|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP.
If you make an uninformed post, or one that isn't relevant to the discussion, you will be moderated. If in doubt, don't post. |
On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told.
No matter how unwieldy the judicial process may seem, subverting its tenants in pursuit of some sort of external justification does nothing positive.
|
On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told.
Its a separate crime that she committed and its fair game in open court(as far as I know). Perjury is serious and Judges do not like to be lied to.
|
On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told.
rest assured. they arrested her immediately after the perjury. so, the decision to arrest and prosecute her was made before they knew the result of this trial.
and just lol at your opinion that prosecuting zimmerman allows his wife carte blanche to break the law. what a joke.
|
On July 09 2013 03:28 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:23 ComaDose wrote:On July 09 2013 02:22 ZasZ. wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 09 2013 01:50 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 01:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 01:08 ComaDose wrote:On July 09 2013 00:48 ZasZ. wrote:On July 08 2013 23:48 ComaDose wrote:
I just really dont like Zimmerman as a person. Is that still a valid possition? It's not like I hold any faith in the law, or enough law education to say he "murdered" someone, or it was "self defense". I don't really like Trayvon either though.
I just hate someone who would carry their gun around looking for suspicious people to follow. If it wasn't Trayvon that got murdered. How long do you think Zimmerman would have followed people around with his gun before someone got hurt? Not saying its illegal, your rights are safe, just saying its stupid. It's hard to tell from the way you worded your post, but you are aware that he was part of the neighborhood watch? With or without a gun, it was his responsibility to look for suspicious people. One can argue how smart it was for him to be carrying a firearm, but I suppose depending on the neighborhood and how seriously you took your job as neighborhood watch, it makes sense to have a way to protect yourself, as is evident in this case if what Zimmerman and Good say is true. What sort of question is that, by the way? No one can answer "how long" it would have taken for Zimmerman to hurt someone if he hadn't shot Trayvon Martin. That is a purely hypothetical question, and a perfectly valid answer is "forever." There is little, if anything, about Zimmerman that indicates if he hadn't gotten into this fight with Martin that it would have been some other kid the following week. People keep saying that Zimmerman was stupid for following Martin with a gun, OK I get that. People don't seem to carry the same criticism for Trayvon for assaulting him and forcing him to use it, however. I get that we all want to have sympathy for the dead kid, but people like to spout the emotionally charged hypothetical that if George Zimmerman wasn't carrying a weapon that night, Trayvon would still be alive today. He would still be alive if he hadn't assaulted Zimmerman in the first place, as well. I consider myself a pretty liberal person on a lot of issues, but self-defense is something I believe very strongly in. If some random person with unknown motives starts assaulting me, you better believe I'd blow him away without a second thought rather than risk my own death. People need to think about consequences before they assault people who may be carrying a gun, and Trayvon should have done the same. It's generous of you to summarize his actions as "look for suspicious people". I do believe that eveyone (not batman) that follows suspicious people around in the dark with a gun on their days off will cause trouble. Are they the ones causing trouble, or are the suspicious people who then assault them causing the trouble? It's sad that we've gotten to a point where you have the idea of a neighborhood fucking watch being impugned. I knew he had volunteered to keep an eye out on his community when i heard he went door to door asking neighboors to be on the lookout for "young black men who appear to be outsiders"
You say depending on how seriously you take it. I say its pretty obvious he takes it way too seriously. If there are a lot of young black men who are outsiders coming into your community and burglarizing homes and you decide to join the neighborhood watch, you might want to warn people to be on the lookout. Perfectly nice, peaceful communities have turned into war-zones before because no one cared enough to step up and try to stop it from happening. I still blame the person that created the situation for the situation.
And im still unsettled that people treat court like a place where right and wrong are decided.
EDIT: just to clarify "job as neighboorhood watch" = volunteer position with no responsibility or authority right?
maybe its different in Canada If Zimmerman's story is true, than Trayvon created the situation. And yes, the neighborhood watch is not an authoritative position. Pretty easy to get the idea of a neighboorhood watch being impugned when they are shooting members of said neighboorhood. sad indeed. No Zimmerman obviously still created the situation, like, by being the one to create the situation. Trayvon was just reacted equally stupid. (may he rip) And I disagree with your justification for racial profiling but it doesn't seem pertinent. It depends what you consider a "situation." To me, the situation was only created once someone performed an illegal act. No matter how stupid or ill-conceived it may have been, it was not illegal for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon that night, and it was not illegal for him to be carrying a gun. Trayvon Martin committed a felony by assaulting George Zimmerman, which is what I would call creating the situation that resulted in his death. Yes, neighborhood watch is a volunteer position with no authority but I would call someone a bad neighborhood watch if they felt they had no responsibility. If there was a history of break-ins, and he saw a suspicious person, it is his responsibility as neighborhood watch to make sure nothing fishy is going on. Most people would call the cops, but people are right when they say calling the cops to report a suspicious individual on foot usually accomplishes nothing since it takes them a while to arrive at the scene, if they do at all. He would have gotten a much faster police reaction if he had followed Trayvon and saw him break into someone's house, and he likely would have backed off and gotten back into his truck if he had seen him enter his own home. Obviously neither of those outcomes happened due to the altercation, but those are valid justifications for following someone you think is suspicious. It's certainly better than calling the cops, having nothing happen, and then find out that your friend had their house broken into that same night. On July 09 2013 02:16 sc2superfan101 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 09 2013 01:50 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 01:38 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 01:08 ComaDose wrote:On July 09 2013 00:48 ZasZ. wrote:On July 08 2013 23:48 ComaDose wrote:
I just really dont like Zimmerman as a person. Is that still a valid possition? It's not like I hold any faith in the law, or enough law education to say he "murdered" someone, or it was "self defense". I don't really like Trayvon either though.
I just hate someone who would carry their gun around looking for suspicious people to follow. If it wasn't Trayvon that got murdered. How long do you think Zimmerman would have followed people around with his gun before someone got hurt? Not saying its illegal, your rights are safe, just saying its stupid. It's hard to tell from the way you worded your post, but you are aware that he was part of the neighborhood watch? With or without a gun, it was his responsibility to look for suspicious people. One can argue how smart it was for him to be carrying a firearm, but I suppose depending on the neighborhood and how seriously you took your job as neighborhood watch, it makes sense to have a way to protect yourself, as is evident in this case if what Zimmerman and Good say is true. What sort of question is that, by the way? No one can answer "how long" it would have taken for Zimmerman to hurt someone if he hadn't shot Trayvon Martin. That is a purely hypothetical question, and a perfectly valid answer is "forever." There is little, if anything, about Zimmerman that indicates if he hadn't gotten into this fight with Martin that it would have been some other kid the following week. People keep saying that Zimmerman was stupid for following Martin with a gun, OK I get that. People don't seem to carry the same criticism for Trayvon for assaulting him and forcing him to use it, however. I get that we all want to have sympathy for the dead kid, but people like to spout the emotionally charged hypothetical that if George Zimmerman wasn't carrying a weapon that night, Trayvon would still be alive today. He would still be alive if he hadn't assaulted Zimmerman in the first place, as well. I consider myself a pretty liberal person on a lot of issues, but self-defense is something I believe very strongly in. If some random person with unknown motives starts assaulting me, you better believe I'd blow him away without a second thought rather than risk my own death. People need to think about consequences before they assault people who may be carrying a gun, and Trayvon should have done the same. It's generous of you to summarize his actions as "look for suspicious people". I do believe that eveyone (not batman) that follows suspicious people around in the dark with a gun on their days off will cause trouble. Are they the ones causing trouble, or are the suspicious people who then assault them causing the trouble? It's sad that we've gotten to a point where you have the idea of a neighborhood fucking watch being impugned. I knew he had volunteered to keep an eye out on his community when i heard he went door to door asking neighboors to be on the lookout for "young black men who appear to be outsiders"
You say depending on how seriously you take it. I say its pretty obvious he takes it way too seriously. If there are a lot of young black men who are outsiders coming into your community and burglarizing homes and you decide to join the neighborhood watch, you might want to warn people to be on the lookout. Perfectly nice, peaceful communities have turned into war-zones before because no one cared enough to step up and try to stop it from happening. I still blame the person that created the situation for the situation.
And im still unsettled that people treat court like a place where right and wrong are decided.
EDIT: just to clarify "job as neighboorhood watch" = volunteer position with no responsibility or authority right?
maybe its different in Canada If Zimmerman's story is true, than Trayvon created the situation. And yes, the neighborhood watch is not an authoritative position. Pretty easy to get the idea of a neighboorhood watch being impugned when they are shooting members of said neighboorhood. sad indeed. Well, first (and this is a relatively minor point), Trayvon Martin wasn't technically a member of the neighborhood. He was visiting his father's fiance's house. Second, that's like saying the cops are horrible because they shot someone and neglecting to mention that the person was beating on them. No Zimmerman obviously still created the situation, like, by being the one to create the situation. Trayvon was just reacted equally stupid. (may he rip) According to the defense, there was no "situation" until Trayvon created it by assaulting Zimmerman. And I disagree with your justification for racial profiling but it doesn't seem pertinent.
I would say it's pretty pertinent as the entirety of the prosecutions case is based on Zimmerman being a racist. What I said and what my point is: I just I dont like Zimmerman because I think it is stupid and ill-conceived to follow suspicious people around while armed (or unarmed). Community watch or not. I'm not saying what Zimmerman did was illegal im just saying it was wrong. What Tryvon did was wrong too. So you hate the idea of a neighborhood watch even if they aren't "shooting members of said neighborhood"? This is the first time I've ever had someone tell me that being part of the neighborhood watch is morally wrong...
No thats not what I said.
+ Show Spoiler +hint: its called a watch not a follow.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told.
I have to disagree. I think any and all lies caught should be punishable because it could set a precedent for future trials and I don't buy into your last part but it's your opinion so all good 
|
On July 09 2013 03:29 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told. No matter how unwieldy the judicial process may seem, subverting its tenants in pursuit of some sort of external justification does nothing positive.
At the risk of "going there":
If a Nazi court was asking a harbor-er of Jews, under oath, if he was harboring Jews... should he lie or tell the truth? Obviously we would all say that the legal aspect is irrelevant, that he should definitely lie. Lies can be justified, if the law has failed to remain just.
|
On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:
I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman.
The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told.
They would not go after Zimmerman's wife, because they couldn't get Zimmerman, but because she broke the law seperately and should be punished for that.
The fact that there is a trial is nothing but admirable, since somebody was killed under unclear circumstances.
|
A bit ironic A guy shoots a teenager after following him and it's his wife who is most likely to get jail time
|
On July 09 2013 03:30 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:29 farvacola wrote:On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told. No matter how unwieldy the judicial process may seem, subverting its tenants in pursuit of some sort of external justification does nothing positive. At the risk of "going there": If a Nazi court was asking a harbor-er of Jews, under oath, if he was harboring Jews... should he lie or tell the truth? Obviously we would all say that the legal aspect is irrelevant, that he should definitely lie. Lies can be justified, if the law has failed to remain just.
did you really just go there? REALLY? jesus christ man.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 09 2013 03:30 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:29 farvacola wrote:On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told. No matter how unwieldy the judicial process may seem, subverting its tenants in pursuit of some sort of external justification does nothing positive. At the risk of "going there": If a Nazi court was asking a harbor-er of Jews, under oath, if he was harboring Jews... should he lie or tell the truth? Obviously we would all say that the legal aspect is irrelevant, that he should definitely lie. Lies can be justified, if the law has failed to remain just.
wait, how is the law not being just in this case? Zimmerman killed Trayvon, has to go to court to prove its self defense. His wife lying was her mistake and she should be punished for it (or whatever the court decided).
|
On July 09 2013 03:29 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told. rest assured. they arrested her immediately after the perjury. so, the decision to arrest and prosecute her was made before they knew the result of this trial. and just lol at your opinion that prosecuting zimmerman allows his wife carte blanche to break the law. what a joke. I said it gave her carte blanche to lie about her finances to them, not to break any law anywhere.
