Justice for Zimmerman

Chanur_sl said:

Did you eat a big bowl of retarded this morning or what. Please tell us what this case has shown about SYG. All ears.

Click to expand...

Again, in case you missed the last page where a bunch of others including myself briefly, ripped into mouthbreathers like you that can't comprehend English and how things proceeded....

Timeline:
1. The incident happened - initial media blame was on SYG being odd.
2. Media interest in SYG stories goes up as a result.
3. THEN we find out that SYG isn't relevant to this case.

See what happened there? See #2 that happened as a result of the initial suspicion that SYG was relevant which was later shown false? Just because something drums up interest in something doesn't mean it's directly relative. It's similar to how any Everquest (or even SOE thread) will suddenly inspire Itzena to come in and start shitting on it about how much better WoW is - doesn't mean it's a "WoW thread" it just inspires her/him/it to start those conversations.

Vaclav's father was narrow in his research, therefore he is sure Maio was the same. Proven guys, how can you argue with this awesome set of facts?

So Vaclav attacks Maio's credentials and level of expertise when the prosecutor who will try to find fault in any fucking thing doesn't. Seems legit.

Abefroman_sl said:

So Vaclav attacks Maio's credentials and level of expertise when the prosecutor who will try to find fault in any fucking thing doesn't. Seems legit.

Click to expand...

When you have the strength of anecdotal evidence you don't back down sir, you double down!

I didnt post once in this thread. But popped in here to say Vaclav sounds like a petty little pussy bitchass.

Ohhhhh my family this and this we have money and my sister this and that and I can prove because my family blah blah blah. Shut the fuck up with your shit. You sound worse than a retarded Lannister with down syndrome, who has a broken record player for a set of vocal chords.

You remind me of my spoiled 8 year old neighbor who tries to tell the other kids on the street that his dad can beat up theirs. Guess what? Nobody (especially on the internet) gives a fuck about who in your family does what.

You're likely the loser reject of your family who sits on the computer playing WoW all day and does jackshit, while your sister makes 6 figures doing whatever bullshit she does. Then your family mocks you behind your back at Thanksgiving because you are who you are and why can't you just be like your sister and your father who have respectable careers.

Can we declare July white history month? Or is it just all 11 other months?

Arbitrary_sl said:

I find your reason for dismissing Dr. Vincent J. M. Di Maio to be absurd. Your reason is literally that your father wasn't very adept outside of his area of specialization. Your father. Your reason is your father.

Click to expand...

Which is why I (in a part you removed when quoting me) stated that perhaps it's wrong for me to feel that way - I understand the possibility that I'm wrong to feel such - I've known one expert on a serious level, and that expert had failings in secondary aspects of his field. Perhaps once my personal level of knowing experts expands (although doubtful - don't see any possibles in the tree) I might see evidence against that - but to date I've known an expert that gives me pause.

Wrong or not, it gives me pause.

hodj: Interesting take and believable - ties into some family stuff but I'll just keep that to myself (especially since I won't be able to resolve it - but you're making me think someone's lied to me in the past...).

Vaclav_sl said:

And? Nothing he said was inaccurate - you're taking "blows to the head" to mean one thing only - I'm reading the transcript and nothing he says translates out to "six blows to the head that could've only come from smashing Zimmerman's head into the concrete" as many of you are trying to meme.

I do see the quote of six blows to the head, I do see him stating that it LIKELY was upon concrete that those blows occurred. I see nothing that disputes that he might have been punched in the face while lying his head on the concrete where it was reciprocal damage not primary damage. (Which note, the broken nose would support - punching someone and giving them a broken nose while on concrete is going to cause damage to the back of the head quite obviously...)

And what purpose would they have for disputing him? The attack by Trayvon wasn't in dispute. And again, it's a long transcript so I'm just trying to search through it with keywords but I'm not finding anything that says "He was absolutely smashed into the concrete" like you're claiming. Perhaps you can do the legwork for me, since you should know his wording used?

Click to expand...

Did you miss the part where the self-defense statutes states that you don't need to require any injuries to be in fear of your life?

its amusing that all the retards crying about this verdict did not participate in this thread the entire fucking time. it means you dont know what you're talking about and you need to GTFO NOW!

also for those who use the line of argument, "herp derp it was a fight nobody ever dies in a fight" for one yes people die all the time in fistfights anf 2 even in a boxing match, you NEVER see the boxer knock someone down and then are allowed to continue beating them while they are incapacitated. NEVER. the second you knock someone the fuck out and yet you still continue to beat them thats just straight up attempted murder.

Lemmiwinks_sl said:

I didnt post once in this thread. But popped in here to say Vaclav sounds like a petty little pussy bitchass.

Ohhhhh my family this and this we have money and my sister this and that and I can prove because my family blah blah blah. Shut the fuck up with your shit. You sound worse than a retarded Lannister with down syndrome, who has a broken record player for a set of vocal chords.

You remind me of my spoiled 8 year old neighbor who tries to tell the other kids on the street that his dad can beat up theirs. Guess what? Nobody (especially on the internet) gives a fuck about who in your family does what.

You're likely the loser reject of your family who sits on the computer playing WoW all day and does jackshit, while your sister makes 6 figures doing whatever bullshit she does. Then your family mocks you behind your back at Thanksgiving because you are who you are and why can't you just be like your sister and your father who have respectable careers.

