L O L... Lets stick with the facts...
1. He called the non-emergency number and he has no legal obligation to follow an "order" from the dispatcher.
...a "fact" which is irrelevant in an inquiry over whether Mr. Zimmerman was acting in self-defense. He could've been ordered by the President to pick his nose and stand on his head, but that doesn't matter. Mr. Zimmerman has claimed he acted in self-defense. He needs to articulate a threshold of evidence that meets the legal criteria of self-defense. Once that's established, the State then needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he wasn't acting in self-defense. Irrelevant or not I was addressing the poster that I quoted explaining the actual facts.
3. Zimmerman didnt follow. He got out of his car to find the name of the street to relay to 911. that's when he got jumped by trayvon.
You sound like you were there. When do you testify? And why haven't you been called yet? So far this is his testimony, and only one from that scene... What/who else should I base my decision off of?
4. There is no evidence to support the theory that Zimmerman followed him
...except Zimmerman's own words, Trayvon Martin's words, and that annoying little statement from the police dispatcher saying "we don't need you to follow him."
5. Even if he did follow him, it is not illegal to do so.
Again, Zimmerman was free to do whatever he wanted. The crux of this trial is whether what he did do, legal or not, in violation of an order or a non-order, was legally excusable under the law. I cannot say this enough: the issue of whether the dispatcher could legally "order" Zimmerman to stop is a false one. The order status or non-order status is irrelevant to determining if Zimmerman acted in self-defense. Ok... And I agree. My point is that following someone is not a crime nor a cause for someone to attack you.
The main point here was, who was the initial aggressor? The answer to that question is trayvon because he punched zimmerman in the face, broke his nose, CONTINUED to fight him as he got on top of him, slamming his head into the concrete sidewalk, which lead to zimmerman having reasonable fear of great bodily harm/injury or death as the law states. it is the state's burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman did not meet this criteria.
I'll ask again: when do you testify? I'll answer again: I am going off the testimony/evidence that has been provided thus far. See Pathologist.
Things proven so far: 1.TM was leaning over GZ when shot. 2.GZ had at least 6 injuries to his skull
It is the State's burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman is guilty of the crime charged. However, self-defense is an affirmative defense, meaning the person raising it must offer some threshold of evidence to establish that it applies. This means that questions over what happened or who started it could actually hurt Zimmerman more than the State. The State has charged Zimmerman with murder. Zimmerman has raised self-defense. If it's unclear that Zimmerman can establish that his actions meet the legal requirements of self-defense, then the State needs to merely establish that a kid is dead, Zimmerman pulled the trigger, and that he acted with some malice or ill intent. There's certainly been testimony to all three. See Above...
Irrelevant. Martin's mindset isn't at issue. IF Martin was "not stopping" his assault on Zimmerman (again, are you a witness?), that doesn't indicate that Martin was also the aggressor. That's just bad logic.
Not irrelevant to a JURY.
Anyways, its pretty evident that the only reason charges were filed was because of the media pressure.
Anyways, its pretty evident that the only reason charges were filed was because of the media pressure.[/color]
I think going after a 2nd degree murder charge was because of the media pressure. A manslaughter charge would have been easier to convict based on what we have seen so far.
Never throw out the "florida" wildcard either. That is the last state where I would want a random selection of the populace to determine my fate.
Unless it's Johnny P (although reading his book may give me pause :think:)
:? :fp:
:corn:
(edit: florida is my last choice unless I'm guilty ... then it is my #1 choice) :geek:
Do you mean physical aggression? Because that's what is questionable here... Is a person getting out of a car with a loaded gun and following someone into the dark rain considered aggression?
But I do agree that Trayvon likely punched Zimmerman first. And because of a law - a subjective one at that - He can claim his life was in danger. Yup, zimmerman thought that he would DIE, so he killed Trayvon. He might walk because of that. DO you agree that Zimmerman thought he would die if he didnt shoot trayvon?
But I have to ask you one question - did you see Zimmerman's injury photos? The bloody ones? Yeah, they looked bad, right? Then did you see the ones the next day? His injuries were not bad. I've seen people get punched in the nose a lot, and i've seen peoples heads slammed against concrete. Zimmerman's injuries were'nt that bad. They appeared bad at first because of the blood, but they in no way appear life threatening to me. But thats why this case is so polarized, because some people dont put as much weight on that.. they just think Zimmerman acted within sketchy, subjective stand your ground law.
So anyone who has a concealed carry is an aggressor? TM didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until well after zimmerman was attacked. hence the Self Defense.
I'll be brutally honest here. I have a family (wife/daughters) that mean more to me than anything. And I will never let anyone take me away from them, so if someone crosses the line where i THINK there is a possibility of something life threatening happening to me (weather it be or not), I will take that chance anytime, and if that means ending someones life, then so be it. I am not taking a chance with my life.
You'r right his injuries weren't that bad, so what? Are you going to take that chance hoping the other person will stop? And if Zimmerman is telling the truth, and TM said " your going to die tonight" you would take that chance?
Do you mean physical aggression? Because that's what is questionable here... Is a person getting out of a car with a loaded gun and following someone into the dark rain considered aggression?
But I do agree that Trayvon likely punched Zimmerman first. And because of a law - a subjective one at that - He can claim his life was in danger. Yup, zimmerman thought that he would DIE, so he killed Trayvon. He might walk because of that. DO you agree that Zimmerman thought he would die if he didnt shoot trayvon?
But I have to ask you one question - did you see Zimmerman's injury photos? The bloody ones? Yeah, they looked bad, right? Then did you see the ones the next day? His injuries were not bad. I've seen people get punched in the nose a lot, and i've seen peoples heads slammed against concrete. Zimmerman's injuries were'nt that bad. They appeared bad at first because of the blood, but they in no way appear life threatening to me. But thats why this case is so polarized, because some people dont put as much weight on that.. they just think Zimmerman acted within sketchy, subjective stand your ground law.
