New information of Zimmerman's claims in Trayvon shooting. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Kopimi;35306518]by the way OP stellar job on being fair with those pictures one photo is trayvon the black teen staring menacingly into a webcam with his shirt off, the other is poor mr. zimmerman smiling at the camera dressed up in a suit[/QUOTE] if we wanna be objective about it, men in suits have done far more killing than any other group

[QUOTE=Lazor;35306495][url=http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborhood-watch-shooting-trayvon-martin-probe-reveals-questionable/story?id=15907136#.T3DJvjFYvG8] correcting witnesses/asking leading questions/police saying zimmerman's record was "squeaky clean"[/url] can't find anything on what the police said on the 911 call right now but that's just a drop in the bucket compared to the monumental fuck up this has been.[/QUOTE] Um, his record [I]is[/I] squeaky clean.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;35306518]by the way OP stellar job on being fair with those pictures one photo is trayvon the black teen staring menacingly into a webcam with his shirt off, the other is poor mr. zimmerman smiling at the camera dressed up in a suit[/QUOTE] Just as all the other pictures have been of Zimmerman in a prison jump suit and Trayvon posing for football pictures.

[QUOTE=Lazor;35306541]if we wanna be objective about it, men in suits have done far more killing than any other group[/QUOTE] Last i checked, no.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;35306518]by the way OP stellar job on being fair with those pictures one photo is trayvon the black teen staring menacingly into a webcam with his shirt off, the other is poor mr. zimmerman smiling at the camera dressed up in a suit[/QUOTE] They're the two most recent photos of the two. Did you want me to include that (5+?) year old picture of Trayvon holding a baby and Zimmerman's mugshot instead? I find it hilarious that you'd complain about this when the media has been juxtaposing the two's pictures the entire time. Welcome to sensationalist headlines by the way,

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;35306489]I thinks its funny that people are shitstorming and picking sides all based on accounts that are from 3rd parties and possibly unreliable resources :downs: Just watch what happens in court.[/QUOTE] people are arguing witness against witness and saying there witness is better than the others witness. Really, it'll come down to FBI investigation and court as you said.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35306515]It isn't your place to side with ANYONE. You weren't there. You have NO IDEA what went on except what some reporters have told you.[/QUOTE] There is a lot of contradicting stories, though, and generally it's quite impossible for some 10+ people citing different evidence to all be correct.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35306560]Um, his record [I]is[/I] squeaky clean.[/QUOTE] Um, no it's not. [url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/09/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin_n_1335984.html[/url]

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35306560]Um, his record [I]is[/I] squeaky clean.[/QUOTE] um, no it isn't. you are objectively wrong. expunged=/= squeaky clean

He also has a history with the neighbourhood of being aggressive and obsessive.

[QUOTE=Cone;35306596]There is a lot of contradicting stories, though, and generally it's quite impossible for some 10+ people citing different evidence to all be correct.[/QUOTE] Luckily we have a process for that. It involves judges and attorneys, both of whom go through the evidence to figure out what is admissible and what isn't. The police are hardly the last line of scrutiny Zimmerman will go through. [editline]26th March 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Lazor;35306623]um, no it isn't. you are objectively wrong. expunged=/= squeaky clean[/QUOTE] Yes it does. Expunged means that in the eyes of the law, it never happened. It [I]cannot[/I] be used against you, either in court or in a job interview.

[QUOTE=Valdor;35306591]Last i checked, no.[/QUOTE] lmao you are also objectively wrong. let's talk about all the imperialists committing genocide and other general atrocities throughout the years have been wearing suits

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;35306561]Just as all the other pictures have been of Zimmerman in a prison jump suit and Trayvon posing for football pictures.[/QUOTE] There have been exactly three pictures of them both, because this is what's been given to them. Journalists work with what they're given at first and it spreads. You can't fault them for using those.

Also, a background check won't reveal an expunged crime. You have to literally find the records of it in the public record.

