Zimmerman was NOT beaten by Travon as claimed

[QUOTE="Renevent42"][QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

Fair enough so with that, when someone is taken to jail for being drunk at that time they are not actually 'arrested' correct?

SEANMCAD

here is what I am driving out.

1. there are very few crimes more dangerious and serious then shooting someone.

2. a person can (at least as I understand it) be 'arrested' without calling the DA. The reason is two fold, one it happens often and two, its a dagerious mistake to let someone who might be drunk on the road, thus we lock him up until morning.

see the connection here? zimmerman regardless of why he shot the kid is dangerious, I would argue MORE dangerious then the guy we just locked up for DWI. I am not saying he is guilty but I am saying is that ANYONE for ANY REASON fires a gun and it kills someone needs to be arrested until we have a trial.

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="Renevent42"] You obviously don't. The police did take Zimmerman in to the station, however, based on the interview, witness accounts, and other evidence the DA determined they did not have enough evidence to formally charge him at that time. The investigation continued, but they did not formally charge him and put out a warrant because once you do that, a clock basically starts as to how long you can actually formalize that charge. There's a difference between being arrested, being detained, and being formally charged. Renevent42

I do, thanks. Meanwhile the new prosecutor hasn't filed charges yet either...obviously not so clear cut is it?

Also just because he recused himself doesn't mean he was guilty of any mishandling or neglect...it could simply be since it had gotten such national attention, he wanted to ensure justice is carried out withouth any issues or perceived biases. He only stepped aside temporarily, too.

[QUOTE="Renevent42"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] You mean the state prosecutor who has since recused himself from the case? -Sun_Tzu-

I do, thanks. Meanwhile the new prosecutor hasn't filed charges yet either...obviously not so clear cut is it?

Also just because he recused himself doesn't mean he was guilty of any mishandling or neglect...it could simply be since it had gotten such national attention, he wanted to ensure justice is carried out withouth any issues or perceived biases. He only stepped aside temporarily, too.

[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

Everyone is 1 of three positions on this subject

1. Zimmerman is innocent

2. Travon is innocent.

3. the courts need to decide that.

Now I am of number 3. The thing is, when someone is arrested THEY ARE NOT CONVICTED, that is why we havea court system that is the whole idea.

So people who are saying Zimmerman should be arrested are NOT saying he is guilty, they are saying there is enough evidence to bring to trial a self defense case.

sSubZerOo

[QUOTE="Renevent42"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] Pretty much this, I would rather have a federal/higher level investgation to look into the whole subject, and the police department themselves.. What is baffling is why is there a VIDEO OF ALL THINGS about this and only this.. Shouldn't the police have taken photo's of Zimmerman's injuries and the whole scene? This just reeks of incompetence.. SEANMCAD

ok for me personally it doesnt matter about the pictures but that said, if they had any evidence at all that could justifytheir position I assure you they would have given it to the media.

my view is this. If someone fires a gun and it ends up killing someone regardless of the reason that person needs to be in jail and a trail needs to then happen to find out why the gun was fired. doesnt matter who , what , or why to me. I understand he might be perfectly innocent but until trial, jail time sorry. Dont like those kind of unfair odds then dont touch a gun. That is my view.SEANMCAD

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="Renevent42"]

I do, thanks. Meanwhile the new prosecutor hasn't filed charges yet either...obviously not so clear cut is it?

Also just because he recused himself doesn't mean he was guilty of any mishandling or neglect...it could simply be since it had gotten such national attention, he wanted to ensure justice is carried out withouth any issues or perceived biases. He only stepped aside temporarily, too.

Renevent42

[QUOTE="Renevent42"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] So why did he feel the need to step down? Mere national attention doesn't explain that - this isn't the first controversial homicide case that has had national exposure . He has given no clear explanation for why he has actually stepped down, other than saying he wants to "preserve the integrity of the investigation" and avoid giving the appearance of a conflict of interest. What is that suppose to mean? And on top of that you have the police chief also stepping down from the case after contradicting his own police department by saying that they found no probable cause, yet the police had officially requested that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter. -Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="collegeboy64"][QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]my view is this. If someone fires a gun and it ends up killing someone regardless of the reason that person needs to be in jail and a trail needs to then happen to find out why the gun was fired. doesnt matter who , what , or why to me. I understand he might be perfectly innocent but until trial, jail time sorry. Dont like those kind of unfair odds then dont touch a gun. That is my view.SEANMCAD

yes...until the evidence is gathered and a trail happens.

is it just me who has lived a lifetime with the assumption that if I kill someone in self defense I am still going to jail until the trial....

It appears so...

