Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hazardous Harry wrote:

biccat wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:And yet people will continue to make excuses for this lying, murdering, piece of garbage...

Killing a kid while getting his head beaten into the concrete by said kid who still had some drugs pot in his system at the time.

Last I checked people don't get amazingly aggressive after smoking a joint, unless you've had a different experience?

I'm not disagreeing with the rest of your post, Zimmerman does have a defence to this case, and it's up to the court to see whether it holds up, but implying that Martin was off his head on crack or some other 'hard' drug is disingenuous (I love that word).

People do not all have the same reaction to the same drugs.

Some people get incredibly paranoid when under the influence of marijuana, some people do get aggressive when under the influence of marijuana as well.

Hazardous Harry wrote:Last I checked people don't get amazingly aggressive after smoking a joint, unless you've had a different experience?

I've seen people who get aggressive, paranoid, happy, lethargic, hungry, panicky, and just about everything else after smoking a joint. The worst were the guys down the hall in college who smoked pot then cranked up their stereo to an obnoxious level and ran through the hall screaming and dancing.

Hazardous Harry wrote:I'm not disagreeing with the rest of your post, Zimmerman does have a defence to this case, and it's up to the court to see whether it holds up, but implying that Martin was off his head on crack or some other 'hard' drug is disingenuous (I love that word).

Rational people don't attack strangers in dark alleys.

Kanluwen wrote:
People do not all have the same reaction to the same drugs.

Some people get incredibly paranoid when under the influence of marijuana, some people do get aggressive when under the influence of marijuana as well.

People can get paranoid under the influence of marijuana, and I suppose having someone actually following you in the dark doesn't help either.

As for the other one, I call horsegak. There is no way that marijuana could make a person even half as aggressive as they would be after drinking, so you're going to need a good source for that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

biccat wrote:

Hazardous Harry wrote:Last I checked people don't get amazingly aggressive after smoking a joint, unless you've had a different experience?

I've seen people who get aggressive, paranoid, happy, lethargic, hungry, panicky, and just about everything else after smoking a joint. The worst were the guys down the hall in college who smoked pot then cranked up their stereo to an obnoxious level and ran through the hall screaming and dancing.

Exactly how aggressive have you seen people get because they smoked a joint. This aggressive?


You can get paranoid, panicky and extremely anxious on the stuff. But aggressive to the point where you bash them against the concrete? Let's not pretend that the marginal amount of marijuana in his system was a factor behind that at all.

Hazardous Harry wrote:I'm not disagreeing with the rest of your post, Zimmerman does have a defence to this case, and it's up to the court to see whether it holds up, but implying that Martin was off his head on crack or some other 'hard' drug is disingenuous (I love that word).

Rational people don't attack strangers in dark alleys.

But they do follow strangers down dark alleys? (Which isn't what happened here but I'll go with whatever you're doing).

biccat wrote:

AustonT wrote:I thought communication between a husband and wife were privileged. Especially were neither spouse has been convicted.

Interesting. I wonder how the defense will play that.

The prosecutor knew about the defense fund at the time of the bail hearing. If she was interested in it she could have raised it at the time. The prosecution is doing everything in its power to paint Zimmerman as a bad guy.

I don't suspect he will last long in prison.

They did raise it at the time. Which is mentioned in some of the articles and by previous posters.

If you are worried that 'lying to the judge about how much money he has' 'keeping a passport when he was instructed to surrender it' and 'speaking in code to his wife about how much money he has because he knows he is being monitored before lying to the judge about it' qualifies as painting Zimmerman as a bad guy then maybe somebody should take the brush away from Zimmerman...

Hazardous Harry wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
People do not all have the same reaction to the same drugs.

Some people get incredibly paranoid when under the influence of marijuana, some people do get aggressive when under the influence of marijuana as well.

People can get paranoid under the influence of marijuana, and I suppose having someone actually following you in the dark doesn't help either.

As for the other one, I call horsegak. There is no way that marijuana could make a person even half as aggressive as they would be after drinking, so you're going to need a good source for that.

http://adai.washington.edu/marijuana/factsheets/aggression.htm

Does smoking marijuana cause aggression?

In general, after using marijuana a person experiences a sedating effect, which makes the drug less likely to cause violence in users than other substances such as alcohol and stimulants (e.g., amphetamines and cocaine).

