On 7/23/2012 3:54 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article m,
says...

On 7/23/2012 3:08 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article om,
says...

On 7/23/2012 11:58 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article om,
says...

On 7/23/2012 11:32 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article om,
says...

On 7/23/2012 10:38 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article m,
says...

On 7/23/2012 10:21 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article om,
says...

On 7/23/2012 9:13 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article m,
says...

On 7/23/2012 8:11 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:03:19 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:


http://sparkiearbuckle.sayanythingbl...erman-will-be-
convicted-and-this-is-why/


It seems like all of your facts come from a liberal blog

How many of those 100 year old precedents are based on current Florida
law?

All of them. A precedent is a precedent.


I'm afraid you dun been fooled. Fool

How so, specifically?

How can you create a precedent based on a law that might not have been
written and passed yet?

No. You can, however use precedent in a second degree murder trial.

That's not what you said.
Words have meaning.

I said a precedent is a precedent. In the case of Zimmerman, this would
be a precedent for second degree murder. That's what he's been charged
with. WTF did you think the precedent cited were for, jaywalking?

Show us the precedent in question.

I didn't know any of the precedents suggested were in question....

Which precedents were suggested, by whom, for what. Quit dancin boy.

You didn't look at the link I posted??????

I hardly ever do.

Well then, that answers why you are ignorant.

One does not become enlightened by following your links. Sorry dude.

So, you didn't read the legal precedents set forth, but you think you
are qualified to argue them? Figures.

Tell us in your own words why you think Zimmerman will be tried and
convicted of a crime.