The Walls be Closing

[Tiberius]

16 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Why do you feel compelled to misrepresent the facts here?  He didn’t just “confront” him, if he did and Zimmerman assassinated him he would likely have been convicted. 
 

TM was beating him up.  Zimmerman had a gun.  The jury believed he acted reasonably in defending himself. 
 

 

 

 

Zimmerman is a trouble maker. He had a gun and that made him brave to go and pursue a person doing nothing wrong. 

9 hours ago, B-Man said:

so may I assume that all the Trayvon Martin diversion means that the 

“wall haven’t closed” yet ?

 

😎

 

 

.

Keep telling yourself that 

[BillsFanNC]

A new semester and the useful idiot from Capen hall is back. Oh joy.

 

Wtf is "SUNY Amherst" anyway?

[Joe Ferguson forever]

1 hour ago, Kemp said:

Since it's 9/11, let's relive one of the moments where Trump showed that he's not only incapable of being a good President, but someone every Trump supporter would hate if they were not in his cult.

 

None of them will be able to offer even the slightest justification for what he did.

 

It's hard to believe he's not pure evil when listening to this.

 

Thousands of people were burning to death and what was he thinking and talking about?

 

Doc or anyone else here want to say that Trump is not a POS?

 

narcissism on steroids.  It's always about him yet they believe he cares about them because he supposedly listens.  plays them like dime store guitars....

[BillsFanNC]

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

55 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Zimmerman is a trouble maker. He had a gun and that made him brave to go and pursue a person doing nothing wrong. 

I understand that perspective and acknowledged as much earlier.   That does not change how TM chose to respond, and the rationale as to why Zimmerman was acquitted on the multiple charges the jury considered. 
 

A few years ago some friends suffered the very tragic loss of their adult child.  While they were off preparing for services and  a gathering place for friends and family, I saw a guy approach their house, look in the front window and try the door.  I saw him wander around the back, come back around the front and I approached him, asked him who he was and what he was doing there.   
 

He stammered a bit, said he was an old friend of the young man who died and just wanted to pay his respects. 
 

I continued to ask questions and wanted answers. 
 

If he became upset and assaulted me, in the driveway of their home, am I to blame, or is he?   Do I defend myself, up to and including seriously injuring him, or allow him to assault me in hopes the police come by? 
 

@Kemp what say you? 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 11, 2023 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[All_Pro_Bills]

19 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I understand that perspective and acknowledged as much earlier.   That does not change how TM chose to respond, and the rationale as to why Zimmerman was acquitted on the multiple charges the jury considered. 
 

A few years ago some friends suffered the very tragic loss of their adult child.  While they were off preparing for services and  a gathering place for friends and family, I saw a guy approach their house, look in the front window and try the door.  I saw him wander around the back, come back around the front and I approached him, asked him who he was and what he was doing there.   
 

He stammered a bit, said he was an old friend of the young man who died and just wanted to pay his respects. 
 

I continued to ask questions and wanted answers. 
 

If he became upset and assaulted me, in the driveway of their home, am I to blame, or is he?   Do I defend myself, up to and including seriously injuring him, or allow him to assault me in hopes the police come by? 
 

@Kemp what say you? 

 

 

 

 

As they see all things through the lens of subjectivity, I expect your question can't be answered until you tell them the race and gender identity of the other person.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

4 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

As they see all things through the lens of subjectivity, I expect your question can't be answered until you tell them the race and gender identity of the other person.

Thanks for reminding me—when I initially questioned the guy, he said he knew me from when he used to come over.  He then proceeded to call me by the wrong name, which seemed odd to me.   On the other hand, if he really thought my name was Marshall Tucker, well, that wouldn’t seem odd to him at all. 
 

@Tiberius

@Kemp

@SUNY_amherst

 

 

[Kemp]

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

The facts of the case and the decision of the jury suggest that’s exactly what you are doing.  

 

 

 

Guess OJ was innocent, too.

 

Jury said so.

[Kemp]

Obvious that at least so far trumpers can't figure out his POS behavior on 9/11.

 

Why no skine-erd? Farley?

 

B-Man?

[Tommy Callahan]

10 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

Guess OJ was innocent, too.

 

Jury said so.

yeah, thats kinda how law works.

 

crazy, huh

 

Doesn't matter what the mob thinks, its what the jury of the peers votes does

 

 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

11 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

Guess OJ was innocent, too.

 

Jury said so.

 

 

Interestingly, one of the problems many observers had with the outcome of the OJ trial was that jury members ignored or disregarded important and critical evidence and decided the outcome based on emotion. 
 

You’re doing that, here.  The tally is showing you’re hyper biased in the Zimmerman model, and you’re following the same path the Simpson jury followed. 
 

It’s ok, but Yikes! 

[Doc]

3 hours ago, Kemp said:

Since it's 9/11, let's relive one of the moments where Trump showed that he's not only incapable of being a good President, but someone every Trump supporter would hate if they were not in his cult.

 

None of them will be able to offer even the slightest justification for what he did.

 

It's hard to believe he's not pure evil when listening to this.

 

Thousands of people were burning to death and what was he thinking and talking about?

 

Doc or anyone else here want to say that Trump is not a POS?

 

It was a stupid and insensitive thing to say.  I'm not going to defend it or some other things he's done and said.  I've said all along that I wish he had acted more Presidential when he was in Office but he is who he is.  

[Tiberius]

7 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

 

 

Interestingly, one of the problems many observers had with the outcome of the OJ trial was that jury members ignored or disregarded important and critical evidence and decided the outcome based on emotion. 
 

You’re doing that, here.  The tally is showing you’re hyper biased in the Zimmerman model, and you’re following the same path the Simpson jury followed. 
 

It’s ok, but Yikes! 

I just think Zimmerman was guilty. He instigated the incident, had a weapon and should of just let the police of handled it. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

Just now, Tiberius said:

I just think Zimmerman was guilty. He instigated the incident, had a weapon and should have just let the police of handled it. 

Well, I think the facts show he was letting the police handle it until TM physically attacked him.  You’re justifying assault here, Tibs, and suggesting an individual has no right to defend himself when it occurs.

 

[Doc]

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

I just think Zimmerman was guilty. He instigated the incident, had a weapon and should of just let the police of handled it. 

 

Guilty of what?  Surveilling Martin?

[Tiberius]

12 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Well, I think the facts show he was letting the police handle it until TM physically attacked him.  You’re justifying assault here, Tibs, and suggesting an individual has no right to defend himself when it occurs.

 

He shouldn't have been following him. He only followed him because he had a gun. That's where his courage came from. Not say TM should have assaulted him, but the assault happened because Zimmerman was following him. 

 

How was Zimmerman so close that he could actually be attacked? 

15 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Guilty of what?  Surveilling Martin?

Manslaughter, he created a situation where he ended up killing someone who was not doing anything wrong 

[Doc]

58 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Manslaughter, he created a situation where he ended up killing someone who was not doing anything wrong 

 

 

It wasn’t a situation until Martin assaulted him. Just being followed isn’t an excuse and again Martin could have gone inside the safety of his father’s house. 

[Tiberius]

4 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

 

It wasn’t a situation until Martin assaulted him. Just being followed isn’t an excuse and again Martin could have gone inside the safety of his father’s house. 

Martin was standing his ground from the harassment of GZ 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

He shouldn't have been following him. He only followed him because he had a gun. That's where his courage came from. Not say TM should have assaulted him, but the assault happened because Zimmerman was following him. 

 

How was Zimmerman so close that he could actually be attacked? 

Manslaughter, he created a situation where he ended up killing someone who was not doing anything wrong 

TM was doing something wrong.  He was beating Zimmerman quite badly.  It was the most important part of the case.  
 

 

 

 

[Tommy Callahan]

So people are now allowed to attack and assault people for following them?  looking at them?