So anyone who has a concealed carry is an aggressor? TM didn't know Zimmerman had a gun until well after zimmerman was attacked. hence the Self Defense.
I'll be brutally honest here. I have a family (wife/daughters) that mean more to me than anything. And I will never let anyone take me away from them, so if someone crosses the line where i THINK there is a possibility of something life threatening happening to me (weather it be or not), I will take that chance anytime, and if that means ending someones life, then so be it. I am not taking a chance with my life.
You'r right his injuries weren't that bad, so what? Are you going to take that chance hoping the other person will stop? And if Zimmerman is telling the truth, and TM said " your going to die tonight" you would take that chance?
Yes, I'd be willing to take that chance. I'm hoping to never put myself in that position. I for one, could NEVER live myself if I shot and killed someone for punching me in the nose. and for instance, I'd never get out of my car at night in the rain and follow someone behind some houses with a loaded gun when told not to. Thats why I think Zimmerman is dangerous.
And no, im not suggesting that anyone who has a concealed carry is an aggressor, but I am suggesting that someone who is carrying their gun, possibly out of the holster at night (we have no idea), following someone in the rain, could be considered an aggressor.. we have no idea how it happened, and you have no idea if Trayvon knew zimmerman had a gun or not -- unless you simply believe every word the lying Zimmerman has spouted...
Yes, I'd be willing to take that chance. I'm hoping to never put myself in that position. I for one, could NEVER live myself if I shot and killed someone for punching me in the nose. and for instance, I'd never get out of my car at night in the rain and follow someone behind some houses with a loaded gun when told not to. Thats why I think Zimmerman is dangerous.
And no, im not suggesting that anyone who has a concealed carry is an aggressor, but I am suggesting that someone who is carrying their gun, possibly out of the holster at night (we have no idea), following someone in the rain, could be considered an aggressor.. we have no idea how it happened, and you have no idea if Trayvon knew zimmerman had a gun or not -- unless you simply believe every word the lying Zimmerman has spouted...
Then were different I guess, and maybe thats why we have differing opinions on this case.
Either way, from my experience, Zimmerman didn't do any out of the ordinary.
Our neighborhood HOA sent out an email notifying people to close their garage doors during the day because some kids/criminals were going into opened garage doors and stealing things while people were up at the pool or whatever. So knowing that is going on in my neighborhood, I wouldn't think twice about following or asking a kid what there up-to if I am unfamiliar with who they are or haven't seen them in the neighborhood before. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a concerned parent and looking out for your neighborhood, which is what zimmerman did. He also called the cops to report such suspicious activity. It seems you want to keep linking whoever had the "gun" with "aggressor".
Also why are you putting so much emphasis on it "raining" and being dark out.
Yes, I'd be willing to take that chance. I'm hoping to never put myself in that position. I for one, could NEVER live myself if I shot and killed someone for punching me in the nose. and for instance, I'd never get out of my car at night in the rain and follow someone behind some houses with a loaded gun when told not to. Thats why I think Zimmerman is dangerous.
And no, im not suggesting that anyone who has a concealed carry is an aggressor, but I am suggesting that someone who is carrying their gun, possibly out of the holster at night (we have no idea), following someone in the rain, could be considered an aggressor.. we have no idea how it happened, and you have no idea if Trayvon knew zimmerman had a gun or not -- unless you simply believe every word the lying Zimmerman has spouted...
Then were different I guess, and maybe thats why we have differing opinions on this case.
Either way, from my experience, Zimmerman didn't do any out of the ordinary.
Our neighborhood HOA sent out an email notifying people to close their garage doors during the day because some kids/criminals were going into opened garage doors and stealing things while people were up at the pool or whatever. So knowing that is going on in my neighborhood, I wouldn't think twice about following or asking a kid what there up-to if I am unfamiliar with who they are or haven't seen them in the neighborhood before. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a concerned parent and looking out for your neighborhood, which is what zimmerman did. He also called the cops to report such suspicious activity. It seems you want to keep linking whoever had the "gun" with "aggressor".
Also why are you putting so much emphasis on it "raining" and being dark out.
well, he also , against direction or advice from 911 dispatch pursued Trayvon. He is the primary actor who set this in motion.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
He also called the cops to report such suspicious activity. It seems you want to keep linking whoever had the "gun" with "aggressor".
Also why are you putting so much emphasis on it "raining" and being dark out.
Because, I think it would be HIGHLY unlikely that Zimmerman wouldve gotten out of his car had he not had a gun on him. Also, people are usually less likely to follow someone in the dark and in the rain. He was VERY determined to get up on Trayvon if you ask me. I think he went too far. And I definitely, as I said before, dont think a punch to the nose and a tiny scrape on the head warrants DEATH. I know a ton of people who have punched people in the nose worse than that, and Im happy some gun toting idiot like Zimmerman didnt end their lives because of it.
Also, I bring those things up I guess because Zimmerman didnt follow suggestions of the dispatcher. He also said he'd wait by the mailboxes, which he didnt do. He also lied about his finances. He also said that doctors said he should've gotten stitches in his head but they decided not to for some odd reason. :? I just dont buy the guys story, and I think he used very bad judgement. I also agree with Gimme - I think Zimmerman is a drama queen and made up the things he said that trayvon said. I mean, according to Zimmerna, he was screaming like a baby for 10 seconds on the 911 call before he shot Trayvon. How could he even hear Travyon say "you're gonna die tonight."
But he might walk - I do see that he might not be guilty according to the crappy florida law. But that is why this is so polarizing, and I dont blame you for thinking like you do. Its a simple difference really. But I think you're a pretty good dude, and I doubt you'd kill someone if they punched you in the nose.
Just putting guns in this type of situation is what is the real problem. It gives pussies like Zimmerman too much confidence and bravado. BOTH trayvon and zimmerman did stupid shit that night, but did it need to result in death?
Yes, I'd be willing to take that chance. I'm hoping to never put myself in that position. I for one, could NEVER live myself if I shot and killed someone for punching me in the nose. and for instance, I'd never get out of my car at night in the rain and follow someone behind some houses with a loaded gun when told not to. Thats why I think Zimmerman is dangerous.
And no, im not suggesting that anyone who has a concealed carry is an aggressor, but I am suggesting that someone who is carrying their gun, possibly out of the holster at night (we have no idea), following someone in the rain, could be considered an aggressor.. we have no idea how it happened, and you have no idea if Trayvon knew zimmerman had a gun or not -- unless you simply believe every word the lying Zimmerman has spouted...
Then were different I guess, and maybe thats why we have differing opinions on this case.
Either way, from my experience, Zimmerman didn't do any out of the ordinary.
Our neighborhood HOA sent out an email notifying people to close their garage doors during the day because some kids/criminals were going into opened garage doors and stealing things while people were up at the pool or whatever. So knowing that is going on in my neighborhood, I wouldn't think twice about following or asking a kid what there up-to if I am unfamiliar with who they are or haven't seen them in the neighborhood before. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a concerned parent and looking out for your neighborhood, which is what zimmerman did. He also called the cops to report such suspicious activity. It seems you want to keep linking whoever had the "gun" with "aggressor".
Also why are you putting so much emphasis on it "raining" and being dark out.
well, he also , against direction or advice from 911 dispatch pursued Trayvon. He is the primary actor who set this in motion.
Yes you are correct, Following or walking towards someone is a criminal offence and reason for someone to attack you. .. :roll:
[well, he also , against direction or advice from 911 dispatch pursued Trayvon. He is the primary actor who set this in motion.
Yes you are correct, Following or walking towards someone is a criminal offence and reason for someone to attack you. .. :roll:
it is when that action results in the death of another person. While he may not have had intent(only he knows why he did what he did) the fact remains a death was the end result. Which according to Fla law is Manslaughter
I personally don't believe his actions fit with what I understand the stand you ground law to be.
I might also hope for a little more decorum for the memory of the deceased.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
He also called the cops to report such suspicious activity. It seems you want to keep linking whoever had the "gun" with "aggressor".
Also why are you putting so much emphasis on it "raining" and being dark out.
Because, I think it would be HIGHLY unlikely that Zimmerman wouldve gotten out of his car had he not had a gun on him. Also, people are usually less likely to follow someone in the dark and in the rain. He was VERY determined to get up on Trayvon if you ask me. I think he went too far. And I definitely, as I said before, dont think a punch to the nose and a tiny scrape on the head warrants DEATH. I know a ton of people who have punched people in the nose worse than that, and Im happy some gun toting idiot like Zimmerman didnt end their lives because of it.
Also, I bring those things up I guess because Zimmerman didnt follow suggestions of the dispatcher. He also said he'd wait by the mailboxes, which he didnt do. He also lied about his finances. He also said that doctors said he should've gotten stitches in his head but they decided not to for some odd reason. :? I just dont buy the guys story, and I think he used very bad judgement. I also agree with Gimme - I think Zimmerman is a drama queen and made up the things he said that trayvon said. I mean, according to Zimmerna, he was screaming like a baby for 10 seconds on the 911 call before he shot Trayvon. How could he even hear Travyon say "you're gonna die tonight."
But he might walk - I do see that he might not be guilty according to the crappy florida law. But that is why this is so polarizing, and I dont blame you for thinking like you do. Its a simple difference really. But I think you're a pretty good dude, and I doubt you'd kill someone if they punched you in the nose.
Just putting guns in this type of situation is what is the real problem. It gives pussies like Zimmerman too much confidence and bravado. BOTH trayvon and zimmerman did stupid shit that night, but did it need to result in death?
Zimmerman also said the TM "looked like he was on drugs" which as we know now is a correct statement. With that said, why are you so eager to dismiss everything he says and assume he is lying.
Injuries aren't the barometer for justifiable actions, meaning just because you don't suffer a life threatening injury, does not mean that your life isn't in danger. Someone on top of you hitting you and saying "your going to die tonight" (weather true or not) IS a LIFE THREATENING situation. I would not take that chance.
Anyways, its pretty evident that the only reason charges were filed was because of the media pressure.
A bold commentary that can never be proven or disproven. I'll remind you that prosecutors take an oath to only charge cases they believe to be warranted. Take what you want from that, but wouldn't your assertion above cut both ways? Many prosecutors are elected officials (I have no idea if they were in this case), and if a prosecutor was seen to be particularly "off" or susceptible to media pressure, whether to charge or not charge, wouldn't that prosecutor be risking his or her job by charging something only because of said media pressure?
I think its a stretch to believe someone would risk a job to charge something they didn't believe was warranted (remember: law licenses are lost when lawyers overreach) just because of media pressure. The fact that we're sitting here, debating the merits of each side in what is generally considered a "close call" shows that the charges were likely appropriate. Whether a guilty verdict is also appropriate remains to be seen, but that's not our test.
As far as Martin standing over Zimmerman (Zimmerman says he was, but he's got a lot to lose, doesn't he?), or the alleged severity of Zimmerman's injuries ("insignificant" I believe was how they were deemed), or Martin allegedly grabbing for Zimmerman's gun (no Martin DNA on the weapon), or whether Zimmerman following Martin justified Martin attacking Zimmerman (whether that happened is up for debate, remember?), is all ultimately before the jury.
