|
This is a good read about Zimmerman
On 7/23/12 3:51 PM, JustWait wrote:
dude. I read the link. It was a hysterical internet blogger Ahh...someone like you...an hysterical internet bomber. |
This is a good read about Zimmerman
In article , says...
On 7/23/2012 3:37 PM, Meyer wrote: 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. I read the link. It was a hysterical internet blogger, being typically imaginative and hitting all the talking points the left has made up about this tradgedy... Short on facts, but understandable why kevin would think it was a "good read"... LOL! You are full of ****!!! It gave precedent after precedent about how Zimmerman will be found guilty. You couldn't have read it, or at least you didn't understand what you read. And I'm not kevin, idiot. Legal precedent is ALL fact, you moron! |
This is a good read about Zimmerman
On 7/23/2012 3:51 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 7/23/2012 3:37 PM, Meyer wrote: 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. I read the link. It was a hysterical internet blogger, being typically imaginative and hitting all the talking points the left has made up about this tradgedy... Short on facts, but understandable why kevin would think it was a "good read"... LOL! Next time you'll know better. |
This is a good read about Zimmerman
In article om,
says... On 7/23/2012 3:51 PM, JustWait wrote: On 7/23/2012 3:37 PM, Meyer wrote: 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. I read the link. It was a hysterical internet blogger, being typically imaginative and hitting all the talking points the left has made up about this tradgedy... Short on facts, but understandable why kevin would think it was a "good read"... LOL! Next time you'll know better. If you believe Scotty, you're just stupid. |
This is a good read about Zimmerman
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. |
This is a good read about Zimmerman
On 7/23/2012 3:55 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On 7/23/2012 3:37 PM, Meyer wrote: 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. I read the link. It was a hysterical internet blogger, being typically imaginative and hitting all the talking points the left has made up about this tradgedy... Short on facts, but understandable why kevin would think it was a "good read"... LOL! You are full of ****!!! It gave precedent after precedent about how Zimmerman will be found guilty. You couldn't have read it, or at least you didn't understand what you read. And I'm not kevin, idiot. Legal precedent is ALL fact, you moron! No sir it isn't, it's a ruling. |
This is a good read about Zimmerman
On 7/23/2012 4:30 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article om, says... On 7/23/2012 3:51 PM, JustWait wrote: On 7/23/2012 3:37 PM, Meyer wrote: 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. I read the link. It was a hysterical internet blogger, being typically imaginative and hitting all the talking points the left has made up about this tradgedy... Short on facts, but understandable why kevin would think it was a "good read"... LOL! Next time you'll know better. If you believe Scotty, you're just stupid. Boy, I'm glad you aren't a name caller. |
This is a good read about Zimmerman
In article m,
says... 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. He will be tried because he's been arrested for second degree murder, unless he plea bargains. Thus, if he pleas bargains, he will be convicted of a crime. Also, I never said he'll be convicted of ANYTHING. What I said was that you didn't read the legal precedents but you think you're qualified to argue them, how is that so? |
This is a good read about Zimmerman
In article om,
says... On 7/23/2012 3:55 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... On 7/23/2012 3:37 PM, Meyer wrote: 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. I read the link. It was a hysterical internet blogger, being typically imaginative and hitting all the talking points the left has made up about this tradgedy... Short on facts, but understandable why kevin would think it was a "good read"... LOL! You are full of ****!!! It gave precedent after precedent about how Zimmerman will be found guilty. You couldn't have read it, or at least you didn't understand what you read. And I'm not kevin, idiot. Legal precedent is ALL fact, you moron! No sir it isn't, it's a ruling. It's still all fact. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:37 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com