Click to expand...

Not that far off - although due to the genetic stuff - the "shit on me behind my back" part isn't accurate. Much like no one shits on my deaf cousin for underachieving with a lesser disability. And they do try to encourage me to get back to work (which *GASP* I'm in the process of now that I've gotten my leg issues under control mostly - went from having falls 2-3 times a day to about a month since my last now since my seizures are much rarer now due some diet improvements) which I am currently working towards, although being that I specialized in openings and I want to be settled down I'm considering a new field (including some extra education for it) before I reenter the work force while I get my problems 100% or damn close to 100% resolved.

But thank you for the criticism - criticism helps make us better people.

Vandyn_sl said:

Did you miss the part where the self-defense statutes states that you don't need to require any injuries to be in fear of your life?

Click to expand...

Did I say the judgment was wrong? Disputing a statement that people are presenting as a "fact" isn't the same as disputing the results of the case. Jesus Christ...

I was disputing people constantly saying "he was smashed into the ground".

hodj: Thanks for the video, but I'm not going to sit here for 35 min - what part is relevant? (I watched the first 5 min before losing it forgetting that it would stop on page flip and no "He was smashed" moment was in those I know)

Arbitrary_sl said:

Your reason is your father.

Click to expand...

A whole lot of people act the way they do and have exetremely rigid and incoherent views of the world because of there fathers. Both in affirming and rejecting what they see is as there fathers views.

I know firsthand my mothers views of this case are fixed by her views of her father.

Because my Grandpa was a open racist that means Zimmerman is guilty. That how it works as far as she is concerned. She has zero interest in any of the actual facts of the case.

BurnemWizfyre_sl said:

When you have the strength of anecdotal evidence you don't back down sir, you double down!

Click to expand...

Didn't realize "Perhaps I'm wrong to think that way but..." was a method of doubling down. Thought it was admitting possible fault, silly me.

[Also note: A number of the people defending this expert I've seen be critical of other experts in the past month or so - for example the Nobel committee was critiqued by a number - odd that some experts might have failing but others don't - but shrug - as I said, my pool of experts I know well is a singular (retired) one that was flawed - so all my impressions of them will be biased by such - human nature (And note: that same expert was diagnosed with Parkinson's within a few years of me noticing such flaws - another reason I am starting to doubt my thoughts on the breadth of knowledge an expert should be expected to have)]

Siddar: Probably depends on the family situation, but absolutely to some people - especially myself - parenting was a huge part of my life. Hell, even to this day my mother's descriptions of how my father gets when he's agitated by my mother leads my wife to label me as "You're being just like Joe!" every time we have a disagreement I start to get emotional about. [Joe is my father in case it's not clear - only time she calls him Joe too... its odd.]

On the convex, I see almost no influence from her parents on my wife - but she was almost entirely a latchkey kid - she even has told me that 80-90% of her meals growing up were prepared by her younger brother. But as a result she has a different faith, feelings on makeup, feelings on.... basically everything than her mother and father. Not to the point of open rebellion but almost everything was a distinctly different choice where one could be made - except sexuality I guess, if you consider that a choice.

Vaclav just shut up seriously come on, why would you come just at the end of the party and say :
"hey guys you know that thing you did at the beginning ? Well I wasn't there so could you do it all over again?"

And 0 fuck was given about your family, welcome to the internet.

hodj_sl said:

I'm not your gopher, watch the testimony yourself.

Click to expand...

I'll take that to assume you're not sure the quote was made. Since so far no one has said WHEN (even vaguely!) within his roughly two hours of testimony it feel in, nor can anyone quote a phrase to Ctl-F in the transcript of his testimony. (Nor can I find it with blind Ctl-F'ing phrases I'd expect to be used like "smash", "concrete", "sidewalk", "pavement" - that would hopefully lead to such a quote)

If you're sure the quote was made it should be easy to say "Hey, I think he made the statement in the first quarter of his deposition" or whatever. I don't need a timestamp, but I'm not listening to roughly two hours of data waiting for one point - because even if I do, since I'll no doubt be split attention I'd miss it even if it came up. Staying vigilant for the quote for 10-15 min is easily doable - two hours, not so much.

Can Zimmeran sue media outlets if they keep telling the public that he's still guilty?

Eorkern_sl said:

Vaclav just shut up seriously come on, why would you come just at the end of the party and say :
"hey guys you know that thing you did at the beginning ? Well I wasn't there so could you do it all over again?"

And 0 fuck was given about your family, welcome to the internet.

Click to expand...

You mean when I was involved with it before and was stating that the stupid meme should stop and people cut it the fuck out and I left for a while? (Although I think it was still in the 1.0 version of the thread that went off into the RR sunset)

I was involved with the original thread pretty much day one, but stopped bothering since the case was dragging and getting dull to me in the middle with the move of the original thread to RR being enough for me to say "Why bother?". Now that the case finalized I thought it might be interesting to read up (although I wasn't planning to post, just read impressions until I saw the "X HAPPENED!" nonsense for stuff that unless there's something I'm missing in Dr. M's testimony wasn't absolute but is still being stated absolutely - which is of course tangential to the results of the trial which were just and as I expected as stated in the 1.0 thread)