Personally, if Zimmerman's acquitted, then the system worked and he's entitled to his freedom. If he's convicted, it's because the culmination of evidence presented convinced the jury that it's unreasonable to believe that an overzealous neighborhood watch volunteer with a history of reporting "suspicious black males" was simply defending himself when he followed and shot an unarmed black 17 year old.
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1 2024-08-31 Wrigley 2 2024-09-15 Fenway 1 2024-09-27 Ohana 1 2024-09-29 Ohana 2
He also called the cops to report such suspicious activity. It seems you want to keep linking whoever had the "gun" with "aggressor".
Also why are you putting so much emphasis on it "raining" and being dark out.
Because, I think it would be HIGHLY unlikely that Zimmerman wouldve gotten out of his car had he not had a gun on him. Also, people are usually less likely to follow someone in the dark and in the rain. He was VERY determined to get up on Trayvon if you ask me. I think he went too far. And I definitely, as I said before, dont think a punch to the nose and a tiny scrape on the head warrants DEATH. I know a ton of people who have punched people in the nose worse than that, and Im happy some gun toting idiot like Zimmerman didnt end their lives because of it.
Also, I bring those things up I guess because Zimmerman didnt follow suggestions of the dispatcher. He also said he'd wait by the mailboxes, which he didnt do. He also lied about his finances. He also said that doctors said he should've gotten stitches in his head but they decided not to for some odd reason. :? I just dont buy the guys story, and I think he used very bad judgement. I also agree with Gimme - I think Zimmerman is a drama queen and made up the things he said that trayvon said. I mean, according to Zimmerna, he was screaming like a baby for 10 seconds on the 911 call before he shot Trayvon. How could he even hear Travyon say "you're gonna die tonight."
But he might walk - I do see that he might not be guilty according to the crappy florida law. But that is why this is so polarizing, and I dont blame you for thinking like you do. Its a simple difference really. But I think you're a pretty good dude, and I doubt you'd kill someone if they punched you in the nose.
Just putting guns in this type of situation is what is the real problem. It gives pussies like Zimmerman too much confidence and bravado. BOTH trayvon and zimmerman did stupid shit that night, but did it need to result in death?
Zimmerman also said the TM "looked like he was on drugs" which as we know now is a correct statement. With that said, why are you so eager to dismiss everything he says and assume he is lying.
Injuries aren't the barometer for justifiable actions, meaning just because you don't suffer a life threatening injury, does not mean that your life isn't in danger. Someone on top of you hitting you and saying "your going to die tonight" (weather true or not) IS a LIFE THREATENING situation. I would not take that chance.
"Looked like he was on drugs?" Good lord man. That means absolutely nothing to me. he also said "these punks always get away." Trayvon would've gotten away with what exactly?
I assume he is lying on many accounts because it was proven that he's a liar in several scenarios. and his stories just dont make sense to me.
i don't view everyone with the concealed carry permit as an aggressor. i will say that someone carrying a gun MIGHT be more inclined to start something since Mr. Colt 45 has his back...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Anyways, its pretty evident that the only reason charges were filed was because of the media pressure.
A bold commentary that can never be proven or disproven. I'll remind you that prosecutors take an oath to only charge cases they believe to be warranted. Take what you want from that, but wouldn't your assertion above cut both ways? Many prosecutors are elected officials (I have no idea if they were in this case), and if a prosecutor was seen to be particularly "off" or susceptible to media pressure, whether to charge or not charge, wouldn't that prosecutor be risking his or her job by charging something only because of said media pressure?
I think its a stretch to believe someone would risk a job to charge something they didn't believe was warranted (remember: law licenses are lost when lawyers overreach) just because of media pressure. The fact that we're sitting here, debating the merits of each side in what is generally considered a "close call" shows that the charges were likely appropriate. Whether a guilty verdict is also appropriate remains to be seen, but that's not our test.
As far as Martin standing over Zimmerman (Zimmerman says he was, but he's got a lot to lose, doesn't he?), or the alleged severity of Zimmerman's injuries ("insignificant" I believe was how they were deemed), or Martin allegedly grabbing for Zimmerman's gun (no Martin DNA on the weapon), or whether Zimmerman following Martin justified Martin attacking Zimmerman (whether that happened is up for debate, remember?), is all ultimately before the jury.
Personally, if Zimmerman's acquitted, then the system worked and he's entitled to his freedom. If he's convicted, it's because the culmination of evidence presented convinced the jury that it's unreasonable to believe that an overzealous neighborhood watch volunteer with a history of reporting "suspicious black males" was simply defending himself when he followed and shot an unarmed black 17 year old.
I would love to trust our elected officials, but the fact is we can not..I think this lady was appointed..What worries me the most is the threat of violence if Zimmerman is found not guilty. I hate how the media and our President made this into a racial crime to further divide this country.
“We the people are the rightful masters of bothCongress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
Anyways, its pretty evident that the only reason charges were filed was because of the media pressure.
A bold commentary that can never be proven or disproven. I'll remind you that prosecutors take an oath to only charge cases they believe to be warranted. Take what you want from that, but wouldn't your assertion above cut both ways? Many prosecutors are elected officials (I have no idea if they were in this case), and if a prosecutor was seen to be particularly "off" or susceptible to media pressure, whether to charge or not charge, wouldn't that prosecutor be risking his or her job by charging something only because of said media pressure?
I think its a stretch to believe someone would risk a job to charge something they didn't believe was warranted (remember: law licenses are lost when lawyers overreach) just because of media pressure. The fact that we're sitting here, debating the merits of each side in what is generally considered a "close call" shows that the charges were likely appropriate. Whether a guilty verdict is also appropriate remains to be seen, but that's not our test.
As far as Martin standing over Zimmerman (Zimmerman says he was, but he's got a lot to lose, doesn't he?), or the alleged severity of Zimmerman's injuries ("insignificant" I believe was how they were deemed), or Martin allegedly grabbing for Zimmerman's gun (no Martin DNA on the weapon), or whether Zimmerman following Martin justified Martin attacking Zimmerman (whether that happened is up for debate, remember?), is all ultimately before the jury.
Personally, if Zimmerman's acquitted, then the system worked and he's entitled to his freedom. If he's convicted, it's because the culmination of evidence presented convinced the jury that it's unreasonable to believe that an overzealous neighborhood watch volunteer with a history of reporting "suspicious black males" was simply defending himself when he followed and shot an unarmed black 17 year old.
I would love to trust our elected officials, but the fact is we can not..I think this lady was appointed..What worries me the most is the threat of violence if Zimmerman is found not guilty. I hate how the media and our President made this into a racial crime to further divide this country.
And what context was that In? Do you know? "they" could have easily been used to describe CRIMINALS, you know, the ones that the neighborhood complained about before the Martin incident... :roll:
Let also forget the media race baiting by showing you...
1. Making GZ "whiter" then he really was by doctoring pictures.
2. Releasing GZ photo to the public, which was a mug shot.(frowing)
3. Editing audio/call tapes
4. Releasing TM photo the the public as a pre-pubescent innocent school boy with a great big smile on his face. and labeling him as "eating skittles and drinking Arizona ice tea"
5. President OBAMA say "If he had a son, he would look just like Martin". (which conveniently, after this was said was when GZ was actually charged of a crime)
6. With-holding all of the TM photos of him holding a gun, smoking weed, being suspended from school for fighting, buying guns Illegally.
The biggest issue in this case is the medias portrayal of both individuals. The way they put the case out there blatantly added to the race hunt that ensued.
i don't view everyone with the concealed carry permit as an aggressor. i will say that someone carrying a gun MIGHT be more inclined to start something since Mr. Colt 45 has his back...
You're off. When I carry I avoid confrontation because of two reasons, the first I don't want to have to use it, the second because of your statement. Most are conscious to the fact that there are trolls everywhere trying to get rights banned. No point giving you guys more to argue with.
And what context was that In? Do you know? "they" could have easily been used to describe CRIMINALS, you know, the ones that the neighborhood complained about before the Martin incident... :roll:
Let also forget the media race baiting by showing you...
1. Making GZ "whiter" then he really was by doctoring pictures.
2. Releasing GZ photo to the public, which was a mug shot.(frowing)
3. Editing audio/call tapes
4. Releasing TM photo the the public as a pre-pubescent innocent school boy with a great big smile on his face. and labeling him as "eating skittles and drinking Arizona ice tea"
5. President OBAMA say "If he had a son, he would look just like Martin". (which conveniently, after this was said was when GZ was actually charged of a crime)
6. With-holding all of the TM photos of him holding a gun, smoking weed, being suspended from school for fighting, buying guns Illegally.
The biggest issue in this case is the medias portrayal of both individuals. The way they put the case out there blatantly added to the race hunt that ensued.
I completely agree with you here. The media butchered this thing. Luckily, the race card seems to have worn off a bit.
And what context was that In? Do you know? "they" could have easily been used to describe CRIMINALS, you know, the ones that the neighborhood complained about before the Martin incident... :roll:
Let also forget the media race baiting by showing you...
1. Making GZ "whiter" then he really was by doctoring pictures.
2. Releasing GZ photo to the public, which was a mug shot.(frowing)
3. Editing audio/call tapes
4. Releasing TM photo the the public as a pre-pubescent innocent school boy with a great big smile on his face. and labeling him as "eating skittles and drinking Arizona ice tea"
5. President OBAMA say "If he had a son, he would look just like Martin". (which conveniently, after this was said was when GZ was actually charged of a crime)
6. With-holding all of the TM photos of him holding a gun, smoking weed, being suspended from school for fighting, buying guns Illegally.
The biggest issue in this case is the medias portrayal of both individuals. The way they put the case out there blatantly added to the race hunt that ensued.
This does not change the fact that there are facts sufficient to charge Mr. Zimmerman and force him to stand trial. No amount of media pressure can change the evidence that exists, which, if insufficient to force him to stand trial, a judge can dismiss the charges. The judge didn't do that (must be more media pressure). On an aside, a question for the "media pressure" folks: do you think all attorneys/judges/prosecutors are simply mindless (spineless?) sycophants who don't have even the smallest modicum of integrity? That's what it's amounting to every time you imply that the prosecutor or judge is simply bowing to media pressure in their handling of this case.
The media may have painted these two individuals in false lights...that doesn't change what evidence has been presented. The old agage in criminal court is that attorneys don't try slam dunks. Meaning, if the prosecutor has a shit case, he doesn't want to get embarrassed in front of a jury, so he dismisses or makes a deal. If the defense attorney has a mountain of evidence inculpating his client, they usually seek a deal. The fact that this is a "close call" means that the prosecutors, at least in charging him, probably got it right (unless of course someone's considering the whole thing with a distinctly pro-gun/anti-gun control bias :think: ).
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1 2024-08-31 Wrigley 2 2024-09-15 Fenway 1 2024-09-27 Ohana 1 2024-09-29 Ohana 2
This trial is joke. The media wants people to perceive this trial as a ‘racial’ matter. When in fact that the main issue of the case has been lost on the public. The ‘Stand Your Ground’ law of Florida. There would not have been a fight had Zimmerman adhered to the Stand Your Ground law and not pursued Martin.
Can you claim the ‘Stand Your Ground’ law if you make it a point to follow, harass, provoke, and engage a person? Does not that person, fearful of what is happening, also have the right to protect him/her self once confronted?
QUESTION for the Posters: Knowing all you feel you know about this case – What would have happen had Zimmerman not pursued Martin? For me, I see that
--Martin would have went home?
--Police may have caught up with Martin, probably had Martin take them to where he was staying for verification, then, still would have taken him to the station for additional questioning, then called his relatives to come get him and take him home.
Yet, without Zimmerman’s pursuit of Martin, Martin would have went home that night, instead of being killed.
So, the only question before the Court and the Jury should have been, did Zimmerman overstep the laws of Stand Your Ground, and, if so, is it murder or manslaughter?
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
This does not change the fact that there are facts sufficient to charge Mr. Zimmerman and force him to stand trial. No amount of media pressure can change the evidence that exists, which, if insufficient to force him to stand trial, a judge can dismiss the charges. The judge didn't do that (must be more media pressure). On an aside, a question for the "media pressure" folks: do you think all attorneys/judges/prosecutors are simply mindless (spineless?) sycophants who don't have even the smallest modicum of integrity? That's what it's amounting to every time you imply that the prosecutor or judge is simply bowing to media pressure in their handling of this case.
The media may have painted these two individuals in false lights...that doesn't change what evidence has been presented. The old agage in criminal court is that attorneys don't try slam dunks. Meaning, if the prosecutor has a shit case, he doesn't want to get embarrassed in front of a jury, so he dismisses or makes a deal. If the defense attorney has a mountain of evidence inculpating his client, they usually seek a deal. The fact that this is a "close call" means that the prosecutors, at least in charging him, probably got it right (unless of course someone's considering the whole thing with a distinctly pro-gun/anti-gun control bias :think: ).
Your correct is doesn't change what evidence has been presented...
Which is funny because now the prosecutors are changing their argument
They were arguing Zimmerman was ontop....now they are saying Trayvon was ontop...
Not only that but the judge thew out all the text messages, saying any 7 year old could "hack" his phone password and his text application password and send those tests. So yes, the MEDIA is creating a bias, and the judge has seem to also conformed to this bias as well.
Are you even paying attention to this trial?
i don't view everyone with the concealed carry permit as an aggressor. i will say that someone carrying a gun MIGHT be more inclined to start something since Mr. Colt 45 has his back...
You're off. When I carry I avoid confrontation because of two reasons, the first I don't want to have to use it, the second because of your statement. Most are conscious to the fact that there are trolls everywhere trying to get rights banned. No point giving you guys more to argue with.
it was a general statement. you can not honestly sit there and tell me that every concealed carry holder is going to act as you do. i am sure that that gun makes a lot of them braver and more willing to confront someone or get involved in a heated situation. case in point, zimmerman. a shitty fighter, knowing he had a gun approached martin. i am willing to bet that had zimmerman not had a gun, he would have never gotten out of his car.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
This trial is joke. The media wants people to perceive this trial as a ‘racial’ matter. When in fact that the main issue of the case has been lost on the public. The ‘Stand Your Ground’ law of Florida. There would not have been a fight had Zimmerman adhered to the Stand Your Ground law and not pursued Martin.
Can you claim the ‘Stand Your Ground’ law if you make it a point to follow, harass, provoke, and engage a person? Does not that person, fearful of what is happening, also have the right to protect him/her self once confronted?
QUESTION for the Posters: Knowing all you feel you know about this case – What would have happen had Zimmerman not pursued Martin? For me, I see that
--Martin would have went home?
--Police may have caught up with Martin, probably had Martin take them to where he was staying for verification, then, still would have taken him to the station for additional questioning, then called his relatives to come get him and take him home.
Yet, without Zimmerman’s pursuit of Martin, Martin would have went home that night, instead of being killed.
So, the only question before the Court and the Jury should have been, did Zimmerman overstep the laws of Stand Your Ground, and, if so, is it murder or manslaughter?
Following someone doesn't mean you lose your right to self-defense, right?
All of this "it wouldn't never happened if Zimmerman just went home or didn't follow him" stuff is nonsense.
i don't view everyone with the concealed carry permit as an aggressor. i will say that someone carrying a gun MIGHT be more inclined to start something since Mr. Colt 45 has his back...
You're off. When I carry I avoid confrontation because of two reasons, the first I don't want to have to use it, the second because of your statement. Most are conscious to the fact that there are trolls everywhere trying to get rights banned. No point giving you guys more to argue with.
it was a general statement. you can not honestly sit there and tell me that every concealed carry holder is going to act as you do. i am sure that that gun makes a lot of them braver and more willing to confront someone or get involved in a heated situation. case in point, zimmerman. a shitty fighter, knowing he had a gun approached martin. i am willing to bet that had zimmerman not had a gun, he would have never gotten out of his car.
Do you think it should be guilty until proven innocent? Don't be afraid to answer. I just want to know if you honestly believe it should be guilty until proven innocent or if you're just riding the biased cock of the media.
So what is prosecution gonna come up with in the closing statement? are they gonna use just one or all of
1. Zimmerman using mini flashlight as a weapon
2. Zimmerman hitting himself with a branch
3. Zimmerman bumping into a branch
4. Zimmerman executing TM
5. Zimmerman being an MMA expert
6. Zimmerman shooting while being pounded, thinking his injuries arent bad and he just wants to waste a kid
7. Zimmerman shooting while TM is backing off after seeing the gun
8. Zimmerman being a racist
9. Zimmerman being a wannabe cop
The prosecution still completely out of a story to replace Zimmerman?
