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.
Not necessarily. If Zimmerman walked up to Trayvon gun drawn and was intending on killing him and Trayvon defended himself yet was shot while doing so that wouldn't be self defense. Or would it?
I haven't heard of any witnesses stating this.....
Maybe he believes some black youths can be "thugs" and that this unarmed black youth walking back from the store with candy was "assassinated." It's not too difficult to have two different thoughts in your head. It's called having intelligence.
Not necessarily. If Zimmerman walked up to Trayvon gun drawn and was intending on killing him and Trayvon defended himself yet was shot while doing so that wouldn't be self defense. Or would it?
To be honest, the fact that Zimmerman left his vehicle and followed Trayvon takes away self defence just on its own........ Trayvon tried to get away from Zimmerman so no matter whether they scuffled..... Zimmerman was the aggressor.
I guess you don't know the law either. Did you not know that there is NO statute of limitations on murder? Did you NOT know that they have to wait for all the evidence/facts before a trial/due process can even happen? If an arrest is warranted, there WILL be one!
Good thing that all of that forensic evidence walked away the night Zimmerman was let go by the local PD. I am not on the side of either but if there seriously is no forensic evidence anywhere (I mean how about a picture or something), then just taking the word of the shooter and an anonymous witness who, based on what I have read, saw a portion of the incident yet missed how it started and the actual shooting is garbage.
Maybe you can't read. I have not passed judgement. I haven't figured out anything. I found some "truth" that contradicts the popular opinion which is based totally on emotion. If the guy had a broken nose and an injury on the back of his head, that means something. There maybe more "truth" coming out.
Is there evidence of these injuries? Like, from a medical examination immediately after the incident occurred?
I haven't heard of any witnesses stating this.....
If.......If.......If. The key word was if. I was just refuting the "It's not important how it started" comment that's all. No one knows how it started except for Zimmerman. No one knows how the actual shooting occurred except for Zimmerman.
How it started is a big piece of the mystery unless it really doesn't matter if what I mentioned before actually happened.
There is nothing racist about what Obama said. If a teenage white boy was killed and Bush said the same exact thing, none of you would be babbling about it and no one would be calling him racist. To trivialize and politicize the death of an innocent teenage boy, you have to be a cold-hearted, selfish person - one that gets aroused at the thought of someone getting away with murdering a black child.
Hang on a second here. The politicizing of this event was done by your president when he decided to make comments about ONE young african american out of MANY killed yearly by other african americans, whaasup?
To my recollection Bush never made any comments about young white boys killed by any other race. DID HE?
Who's trivializing this kids death but those who take it into the political arena. O'bama, Jackson's (all of them), Sharpton et al, that's who!
It was not 2:00 in the morning, there is no eye witness that saw anything before Trayvon was killed (until this person actually comes out and testifies, there is no evidence) and all we have is Zimmerman's word which isn't worth much, since he took it upon himself to follow and confront someone that was minding their own business with nothing but skittles and tea in his pocket. Ghost witness and lies mean nothing in a court of law.
That pretty much says there is no hospital record of the broken nose or gash that needed stitches. I am pretty sure that someone checked his injuries at the scene - if he was bleeding that bad, why wasn't he taken to the hospital? Someone is lying and it certainly isn't Trayvon Martin.
The responding officer's report details the cuts and the fact that Zimpy was treated while handcuffed in the rear seat of the cruiser by respondent EMT's; is he and they lying also. How bad do you need to bleed to substantiate a claim of attack? Is there a standard that's been set?
Whassup with all this crap? A kid is dead who need not have died but for stupid laws that allow people to run around armed with whatever chip on their shoulder and a card in their wallet to give vent to their inner frustrations. These are bad laws that serve to enfranchise stupid people. The police forces are bound by them and must act accordingly when faced with an event.
Taking this event into the racist arena when the idiotic law that enabled it should rightly be in the legislative arena, serves no one.
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.
