, SYG is not a factor.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. PG soon.....we hope!?
    By arhaney in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-23-2007, 10:39 AM
  2. Not Exactly Fire Related, But It Fits.
    By MalahatTwo7 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-28-2004, 10:48 AM
  3. Might there be hope?!!
    By BC79er_OLDDELETE in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 02-09-2004, 11:04 AM
  4. Any Hope?
    By Kiernan in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-26-2003, 08:48 PM
  5. Hope for the best?
    By Bones42 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-15-2003, 08:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts