When "Neighborhood Watch" Gets Out of Hand

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You have to view the overall results of what happens when a state allows people to carry concealed weapons. I think the evidence shows that the overall results are positive (there are less deaths and less violent crimes).

If you have any evidence that shows the opposite, feel free to present it.

I agree that concealed carry states have less murder and violent crime once it becomes common there. But - the evidence to the contrary is countries that do not have a handgun/assault weapons available to the public culture (say, Canada or England), and those that do (us).

We murder each other with guns in the thousands compared to less than 100. Why does a 20-bullet clip for a handgun need to be legal here? You can still have gun ownership, but with hard restrictions and responsibilities. Trouble is, in America we think that violates our freedomz. The definition of "responsible gun laws" varies widely among Americans.

[GenuineRisk]

It's not exactly true that concealed-carry states saw a drop in crime. Some did, some didn't. And some non-concealed-carry states saw a drop in crime. This is a very good, and, I think, fair look at concealed carry:

Happiness Is a Worn Gun

If it doesn't link right, a google search of the title will take you to it.

[Antitrust32]

bond set at 150,000


I really doubt Zimmerman gets convicted of 2nd degree murder. I just dont see how that case will be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. They should have went with a lesser charge, because the man does deserve to spend a couple of years locked up.

I do not think Zimmerman set out to kill Martin. I also wouldnt be surprised if Martin began the physical altercation.. because many people in Martin's situation (being followed and harrassed by a stranger) would resort to a few punches. But you can not act like a wanna be cop and get away with ending a life unpunished. While I do not see 2nd degree murder, Zimmerman deserves a 3-5 year sentence IMO.

[bigrun]

This was posted at another forum...Is this in evidence of his head injuries?..or a photoshopped bit..jus askin..


[/quote]

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by bigrun

This was posted at another forum...Is this in evidence of his head injuries?..or a photoshopped bit..jus askin..

[/quote]

That picture must be forged because Danzig told me that there was no struggle. She had strong evidence too. Her evidence was that the funeral director (who works for the Martins) said that Trayvon had no bruises. LOL.

I'm sorry Danzig. I couldn't resist.

[Riot]

ABC must have a massive contact leaking information to them from inside the prosecutors office - they've had all the "good stuff" in this case. I wonder if the prosecutor will freak out about this new leak, especially after the case has been sealed by the judge?

That looks like real blood to me. But you see how the pattern is running down to the left and right of the back-top of the head? [although there appears to be two contusions in a linear fashion (like the edge of a curb?) ] - there is no blood smear.

If his head was "being beaten" against the concrete, how come none of the blood is smeared?

So, say it's real, his head was beaten against the concrete to get the two contusions - he must have immediately gotten up and regained the upper hand, because the blood is running down both sides, consistent with how he's sitting now: with his head up, facing downward a little.

If his head was beaten against the concrete to get that, then he immediately got up before he started bleeding from the wounds, because none of the blood is smeared (is there blood on the concrete at the scene?)

And if he was standing after the injury, the blood would have run straight down his collar. It appears the head was bent over, as the blood ran down the left and right sides from the wounds.

I wonder if he shot Trayvon while laying on his back with Trayvon on top, then pushed dead Trayvon off and immediately stood up. Could be.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

I wonder if he shot Trayvon while laying on his back with Trayvon on top, then pushed dead Trayvon off and immediately stood up. Could be.

Yes. I believe that is what the claim has been all along.

[bigrun]

That picture must be forged because Danzig told me that there was no struggle. She had strong evidence too. Her evidence was that the funeral director (who works for the Martins) said that Trayvon had no bruises. LOL.

I'm sorry Danzig. I couldn't resist.[/quote]


Is there a doctor in the house....more i look at that blood pattern the more it looks painted on...I watch a lot of CSI and never saw splatter like that...but i'd like one of our resident physicians to corroborate...danz, riot, anybody...

[Rupert Pupkin]

I think the Zimmermans made an excellent choice in picking Mark O"Mara to be George Zimmerman's defense attorney. Some defense attorneys are confrontational, argumentative, flamboyant, and "in your face". O'Mara is not like that at all. He is quiet, low-key, and very professional. In a case like this, I think that is a very good thing.

Emotions are really high on both sides. If you had one of these loud and confrontational defense attorneys, I think that would just inflame people. O'Mara could have easily gone out there and publicly attacked the special prosecutor. But he didn't do that. He knows the facts are on his side and he knows that the truth will come out.

He handled the hearing today very well. He didn't attack the prosecution investigator at the hearing today. He just asked him a simple question. He asked him whether he had any evidence of who started the fight. The prosecution investigator responded, "No".

That was all he needed to ask. The prosecution admitted that they had no evidence of who started the fight. That means they have no evidence that contradicts Zimmerman's claim that Martin attacked him first.

The judge will practically be forced to throw out the 2nd degree murder charge. There is a chance he may even throw out the manslaughter charge. If the prosecution has no evidence that contradicts Zimmerman's contention that Martin attacked him first, then they have no case. Zimmerman had obvious and visible injuries. If you get attacked and sustain those kinds of injuries, you have a right to defend yourself. The law is very clear on that, especially in Florida.


http://southflorida.sun-sentinel.com...,4802623.story

[Danzig]

That picture must be forged because Danzig told me that there was no struggle. She had strong evidence too. Her evidence was that the funeral director (who works for the Martins) said that Trayvon had no bruises. LOL.

I'm sorry Danzig. I couldn't resist.[/quote]

gfy.

sorry, couldn't resist.

and what i said was according to what had been put out up to that point, there was no evidence of a struggle. if the photo is real, i guess it shows otherwise...
and i didn't say there were no bruises, the funeral director did-take your beef up with him.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

Tgfy.

sorry, couldn't resist.

and what i said was according to what had been put out up to that point, there was no evidence of a struggle. if the photo is real, i guess it shows otherwise...
and i didn't say there were no bruises, the funeral director did-take your beef up with him.

Of course there was evidence of a struggle at the time you made the post. You just chose to ignore that evidence. At the time you made the post, it had been reported that Zimmerman had a broken nose. It had been reported that several witnesses at the scene including police officers said that Zimmerman's nose was bleeding and the back of his head was bleeding.

That was the evidence that we knew at the time that suggested a struggle. That was why I was so shocked when you claimed you didn't think there was any evidence of a struggle. That was when I told you that I had never heard anyone from either side claim that there was no struggle. That was when you answered that the funeral director said that Martin had no bruises on him and that was what you based your opinion on.

You can go back and re-read the posts if you don't believe me.

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

While I do not see 2nd degree murder, Zimmerman deserves a 3-5 year sentence IMO.

Based on what I saw in court this morning, he will walk. Prosecutors are idiots for using loaded words like "profiled" and "confronted" in the affidavit. Defense attorney looks like he's on the ball, and judge set remarkably low bail. Unless some really startling evidence is produced, he ultimately beats the rap.

As to what he "deserves," who can say; did think that his "apology" was self-serving, and I was really surprised that O'Mara let him get up there.