The state is trying to put in any possible theory as to how this went down, and hoping the jury bites on any one of them. They change the possibilities everytime the state proves a new point.
Meanwhile the defense has stuck to one story, proven it time and time again, and never deviated.
As this trial comes to a close, and the rioters start to consider bubbling up, let me remind everyone that Race Baiters Rev's Al & Jesse pounced on this when they thought George Zimmerman was some German guy with a gun. Had Hispanic George Zimmerman more resembled David Ortiz or Mariano Rivera and not Lumpy Rutherford, this whole calamity would have been "just another" black on black killing, unworthy of more than 10 seconds on the local news.............
- Breitbart - one voice silenced , millions awakened.
live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.
Comments
Anyways, its pretty evident that the only reason charges were filed was because of the media pressure.
Never throw out the "florida" wildcard either. That is the last state where I would want a random selection of the populace to determine my fate.
Unless it's Johnny P (although reading his book may give me pause :think:)
:? :fp:
:corn:
(edit: florida is my last choice unless I'm guilty ... then it is my #1 choice) :geek:
I'll be brutally honest here. I have a family (wife/daughters) that mean more to me than anything. And I will never let anyone take me away from them, so if someone crosses the line where i THINK there is a possibility of something life threatening happening to me (weather it be or not), I will take that chance anytime, and if that means ending someones life, then so be it. I am not taking a chance with my life.
You'r right his injuries weren't that bad, so what? Are you going to take that chance hoping the other person will stop? And if Zimmerman is telling the truth, and TM said " your going to die tonight" you would take that chance?
Yes, I'd be willing to take that chance. I'm hoping to never put myself in that position. I for one, could NEVER live myself if I shot and killed someone for punching me in the nose. and for instance, I'd never get out of my car at night in the rain and follow someone behind some houses with a loaded gun when told not to. Thats why I think Zimmerman is dangerous.
And no, im not suggesting that anyone who has a concealed carry is an aggressor, but I am suggesting that someone who is carrying their gun, possibly out of the holster at night (we have no idea), following someone in the rain, could be considered an aggressor.. we have no idea how it happened, and you have no idea if Trayvon knew zimmerman had a gun or not -- unless you simply believe every word the lying Zimmerman has spouted...
Either way, from my experience, Zimmerman didn't do any out of the ordinary.
Our neighborhood HOA sent out an email notifying people to close their garage doors during the day because some kids/criminals were going into opened garage doors and stealing things while people were up at the pool or whatever. So knowing that is going on in my neighborhood, I wouldn't think twice about following or asking a kid what there up-to if I am unfamiliar with who they are or haven't seen them in the neighborhood before. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a concerned parent and looking out for your neighborhood, which is what zimmerman did. He also called the cops to report such suspicious activity. It seems you want to keep linking whoever had the "gun" with "aggressor".
Also why are you putting so much emphasis on it "raining" and being dark out.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Because, I think it would be HIGHLY unlikely that Zimmerman wouldve gotten out of his car had he not had a gun on him. Also, people are usually less likely to follow someone in the dark and in the rain. He was VERY determined to get up on Trayvon if you ask me. I think he went too far. And I definitely, as I said before, dont think a punch to the nose and a tiny scrape on the head warrants DEATH. I know a ton of people who have punched people in the nose worse than that, and Im happy some gun toting idiot like Zimmerman didnt end their lives because of it.
Also, I bring those things up I guess because Zimmerman didnt follow suggestions of the dispatcher. He also said he'd wait by the mailboxes, which he didnt do. He also lied about his finances. He also said that doctors said he should've gotten stitches in his head but they decided not to for some odd reason. :? I just dont buy the guys story, and I think he used very bad judgement. I also agree with Gimme - I think Zimmerman is a drama queen and made up the things he said that trayvon said. I mean, according to Zimmerna, he was screaming like a baby for 10 seconds on the 911 call before he shot Trayvon. How could he even hear Travyon say "you're gonna die tonight."
But he might walk - I do see that he might not be guilty according to the crappy florida law. But that is why this is so polarizing, and I dont blame you for thinking like you do. Its a simple difference really. But I think you're a pretty good dude, and I doubt you'd kill someone if they punched you in the nose.
Just putting guns in this type of situation is what is the real problem. It gives pussies like Zimmerman too much confidence and bravado. BOTH trayvon and zimmerman did stupid shit that night, but did it need to result in death?
I personally don't believe his actions fit with what I understand the stand you ground law to be.
I might also hope for a little more decorum for the memory of the deceased.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Injuries aren't the barometer for justifiable actions, meaning just because you don't suffer a life threatening injury, does not mean that your life isn't in danger. Someone on top of you hitting you and saying "your going to die tonight" (weather true or not) IS a LIFE THREATENING situation. I would not take that chance.
I lived near that gated community when it happened.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national ... ven/52522/
A bold commentary that can never be proven or disproven. I'll remind you that prosecutors take an oath to only charge cases they believe to be warranted. Take what you want from that, but wouldn't your assertion above cut both ways? Many prosecutors are elected officials (I have no idea if they were in this case), and if a prosecutor was seen to be particularly "off" or susceptible to media pressure, whether to charge or not charge, wouldn't that prosecutor be risking his or her job by charging something only because of said media pressure?
I think its a stretch to believe someone would risk a job to charge something they didn't believe was warranted (remember: law licenses are lost when lawyers overreach) just because of media pressure. The fact that we're sitting here, debating the merits of each side in what is generally considered a "close call" shows that the charges were likely appropriate. Whether a guilty verdict is also appropriate remains to be seen, but that's not our test.