However, sometimes when marijuana is used it can cause fear, anxiety, panic or paranoia, which can result in an aggressive outburst. For most people, however, once the effects of the drug wear off, their behaviour gradually improves.

Studies show that violence can occur more often among people who use marijuana regularly, rather than those who use it occasionally or not at all. It is unclear why this is the case, but it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems and are therefore more likely to use marijuana. marijuana is also part of the illegal drug market, which may increase the chances of violence occurring in some social interactions.

Research also shows that marijuana users who commit violent acts usually have a history of violence before they start using the drug.

In addition, when people are withdrawing from marijuana they can be irritable, which can lead to abusive or aggressive behaviour.

Also of note:

This thread was about a report of how Zimmerman & Co lied to the judge about how much money he had and surrendered an expiring passport while keeping a valid passport.

Instead of addressing the matter at hand biccat successfully casts "blame others for pointing out how Zimmerman screwed up" and follows with "it's the kids fault for doing drugs!".

It's super effective.

Maybe we can get back on topic, or should we just let this thread get locked for being off-topic while making the same argument about drugs that can be found in all the other threads?

d-usa wrote:Also of note:

This thread was about a report of how Zimmerman & Co lied to the judge about how much money he had and surrendered an expiring passport while keeping a valid passport.

Instead of addressing the matter at hand biccat successfully casts "blame others for pointing out how Zimmerman screwed up" and follows with "it's the kids fault for doing drugs!".

It's super effective.

Maybe we can get back on topic, or should we just let this thread get locked for being off-topic while making the same argument about drugs that can be found in all the other threads?

We're not off topic. We're discussing the case, which is relevant to the matter.

Or we could always discuss the fact that Zimmerman has a very good reason to lie to get out on bail, considering there were people offering bounties for his death.

Kanluwen wrote:

d-usa wrote:Also of note:

This thread was about a report of how Zimmerman & Co lied to the judge about how much money he had and surrendered an expiring passport while keeping a valid passport.

Instead of addressing the matter at hand biccat successfully casts "blame others for pointing out how Zimmerman screwed up" and follows with "it's the kids fault for doing drugs!".

It's super effective.

Maybe we can get back on topic, or should we just let this thread get locked for being off-topic while making the same argument about drugs that can be found in all the other threads?

We're not off topic. We're discussing the case, which is relevant to the matter.

Or we could always discuss the fact that Zimmerman has a very good reason to lie to get out on bail, considering there were people offering bounties for his death.

Wouldn't administrative confinement be the safest place for him then?

Maybe, but at the same time if he has even the slightest chance of interacting with the other prisoners through work release programs, etc he'd still require some level of protective custody.

Studies show that violence can occur more often among people who use marijuana regularly, rather than those who use it occasionally or not at all. It is unclear why this is the case, but it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems and are therefore more likely to use marijuana. marijuana is also part of the illegal drug market, which may increase the chances of violence occurring in some social interactions.

Research also shows that marijuana users who commit violent acts usually have a history of violence before they start using the drug.

So they're not even sure if its actually the marijuana causing the aggression?

Nice way to shoot down your own argument, Kanluwen.

d-usa wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

d-usa wrote:Also of note:

This thread was about a report of how Zimmerman & Co lied to the judge about how much money he had and surrendered an expiring passport while keeping a valid passport.

Instead of addressing the matter at hand biccat successfully casts "blame others for pointing out how Zimmerman screwed up" and follows with "it's the kids fault for doing drugs!".

It's super effective.

Maybe we can get back on topic, or should we just let this thread get locked for being off-topic while making the same argument about drugs that can be found in all the other threads?

We're not off topic. We're discussing the case, which is relevant to the matter.

Or we could always discuss the fact that Zimmerman has a very good reason to lie to get out on bail, considering there were people offering bounties for his death.

Wouldn't administrative confinement be the safest place for him then?

The magic is gone D. Confinement of any sort is generally less preferable to freedom.

Kanluwen wrote:Maybe, but at the same time if he has even the slightest chance of interacting with the other prisoners through work release programs, etc he'd still require some level of protective custody.

-------Needs police protection and co-operation with the authorities
-------Lies to the authorities and police

So in addition to being a liar and untrustworthy he's also not the brightest tool in the shed?

d-usa wrote:This thread was about a report of how Zimmerman & Co lied to the judge about how much money he had and surrendered an expiring passport while keeping a valid passport.