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

[QUOTE="Renevent42"] I don't know...what does it mean? The fact is you don't know either. If the federal investigation finds a miscarriage of the law took place we will all know at that point...but right now all you are doing is speculating. Renevent42

The doubters of OT are still doubting...this is nothing more then a hate crime. Racial profiling at its greatest. Zimmerman is a murderer, lock him up.MgamerBD

[QUOTE="collegeboy64"][QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]my view is this. If someone fires a gun and it ends up killing someone regardless of the reason that person needs to be in jail and a trail needs to then happen to find out why the gun was fired. doesnt matter who , what , or why to me. I understand he might be perfectly innocent but until trial, jail time sorry. Dont like those kind of unfair odds then dont touch a gun. That is my view.SEANMCAD

yes...until the evidence is gathered and a trail happens.

is it just me who has lived a lifetime with the assumption that if I kill someone in self defense I am still going to jail until the trial....

It appears so...

[QUOTE="Renevent42"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] Based on all that has transpired since the shooting I'd say I have more reason to believe that a miscarriage of the law has taken place then the contrary, especially when you have people in high profile positions stepping down from the case without any real explanation. That's usually a tell-tale sign that something isn't right.

-Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="Renevent42"] Well, that sounds like your own personal opinion. You are certainly welcome to have it, but that's all it is.Renevent42

[QUOTE="Renevent42"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] Of course it is my personal opinion. What other opinion could I give? -Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="collegeboy64"][QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

yes...until the evidence is gathered and a trail happens.

is it just me who has lived a lifetime with the assumption that if I kill someone in self defense I am still going to jail until the trial....

It appears so...

SEANMCAD

so you think if you shot someone there is a chance (depending on what happened) that you would not go to jail?

intresting, I guess its just my assumption. I assumed that if you kill someone (regardless of why) you go to jail and get a lawyer to defend you for self defense.

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="Renevent42"] You were coming off a little more than stating it like a simple opinion. You acted as if there could not be any other explanation for him stepping down, and you based this on nothing more than what you though other people's intentions and motivations were.

Renevent42

The point is there's no evidence of wrong doing, you are assuming there is. The things you cited as evidence of wrong doing was your own injecting of someone else's motivation...that's just as bad as people saying Zimmerman gunned down Martin because he was acting like a thug. You clearly didn't look at everything that is available today, because frankly there's nothing that shows the prosecutor did anything wrong. You are simply assuming there must be foul play.

Is it possible there's been foul play? Sure, absolutely. Just as likely at this point it's entirely possible that he was totally inline with normal procedures and did nothing wrong, and only stepped down to ensure confidence in the investigation.

[QUOTE="collegeboy64"][QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

yes...until the evidence is gathered and a trail happens.

is it just me who has lived a lifetime with the assumption that if I kill someone in self defense I am still going to jail until the trial....

It appears so...

SEANMCAD

so you think if you shot someone there is a chance (depending on what happened) that you would not go to jail?

intresting, I guess its just my assumption. I assumed that if you kill someone (regardless of why) you go to jail and get a lawyer to defend you for self defense.

[QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

[QUOTE="collegeboy64"] Well, all I can say is I am very glad you are not in charge. I cannot imagine being the police officer that has to cuff and stuff some poor woman who has just been violated AND done society a favor by dispatching the POS that did it. I just cannot fathom why, in such a clear case of self defense as I have postulated, anyone would feel the need to lock up the woman, much less put her on trial.collegeboy64

so you think if you shot someone there is a chance (depending on what happened) that you would not go to jail?

intresting, I guess its just my assumption. I assumed that if you kill someone (regardless of why) you go to jail and get a lawyer to defend you for self defense.

Has OT come to a collective conclusion yet?

Has OT come to a collective conclusion yet?

coolbeans90

[QUOTE="MgamerBD"]The doubters of OT are still doubting...this is nothing more then a hate crime. Racial profiling at its greatest. Zimmerman is a murderer, lock him up.Moriarity_

That's what happens when you mix the media and justice together: You get an unholy alliance where the average American suddenly thinks that he's judge, jury, and executioner, especially when race is involved.

I will state that courts have been biased before against minorities but not every person of minority is innocent. Some of them actually did commit serious crimes. I think the Boondocks made a point in their R.Kelly episode.

OK how many people can reach a concealed weapon on their side with a person beating them in full mount ??

noscope-ak47

Lots.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="collegeboy64"]I know that, given the right circumstances, I would not go to jail or even be arrested. True story: 15 or so years ago there was a woman that had a restraining order against her abusive boyfriend. She also had the good sense to purchase a 45ACP and learn to use it. Well, the scumbag eventually showed up in the middle of the night, broke a window and was crawling in when this gal put a 45 round in him and blew his ass right back out the window in to the flower bed. She was not arrested. She was taken to the police station, voluntarily, and questioned while the officer's on scene gathered evidence. After a few hours they took her home.SEANMCAD

I very honestly didnt know it worked that way.