The legal system, in this case, is acting unjustly. Without justification, the legal system is itself a joke, and has no moral authority.
|
Lawyers: What's the purpose of asking all the questions about every witness' background, experience, history owning a gym etc? Does it just relax the witness or is there some credibility reason to do this?
|
On July 09 2013 03:32 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:30 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:29 farvacola wrote:On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told. No matter how unwieldy the judicial process may seem, subverting its tenants in pursuit of some sort of external justification does nothing positive. At the risk of "going there": If a Nazi court was asking a harbor-er of Jews, under oath, if he was harboring Jews... should he lie or tell the truth? Obviously we would all say that the legal aspect is irrelevant, that he should definitely lie. Lies can be justified, if the law has failed to remain just. did you really just go there? REALLY? jesus christ man.
You're not understanding... the point isn't the first part, that's just an extreme example to prevent anyone from arguing the underlying premise: lies can sometimes be justified.
Now the actual argument is whether this lie was justified. I believe it was. No reasonable DA would ever have brought this case to trial.
|
On July 09 2013 03:30 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:29 farvacola wrote:On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told. No matter how unwieldy the judicial process may seem, subverting its tenants in pursuit of some sort of external justification does nothing positive. At the risk of "going there": If a Nazi court was asking a harbor-er of Jews, under oath, if he was harboring Jews... should he lie or tell the truth? Obviously we would all say that the legal aspect is irrelevant, that he should definitely lie. Lies can be justified, if the law has failed to remain just.
I think you're well aware of just how short that analogy comes in regards to being relative to the case at hand. Floridian courts may not be shining exemplars of the US justice system, but even they are a far cry from whatever a Nazi court would be.
|
On July 09 2013 03:32 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:29 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told. rest assured. they arrested her immediately after the perjury. so, the decision to arrest and prosecute her was made before they knew the result of this trial. and just lol at your opinion that prosecuting zimmerman allows his wife carte blanche to break the law. what a joke. I said it gave her carte blanche to lie about her finances to them, not to break any law anywhere. The legal system, in this case, is acting unjustly. Without justification, the legal system is itself a joke, and has no moral authority.
You do know that perjury is a crime right? That you can't do it for any reason.
|
On July 09 2013 03:33 Sabu113 wrote:
Lawyers: What's the purpose of asking all the questions about every witness' background, experience, history owning a gym etc? Does it just relax the witness or is there some credibility reason to do this?
foundation to support his testimony and opinions. he is going to probably say that zimmerman is a fat ass and wasnt good at MMA.
|
On July 09 2013 03:34 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:30 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:29 farvacola wrote:On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 02:59 sc2superfan101 wrote:
Punishing his wife would be pretty fucking petty imo. dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told. No matter how unwieldy the judicial process may seem, subverting its tenants in pursuit of some sort of external justification does nothing positive. At the risk of "going there": If a Nazi court was asking a harbor-er of Jews, under oath, if he was harboring Jews... should he lie or tell the truth? Obviously we would all say that the legal aspect is irrelevant, that he should definitely lie. Lies can be justified, if the law has failed to remain just. I think you're well aware of just how short that analogy comes in regards to being relative to the case at hand. Floridian courts may not be shining exemplars of the US justice system, but even they are a far cry from whatever a Nazi court would be.
Like I said, it was an obviously extreme example to prevent any argument against the idea that lying under oath is ALWAYS wrong/should be punished. Focusing on the example itself is ridiculous.
edit: Of course, it was ultimately a useless example, as Plainsix apparently believes perjury is never justifiable. >.<
|
On July 09 2013 03:33 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2013 03:32 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:30 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:29 farvacola wrote:On July 09 2013 03:26 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:23 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:18 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:09 dAPhREAk wrote:On July 09 2013 03:06 sc2superfan101 wrote:On July 09 2013 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:
[quote]
dont lie. i can't believe how stupid they were. People perjure themselves all the time and go unpunished, the only reason they would go after Zimmerman's wife is because of the politics/spite. they dont punish perjury very often because its incredibly difficult to prove. here, they have these dumbasses on video/tape lying. maybe it is spiteful to prosecute her, but so what? she committed a crime. there is no reason why she should go unpunished because allegedly people are always perjuring themselves--a proposition i find unlikely by the way. You find it unlikely that people lie under oath all the time? Further, I don't see why she should be charged. She didn't hurt anyone. She acted stupidly, and in the end she got her husband stuck back in jail. The whole trial is a farce anyway so I honestly don't care one bit that she lied to the fucking judge and prosecutors who are basically risking her husband's life so that they can avoid a political backlash. they were stupid though. But then again, a $1million bond? WTF? it was originally lower because they lied about their finances. also, there is considerable evidence showing zimmerman was about to flee the country. The prosecution wanted a $1 million dollar bond. They argued they were broke (didn't flatly state any numbers), judge set it lower. Jail records Zimmerman's calls and investigates their finances, Mrs. Zimmerman is arrested for perjury. Zimmerman was put back in jail. I wasn't aware Zimmerman was about to flee, though I couldn't blame him if he had. i am apparently not as big a cynic as you. i do not think people commonly lie under oath. they may fudge/bend the truth; they may misremember facts; etc. but i dont believe people commonly outright lie. nobody was hurt? the system is hurt when we allow people to blatantly lie in court. plus, it doesnt matter if anyone is hurt; its the law. "nobody was harmed" is not a defense to perjury. I'm not mounting a legal defense, nor have I ever said that I was. I am suggesting that it would be immoral to actually go after Zimmerman's wife just because they couldn't get Zimmerman. The fact that this trial is going on right now, and wasn't immediately thrown out with a word to the DA not to bring shit like this into the courtroom, is disturbing and that, in my opinion, justifies any lies Zimmerman's wife may or may not have told. No matter how unwieldy the judicial process may seem, subverting its tenants in pursuit of some sort of external justification does nothing positive. At the risk of "going there": If a Nazi court was asking a harbor-er of Jews, under oath, if he was harboring Jews... should he lie or tell the truth? Obviously we would all say that the legal aspect is irrelevant, that he should definitely lie. Lies can be justified, if the law has failed to remain just. did you really just go there? REALLY? jesus christ man. You're not understanding... the point isn't the first part, that's just an extreme example to prevent anyone from arguing the underlying premise: lies can sometimes be justified. Now the actual argument is whether this lie was justified. I believe it was. No reasonable DA would ever have brought this case to trial.
That is a decision for the Judge and jury, not the prosecution. If the feel it was justified, they can lower the sentence as allowed by law.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 09 2013 03:33 Sabu113 wrote:
Lawyers: What's the purpose of asking all the questions about every witness' background, experience, history owning a gym etc? Does it just relax the witness or is there some credibility reason to do this?
not a lawyer lol but from my perspective, it does feel like it's to relax them and get the jury to see that they are normal everyday people etc... Other thing is that the gym could be for the witness that saw Trayvon attack Zimmerman MMA style so I'm guessing aside from relax, also to lead the jury to certain conclusions.
|
On July 09 2013 03:33 Sabu113 wrote:
Lawyers: What's the purpose of asking all the questions about every witness' background, experience, history owning a gym etc? Does it just relax the witness or is there some credibility reason to do this?
I think it's both, relaxing, get them used to talk before court about things that they know by heart and also gives the jury / court a sense of what topic the witness can give valid opinions about and what not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