Wait, didn't you just post that Zimmerman & Co. didn't lie to the judge? That the prosecution raised the defense fund at the time of the bail hearing and raised it to the judge?

d-usa wrote:Instead of addressing the matter at hand biccat successfully casts "blame others for pointing out how Zimmerman screwed up"

No, the Prosecution is responsible for presenting evidence relevant to bail at the bail hearing, not a month after the bail hearing. Either they did and the judge ignored it, or they didn't and only now are raising the issue. If the latter, given that the prosecution knew about the defense fund at the time, this is the prosecution trying to paint Zimmerman in an unflattering light.

d-usa wrote:and follows with "it's the kids fault for doing drugs!".

Yes...nobody in this thread called Zimmerman a "lying, murdering, piece of garbage." Any responses that aren't directly responsive to d-usa should be treated as off-topic spam.

AustonT wrote:The magic is gone D. Confinement of any sort is generally less preferable to freedom.

I'd imagine temporary confinement becomes infinitely more appealing when there's the possibility of a mob waiting for you on the outside.

Hazardous Harry wrote:

Studies show that violence can occur more often among people who use marijuana regularly, rather than those who use it occasionally or not at all. It is unclear why this is the case, but it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems and are therefore more likely to use marijuana. marijuana is also part of the illegal drug market, which may increase the chances of violence occurring in some social interactions.

Research also shows that marijuana users who commit violent acts usually have a history of violence before they start using the drug.

So they're not even sure if its actually the marijuana causing the aggression?

Nice way to shoot down your own argument, Kanluwen.

The absence of proof is not the proof of absence.

biccat wrote:

d-usa wrote:This thread was about a report of how Zimmerman & Co lied to the judge about how much money he had and surrendered an expiring passport while keeping a valid passport.

Wait, didn't you just post that Zimmerman & Co. didn't lie to the judge? That the prosecution raised the defense fund at the time of the bail hearing and raised it to the judge?

During the bail hearing the prosecution raised the issue.

Zimmerman & Co responded that they do not have any access to money and are poor.

At the time Judge stated that he needs to do more research about it. Which he did, and he decided that Zimmerman lied.

biccat wrote:

d-usa wrote:Instead of addressing the matter at hand biccat successfully casts "blame others for pointing out how Zimmerman screwed up"

No, the Prosecution is responsible for presenting evidence relevant to bail at the bail hearing, not a month after the bail hearing. Either they did and the judge ignored it, or they didn't and only now are raising the issue. If the latter, given that the prosecution knew about the defense fund at the time, this is the prosecution trying to paint Zimmerman in an unflattering light.

Don't feel restricted by facts. It is interesting that you left out one scenario: They did, the judge didn't ignore it but decided to do more research about who has access to the funds. Which is exactly what the judge said at the time.

biccat wrote:

d-usa wrote:and follows with "it's the kids fault for doing drugs!".

Yes...nobody in this thread called Zimmerman a "lying, murdering, piece of garbage." Any responses that aren't directly responsive to d-usa should be treated as off-topic spam.

Well, in a thread about "Did Zimmerman lie" calling him a lying piece of garbage is actually a lot more on-topic than "Zimmerman lied? Well, KID DID DRUGS!!!! DRUGS ARE BAD!!!!"

Hazardous Harry wrote:

Studies show that violence can occur more often among people who use marijuana regularly, rather than those who use it occasionally or not at all. It is unclear why this is the case, but it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems and are therefore more likely to use marijuana. marijuana is also part of the illegal drug market, which may increase the chances of violence occurring in some social interactions.

Research also shows that marijuana users who commit violent acts usually have a history of violence before they start using the drug.

So they're not even sure if its actually the marijuana causing the aggression?

Nice way to shoot down your own argument, Kanluwen.

Nice try, but you left out part of it.

However, sometimes when marijuana is used it can cause fear, anxiety, panic or paranoia, which can result in an aggressive outburst. For most people, however, once the effects of the drug wear off, their behaviour gradually improves.

If you're going to argue that paranoia and anxiety can be caused with marijuana, then you need to acknowledge the fact that paranoia can lead to aggressive outbursts.

Hazardous Harry wrote:-------Needs police protection and co-operation with the authorities
-------Lies to the authorities and police

So in addition to being a liar and untrustworthy he's also not the brightest tool in the shed?