That all said understand there is a difference (at least in my mind) between being arrested and being guilty. determining guilt is for the courts I would think. being arrested is for immediate safety of community.

despite what people think (yourself included) this issue is not at all about race. Its all about a man shot someone and is not in jail. My understanding is that one goes to jail if you shoot someone who ends up diying regardless of the reason but I have sense been told that is not the case so I concede. However, its not about race.SEANMCAD

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="collegeboy64"] I know, right? Like, she should have just like let him come in a beat her ass to a bloody pulp and rape her, then like just like wait for the cops to like arrest him, like ya know.SEANMCAD

you guys are confusing (which happens all the f*cking time!) between what the cops said happen AND WHAT THE COURTS SAY HAPPENED.

sorry the cops do not get to decide the facts of the case as much as sometimes its better that they did.

There was no reason for Zimmerman to be arrested.
Yet he was,then questioned, and was returned home later.

[QUOTE="leviathan91"]

[QUOTE="Moriarity_"] So much for innocent until proven guilty. Most people seem to think its guilty until proven innocent.SEANMCAD

That's what happens when you mix the media and justice together: You get an unholy alliance where the average American suddenly thinks that he's judge, jury, and executioner, especially when race is involved.

I will state that courts have been biased before against minorities but not every person of minority is innocent. Some of them actually did commit serious crimes. I think the Boondocks made a point in their R.Kelly episode.

despite what people think (yourself included)

this issue is not at all about race.

Its all about a man shot someone and is not in jail. My understanding is that one goes to jail if you shoot someone who ends up diying regardless of the reason but I have sense been told that is not the case so I concede. However, its not about race.

You're right. Tell that to Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and the protesters who insist that racism was involved. ;)

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"][QUOTE="collegeboy64"] I know, right? Like, she should have just like let him come in a beat her ass to a bloody pulp and rape her, then like just like wait for the cops to like arrest him, like ya know.SEANMCAD

you guys are confusing (which happens all the f*cking time!) between what the cops said happen AND WHAT THE COURTS SAY HAPPENED.

sorry the cops do not get to decide the facts of the case as much as sometimes its better that they did.

[QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

[QUOTE="leviathan91"]

That's what happens when you mix the media and justice together: You get an unholy alliance where the average American suddenly thinks that he's judge, jury, and executioner, especially when race is involved.

I will state that courts have been biased before against minorities but not every person of minority is innocent. Some of them actually did commit serious crimes. I think the Boondocks made a point in their R.Kelly episode.

leviathan91

despite what people think (yourself included)

this issue is not at all about race.

Its all about a man shot someone and is not in jail. My understanding is that one goes to jail if you shoot someone who ends up diying regardless of the reason but I have sense been told that is not the case so I concede. However, its not about race.

You're right. Tell that to Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and the protesters who insist that racism was involved. ;)

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

[QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

you guys are confusing (which happens all the f*cking time!) between what the cops said happen AND WHAT THE COURTS SAY HAPPENED.

sorry the cops do not get to decide the facts of the case as much as sometimes its better that they did.

SEANMCAD

There was no reason for Zimmerman to be arrested.
Yet he was,then questioned, and was returned home later.

ok I am going to try this one more time. Let me try to explain why we have courts.

the reason we have courts is to provide the evidence and then have the courts decide what happened. the cops and people on the side of the street DO NOT have the luxury of being the jury or the judge. This is misunderstood all the time.

again, courts are specifically in place explictly to make the point that the cops on the street do not get to say what the facts where.

does this at all make sense?

All the know, is someone is dead because of a gun fired from zimmermans hand. peroid, NOTHING more, that is usually reason to take someone off the street UNTIL courts have a trial.

why is this so hard to understand?

"Innocent until proven guilty"
the DA cannot prove he is guilty, or is waiting for more solid evidence.

Until that time arises, he's innocent in the eyes of the law.

[QUOTE="Nibroc420"]

[QUOTE="SEANMCAD"]

you guys are confusing (which happens all the f*cking time!) between what the cops said happen AND WHAT THE COURTS SAY HAPPENED.

sorry the cops do not get to decide the facts of the case as much as sometimes its better that they did.

SEANMCAD

There was no reason for Zimmerman to be arrested.
Yet he was,then questioned, and was returned home later.

ok I am going to try this one more time. Let me try to explain why we have courts.

the reason we have courts is to provide the evidence and then have the courts decide what happened. the cops and people on the side of the street DO NOT have the luxury of being the jury or the judge. This is misunderstood all the time.

again, courts are specifically in place explictly to make the point that the cops on the street do not get to say what the facts where.

does this at all make sense?

All the know, is someone is dead because of a gun fired from zimmermans hand. peroid, NOTHING more, that is usually reason to take someone off the street UNTIL courts have a trial.

why is this so hard to understand?

Shouldn't matter if he was beaten or not. He killed him after following him, when Travon was walking home. The laws in Florida are jacked up though..If a man followed me down a street and pulled a gun on me, I'd beat him up. That would be self defense.. I don't see what the debate is about, unless there's something else going on..Truf89