As far as Martin standing over Zimmerman (Zimmerman says he was, but he's got a lot to lose, doesn't he?), or the alleged severity of Zimmerman's injuries ("insignificant" I believe was how they were deemed), or Martin allegedly grabbing for Zimmerman's gun (no Martin DNA on the weapon), or whether Zimmerman following Martin justified Martin attacking Zimmerman (whether that happened is up for debate, remember?), is all ultimately before the jury.
Personally, if Zimmerman's acquitted, then the system worked and he's entitled to his freedom. If he's convicted, it's because the culmination of evidence presented convinced the jury that it's unreasonable to believe that an overzealous neighborhood watch volunteer with a history of reporting "suspicious black males" was simply defending himself when he followed and shot an unarmed black 17 year old.
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2024-08-31 Wrigley 2
2024-09-15 Fenway 1
2024-09-27 Ohana 1
2024-09-29 Ohana 2
"Looked like he was on drugs?" Good lord man. That means absolutely nothing to me. he also said "these punks always get away." Trayvon would've gotten away with what exactly?
I assume he is lying on many accounts because it was proven that he's a liar in several scenarios. and his stories just dont make sense to me.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I would love to trust our elected officials, but the fact is we can not..I think this lady was appointed..What worries me the most is the threat of violence if Zimmerman is found not guilty. I hate how the media and our President made this into a racial crime to further divide this country.
I agree !
Godfather.
Let also forget the media race baiting by showing you...
1. Making GZ "whiter" then he really was by doctoring pictures.
2. Releasing GZ photo to the public, which was a mug shot.(frowing)
3. Editing audio/call tapes
4. Releasing TM photo the the public as a pre-pubescent innocent school boy with a great big smile on his face. and labeling him as "eating skittles and drinking Arizona ice tea"
5. President OBAMA say "If he had a son, he would look just like Martin". (which conveniently, after this was said was when GZ was actually charged of a crime)
6. With-holding all of the TM photos of him holding a gun, smoking weed, being suspended from school for fighting, buying guns Illegally.
The biggest issue in this case is the medias portrayal of both individuals. The way they put the case out there blatantly added to the race hunt that ensued.
You're off. When I carry I avoid confrontation because of two reasons, the first I don't want to have to use it, the second because of your statement. Most are conscious to the fact that there are trolls everywhere trying to get rights banned. No point giving you guys more to argue with.
I completely agree with you here. The media butchered this thing. Luckily, the race card seems to have worn off a bit.
This does not change the fact that there are facts sufficient to charge Mr. Zimmerman and force him to stand trial. No amount of media pressure can change the evidence that exists, which, if insufficient to force him to stand trial, a judge can dismiss the charges. The judge didn't do that (must be more media pressure). On an aside, a question for the "media pressure" folks: do you think all attorneys/judges/prosecutors are simply mindless (spineless?) sycophants who don't have even the smallest modicum of integrity? That's what it's amounting to every time you imply that the prosecutor or judge is simply bowing to media pressure in their handling of this case.
The media may have painted these two individuals in false lights...that doesn't change what evidence has been presented. The old agage in criminal court is that attorneys don't try slam dunks. Meaning, if the prosecutor has a shit case, he doesn't want to get embarrassed in front of a jury, so he dismisses or makes a deal. If the defense attorney has a mountain of evidence inculpating his client, they usually seek a deal. The fact that this is a "close call" means that the prosecutors, at least in charging him, probably got it right (unless of course someone's considering the whole thing with a distinctly pro-gun/anti-gun control bias :think: ).
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2024-08-31 Wrigley 2
2024-09-15 Fenway 1
2024-09-27 Ohana 1
2024-09-29 Ohana 2
Can you claim the ‘Stand Your Ground’ law if you make it a point to follow, harass, provoke, and engage a person? Does not that person, fearful of what is happening, also have the right to protect him/her self once confronted?
QUESTION for the Posters: Knowing all you feel you know about this case – What would have happen had Zimmerman not pursued Martin? For me, I see that
--Martin would have went home?
--Police may have caught up with Martin, probably had Martin take them to where he was staying for verification, then, still would have taken him to the station for additional questioning, then called his relatives to come get him and take him home.
Yet, without Zimmerman’s pursuit of Martin, Martin would have went home that night, instead of being killed.
So, the only question before the Court and the Jury should have been, did Zimmerman overstep the laws of Stand Your Ground, and, if so, is it murder or manslaughter?
Which is funny because now the prosecutors are changing their argument
They were arguing Zimmerman was ontop....now they are saying Trayvon was ontop...
Not only that but the judge thew out all the text messages, saying any 7 year old could "hack" his phone password and his text application password and send those tests. So yes, the MEDIA is creating a bias, and the judge has seem to also conformed to this bias as well.
Are you even paying attention to this trial?
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
And went out for a few Jaegerbombs....
We could have avoided this whole mess!!!!
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....
All of this "it wouldn't never happened if Zimmerman just went home or didn't follow him" stuff is nonsense.
1. Zimmerman using mini flashlight as a weapon
2. Zimmerman hitting himself with a branch
3. Zimmerman bumping into a branch
4. Zimmerman executing TM
5. Zimmerman being an MMA expert
6. Zimmerman shooting while being pounded, thinking his injuries arent bad and he just wants to waste a kid
7. Zimmerman shooting while TM is backing off after seeing the gun
8. Zimmerman being a racist
9. Zimmerman being a wannabe cop
The prosecution still completely out of a story to replace Zimmerman?
The state is trying to put in any possible theory as to how this went down, and hoping the jury bites on any one of them. They change the possibilities everytime the state proves a new point.
Meanwhile the defense has stuck to one story, proven it time and time again, and never deviated.
- Breitbart - one voice silenced , millions awakened.