Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
George Zimmerman Questioned by Police for Threatening Wife With Gun (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Dinsy Ejotuz
- Start date
The Commish
Footballguy
Hope you aren't paid to think
I asked my buddies at our local shooting range about your theory that I was afraid of guns. They looked at me like I had three heads.
Apes with Guns
Footballguy
lots of anger and misunderstanding in this thread. you should be careful or someone will get shot.
Foosball God
Foos
5 digit know nothing
Footballguy
How many heads did they think you have when you told them you assumed Zimmerman was guilty based on him following Martin (and ignoring all of the relevant details of the case)?Hope you aren't paid to think
The Commish
Footballguy
Oddly enough....they agreed it was bush league that he started something he couldn't finish without a gun....they believe it gave real gun owners a bad nameHow many heads did they think you have when you told them you assumed Zimmerman was guilty based on him following Martin (and ignoring all of the relevant details of the case)?Hope you aren't paid to think
Same thing with this idiot here in SC that's getting ready to get thrown to the wolves. ETA: And I do appreciate the nice misrepresentation of my position. Awesome job....didn't want it to go unrecognized. jon taught you well.
Last edited by a moderator:
T Bell
Footballguy
Cardboard cutouts that you put in the door of liquor stores to warn would-be robbers/hoodie wearers/Skittles-eaters.I thought the same thing initially, but then realized, I doubt he has the capacity to do any of these things. Then I realized who his audiences would be and figured he'd be alright. All he has to do is figure out how to get a picture of himself on a tackling dummy, put it on stage and play recordings of the 911 calls. That will be enough to get the dough rolling in from his supporters.What I see him doing is a book deal and interviews, NRA speaking tour, etc.i can see him blowing his own brains out in the near future
5 digit know nothing
Footballguy
That he started?Oddly enough....they agreed it was bush league that he started something he couldn't finish without a gun....they believe it gave real gun owners a bad nameHow many heads did they think you have when you told them you assumed Zimmerman was guilty based on him following Martin (and ignoring all of the relevant details of the case)?Hope you aren't paid to think
Yeah CLEARLY no anti-gun bias here. Nothing in the evidence pointed to Zimmerman starting anything, again you show your true colors of ignoring the facts and inserting hyperbole.
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
Gun owners at a shooting range have an anti-gun bias. We've really made progress here.
5 digit know nothing
Footballguy
I understand reading comprehension is not your strong suit.
...postulates The Commish offered this opinion to his imaginary gun friends (who The Commish hangs out regularly at the shooting range
talking about gun politics) were either ill informed about the details of the case or were idiots.
Last edited by a moderator:
fatness
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
Well, if you ignore the fact that he followed the kid in his car....then got out of his car and followed him until dispatch told him they didn't need him to do that. I might be going out on a limb here, but I don't think anything happens if Zimmerman doesn't put himself into this kid's world and just goes to Target. Now, if you would please entertain us by telling us how any of that has to do with guns. We'd all love to see the mental gymnastics at work.That he started?Oddly enough....they agreed it was bush league that he started something he couldn't finish without a gun....they believe it gave real gun owners a bad nameHow many heads did they think you have when you told them you assumed Zimmerman was guilty based on him following Martin (and ignoring all of the relevant details of the case)?Hope you aren't paid to think
Yeah CLEARLY no anti-gun bias here. Nothing in the evidence pointed to Zimmerman starting anything, again you show your true colors of ignoring the facts and inserting hyperbole.
The Commish
Footballguy
I understand reading comprehension is not your strong suit.
...postulates The Commish offered this opinion to his imaginary gun friends (who The Commish hangs out regularly at the shooting range
Don't ever change dude....don't ever change. Purely awesome (specifically the part insulting others reading comprehension)!! Who's alias are you?
Last edited by a moderator:
BustedKnuckles
Footballguy
Why are you afraid of people? I dont answer MY door with a gun behind my back...that girl scout selling cookies didnt intimidate me one bit
BustedKnuckles
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Weren't you one of them? At least at first?jon_mx said:
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Do you need all five digits to fire a gun? Could you manage with a thumb and two other fingers? Or I guess toes
5 digit know nothing
Footballguy
It has to do with guns because you looked at the case with blinders on and formed your opinion that Zimmerman was guilty before reviewing all of the facts, or maybe you did review all of the facts and ignored any of the details that had to do with his innocence which just goes to prove my point. If you look at the timeline you would know he was on the phone the entire time when you claim he was "following" Martin. You'd also know Martin had ample time to get home by a few minutes which might as well be hours given the short distance he had to travel. You'd know that Zimmerman was nowhere near Martin while Zimmerman was with non-emergency on the phone since Martin's own girlfriend spoke with him on the phone during that time and never said Martin was whispering so the bad guy would not find him hiding, in fact she never said Martin was hiding she said he was behind his father's girlfriend's house which if anything supports the narrative that Martin came back to confront Zimmerman, even the evidence trail of items left on the ground support the confrontation took place a lot closer to Zimmerman's truck then to Martin's destination. You'd know there was a freaking eyewitness that saw Martin on top of Zimmerman punching him MMA style. If you are trying to tell me this all points to Zimmerman "starting something that he couldn't finish without a gun" then you are hopeless as are your "gun friends". I assume as previously stated this probably has more to do with your obvious anti-gun bias that you refuse to own up to and I am saying this based on the quote you gave us bolded in my reply. The only other explanation is you think Zimmerman is a racist. The two loudest voices supporting Martin in this trial were either anti-gun, claimed they thought Zimmerman was racist and profiled Martin or a combination of both. Both arguments failed miserably to prove their points other than to show their obvious bias. Most people were upfront about their bias but there will always be knuckleheads like you that can't own up to their convictions.The Commish said:Well, if you ignore the fact that he followed the kid in his car....then got out of his car and followed him until dispatch told him they didn't need him to do that. I might be going out on a limb here, but I don't think anything happens if Zimmerman doesn't put himself into this kid's world and just goes to Target. Now, if you would please entertain us by telling us how any of that has to do with guns. We'd all love to see the mental gymnastics at work.5 digit know nothing said:That he started?The Commish said:Oddly enough....they agreed it was bush league that he started something he couldn't finish without a gun....they believe it gave real gun owners a bad name5 digit know nothing said:How many heads did they think you have when you told them you assumed Zimmerman was guilty based on him following Martin (and ignoring all of the relevant details of the case)?The Commish said:Hope you aren't paid to think
Yeah CLEARLY no anti-gun bias here. Nothing in the evidence pointed to Zimmerman starting anything, again you show your true colors of ignoring the facts and inserting hyperbole.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish
Footballguy
Yeah....you're wrong and in this case the mental gymnastics suck....that's a let down.It has to do with guns because you looked at the case with blinders on and formed your opinion that Zimmerman was guilty before reviewing all of the facts, or maybe you did review all of the facts and ignored any of the details that had to do with his innocence which just goes to prove my point. If you look at the timeline you would know he was on the phone the entire time when you claim he was "following" Martin. You'd also know Martin had ample time to get home by a few minutes which might as well be hours given the short distance he had to travel. You'd know that Zimmerman was nowhere near Martin while Zimmerman was with non-emergency on the phone since Martin's own girlfriend spoke with him on the phone during that time and never said Martin was whispering so the bad guy would not find him hiding, in fact she never said Martin was hiding she said he was behind his father's girlfriend's house which if anything supports the narrative that Martin came back to confront Zimmerman, even the evidence trail of items left on the ground support the confrontation took place a lot closer to Zimmerman's truck then to Martin's destination. You'd know there was a freaking eyewitness that saw Martin on top of Zimmerman punching him MMA style. If you are trying to tell me this all points to Zimmerman "starting something that he couldn't finish without a gun" then you are hopeless as are your "gun friends". I assume as previously stated this probably has more to do with your obvious anti-gun bias that you refuse to own up to. The only other explanation is you think Zimmerman is a racist. The two loudest voices supporting Martin in this trial were either anti-gun, claimed they thought Zimmerman was racist and profiled Martin or a combination of both. Both arguments failed miserably to prove their points other than to show their obvious bias. Most people were upfront about their bias but there will always be knuckleheads like you that can't own up to their convictions.The Commish said:Well, if you ignore the fact that he followed the kid in his car....then got out of his car and followed him until dispatch told him they didn't need him to do that. I might be going out on a limb here, but I don't think anything happens if Zimmerman doesn't put himself into this kid's world and just goes to Target. Now, if you would please entertain us by telling us how any of that has to do with guns. We'd all love to see the mental gymnastics at work.5 digit know nothing said:That he started?The Commish said:Oddly enough....they agreed it was bush league that he started something he couldn't finish without a gun....they believe it gave real gun owners a bad name5 digit know nothing said:How many heads did they think you have when you told them you assumed Zimmerman was guilty based on him following Martin (and ignoring all of the relevant details of the case)?The Commish said:Hope you aren't paid to think
Yeah CLEARLY no anti-gun bias here. Nothing in the evidence pointed to Zimmerman starting anything, again you show your true colors of ignoring the facts and inserting hyperbole.
I already explained why my initial thoughts were what they were and then explained that once the information was presented that I knew he wasn't going to get convicted of the charges brought against him. By Wed of the first week of the trial I knew he'd walk and admitted such. None of that has anything to do with guns being involved of course. If it were a knife he were carrying or he didn't have anything wouldn't change the fact that he interjected himself into Martin's life.
What I didn't do was presume innocence or guilt prior to the trial and hearing everything in a court of law. You can take issue with that if you want, but that's how I work. I like to get my information from anywhere other than the "news". The last comment is comedy gold as it's pretty much the exact opposite of what happened in the thread. I said over and over that I didn't have a dog in the fight, but that I had a bias simply because he killed a person after sticking his nose into someone else's life. Of course NONE of this has to do with guns as you suggest, but you keep beating that bush...you might get something out of it eventually. You guys seem to think that my belief he should be punished for killing a person clouds my judgment, yet I admitted that the only thing the jury could come back with on the second degree murder charges was "not guilty". This, of course, is just fuel on the fire of how absurd your last statement is since my convictions don't allow me to render a guilty verdict. Again...who's alias are you??
5 digit know nothing
Footballguy
You wouldn't know objective if she knocked on your door, shook your hand, introduced herself and then slapped you in the face.
There's nothing objective about your posts in the various shooting threads, go ahead find any pro-gun comments made by you.
47 People Shot - 9 Dead in Chicago
Active shooter at Washington Navy YardThe Commish said:Musta been a gun free zone
25 posts
Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch
668 posts
Shots fired at US Capitol
12 posts
first post:
George Zimmerman Questioned by Police for Threatening Wife With GunThe Commish said:
34 posts
Another school shooting (aka Newtown thread)
The Commish
Footballguy
So I'm not objective because I mock YOUR ridiculous claims....got it Like I said....don't ever change. Again, who's alias are you? I know it's hard, but here's a "pro gun" comment for you. I believe we all have the right to own guns. There. Feel better?? I can pretty much guarantee you, you will never see me defending guns in a time where peoples' lives have been taken by them. I have far too much respect for the deceased and life in general to get on a "pro gun" stump and start preaching. That's what jackoffs do.
Like I said....don't ever change. Again, who's alias are you? I know it's hard, but here's a "pro gun" comment for you. I believe we all have the right to own guns. There. Feel better?? I can pretty much guarantee you, you will never see me defending guns in a time where peoples' lives have been taken by them. I have far too much respect for the deceased and life in general to get on a "pro gun" stump and start preaching. That's what jackoffs do.
5 digit know nothing
Footballguy
See that wasn't so hard to show you have a bias, was it? I can't believe it took you so long to own up to it, I had to practically make reference to every thread you posted in to get you to show your anti-gun bias. You're o.k. with people taking other people's lives (Zimmerman might be dead if he was not armed, Martin showed no signs of stopping with 2 neighbors verbally intervening) so long as they don't use a gun and heaven forbid someone defends themselves with one then it's their fault for "starting it" and they should go to prison.
Back on ignore you go.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish
Footballguy
HFSSee that wasn't so hard to show you have a bias, was it? I can't believe it took you so long to own up to it, I had to practically make reference to every thread you posted in to get you to show your anti-gun bias. You're o.k. with people taking other people's lives (Zimmerman might be dead if he was not armed, Martin showed no signs of stopping with 2 neighbors verbally intervening) so long as they don't use a gun and heaven forbid someone defends themselves with one then it's their fault for "starting it" and they should go to prison.
Am I on candid camera?!?!?!?!?!
The Commish
Footballguy
Because I refuse to use threads where people die at the hands of guns to stump for gun ownership I have an irrational fear of guns AND a bias against them....can't make this stuff up guys
fatness
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
bakes
I am the Beer God!
fatness
Footballguy
Mister Martie
Footballguy
What is the point of billing so much if the debt is uncollectable? I am sure they can write off the bad debt, but that does not help since it just offsets the 'income'.
BustedKnuckles
Footballguy
Guessing they were counting on people like you to send Zimmy Mo` money ...Mo` money ...Mo` money
T Bell
Footballguy
Those lawyers knew they weren't going to get paid in full for this. This was about marketing for them, and BTW they were making money from other clients even during that case. They'll make that back and more from other clients that will come to them because of the Zimmerman case.
Last edited by a moderator:
PinkydaPimp
Footballguy
http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmermans-girlfriend-drop-charges/story?id=21153527
This sounds like just another day at the trailer park. Run away, George. If you have half a brain, move a few thousand miles away, change your name, and start over.
They got a lot of publicity through the case, running up ridiculous legal bills does not really help in the marketing department. I think they are hoping George signs a book deal or something they can get at. George needs to file bankruptcy.This
fatness
Footballguy
Zimmerman at one time sued a network I believe, NBC maybe? The lawyers were hoping to get a cut of that. Apparently Zimmerman is no longer pursuing the case. Correct me if my memory's wrong on those things.They got a lot of publicity through the case, running up ridiculous legal bills does not really help in the marketing department. I think they are hoping George signs a book deal or something they can get at. George needs to file bankruptcy.This
The lawyers thought he was a cash cow who'd directly get them income. Now he isn't, and they're just hoping he's an effective loss leader.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
T Bell
Footballguy
You obviously know little about law practice. Those aren't "ridiculous legal bills" in a major case requiring a big work up. Yes, it's a lot of money but that doesn't shock me at all in light of the case it's associated with.They got a lot of publicity through the case, running up ridiculous legal bills does not really help in the marketing department. I think they are hoping George signs a book deal or something they can get at. George needs to file bankruptcy.This
Doug B
Footballguy
[NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED ... REPEAT ... NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED]
With Zimmerman's rep, anyobe PO'd at him for any reason can mess with him by calling the cops and saying "He threatened me!". If he were a play-it-cool reserved type, maybe he wouldn't be angering people all the time. Apparently, he's something of a hothead in real life.
He needs to enter the same wormhole that Casey Anthony stepped through, and avoid humanity for a long spell.
[/NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED ... REPEAT ... NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED]
T Bell
Footballguy
Maybe they'd make a good couple.[NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED ... REPEAT ... NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED]
With Zimmerman's rep, anyobe PO'd at him for any reason can mess with him by calling the cops and saying "He threatened me!". If he were a play-it-cool reserved type, maybe he wouldn't be angering people all the time. Apparently, he's something of a hothead in real life.
He needs to enter the same wormhole that Casey Anthony stepped through, and avoid humanity for a long spell.
[/NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED ... REPEAT ... NOT SAYING THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED]
Zow
Footballguy
You obviously know little about law practice. Those aren't "ridiculous legal bills" in a major case requiring a big work up. Yes, it's a lot of money but that doesn't shock me at all in light of the case it's associated with.They got a lot of publicity through the case, running up ridiculous legal bills does not really help in the marketing department. I think they are hoping George signs a book deal or something they can get at. George needs to file bankruptcy.This
You're just realizing this now?
Zow
Footballguy
Only issue I have is the amount of the billing and the fact it was hourly. I don't know how Florida works, but in AZ I'd be very nervous about submitting a client a bill like that for a criminal case. My state bar strongly frowns on hourly rates for criminal cases and strongly suggests up front flat fees. I'd agree that the 250,00 ballpark for this case is well within the ethical boundaries. But 2.5 million? Eh….
You say that, but then you basically agree with my point.You obviously know little about law practice. Those aren't "ridiculous legal bills" in a major case requiring a big work up. Yes, it's a lot of money but that doesn't shock me at all in light of the case it's associated with.They got a lot of publicity through the case, running up ridiculous legal bills does not really help in the marketing department. I think they are hoping George signs a book deal or something they can get at. George needs to file bankruptcy.This
You're just realizing this now?
Zow
Footballguy
Me agreeing with one thing you say does not mean I blanket agree with everything. I actually don't think those bills are per se ridiculous. I spoke specifically about ethical considerations.You say that, but then you basically agree with my point.You obviously know little about law practice. Those aren't "ridiculous legal bills" in a major case requiring a big work up. Yes, it's a lot of money but that doesn't shock me at all in light of the case it's associated with.They got a lot of publicity through the case, running up ridiculous legal bills does not really help in the marketing department. I think they are hoping George signs a book deal or something they can get at. George needs to file bankruptcy.This
You're just realizing this now?
The fact you don't see the division of issues affirms the fact you know so incredibly little about general law practice and criminal law.
Ramsay Hunt Experience
Footballguy
There's no doubt that the lawyer's rates were reasonable (you'd be hard pressed to get an associate at that rate in many larger markets). The hours charged seem, to me, likely to be found excessive if challenged through the state bar association. They represented him for about 15 months and each charged over 200 hours a month exclusively to his case (which was high profile, but not particularly complex). Now, it's not unusual to bill far more than 200 hours in a month as you approach trial, but it still seems high to me on average.
In any case, I fully expect them to negotiate a haircut on the bills.
In any case, I fully expect them to negotiate a haircut on the bills.
T Bell
Footballguy
I'd figure that a good % of that is going to be costs, especially for experts. This is a case in which an expert can easily have spent at least a couple hundred hours working up this case by the time it was all said and done. Multiply that by $300-$600 per hour depending upon the expert (ridiculous I know, but that's the going rate nowadays, at least in LA) and you're easily into six figures.
As for the attorneys, even assuming a relatively low $350/hour, $1M in fees would arise from about 2860 hours, which a single attorney could actually bust out in the span of a single (albeit certainly very busy) calendar year; I've worked with associates who've billed in excess of 3000 hours.
In a major case that's an easy number to hit, especially with multiple attorneys and paralegals working the file, doing media appearances, a lengthy trial, etc.
