Justice for Zimmerman
- Thread starter Adebisi
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
- Status
Blackyce
Silver Knight of the Realm
- 836
- 12
I would have been upset if the story the media portrayed was true, as it sounds horrible. I would have probably went to discussions of the matter. But when I looked in to it, it was a sham.
How come Al Sharpton hasn't been disgraced enough to quietly go away?
Vaclav
Bronze Baronet of the Realm
- 12,650
- 877
You mean the woman that fired a warning shot to scare someone off into the air? I don't think that was Melissa Harris. But if that's the one that you're referencing it's interesting how narrow SYG is although completely irrelevant to the GZ case directly. (Although as mentioned before - the GZ case due to initial reports did drive interest in SYG laws that most people had been ignorant of - even though the GZ case had nothing to do with it as we later found out - false narrative started a REAL interest)
I'd say the people that are comparing them are just doing the reverse version of racebaiting that some people did with the GZ trial. Not that I agree with them doing it, just pointing out what their reasoning likely is. Instead of "white guy can kill black scotfree" it's now showing "blacks can't even fire a gun non-lethally and get away with it". [Although that part I think is ludicrous, I do think the case is interesting that SYG only would protect her to shoot lethally/attempted lethally - firing into the air to scare but not harm was not covered is bizarre - logically should be ANY weapon use...]
I'd say the people that are comparing them are just doing the reverse version of racebaiting that some people did with the GZ trial. Not that I agree with them doing it, just pointing out what their reasoning likely is. Instead of "white guy can kill black scotfree" it's now showing "blacks can't even fire a gun non-lethally and get away with it". [Although that part I think is ludicrous, I do think the case is interesting that SYG only would protect her to shoot lethally/attempted lethally - firing into the air to scare but not harm was not covered is bizarre - logically should be ANY weapon use...]
Famm
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 11,041
- 794
The part where that fucking judge all but tells the defense to shut up and browbeats the defendant into answering himself makes me quite literally sick to my fucking stomach. Every criminal trial I've witness the judge will say "sir, you do not have to answer if you would prefer to have your attorney speak for you...." etc when addressing the defendant directly. And that's just on entering the plea or what have you. This is on hisabsolute constitutional rightnot to take the stand. Cad, or anyone, did she have any business at all overruling the defense's request to speak on behalf of their client? They call these guys your "representation" for a reaon FFS!
Sorry, I'm late to the video footage. I followed the updates in written media and this thread and watched very little of the trial, but that shit makes my blood boil. I remember it coming up in the thread, but it really hits home to see that.
And yes, WTF Fox News is the voice of reason this time. I don't even.
Homsar
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 9,409
- 8,324
I meant Alexander, but yes the case where the bitch got angry went into the garage grabbed a gun instead of leaving, went back inside the house and into the living room firing a bullet towards the father and two children (Not the ceiling) instead of going out the front door, the father and children fled and called 911 while the woman stayed at Grays house and attempted to never contact the police and then tried to use SYG as a defense and got charge with a temped murder. How the fuck is that anything like the zimmerman case ?
Famm
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 11,041
- 794
From the way I read it she left the house, went to her CAR to get the gun, and came back in. First pointed it at him, then turn the gun and fired somewhere else. Meanwhile the guy's just asking her to leave and at some point covers his face in expectation of getting blasted. Keep in mind she wasn't even living there anymore either.
Vaclav
Bronze Baronet of the Realm
- 12,650
- 877
"Forced interest"? Not really - things that are inconsistent and have loopholes are frequently interesting on their own.
Most people find odd tax breaks interesting, not because they're assholes - but because they're logically inconsistent. People in Maryland found it interesting that we actually LEGALLY WERE REQUIRED TO CONSIDER MANSLAUGHTER AT A MINIMUM for a JHU student that killed a home invader with a sword with a single strike (From bleedout - why he was acquitted quickly) - we actually flirted with the idea of something SYGish after it occurred because of the oddity to it on the opposite side of the coin.
People don't like inconsistency in the legal framework - it's always going to be a discussion topic. Now, those that bring race into the equation - probably assholes - certainly assholes if they jump to that conclusion first without researching it - and it's certainly worth researching to see if there's a racial element - but shouldn't be assumed, should be empirically proven first.
Vaclav
Bronze Baronet of the Realm
- 12,650
- 877
As I stated, not besides people just using a different variant of GZ case race-baiting. It by itself is an interesting case however.
I wouldn't attempt to argue with that moron. He was one of the people who immediately came to post about how a child killer got away with murder as soon as the verdict was made.
I'm interested in a lot of things, that doesn't mean they're in the national spot light. It just seems to be the narrative democrats want to blast screaming for any type of silver lining from this backfire in the eye of the nation. Are you saying there has been SYG narrative for a long time? What is the timing of this being put in the spot light? Is it after the GZ case was no longer their ammunition to be "right"?
Cad
scientia potentia est
- 25,426
- 49,042
I've never heard of a judge shutting the lawyers up and asking the defendant directly like that. I understand the point though. It's a common appeal to say "my lawyers wouldn't let me testify, I wanted to" after you lose, and claim ineffective assistance of counsel. Making Zimmerman answer himself like that circumvents the argument. It was out of the presence of the jury, I don't see any harm in it. I would have objected too, but once the judge is obviously going to do it anyway, you don't gain anything by antagonizing her like West was doing.
khalid
Unelected Mod
- 14,071
- 6,775
It seemed like she was trying to badger the defendant into testifying. That seems pretty harmful, to have so little respect for the 5th amendment.
Cad
scientia potentia est
- 25,426
- 49,042
No, it seemed like she wanted him to affirm that he didn't want to testify on his own. The judge did a lot of stupid ass stuff in that trial but this wasn't one of them. Nothing he could have said would have been in front of the jury so none of it is "testimony."
Famm
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 11,041
- 794
Gotcha. O'Mara did look like he wanted West to just STFU so I figured it was at least counterproductive. Just seems way the fuck out of line to me to hammer on that issue, if she was worried about appeal there sounded like plenty of shadiness with discovery and what she allowed entered.
- Status