You don't seem to understand the context here. I'll explain it very simply.

Zimmerman, if incarcerated while awaiting trial, would require near constant supervision. In a correctional/detention facility--which is where he would be placed given the nature of the crime committed, he would not likely be given that "near constant supervision" and we would almost certainly then be hearing about how he was killed while in custody.

Given the level of cooperation he has had with the authorities, they chose the option of letting him out on bond and to effectively "vanish" as long as he checked in regularly and agreed to present himself to the authorities when required.

If he y'know, wasn't presenting himself to the authorities or checking in when required--I'd be a bit more sympathetic to your argument.
If he fled to a non-extradition country as soon as he could, I'd be more sympathetic to your argument.

As it stands--outside of this bail issue, he has actually been fairly cooperative.

Kanluwen wrote:

Hazardous Harry wrote:

Studies show that violence can occur more often among people who use marijuana regularly, rather than those who use it occasionally or not at all. It is unclear why this is the case, but it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems and are therefore more likely to use marijuana. marijuana is also part of the illegal drug market, which may increase the chances of violence occurring in some social interactions.

Research also shows that marijuana users who commit violent acts usually have a history of violence before they start using the drug.

So they're not even sure if its actually the marijuana causing the aggression?

Nice way to shoot down your own argument, Kanluwen.

Nice try, but you left out part of it.

However, sometimes when marijuana is used it can cause fear, anxiety, panic or paranoia, which can result in an aggressive outburst. For most people, however, once the effects of the drug wear off, their behaviour gradually improves.

If you're going to argue that paranoia and anxiety can be caused with marijuana, then you need to acknowledge the fact that paranoia can lead to aggressive outbursts.

I only read the article and what you posted. I quoted the stuff in bold which is evidence that you didn't even read it, given that it states that in those cases where marijuana is suggested to have lead to aggression the user already had a predisposition to violence in the first place.

If you're going to argue that marijuana caused Martin to violently attack Zimmerman then you're going to have to acknowledge a couple of things:

1) The amount of marijuana in his system was negligible.
2) The possibility of marijuana causing someone to become violent is negligible, and is more likely a result of the person themselves being aggressive than the marijuana causing it.
3) Implying through vauge wording that Zimmerman was on some other, more dangerous, drug is dishonest.

Hazardous Harry wrote:-------Needs police protection and co-operation with the authorities
-------Lies to the authorities and police

So in addition to being a liar and untrustworthy he's also not the brightest tool in the shed?

You don't seem to understand the context here. I'll explain it very simply.

Zimmerman, if incarcerated while awaiting trial, would require near constant supervision. In a correctional/detention facility--which is where he would be placed given the nature of the crime committed, he would not likely be given that "near constant supervision" and we would almost certainly then be hearing about how he was killed while in custody.

Given the level of cooperation he has had with the authorities, they chose the option of letting him out on bond and to effectively "vanish" as long as he checked in regularly and agreed to present himself to the authorities when required.

If he y'know, wasn't presenting himself to the authorities or checking in when required--I'd be a bit more sympathetic to your argument.
If he fled to a non-extradition country as soon as he could, I'd be more sympathetic to your argument.

As it stands--outside of this bail issue, he has actually been fairly cooperative.

Then why lie?

d-usa wrote:At the time Judge stated that he needs to do more research about it. Which he did, and he decided that Zimmerman lied.

No, that's not how the system works. And I'm not in the mood to explain the concept of an adversarial judicial system.

d-usa wrote:Well, in a thread about "Did Zimmerman lie" calling him a lying piece of garbage is actually a lot more on-topic than "Zimmerman lied?

Don't feel restricted by facts. The actual quote was "lying, murdering, piece of garbage" (emphasis added).

d-usa wrote:Well, KID DID DRUGS!!!! DRUGS ARE BAD!!!!"

And I'm pretty sure I never said that.

biccat wrote:

d-usa wrote:At the time Judge stated that he needs to do more research about it. Which he did, and he decided that Zimmerman lied.

No, that's not how the system works. And I'm not in the mood to explain the concept of an adversarial judicial system.

Deflect! Deflect!

biccat wrote:

d-usa wrote:Well, in a thread about "Did Zimmerman lie" calling him a lying piece of garbage is actually a lot more on-topic than "Zimmerman lied?

