Zimmerman ~ NOT Guilty

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Expert684

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Jul 24, 2011
    999
    18
    Lafayette
    Just my opinion is, Zimmerman only fired once. I my mind he did to stop the attack. If he had intention to kill Travon he would have fired more rounds than one? I think he did so as a last resort realizing he no other choice.
     

    Pas Tout La

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Dec 12, 2012
    1,302
    38
    Droite La
    Just my opinion is, Zimmerman only fired once. I my mind he did to stop the attack. If he had intention to kill Travon he would have fired more rounds than one? I think he did so as a last resort realizing he no other choice.

    Makes it glad that it was not me in that situation, because I would have fired until the threat was off of me and clearly incapacitated.
     

    Hitman

    ® ™
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Sep 4, 2008
    16,034
    36
    Lake Charles
    Sugarbug, if you stay away from the Off Topic thread, it's much more enjoyable.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk 2
     
    Last edited:

    Sugarbug

    Sugarbug don't care.
    Rating - 100%
    54   0   1
    Feb 5, 2012
    5,666
    36
    Slidell
    He immediately quit fighting back and said you got me man, according to GZ. The threat was eliminated with that one bullet.

    Yeah. They'd have had an issue with any number of shots fired.

    I think only firing once was the least problematic number he could have fired. Had he fired more, they would say he was trying to kill him, not stop him.
     

    mpl006

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 4, 2011
    386
    16
    Ruston
    Of course now the prosecutor is trying to imply that when the gun was pull TM started to get off of GZ and that's when the shot was fired. They keep introducing reasonable doubt with saying "he could have been laying on top of him, BUT he could have been pulling away when the shot was fired." That to me is the definition of doubt.
     

    JNieman

    Dush
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Jul 11, 2011
    4,743
    48
    Lafayette
    In all my time watching Matlock and Law&Order, that kind of speculation gets a quick objection and the judge makes a small lecture on speculation like that being inappropriate.
     

    Sugarbug

    Sugarbug don't care.
    Rating - 100%
    54   0   1
    Feb 5, 2012
    5,666
    36
    Slidell
    The hell... Maybe I missed something and it was only a break, but she was talking about resuming tomorrow at 8 when she dismissed them. :dunno:

    The questioning attorney's suit looks like ****. Like he's wearing his dad's jacket, lol
     
    Last edited:

    mpl006

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 4, 2011
    386
    16
    Ruston
    This is a hearing to see if the animation will be allowed in evidence. The jury is out until in the morning. They started this hearing this morning and it went long so they are finishing now.
     

    Sugarbug

    Sugarbug don't care.
    Rating - 100%
    54   0   1
    Feb 5, 2012
    5,666
    36
    Slidell
    Ugh... this bastard is irritating.

    "Oh... was that in court? No? Oh... Was that in court? You don't know?" Jackass.

    What does this animation show? Judging by the attorney's attitude, it's not good for their prosecution.
     

    Staff online

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    196,187
    Messages
    1,552,502
    Members
    29,393
    Latest member
    jamesernestomurray
    Top Bottom