On Wednesday, July 3, 2013 5:15:25 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 7/3/13 6:07 AM, Tim wrote:

On Tuesday, July 2, 2013 3:03:57 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:

"iBoaterer" wrote in message



...







In article ,



says...















Personally, I haven't "lined up" with either side yet. I am



fascinated with the trial. What I am noticing big time is the



presumption of guilt by some of the liberal media and their possible



attempts to keep information that may conflict with their attitudes



away from viewers. I confess, I haven't watched Fox News to see



what



their slant is, if any. Maybe I'll do that for a while and see if



their coverage is equally biased the other way.







There's also a lot of presumption of innocent by the conservatives,



too.







-----------------------------------------------------







You are *supposed* to be presumed innocent until found guilty beyond a



reasonable doubt.



But, Harry. you're pronounced Zimmerman guilty from the world 'go'. No need for a trial.





The pronouncements of those who are not the judge or jury don't matter.

I think Zimmerman is guilty of a violent criminal offense that resulted

from his actions alone, but I also know that the offense took place in

Redneckville, Florida, that the victim was black, and most of the jury

is white, so I don't expect Zimmerman to be found guilty.

See what I mean?

On Wednesday, July 3, 2013 5:18:03 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 7/3/13 6:09 AM, Tim wrote:

On Tuesday, July 2, 2013 5:00:36 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:

On 7/2/13 4:23 PM, iBoaterer wrote:



In article ,



says...







"iBoaterer" wrote in message



...











This trial has gotten SO political and it's a damned shame. No matter



what the outcome, there is going to be a large percentage of people



who



aren't happy with it.







--------------------------------------







Similar but different from the O.J. Simpson trial. That one had



external forces applying influence but it wasn't necessarily racial or



political.







I'm not really sure WHAT that was!











OJ's lawyers totally overwhelmed the state's prosecutors, and the facts



that the defense was able to show that some evidence was mishandled,



that at least one of the cops intimately involved in the case was an



avowed racist and engaged in shenanigans with some of the evidence and



then "took the fifth" about it, and a number of other factors resulted



in a not guilty verdict.







If Zimmerman walks, it won't be because he stalked a young man,



instigated a fight and, when it wasn't going his way, whipped out his



pistol and shot and killed the young man. It'll be because the trial



took place in a gun-happy state.



"But, Harry. you're pronounced Zimmerman guilty from the word 'go'. No need for a trial."





My opinion about the Zimmerman case matters no more than yours, Tim. I

don't see the Martin kid's family getting justice for the murder of

their son.

Of course it does, Harry. I don't have an opinion. I'm letting the courts decide and that's it. Why can't everybody else?

On 7/3/2013 6:34 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:


Had Zimmerman not started the fight, Martin and his can of tea and bag
of skittles would have made it safely to where he was visiting or
staying with his dad.




Assuming he didn't cut his hand while in the act of smash and grab.
Remember his interest in the contents of cars in the neighborhood?

On 7/3/2013 7:06 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...

On 7/3/13 6:31 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
m...



The pronouncements of those who are not the judge or jury don't matter.
I think Zimmerman is guilty of a violent criminal offense that resulted
from his actions alone, but I also know that the offense took place in
Redneckville, Florida, that the victim was black, and most of the jury
is white, so I don't expect Zimmerman to be found guilty.

-------------------------------------

Wow. So much for giving consideration to any evidence and law that
might indicate otherwise.
Redneckville? 24 states have Stand Your Ground statutes. That's one
shy of half the country.

Al Sharpton has schooled you well, it seems.


It is unfortunate that so-called "Stand Your Ground" laws allow a
gun-toter to stalk an unarmed person, confront that person, precipitate
an argument, and then shoot and kill that person.

That is precisely what Zimmerman did, eh.


-------------------------------------------

The "Stand Your Ground" laws in this country specifically forbid any
action as you have described. What actually happened in the Zimmerman
case will be determined by a jury after giving consideration to all the
evidence presented in the trial.

Until Trev pushed Zimm to the ground and started wailing on him, No
crime had been committed. Why don't we proceed from that point in time.
Forget what happened prior.

On Wednesday, July 3, 2013 5:24:25 AM UTC-5, Eisboch wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message

...



On Tuesday, July 2, 2013 2:46:46 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:





Personally, I haven't "lined up" with either side yet.





"But, Harry. you're pronounced Zimmerman guilty from the world 'go'.

No need for a trial. "



------------------------------------



Tim, your attributes are off. Harry didn't say that. I did.

That's one thing about Google Groups and you and Harry using the same fake email address. Sometimes it can't distinguish who is who.

According to Google Groups Iresoponded to F.O.A.D.

On 7/3/2013 7:12 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
I have little confidence in southern, white juries deliberating on
whether a white man killed a black man, but we shall see.

That point isn't to be deliberated. Why so biased and racist, Harry?

On 7/3/2013 7:22 AM, Eisboch wrote:
But, I understand your point even though I don't agree with your all
inclusive, predetermined views on the subject.


His views are purely racist. He gives nothing else consideration.

"Tim" wrote in message
...

On Wednesday, July 3, 2013 5:18:03 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
My opinion about the Zimmerman case matters no more than yours, Tim.
I
don't see the Martin kid's family getting justice for the murder of
their son.

Of course it does, Harry. I don't have an opinion. I'm letting the
courts decide and that's it. Why can't everybody else?

-------------------------------------------------

You have to remember Tim, Harry has a problem with court decisions
(even by the Supreme Court of the United States) unless the decision
happens to go his way.

Don't you remember Gore versus Bush? Some people just can't forget
it, including Harry.
But, when an important issue like same sex marriage with full federal
benefits (for 1.7 percent of the population) is decided, many people
including Harry applaud.

So, you see, it all depends what the subject is.

On 7/3/2013 7:26 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
I have no requirement that you agree with my preconceived notions!
You're a better than reasonable guy, even when you are completely wrong
(from my point of view).

That was a hard read. Was it proper English?

"Tim" wrote in message
...

On Wednesday, July 3, 2013 5:24:25 AM UTC-5, Eisboch wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message

...



On Tuesday, July 2, 2013 2:46:46 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:





Personally, I haven't "lined up" with either side yet.





"But, Harry. you're pronounced Zimmerman guilty from the world 'go'.

No need for a trial. "



------------------------------------



Tim, your attributes are off. Harry didn't say that. I did.

That's one thing about Google Groups and you and Harry using the same
fake email address. Sometimes it can't distinguish who is who.

According to Google Groups Iresoponded to F.O.A.D.

------------------------------

Gotcha. I'll change mine.