Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Stanford, Fl. Police Chief Should Get His Job Back

  1. #1
    Now that this time & media-wasting George Zimmerman trial is over with and we finally had a jury with common sense and no fear--it's time for their fired police chief to return. He rightfully concluded there was no reason to arrest Zim, but as usual, the town succumbed to the racist rantings of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, haters like Jamie Fox, and even our dumbass president chimed in for that dead punk Trayvon Martin. Now, however, the truth has emerged, and even though the police hid key evidence that proved this black teenager was a true thug and prison-inmate-in-the-making after the chief was canned, because they were afraid of being seen as not being D-I-V-E-R-S-E enough, Zimmerman STILL was acquitted in a trial that had no right in being held in the first place. Now of course, the blacks across the country are and will be causing sporadic violence and destruction, and president Obama can in part be thanked for that. These people will never see that Zimmerman simply defended himself after doing his job by keeping an eye on the punk while waiting for police to arrive. Good riddance, TM.

    We in this country will never get out of the racism funk as long as our black leaders continue to hate whites and turn every issue involving blacks into an issue of race.

  2. #2
    Yes, Rob, the jury has spoken. Now, I am curious if you think it was wrong for OJ Simpson to have been sued and found liable for civil damages in the deaths of Goldman and his ex-wife?

  3. #3
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Yes, Rob, the jury has spoken. Now, I am curious if you think it was wrong for OJ Simpson to have been sued and found liable for civil damages in the deaths of Goldman and his ex-wife?
    No, because it was obvious he killed them. Travon's family may try to do the same thing but I doubt very much they'll succeed. These idiots are making this all about race. Besides, Zim admits to shooting the punk. And since the trial should have never happened, a civil trial would just be another waste of time. It's an issue of self-defense. No money in that.

  4. #4
    Please clarify: in the case of OJ you say "it was obvious he killed him" yet a jury found him "not guilty."

    In the case of Zimmerman he was also found "not guilty" but is it obvious that he killed Martin?

    Is it the jury's verdict that makes the police chief's action in Florida right or wrong?

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Please clarify: in the case of OJ you say "it was obvious he killed him" yet a jury found him "not guilty."

    In the case of Zimmerman he was also found "not guilty" but is it obvious that he killed Martin?

    Is it the jury's verdict that makes the police chief's action in Florida right or wrong?
    Zim killed but didn't murder like most people believe OJ did. The police chief at first was lauded for not giving in to local pressure to arrest Zim, then when our country's racist leaders went there to cause trouble and our racist president opened his big mouth, the city's leaders had no choice but to arrest Zim and fire the police chief--who then was labeled a racist for not arresting Zim. The quick verdict and widespread belief that the trial should never have been held along with an incredibly weak case presented by the prosecution, absolutely means the police chief should be vindicated. As much as it hurts the blacks and weak/misled white sympathizers, the guy was right all along. Even the FBI investigated and never found a thing against Zim.

    God bless those 6 brave women on the jury, who showed no fear in the face of historical black violence whenever they've created racism out of thin air.
    Last edited by Rob.Singer; 07-15-2013 at 05:51 PM.

  6. #6
    Rob I'd like you to comment on the OJ civil liability case: he was found not guilty in the criminal court.

    If the police chief should get his job back (firing him was a civil action) because Zimmerman was found not guilty in a criminal trial, should OJ not be held liable for civil damages because in the criminal trial he was found not guilty?

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Rob I'd like you to comment on the OJ civil liability case: he was found not guilty in the criminal court.

    If the police chief should get his job back (firing him was a civil action) because Zimmerman was found not guilty in a criminal trial, should OJ not be held liable for civil damages because in the criminal trial he was found not guilty?
    OJ was found liable in the civil case because of 3 reasons: First, the burden of proof is easier and it need not be unanimous; 2nd, it was a different jury; & 3rd, because it was well known that OJ would never pay anything either way, since pensions and SS are exempt from creditors.

    It wasn't only that Zim wasn't guilty of any type of murder, the police chief was fired ONLY because of pressure from black leaders as well as Obama (who seems to have finally learned his lesson since the verdict was announced) & Holder (who is too dumb and totally racist to have learned a thing from it). Now that it's over, give the guy his job back along with back pay and a great big THANK YOU and raise! And there is no way to compare any of this to the OJ trials.

  8. #8
    Rob, you didn't answer my question.

    OJ was found not guilty in the criminal trial. By your reasoning that the police chief in Florida was not wrong because of the not guilty verdict, OJ should not be held liable in the civil trial.

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Rob, you didn't answer my question.

    OJ was found not guilty in the criminal trial. By your reasoning that the police chief in Florida was not wrong because of the not guilty verdict, OJ should not be held liable in the civil trial.
    A question such as that cannot be answered because it isn't compatible on both ends. I explained that above.

  10. #10
    Just as the OJ case "isn't compatible on both ends" nor is your case with the police chief. That is my point.

  11. #11
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Just as the OJ case "isn't compatible on both ends" nor is your case with the police chief. That is my point.
    Not true....at all. The police chief was right by not arresting an innocent man just as simple common sense said he was right, the trial proved he was right, but he was fired because the city claimed he was wrong and only after black power pressured it to do so. So by deduction, because he was right all along, he should be reinstated with back pay. Only people who still want to believe the trial was about race and who have sour grapes over the verdict, do not believe he should return. Without trying to compare dissimilar trials or events, how do you see this?
    Last edited by Rob.Singer; 07-18-2013 at 04:18 PM.

  12. #12
    In all honesty, I didnt follow the case of the police chief. My point is this: If OJ was found not guilty in a criminal trial, how could he be found liable for damages in the civil suit?

    Sure I understand that civil suits have a lower threshhold for proof, but if he is not guilt of the crime how can he be held liable for damages in the crime?

    Now, Rob, you are using the results of a criminal trial to show that the police chief should get his job back. And I am saying that if the outcome of a criminal trials should mean the police chief was "right" then how could the outcome of OJ's criminal trial not be used to wipe out the claims of civil liability?

  13. #13
    I'm in complete agreement about the OJ trials. I could never understand that. In my opinion, no criminal conviction equals no civil conviction. He was found not guilty of the killings, so how in the world could any civil jury find him LIABLE for them?? In the Zimmerman case, if he's found liable in civil court I might be able to understand that one. After all, he DID KILL Trayvon Martin.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •