Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > Texas > Houston > The Sandbox - Houston
test
The Sandbox - Houston The Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here. If it's NOT an adult-themed topic, then it belongs here

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 646
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 396
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 279
George Spelvin 265
sharkman29 255
Top Posters
DallasRain70793
biomed163231
Yssup Rider60954
gman4453294
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48654
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42582
CryptKicker37218
The_Waco_Kid37007
Mokoa36496
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Thread Closed
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-16-2013, 06:28 PM   #196
BatteriesNotIncluded
Valued Poster
 
BatteriesNotIncluded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 18, 2009
Location: Houston
Posts: 867
Default

Innocent until proven guilty. Proven not guilty implies - by induction - innocent. Logic, people. I know nothing of the details of this case but know that looting and rioting will not solve it. I DO respect the peaceful protesters that shut down 288 for 15 mins or so. They allowed an ambulance to proceed but not normal civie cars.
BatteriesNotIncluded is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 07:04 PM   #197
lostincypress
Valued Poster
 
lostincypress's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 31, 2012
Location: Cypress, Texas
Posts: 413
Default

http://abovethelaw.com/2013/07/the-r...icts-are-made/
lostincypress is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 07:15 PM   #198
BatteriesNotIncluded
Valued Poster
 
BatteriesNotIncluded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 18, 2009
Location: Houston
Posts: 867
Default

Mr Zimmerman is an Hispanic of Caucasian origin. I don't know about the possible Jewish aspect. This case highlights that "racism" is far from being a black and white affair. Just wait until the Asian Americans start shooting people!!
BatteriesNotIncluded is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 07:41 PM   #199
Wakeup
Valerie's Mod Husband
 
Wakeup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 13, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 28,030
Encounters: 4
Default

You people seem to conveniently forget that he was innocent all along...even throughout the trial...by finding him not guilty, they confirmed his innocence...

You'll continue to cling to any possible hope you have to think of him as guilty...HE'S NOT...get the fuck over it...
Wakeup is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 07:42 PM   #200
coolaid
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Feb 25, 2013
Location: Maine to Spain
Posts: 586
Encounters: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lostincypress View Post
Wow, Coolaid , what an appropriate handle. " Walking around on someone else/s private property.....". where did that come from? TM was staying with his father ......and common areas in residential areas are not ""private property" in the sense you are using term. He was a RESIDENT. He was living there! IDIOTS....sorry....I take that back. It's amazing the mischaracterizations people are willing to make to justify TM's death.
I think he was on private property when zimmerman spotted him. He was behind SOMEBODY ELSE'S HOUSE, NOT ON THE SIDEWALK OR THE STREET. I was wrong about it being the middle of the night, it was only like 7:00pm.

Regardless, all that matters is 2 things. 1)Was zimmerman the aggressor? There's NO SOLID EVIDENCE to show he was the aggressor. 2)Was zimmerman in fear of his life? There's NO SOLID EVIDENCE to show he was not in fear of his life.

If you know you have a loaded gun on you and you are getting YOUR ASS WHIPPED, all you will be thinking is "oh shit this dude's about to kill me with my own gun". In that case all you can do is shoot him before he shoots you.

I still don't understand the uproar around all of this though. It should be well understood, if you walk around looking like a hoodlum, on other people's private property expect to get your ass shot. This is just like joe horn. Joe horn saw some hoodlums up to no good ON SOMEONE ELSE'S PRIVATE PROPERTY and he shot the shit out of them. That's exactly what you're supposed to do.
coolaid is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 07:45 PM   #201
StinkyFingers
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 9, 2010
Location: Insane In The Membrane
Posts: 2,198
Encounters: 22
Default

Legal language is very precise. Not Guilty means Not Guilty, period. Meaning, the prosecution could Not Prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman's actions were in violation of the laws, as written.

Being found Not Guilty does not mean that Zimmerman is innocent, it means that he could not be proven Guilty. There is a difference.

Had Zimmerman been exonerated, meaning evidence was presented that proved that he had acted in self defense, then his innocence would be proven.

In this case, the verdict does not mean that Zimmerman did not commit a crime, it means that it could not be proven that he did commit a crime.

What is certain is that Zimmerman set the wheels in motion of the sequence of events that ended in the death of Travon Martin. I'd say that Zimmerman is probably guilty, but his guilt could not be proven.
StinkyFingers is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 07:56 PM   #202
Wakeup
Valerie's Mod Husband
 
Wakeup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 13, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 28,030
Encounters: 4
Default

And since the trial meant two things, jack and shit, he's still what he was before he went in...innocent...
Wakeup is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 08:03 PM   #203
TheJudge69
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagoboy View Post

Just like Casey Anthony.
Just like Casey Anthony. Remember, in that case, the State charged her with first-degree murder. However, the State's Medical Examiner testified under oath that he could not determine:

(1) When Calee Anthony died
(2) Where Calee Anthony died
(3) How Calee Anthony died
(4) Who killed Calee Anthony

In addition, there was not one piece of forensic evidence that connected Casey Anthony to her daughter's death..

