Started By
Message

re: Zimmerman not guilty

Posted on 7/14/13 at 3:13 pm to
Posted by 3nOut
Central Texas, TX
Member since Jan 2013
29098 posts
Posted on 7/14/13 at 3:13 pm to
quote:

I'm genuinely interested to know what sort of political agenda you think I have here? What is to be gained by me saying that the FLA law is unusual and inverts the traditional notion of a defendant having to prove self-defense?



i didn't say it had to be a political agenda by any stretch. i just am implying that I believe their is an underlying reason why you refuse to accept self-defense as it was presented by the Z defense team, accepted at the time of the crime by the police, and ultimately agreed upon by the Jury.

obviously the Defense team argued self-defense successfully
Posted by CHSgc
Charleston, SC
Member since Oct 2012
1658 posts
Posted on 7/14/13 at 3:16 pm to
quote:

i didn't say it had to be a political agenda by any stretch. i just am implying that I believe their is an underlying reason why you refuse to accept self-defense as it was presented by the Z defense team, accepted at the time of the crime by the police, and ultimately agreed upon by the Jury.

obviously the Defense team argued self-defense successfully


True enough, but I like to think my objection to the statute is based more on how I was taught in school (common law), and of what I perceive to be a fair standard to apply. I've tried like hell not to drag any race/political stuff into this convo, and to not let that color my thinking.

Anyways, like I said above, that's enough discussion for one day. I enjoyed it, it's helped me clarify my own thoughts.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter