• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

Status
Not open for further replies.
And one has to wonder, if the prosecution has time out from a murder trial to go after a spouse (and someone said something about a sister in law?) over perjury about chump change, does that mean that their case is so airtight that they are bored, or so weak they are desperate?

The murder trial has started? If not, how is anyone taking time out from it?

I wouldn't read anything into the murder case based on the perjury charges. It's just the State Attorney's office doing its job. You shouldn't be able to lie to a court in such an egregious manner without being charged with perjury.

If they had decided not to file perjury charges, wouldn't you be speculating on what that means about the murder case? (In fact, I would find that much more significant of a problem.)
 
I believe that there is no justice without examining mitigating circumstances, and it is a good idea to apply those considerations in your personal life, as well. That is why I agreed early on that attacking the Martin's was an error in judgement that I needed to correct.

Oh, and who committed felony perjury?
Shellie.

(do I really need to explain this to you??)
 
Shellie Zimmerman is charged with third-degree felony - punishable by up to five years in prison.
 
Shellie Zimmerman is charged with third-degree felony - punishable by up to five years in prison.

It is only one more step for you to acknowledge she is charged with felony perjury, and she has not committed felony perjury any more than her husband has committed 2nd degree murder.
 
I believe that there is no justice without examining mitigating circumstances, and it is a good idea to apply those considerations in your personal life, as well. That is why I agreed early on that attacking the Martin's was an error in judgement that I needed to correct.

Oh, and who committed felony perjury?
And this part here: "mitigating circumstances" -- you don't get to say ...your Honor, I lied because of mitigating circumstances. If we had a legal system like that, it'd work real dandy, wouldn't it? :rolleyes:
When you get come before the Court you are sworn to tell the TRUTH.
The WHOLE TRUTH.

And nothing but the TRUTH.

So help her God.
 
The murder trial has started? If not, how is anyone taking time out from it?

I wouldn't read anything into the murder case based on the perjury charges. It's just the State Attorney's office doing its job. You shouldn't be able to lie to a court in such an egregious manner without being charged with perjury.

If they had decided not to file perjury charges, wouldn't you be speculating on what that means about the murder case? (In fact, I would find that much more significant of a problem.)
If in fact you had been reading the thread, instead of pulling these drive bys, you'd see that I'm not the one claiming that the perjury charges will affect George's murder conviction.

I wonder who was, though??


joeTheJuggler said:
...I wouldn't read anything into the murder case based on the perjury charges....

---


JoeTheJuggler said:
Rubbish. A jury that knows he is a person who has flagrantly misled the court will be that much less likely to believe any other testimony he gives.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8345608#post8345608

Who to believe, who to believe??
 
Last edited:
It is only one more step for you to acknowledge she is charged with felony perjury, and she has not committed felony perjury any more than her husband has committed 2nd degree murder.
Oh. You still think she's innocent. Even with the evidence we all heard and saw for ourselves.

OK.
 
It is only one more step for you to acknowledge she is charged with felony perjury, and she has not committed felony perjury any more than her husband has committed 2nd degree murder.

So she didn't know the money was in her bank account before the bond hearing?
 
Then how do you justify your words of "she has not committed felony perjury"?

That has to be determined in court. What are those saying in advance she is "guilty of felony perjury" going to say if this is ultimately plead down to a misdemeanor, or if she is found not guilty of anything? We were right and the court was wrong?

I think to state she is "guilty of felony perjury" as a fact implies a court decision that has yet to be decided.
 
See? what did I say earlier?

Here we actually have a video of a Zimmerman committing a crime - and still - a defense to the end!
Hi ho Silver!
 
That has to be determined in court. What are those saying in advance she is "guilty of felony perjury" going to say if this is ultimately plead down to a misdemeanor, or if she is found not guilty of anything? We were right and the court was wrong?

I think to state she is "guilty of felony perjury" as a fact implies a court decision that has yet to be decided.

"Committed felony perjury" is a subjective statement that can be made in an incredibly objective manner. It doesn't require a court to decide. We know what the facts are. We know what the law is. She committed the crime.

The courts and the lawyers can decide to plea it down, sure. But that doesn't change the fact that a rational person will recognize that she committed the crime.
 
I'm quite sure that there is no evidence at all that could come to light that would convince some of you that Z is guilty.

Z himself could confess and some of you would still spin it.

I don't believe that at all. Everyone I see here who supports Zimmerman appears to me to be looking for the truth. I see the people who think he hunted TM down turning everything into a justification for that belief.
 
"Committed felony perjury" is a subjective statement that can be made in an incredibly objective manner. It doesn't require a court to decide. We know what the facts are. We know what the law is. She committed the crime.

The courts and the lawyers can decide to plea it down, sure. But that doesn't change the fact that a rational person will recognize that she committed the crime.

The phrase I was objecting to is clearly stated above, which is she is "guilty of felony perjury" stated as a fact.
 
The phrase I was objecting to is clearly stated above, which is she is "guilty of felony perjury" stated as a fact.

Luka Magnotta killed a man on video and mailed the body parts to various people, then fled to Europe. He has not been convicted of this crime.

Is he still a murderer, in your opinion?
 
You don't really believe that this is going to sway the minds of those that are committed to GZ's innocence.

These posts by Rare Truth have nothing whatsoever to do with GZ's innocence. I would venture to guess a very large percentage of the population would do anything in their power to stay out of jail. What the Zimmerman's did was not very bright, but the entire population is not as brilliant as all you people either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom