Still waiting for a single shred of evidence zimmerman committed any crime. So far nobody has provided any, I'll keep waiting.
Still waiting for a single shred of evidence zimmerman committed any crime. So far nobody has provided any, I'll keep waiting.
Dead body? Check
Murder weapon? Check
Killer? Check
Recorded call of the killer muttering hate speech and setting out on foot after the minor he'd seen do nothing wrong? Check.
Witness directly contradicting killers story? Check.
Run along spidey. Your trolling has gone on for way too long, bub.
Dead body? Check
Murder weapon? Check
Killer? Check
Recorded call of the killer muttering hate speech and setting out on foot after the minor he'd seen do nothing wrong? Check.
Witness directly contradicting killers story? Check.
Run along spidey. Your trolling has gone on for way too long, bub.
You forgot:
Person assaulted? Check
Witnesses place attacker on top of victim? Check
Victim shoots attacker in self defense? Check
Let me guess:
IT'S NOT AGAINST THE LAW TO FOLLOW SOMEONE WITH A LOADED WEAPON AND ATTEMPT TO APPREHEND AND DETAIN THEM WHEN YOU HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO APPREHEND, QUESTION OR DETAIN ANYONE.
Follow someone? Legal. Loaded weapon with permit? Legal. Apprehend and detain? No evidence of such, just your conjecture. Question them? Legal. Your meltdown when GZ gets off? Priceless.
IT'S NOT AGAINST THE LAW TO IGNORE 911 ADVICE.
It was not 911, it was the non emergency line at SPD. He was speaking with a dispatch operator, a civilian. I was offered a job as a 911 dispatch operator a few years ago, now think about what you think of me... would you want your life to possibly depend on my advice, not being at the scene, given over a phone, being followed?
It is in fact legal to ignore that operator saying "we don't need you to do that (follow)" because it wasn't a lawful order. This is irrelevant though because there is no indication that he did ignore it. He said "okay" and then on the way back to his car was attacked by Trayvon, who had disappeared previously. How did Trayvon get back to a place where he could attack him? Whether it be the top of the T or 30 feet south, Trayvon should've been nowhere near either location. GZ's keys to his car were found on the ground at the "T" junction. That's where he was punched, just as he says. That's why he dropped those keys.
IT'S NOT AGAINST THE LAW TO BE A COWARD WHO WANTS TO SHOW THE POLICE HOW IT'S DONE, IN HOPES OF GETTING A JOB WITH THEM IN THE FUTURE.
Your conjecture. Based on nothing but you projecting your own hatred for other people in your life, possibly your father, or just certain types of people... onto GZ. The fact is GZ doesn't fit your republican racist boogie man mold as well as you'd like. He's a registered democrat, mentored 2 black inner city boys, lead an awareness campaign to get justice for Sherman Ware, a black homeless man assaulted for no reason by a white cop's son. Went into business selling insurance with one business partner, who was a black man. Hadn't had a gun that long, but got it after an animal control officer suggested it, after a pitbull or rotweiller incident where his wife was menaced by the dog in question.
On a previous call about another suspicious person, he had said "I don't want to approach him, personally" - you made the wrong call about this case and now pride and batshit craziness on your part prevent admitting it.
IT'S NOT AGAINST THE LAW IN FLORIDA TO PICK A FIGHT, THEN KILL THE OTHER PERSON WHEN YOU START TO LOSE.
This may actually be true, that may be legal depending on exactly how it went. My understanding is that it depends largely on just how far the other person is taking it when you're now "losing" there is turning a fight around and winning it against the aggressor, and then there is going too far. Any person would acknowledge that you can go too far. I'd say holding someone down and bashing their head on pavement, covering their mouth and nose, and grabbing at their previously holstered gun... would qualify.
But again, there is no evidence that GZ picked a fight with TM. That's just raw conjecture on your part. You portray him as this pussy, yet... you
want to believe his 5'9" little 'white' (according to you) ass went up and tried to physically detain or swing at a 6'3" black guy in a dark hoodie that he had been pissing himself a few minutes earlier about approaching his car, and in a quivering voice said to the dispatch "just get an officer out here!"
???
Give me a fucking break.
JKing never "had it" to lose in the first place. He's the most miserable excuse for a human being on this forum.I love reading your psycho-babbling rants, and it's clear that as time goes on you are 'losing it' more and more.
Dead body? Check
Murder weapon? Check
Killer? Check
Recorded call of the killer muttering hate speech and setting out on foot after the minor he'd seen do nothing wrong? Check.
Witness directly contradicting killers story? Check.
Run along spidey. Your trolling has gone on for way too long, bub.
JKing never "had it" to lose in the first place. He's the most miserable excuse for a human being on this forum.
Humor me, describe a legitimate use of a firearm in self-defense to us.
Bonus points for making it as close to the Trayvon situation as you can, while still having it satisfy your moral code, or whatever.
Humor me, describe a legitimate use of a firearm in self-defense to us.
Bonus points for making it as close to the Trayvon situation as you can, while still having it satisfy your moral code, or whatever.
Legitimate use? Trayvon breaks into zimmerman's house.. he shoots him.
Murder? Zimmerman ignores all reason, ignores the dispatcher, and ignores the rules of the neighborhood watch as given by the SPD and chases after Trayvon. Catches up to him. Grabs him, and buys himself a swift punch to the face.
At the point he grabs Trayvon he's the aggressor. Self defense is out the window especially given the minor nature of his injuries.
There was no fight over the gun. Zimmerman is on record saying matter of factly that he simply pulled the gun and shot.
This is where the murder comes in since he didn't have to shoot. His life wasn't in danger. The only person who's life was in danger was the guy without the gun.
Had he made trayvon aware he had a gun, the situation would be over without anybody being murdered and we wouldn't be having this discussion.
It is nice to see who the racists and the crazies are though. Makes the ignore list fill up rather quickly.
Even your what if is still self defense. Even IF zimmerman was initial aggressor he can still lawfully shoot in self defense when he is on his back, mounted, unable to retreat and screaming for his life. All of this verified by eye witnesses.
so JKing106 is convinced there was a struggle for the gun, and that's why it's murder.
airdata is convinced there wasn't, and that's why it's murder.
airdata is probably prepared to believe every word out of GZ's mouth is a self-serving lie, but on this point about no struggle for the gun... now it's a lie.
I'm reading the Osterman book slowly btw, and he indicates that GZ did say Trayvon's hand was on the gun.
Frankly, GZ has said a lot of shit about what went down.
You can draw a couple conclusions. One is, you could say his versions vary because he's lying.
The other is, and this is what I think, that you could say they vary because it was an incredibly fast paced, hectic, life or death situation where he was already dazed from the first punch, and it all happened very quickly. He took someone's life for the first and only time, he then was kept awake for hours at the police station, it all took place while he had a broken nose, and then got his head slammed on pavement.
To me, it is very, very understandable that someone in a situation like that wouldn't remember exactly what the dispatch said leading up to it, or exactly why he thought TM went for the gun, or whether TM touched the gun, or whether TM said "homey" or not before punching him.... or even how they ended up 30 feet south of the "T"
Frankly, when you get right down to it... you can pretend GZ died too, and ignore his testimony entirely. Let's just write off every thing he's said as too tainted by bad memory, ADD, lying, trauma, or some mixture of all of those... and let's just look at what we see apart from what he says.
We have ballistics showing Trayvon was very very close, and on top of GZ at the time of the shot.
We have a witness who attests that TM was on top of GZ either holding him down, punching him repeatedly, but without a doubt keeping him from getting up and away... moments before the shot.
We have the injuries on GZ's head, and the broken nose the doctor verified. These should make it clear which thing the witness saw (an attack, not just a wrestle or hold him down situation)
You combine all of these, and I don't see how any reasonable person can question that it was self-defense.
He did not equivocate, though, about who was on top.
"The black guy was on top," he said.
You forgot:
Person assaulted? Check
Witnesses place attacker on top of victim? Check
Victim shoots attacker in self defense? Check
Funny how you conveniently left this part out.
Let me guess you did this because you feel it's not relevant or doesn't help your argument.
I'm highly amused by these two clips from a video made a few months back about the case.
I love how he looks like he's straight up 8 years old there in their CGI. It looks like Webster.
and in this next one, I love how the 8 year old Webster is shot from great distance... just hilarious.
Fact is, the harmless little boy with Skittles is still an image which influences a lot of people and how they see this case. They'll deny it, but it's still that little boy they see in their mind. Including a lot of people in this thread.
When they first heard about this case, the idea that a little boy could have been assaulting a big grown man, just struck them as absurd, no way it was possible.
They haven't allowed the actual facts that came out since to budge them from that initial gut reaction. Simple as that.
These are your opinions, not facts. The person you are responding to only posted facts.
This all testifies to just how effective some of the tactics of the Martin family are.
1.) Show ancient pictures of their dead son, and with these the first pictures of him everyone saw... a lot of people would never get past this image of the little harmless boy. That has worked very, very well for them.
2.) Lie about his lifestyle, seal his records, take advantage of the fact that he was a minor and do everything you can to hide the facts of what he was up to. Utilize the fact that society is terrified of ever calling out any black person on anything, especially if they're a grieving family member of the lil' boy with Skittles you already established in item number 1.
3.) Wear a dark grey hoodie when you're out lurking around, makes it harder to see you and makes you look more like an intimidating badass. This ended up helping erode John's certainty of what he saw, GZ was very visible in red... Trayvon in dark grey, not so much.
4.) Last, but most... let the mythos about the lil' 8 year old boy with Skittles loom so large in the media that it taints and influences all the neighbors/witnesses. Any person who doubts that John's equivocation later on what he saw is a direct result of being spammed by pictures of Trayvon at age 12, or age 10 in his football uniform, isn't being honest.
It was, and still is an incredibly effective media play. If you're a witness who saw what John saw, it'll require very great courage and clarity indeed to stick with what you know you saw, in the face of the racial narrative, the black panther shit, the Sharpton ball rolling... that feeling of oh shit, I'm a white dude and the entire black community is mobilizing for this kid who I saw beating the shit out of this guy... holding him down, basically I know this whole narrative is bullshit and could single handedly tear it down, but think what might happen to me then? Will they come after me? And maybe... maybe I didn't see what I thought I saw, after all look at this kid in the pictures, he is innocent and 12 years old. Maybe I am mistaken.
It's incredibly, incredibly evil really.
Which doesn't address the issue of how the confrontation started, or who started it. You know, the things you want to avoid by having the case thrown out, because you don't give two shits about what really happen. Dead "thug" is good enough for you, just like it was for your Klan daddy.