Don't feel restricted by facts. The actual quote was "lying, murdering, piece of garbage" (emphasis added).

Well, Zimmerman admitted to killing him. So what is the big deal there?

biccat wrote:

d-usa wrote:Well, KID DID DRUGS!!!! DRUGS ARE BAD!!!!"

And I'm pretty sure I never said that.

You were the 1st poster to bring up the kids drug use in this thread.

d-usa wrote:Deflect! Deflect!

OK, I'll bite. Explain what research the judge did. Not prosecution, judge.

If you're going to throw out absurd and provocative statements, expect others to call you on it.

d-usa wrote:Well, Zimmerman admitted to killing him. So what is the big deal there?

Context, mostly. You ignored it.

d-usa wrote:You were the 1st poster to bring up the kids drug use in this thread.

Please point out where I said what you quoted me as saying.

biccat wrote:
Killing a kid while getting his head beaten into the concrete by said kid who was on drugs at the time.

Should've just sat there and let himself be killed, obviously.

Right here. Both an implication that the drugs he was on (from the use of the general term) was a 'hard' drug that would be likely to induce violence, and that the marginal amount of drugs (of the kind which were very unlikely to cause aggression) actively contributed to the attack.

CT GAMER wrote:

And yet people will continue to make excuses for this lying, murdering, piece of garbage...

This pretty much sums up what is wrong with the endless back and forth on all these threads, ridiculous black and white statements like the above.

How on earth do you know he is a murdering piece of garbage?

Ill give the lying one to you of course..

The point is, most people aren't making excuses for him! I certainly am not, but its very fething simple, and I'm stunned why those of you condemning the bloke so aggressively cant possibly grasp what people are saying. Namely, if nobody knows all the facts at this point, where the feth do you get off calling him a murdering piece of garbage?

If the court finds him guilty, Ill happily call him garbage, but until that time CT and D-usa et al are basically deciding that a (currently) innocent man is guilty of an appalling murder and they are judging him accordingly. Its infantile in the extreme that you cant possibly grasp what people are saying.

What ever happened to Innocent until proven guilty? Does that not count if you happen to feel really strongly about something?

Personally I hope he gets off just for the lulz. I don't care what happens to him either way, but I dislike people that are so mind melting shallow that they leap into actively condemning him without knowing all of the facts, so ill be filled with the joys of spring if his story stands up and he gets off with murder in court.

biccat wrote:

d-usa wrote:Deflect! Deflect!

OK, I'll bite. Explain what research the judge did. Not prosecution, judge.

If you're going to throw out absurd and provocative statements, expect others to call you on it.

Without even leaving this thread to get information, from post #1:

Seminole County Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. ordered Zimmerman back to jail, saying the 28-year-old was not truthful about how much money he had access to when he was freed on bond in April.

Lester's ruling on Friday followed allegations by prosecutors that Zimmerman had $135,000. At the time, his wife told the court under oath that the family was indigent.

At the time of the bond hearing:

1) Prosecutors raised the point during the bond hearing.
2) At the time of the bond hearing Zimmerman & Co stated that he didn't have money (the lie)
3) Judge didn't make a ruling on that money.

Since then:

More research, more evidence.

Friday:

Judge ruled.

biccat wrote:

d-usa wrote:Well, Zimmerman admitted to killing him. So what is the big deal there?

Context, mostly. You ignored it.

What context. This thread was about a man who admits to killing somebody lied about how much money he had. A guy called him a lying, murdering, piece of garbage. He was actually on-topic. The only thing objectionable would be calling him garbage, but you can always click the triangle of friendship if you don't like it.

Nothing about Zimmerman's Finances has anything do to with Martin being stoned. So I called it out as being off-topic.

biccat wrote:

d-usa wrote:You were the 1st poster to bring up the kids drug use in this thread.

Please point out where I said what you quoted me as saying.

Since you asked so nicely:

biccat wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:And yet people will continue to make excuses for this lying, murdering, piece of garbage...

Killing a kid while getting his head beaten into the concrete by said kid who was on drugs at the time.

Should've just sat there and let himself be killed, obviously.