[QUOTE=Valdor;35306591]Last i checked, no.[/QUOTE] Then you should probably check again.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35306629] Yes it does. Expunged means that in the eyes of the law, it never happened. It [I]cannot[/I] be used against you, either in court or in a job interview.[/QUOTE] this isn't about court or employment. this is about the police misrepresenting his character to save face. the police are hardly even trying to investigate this. and your feigned neutrality is only allowing this bumblefuck of an investigation to continue unhindered [editline]26th March 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;35306651]Also, a background check won't reveal an expunged crime. You have to literally find the records of it in the public record.[/QUOTE] the police admitted they didn't even do a background check so lol

[QUOTE=Splendor;35305814]the knuckleheads here (thisispain) who jumped on the bandwagon.[/QUOTE] i haven't even said anything nor jumped on any bandwagon?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35306629] Yes it does. Expunged means that in the eyes of the law, it never happened. It [I]cannot[/I] be used against you, either in court or in a job interview.[/QUOTE] you're lying to yourself if you think jurors won't use his history against him, expunged or not

[QUOTE=Lazor;35306697]this isn't about court or employment. this is about the police misrepresenting his character to save face. the police are hardly even trying to investigate this. and your feigned neutrality is only allowing this bumblefuck of an investigation to continue unhindered [editline]26th March 2012[/editline] the police admitted they didn't even do a background check so lol[/QUOTE] In this case doing a background check would only paint a picture of the persons past, it does not explain the events of what has taken place. While that's all fine and dandy for the prosecution to use on court, it doesn't detail what may or may not have happened that night.

[QUOTE=Lazor;35306697]this isn't about court or employment. this is about the police misrepresenting his character to save face. the police are hardly even trying to investigate this. and your feigned neutrality is only allowing this bumblefuck of an investigation to continue unhindered [/QUOTE] This is about the legality of his record. His record no longer has any criminal record. He is allowed to sign a document that says he has [I]never[/I] been convicted of a felony in his life. Expungement seals the crime, it's gone forever. And it doesn't matter if the police did a background check or not because either way his record is squeaky clean.

[QUOTE=Sanius;35306738]you're lying to yourself if you think jurors won't use his history against him, expunged or not[/QUOTE] Technically It can't be used in court under the law since it was expunged, and if they were to attempt to use it in any way Zimmermans legal team could go for the grounds of a mistrial due to bias.

[QUOTE=Sanius;35306738]you're lying to yourself if you think jurors won't use his history against him, expunged or not[/QUOTE] It isn't admissible in court. If the prosecutors use it, it could be grounds for a mistrial.

[QUOTE=thisispain;35306723]i haven't even said anything nor jumped on any bandwagon?[/QUOTE]He's probably just lumping you in because he doesn't like your political and social standpoints.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35306768]It isn't admissible in court. If the prosecutors use it, it could be grounds for a mistrial.[/QUOTE] it will still cloud their judgement

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;35306750]In this case doing a background check would only paint a picture of the persons past, it does not explain the events of what has taken place. While that's all fine and dandy for the prosecution to use on court, it doesn't detail what may or may not have happened that night.[/QUOTE] yeah dude who needs background checks during a police investigation it's not like knowing a person's past tendencies could possibly help solve a violent crime!!

[QUOTE=Sanius;35306776]it will still cloud their judgement[/QUOTE] No it won't, because if the prosecutor even brings it up in the court, the whole thing is dropped and a new jury is found.

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;35306750]In this case doing a background check would only paint a picture of the persons past, it does not explain the events of what has taken place. While that's all fine and dandy for the prosecution to use on court, it doesn't detail what may or may not have happened that night.[/QUOTE] Then you don't understand how investigations work.

[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;35306775]He's probably just lumping you in because he doesn't like your political and social standpoints.[/QUOTE] no it's because he's a nutter.

[QUOTE=Lazor;35306641]lmao you are also objectively wrong. let's talk about all the imperialists committing genocide and other general atrocities throughout the years have been wearing suits[/QUOTE] omg women gave birth to these people Omg omg women cause all deaths! :downs:

[QUOTE=Kopimi;35306780]yeah dude who needs background checks during a police investigation it's not like knowing a person's past tendencies could possibly help solve a violent crime!![/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure it's not the police's job to dig up his record. It's the prosecutor's job. It isn't relevant to the investigation. The thing that police need to be worried about are the facts of the case, not any past issues. Prosecutors get the job of painting Zimmerman as a crazed overzealous racist gunman who killed this kid in cold blood.