i think, before this gets too far, it's important for me to not that i am neither arguing that what happened is right, nor that zimmerman is innocent. all i'm arguing is that as far as what information the public has been given, it is not unreasonable that the situation has been transpired as such.
i apologize if i got angry a bit ago. i'm just sick of this flavor of the week human rights shit- last week it was kony, next week it will be something else. no one really gives a damn, they just pretend to.
daz28 wrote:
Any cop worth a grain of salt would be able to figure out what happened here by questioning alone. As for evidence, I'd say his statement of, "these assholes always get away", combined with him ignoring the direction to stay put, could be considered motive.
Besides, I know enough racist people to back the claim up anyways.
If you're still not convinced he was a racist, then who is he referring to when he says, "THESE ASSHOLES always get away". Sure doesn't sound like a blanket statement about criminals in general to me.
Now, if I'm in a bar, getting drunk, jamming some Skynerd, and start saying things like, "I hate ni@@ers", then minutes later I'm found out in the parking lot with a dead black guy at my feet, I'd expect to be charged, even though no one "saw me do it". Especially when I'm 6'2", and the black guy is smaller than a teenage girl, and I'm claiming "self-defense". I think anyone who's buying that is pretty much a fucking idiot. Grand juries and juries often convict on circumstantial evidence, as credible witnesses and video cameras usually are avoided by criminals.
none of this is worth a grain of salt. i think you're misunderstanding the point of the constitution. innocent until proven guilty (beyond a reasonable doubt). i don't care if he is a racist. the point is, that in america, that it doesn't matter. well, it can matter circumstantially, but just being a racist isn't enough to be convicted of murder.
sure, you might be able to construe any of that as motive. HOWEVER, some witnesses are arguing FOR him, and some against him. there is no evidence there against him because, unless you know something no one else does, there is no way to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not acting in self defense.
ironyisadeadscene wrote:
there is enough evidence to put zimmerman in jail. a kid is dead. that should be enough to at least warrant an arrest and subsequent investigation.
i don't need to and i'm not going to. if they cops and prosecutors aren't sure, that's enough for me. this is high profile enough that if they knew for sure, it would be said they did. i'm not saying someone didn't mess with the tapes a little, but i am saying that what is there is what is being judged. you don't just put someone in jail before there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he was not acting in self defense. they can't do that. with what evidence i've heard, and the lack of consistent witness accounts, it's even unlikely that a jury of his peers put him in jail.