Well, I guess since you made an excuse for Zimmerman you may have actually been on-topic with the previous post. I stand corrected.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote: If the court finds him guilty, Ill happily call him garbage, but until that time CT and D-usa et al are basically deciding that a (currently) innocent man is guilty of an appalling murder and they are judging him accordingly. Its infantile in the extreme that you cant possibly grasp what people are saying.

Zimmerman admits he killed him. Nobody denies that he killed him. The question is if it was justified.

mattyrm wrote: What ever happened to Innocent until proven guilty? Does that not count if you happen to feel really strongly about something?

He is innocent until proven guilty. This has nothing to do with that. He was granted bail based on saying "I have no money" and it turns out he lied about that. This is about one aspect of the trial. Being caught lying this early in the game is going to hurt him down the line though.

mattyrm wrote: Personally I hope he gets off just for the lulz. I don't care what happens to him either way, but I dislike people that are so mind melting shallow that they leap into actively condemning him without knowing all of the facts, so ill be filled with the joys of spring if his story stands up and he gets off with murder in court.

I hope he killed somebody and gets away with it, just for the lulz. Very nice.
It is one thing to hope somebody gets found innocent because they are innocent. But to root for somebody getting away with murder (to quote you) is pretty immature.

Question: Where are White Hispanics from?

He shouldn't be convicted. There will always be people who are against and people who are for Zimmerman. There is a lack of evidence. We will never know what actually happened.

Great White wrote:Question: Where are White Hispanics from?

Pretty much anywhere in South America. and you know...Spain.

Great White wrote:Question: Where are White Hispanics from?

He shouldn't be convicted. There will always be people who are against and people who are for Zimmerman. There is a lack of evidence. We will never know what actually happened.

Well, we don't know if there is a lack of evidence actually. Both prosecution and defense are trying to keep the evidence sealed until trial, which is most likely a good thing.

d-usa wrote:Without even leaving this thread to get information, from post #1:

Lester's ruling on Friday followed allegations by prosecutors that Zimmerman had $135,000. At the time, his wife told the court under oath that the family was indigent.

At the time of the bond hearing:

1) Prosecutors raised the point during the bond hearing.
2) At the time of the bond hearing Zimmerman & Co stated that he didn't have money (the lie)
3) Judge didn't make a ruling on that money.

Since then:

More research, more evidence.

Apparently you missed the "allegations by prosecutors that Zimmerman had $135,000." The prosecutor said he had undisclosed funds. The judge revoked bail based on that.

d-usa wrote:Friday:

Judge ruled.

The judge ruled on bail at the initial bail hearing. This was a move by the prosecutor to revoke bail.

d-usa wrote:What context.

Well, when you say "lying piece of garbage" you link "piece of garbage" with lying.

But when you include "murdering" in there, it evidences that the person is a piece of garbage not because he lies, but also because he's a murderer. Of course, as I'm sure you'll recognize, he's not considered a murderer until he's actually convicted of murder.

Explaining the concept of context on the internet...FFS.

d-usa wrote:This thread was about a man who admits to killing somebody lied about how much money he had.

The killing may have been justified self defense. And it's likely that it wasn't a lie as you've admitted.

d-usa wrote:A guy called him a lying, murdering, piece of garbage. He was actually on-topic.

But comments about justifiable self defense - which is what the entire case is about - aren't? Please.

d-usa wrote:you can always click the triangle of friendship if you don't like it.

I've given up on any theory of objective moderation in the OT forum.

d-usa wrote:Nothing about Zimmerman's Finances has anything do to with Martin being stoned. So I called it out as being off-topic.

And nothing about Zimmerman's Finances has anything to do with him being a "murderer." But you didn't call it out as being off-topic. Rebutting a comment made by someone isn't off-topic.

d-usa wrote:Well, I guess since you made an excuse for Zimmerman you may have actually been on-topic with the previous post. I stand corrected.

Just to get it straight, since you're insisting on being obtuse, are you admitting that I didn't actually say what you quoted me as saying? And you're just making up quotes to purposefully distort another poster's comments?

See above about the "yellow triangle of friendship."

biccat wrote: Just to get it straight, since you're insisting on being obtuse...

By the way, are you still insisting that you are not the first person in this thread to bring up Martins drug use?

AustonT wrote:The magic is gone D. Confinement of any sort is generally less preferable to freedom.

Until Institutionalisation sets in, that is.

Though I guess your statement could still work, it's just the persons viewpoint on what confinement and freedom are which changes.