The State had no chance of proving "beyond a reasonable doubt" that Casey Anthony committed 1st-degree murder given those unknowns. They could have convicted Casey Anthony of being a really crappy mother. There is no question about that. But proving murder was a long-shot. The State of Florida over-reached, again.
TheJudge69 is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 08:06 PM   #204
TheJudge69
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wakeuр View Post
And since the trial meant two things, jack and shit, he's still what he was before he went in...innocent...
No WU, you're wrong. He's still innocent and now publicly hated.
TheJudge69 is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 08:10 PM   #205
StinkyFingers
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 9, 2010
Location: Insane In The Membrane
Posts: 2,198
Encounters: 22
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wakeuр View Post
And since the trial meant two things, jack and shit, he's still what he was before he went in...innocent...
As was OJ Simpson found not guilty in criminal trial, but held liable for the deaths in a civil trial. Zimmerman's probably facing the same fate. And, then there's the court of public opinion.

Not Guilty and Innocent are not necessarily one and the same unless you are exonerated, meaning your innocence was proven. Ziimerman's innocence was not proven, but he was found not guilty.
StinkyFingers is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 08:12 PM   #206
TheJudge69
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StinkyFingers View Post
Legal language is very precise. Not Guilty means Not Guilty, period. Meaning, the prosecution could Not Prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman's actions were in violation of the laws, as written.

Being found Not Guilty does not mean that Zimmerman is innocent, it means that he could not be proven Guilty. There is a difference.

Had Zimmerman been exonerated, meaning evidence was presented that proved that he had acted in self defense, then his innocence would be proven.

In this case, the verdict does not mean that Zimmerman did not commit a crime, it means that it could not be proven that he did commit a crime.

What is certain is that Zimmerman set the wheels in motion of the sequence of events that ended in the death of Travon Martin. I'd say that Zimmerman is probably guilty, but his guilt could not be proven.
You're right, legal language is precise. The jurors only had three options in their instructions: (1) Guilty of 2nd Degree Murder, (2) Guilty of Manslaughter, (3) Not Guilty.

There were no options to explicitly say: (a) Innocent or (b) Guilty but Not Proven. In this trial,

Not Guilty includes a finding of Innocent. There is no distinction.
TheJudge69 is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 08:36 PM   #207
BatteriesNotIncluded
Valued Poster
 
BatteriesNotIncluded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 18, 2009
Location: Houston
Posts: 867
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StinkyFingers View Post
Legal language is very precise. Not Guilty means Not Guilty, period. Meaning, the prosecution could Not Prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman's actions were in violation of the laws, as written.

Which, in turn means innocent. Since the basis of American law is INNOCENT until proven guilty!
BatteriesNotIncluded is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 08:40 PM   #208
oilfieldscum
Valued Poster
 
oilfieldscum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 22, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 12,735
Encounters: 19
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StinkyFingers View Post
Legal language is very precise. Not Guilty means Not Guilty, period. Meaning, the prosecution could Not Prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman's actions were in violation of the laws, as written.

Being found Not Guilty does not mean that Zimmerman is innocent, it means that he could not be proven Guilty. There is a difference.

Had Zimmerman been exonerated, meaning evidence was presented that proved that he had acted in self defense, then his innocence would be proven.

In this case, the verdict does not mean that Zimmerman did not commit a crime, it means that it could not be proven that he did commit a crime.

What is certain is that Zimmerman set the wheels in motion of the sequence of events that ended in the death of Travon Martin. I'd say that Zimmerman is probably guilty, but his guilt could not be proven.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJudge69 View Post
You're right, legal language is precise. The jurors only had three options in their instructions: (1) Guilty of 2nd Degree Murder, (2) Guilty of Manslaughter, (3) Not Guilty.

There were no options to explicitly say: (a) Innocent or (b) Guilty but Not Proven. In this trial,

Not Guilty includes a finding of Innocent. There is no distinction.
In the good of USA the verdict is either "not guilty" or "guilty". The verdict is never "innocent".

Quote:
Originally Posted by StinkyFingers View Post
As was OJ Simpson found not guilty in criminal trial, but held liable for the deaths in a civil trial. Zimmerman's probably facing the same fate. And, then there's the court of public opinion.

Not Guilty and Innocent are not necessarily one and the same unless you are exonerated, meaning your innocence was proven. Ziimerman's innocence was not proven, but he was found not guilty.
You have to be found "guilty" of a crime first before you can be exonerated (innocent) of it.
oilfieldscum is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 08:46 PM   #209
Wakeup
Valerie's Mod Husband
 
Wakeup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 13, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 28,030
Encounters: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJudge69 View Post
No WU, you're wrong. He's still innocent and now publicly hated.
And that public hatred is a massive illustration of how all these moron sheep in our society are fucked in the head...like I said...they need to go back into their holes until the next time we tell them what to think about something...
Wakeup is offline  
Old 07-16-2013, 09:10 PM   #210
StinkyFingers
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 9, 2010
Location: Insane In The Membrane
Posts: 2,198
Encounters: 22
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJudge69 View Post
You're right, legal language is precise. The jurors only had three options in their instructions: (1) Guilty of 2nd Degree Murder, (2) Guilty of Manslaughter, (3) Not Guilty.

There were no options to explicitly say: (a) Innocent or (b) Guilty but Not Proven. In this trial,

Not Guilty includes a finding of Innocent. There is no distinction.
I agree, on a strictly legal basis, the verdict is correct. Now, as a practical matter, the boy is dead, and I suspect that Zimmerman's actions were negligent, at a minimum, and I suspect with a certain malice, but that cannot be proven, just IMHO. The problem with this case is that the actions of Martin and Zimmerman at the commencement of the physical altercation are indeterminate, save Zimmerman's version of events.
StinkyFingers is offline  
Thread Closed



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved