Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There was no "facts"/evidence!
He was within his right to follow TM. He dialed 911 for the Cops as he should have....
If he was within his rights to follow Trayvon because he deemed him suspicious, than Trayvon was also within his rights to follow Zimmerman who he deemed suspicious. Don't you agree?
Anecdotal BS. I can come up with single acts of stupidity about any race all day long. Does not mean others of that race are the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox Terrier
Absolutely true.
Years ago I was coming back from a vacation in Europe. An African man was one of the passengers, dressed in a suit and tie. Then the person who had the seat next to him arrived. When he saw that a Black man was going to be sitting next to him, oh my god! He created such a ruckus, saying he's not going to sit in that seat next to a ____. Guy yelling this with his southern accent.
I was totally mortified and felt so bad for the Black guy. He appeared to not really understand what the white guy's problem was; maybe he didn't speak English. I was just about to tell the bigot I'd change seats with him when the stewardesses got there and handled the situation.
If he was within his rights to follow Trayvon because he deemed him suspicious, than Trayvon was also within his rights to follow Zimmerman who he deemed suspicious. Don't you agree?
Yes I do.
The problem is he assaulted he GZ. Not just followed him.
Yes, because Mike Tyson was at such a disadvantage when facing taller opponents.
It's obvious that folks who think like you do, don't know the first thing about physical strength.
When I 1st heard that gz went to learn boxing, I immediately thought of the next Mike Tyson. GZ a little old to start a new career, but he had the skills, as the instructor said.
If so, didn't you think it was very strange that porky never even looked at his wife, much less go to her and hug her or his own parents?
Then, after he was done congratulating his defense team, he walked out of the courtroom, right past his family.
Maybe he thinks he's a media sensation and will be looking for a prettier wife? After all, he's going to be a millionaire and his wife is going to be in jail.
Sick f... he is.
His ex-fiance testified to the FBI that Zimmerman contacted her several times over the last few years, and that they met up a few times. Zimmerman complained to her that his wife didn't want to have kids, and he did.
I would bet all my money that his wife did not know about those visits. It just shows what kind of guy he is.
I didnt make that claim.
The person I quoted did.
Should be pretty obvious considering there was no bruising and no evidence of assault on TM though...
Jean71, here's what you said:
Quote:
Launching a punch first isn't attacking first????
It was in response to this by RaymondChandlerLives:
Quote:
Still no proof Martin attacked first. We only know he landed a punch first, after being "followed" by Zimmerman.
So, my question to you remains - "How do we know who threw the first punch?"
Are you saying that a person has to actually INJURE someone in order to be the aggressor, the one who "starts something?" Are you saying that since Zimmerman didn't manage to land a good punch, that he wasn't fighting with Martin prior to shooting him?
I think the only evidence we really have about the physical altercation between the two of them is that Zimmerman was getting the crap beat out of him, after following a guy in the dark, until he shot Martin. He should have stayed in his damn car like he was instructed to do, and none of this would have happened.
How do you know that Zimmerman didn't strike him? Because Zimmerman said so?
Zimmerman would never have had the nerve to follow Martin if he didn't fully intend to use that loaded gun if things got too "hot." We have no idea when he pulled that gun, whether or not he hit Martin or threatened him first, who exchanged words first, nothing - only the testimony of the defendant, who also claimed that he was only persisting in getting out of his car and following Martin in order to "find his correct address and tell it to the dispatcher." Yeah, right. There were only about two streets in that neighborhood - just give the dispatcher a description of your vehicle and then sit tight till the police get there.
But no...He just had to get out and follow Martin - and the only reason he felt like he could do this is because he fully intended to use that gun if he felt threatened. He just didn't stop to think, apparently, that the person he was following might feel threatened (who wouldn't?) and just might respond in fear and anger.
And you have no idea that his story isnt true. You have no idea if he didnt stop following and that Martin indeed came out of no where and assaulted him. It was up to the State to prove their case. They couldnt, because they didnt have one.
You cant just make things up. You dont know what happened. The State could not prove otherwise. I guess you dont have to that smart to end up winning one of the contests here. Just get enough ignorant people to like a post.....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
