BoatBanter.com

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)
-   General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)
-   -   This is a good read about Zimmerman (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/152741-good-read-about-zimmerman.html)

iBoaterer[_2_] July 22nd 12 03:03 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 

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



Meyer[_2_] July 22nd 12 08:01 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
On 7/22/2012 10:03 AM, iBoaterer wrote:

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


Sparkie Arbuckle? Are you serious?

iBoaterer[_2_] July 22nd 12 08:18 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
In article m,
says...

On 7/22/2012 10:03 AM, iBoaterer wrote:

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


Sparkie Arbuckle? Are you serious?


You, like Scotty, when you don't have anything to refute the text,
instead say something about where the text came from, it's really funny
to watch!

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 01:11 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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.

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 01:17 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 02:13 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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?

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 02:30 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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?

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 03:21 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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.

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 03:32 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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.

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 03:38 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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?

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 03:44 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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.

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 04:32 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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....

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 04:48 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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.

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 04:58 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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??????

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 07:51 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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.

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 08:08 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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.

[email protected] July 23rd 12 08:12 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
On Monday, July 23, 2012 4:08:52 PM UTC-3, iBoaterer wrote:
In article b.com>,
says...
>
> On 7/23/2012 11:58 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> > In article b.com>,
> >
says...
> >>
> >> On 7/23/2012 11:32 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> >>> In article b.com>,
> >>>
says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On 7/23/2012 10:38 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> >>>>> In article .com>,
> >>>>>
says...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 7/23/2012 10:21 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article b.com>,
> >>>>>>>
says...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 7/23/2012 9:13 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> In article .com>,
> >>>>>>>>>
says...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 7/23/2012 8:11 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> In article > ,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
says...
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ; On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:03:19 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;
http://sparkiearbuckle.sayanythingbl...erman-will-be-
> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t; convicted-and-this-is-why/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ; It seems like all of your facts come from a liberal blog
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ; How many of those 100 year old precedents are based on current Florida
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ; 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.


Ouch! Snerk!

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 08:37 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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.

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 08:38 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
On 7/23/2012 3:12 PM, wrote:
On Monday, July 23, 2012 4:08:52 PM UTC-3, iBoaterer wrote:
In article b.com>,
says...
>
> On 7/23/2012 11:58 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> > In article b.com>,
> >
says...
> >>
> >> On 7/23/2012 11:32 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> >>> In article b.com>,
> >>>
says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On 7/23/2012 10:38 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> >>>>> In article .com>,
> >>>>>
says...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 7/23/2012 10:21 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article b.com>,
> >>>>>>>
says...
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 7/23/2012 9:13 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> In article .com>,
> >>>>>>>>>
says...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 7/23/2012 8:11 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> In article > ,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
says...
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ; On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:03:19 -0400, iBoaterer > wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;
http://sparkiearbuckle.sayanythingbl...erman-will-be-
> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t; convicted-and-this-is-why/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ; It seems like all of your facts come from a liberal blog
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ; How many of those 100 year old precedents are based on current Florida
> >>>>>>>>>>>&gt ; 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.


Ouch! Snerk!

Stb yer toe? Did ye?

JustWait[_2_] July 23rd 12 08:51 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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!

X ` Man[_3_] July 23rd 12 08:54 PM

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.


iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 08:54 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
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.

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 08:55 PM

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!

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 08:56 PM

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.

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 09:30 PM

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.

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 09:43 PM

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.

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 09:47 PM

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.

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 09:50 PM

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.

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 10:02 PM

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?

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 10:03 PM

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.

iBoaterer[_2_] July 23rd 12 10:03 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
In article om,
says...

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.


What name did I call you?

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 10:19 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
On 7/23/2012 5:02 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
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?

You tell me. You think you know what I think. Fire away dummy.

Meyer[_2_] July 23rd 12 10:20 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
On 7/23/2012 5:03 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article om,
says...

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.


What name did I call you?


Stupid for one, dummy.

iBoaterer[_2_] July 24th 12 01:13 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
In article m,
says...

On 7/23/2012 5:03 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article om,
says...

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.


What name did I call you?


Stupid for one, dummy.


No, I didn't. I said you were stupid.

iBoaterer[_2_] July 24th 12 01:13 PM

This is a good read about Zimmerman
 
In article m,
says...

On 7/23/2012 5:02 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
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?

You tell me. You think you know what I think. Fire away dummy.


As I thought......


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com