If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gawker)   George Zimmerman, America's Watch Captain creates a web page to tell his side of the story. Just kidding, please send him money and check out his pictures of a vandalized black cultural center   (gawker.com) divider line 738
    More: Stupid, George Zimmerman, cultural center, Thomas Paine, hunters, web pages  
•       •       •

15311 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Apr 2012 at 11:25 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



738 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-10 11:17:10 AM

Thunderpipes: Hope Zimmerman is cleared, then massive, multi billion dollars lawsuits against the media, the state, the Feds, and huge lawsuits against the parents, Al, Jesse, everyone.

Disgusting what is happening here.


You're too late, TP. 9beers already provided enough derp in here to fill 7 threads.

Don't feel bad though - I'm sure there's a Santorum or Gingrich thread that needs your herp and/or derp right now.
 
2012-04-10 11:19:58 AM

ChuDogg: tirob:
ChuDogg:


My reply and your reply are long enough so that the filter shortened it when I hit the "quote" button, so I'll try to respond as best I can to your points: Yes, the overlay and the pictures are helpful but I think that while your conclusions are plausible, so are many others. And I *can* say that what you write is conjecture *because* we do not have the entirety of the police report. There may be things that the cops or the detectives saw that render your speculations impossible. Detective Serino, who unlike either of us was on the scene right after the shooting, and who interviewed Zimmerman that evening, believed, according to sources, that what he heard Zimmerman tell him did not fit with the other evidence that he saw. I for one am not willing to attempt to reconstruct what happened based on the limited amount of evidence that has been made public so far.

I don't know whether Martin was scared for his life and I have certainly never asserted that he was. OTOH, we do know that he was a juvenile who was being pursued by an adult at some point just before he was shot to death. I've made this point before here, but Martin, who was an invitee on the real estate where he was shot, and who could not have known that Zimmerman had called 911, could have reasonably believed that the adult who was pursuing him was doing so in order to commit a crime.
 
2012-04-10 11:23:30 AM

tirob: Phinn: tirob: Which one? George Zimmerman's father said that the confrontation started when Martin walked up to Zimmerman and addressed him, and Zimmerman's brother claimed that it started after Martin "snuck up" on Zimmerman.

You can't sneak and walk at the same time?

There \All you've got is argument-by-thesaurus. You lose. Just like the Duke lacrosse team. Just like the Jena Six. Just like Tawana Brawley.

I don't like Zimmerman, but he has the right enemies.

Read what I wrote again. You can sneak and walk at the same time, but you can't "sneak up on" and "walk up and address" someone at the same time. If I address you I'm not sneaking up on you. This isn't argument by thesaurus, it's two different versions of how the confrontation started.


the whole " I was walking back to my truck and was ambushed" story doesn't wash.
first off it requires both parties to completely do a 180 at the same time.
both have to change their minds
Zimmerman has to break off his pursuit just as he's about to catch up to the "asshole(s) who always gets away" (his words and sentiment not mine)
Trayvon has to stop trying to avoid the strange man with a gun following him (we know he was running because Zimmerman himself said so and it was confirmed by his gf on the phone)

I call bullshiat. I find it highly unlikely Zimmerman broke off the pursuit. and just as unlikely that Trayvon wouldn't just go the last few yards to where he was staying. What probably happened is Zimmerman caught up with him , He tried to detain Trayvon and Trayvon punched him in the nose and a fight started. Once Zimmerman realized his ass was probably going to lose the fight he pulled his gun. Trayvon grabbed at the gun to try to avoid being shot and started screaming for help. (seriously listen to the tape it sounds like a kid fearing for their life. it's farking haunting) and George shot him.
 
2012-04-10 11:24:57 AM

tirob: You can sneak and walk at the same time, but you can't "sneak up on" and "walk up and address" someone at the same time. If I address you I'm not sneaking up on you. This isn't argument by thesaurus, it's two different versions of how the confrontation started.


I fully and whole-heartedly admit that speaking to someone is incompatible with sneaking.

However, since we are getting these tidbits of information second- and third-hand, filtered through reporters (who are, by and large, borderline retarded), it is entirely possible that these two versions are not as incompatible as you may think.

It's possible that Zimmerman claimed that Martin was attempting to sneak up on him, then Zimmerman saw him, then Martin spoke. Let's call this the sneak-then-speak hypothesis, counselor.

It is also entirely possible that Zimmerman was mistaken -- that Martin had no intention of sneaking, but rather that Martin wanted Zimmerman to see him, and that Zimmerman was merely surprised to see Martin so close by, believing that Martin had walked or run a much further distance than he actually had. So, he called Martin's behavior "sneaking" but did so unfairly. Let's call this the speaking-not-sneaking hypothesis.

It is also possible that either the father or brother is mis-characterizing Zimmerman's statements. Let's call this the "I-never-said-he-was-sneaking" hypothesis.

And so on.

So, congratulations on discovering the case-cracking quasi-discrepancy between two hearsay comments that have been filtered through the media. The problem with your intrepid investigative work is that no one in the Get Zimmerman Now lynch mob is actually concerned with evidence, reason or law.
 
2012-04-10 11:25:50 AM

s2s2s2: Like this guy?


I a

ChuDogg: Thanks, appreciate it.


Maybe you can answer a question for me. Given that Zimmerman still isn't in jail, and Martin is still dead, why is it that guys like you are spending so much time and effort defending Zimmerman? I can understand the people who think a miscarriage of justice occurred. To them, a teenager is dead for no reason. But guys like you and Phinn? I don't get you. I don't get why you're apparently spending your entire week obsessing over this. I'm sure that it couldn't possibly be that you're so overjoyed by the idea of a black teenager being killed that it's simply not enough for you that the killer didn't go to jail, and isn't being charged with anything.
 
2012-04-10 11:26:36 AM

Raharu: 9beers: Zimmerman was returning to his vehicle when he was attacked by Martin.

Prove
he
wasn't

Prove
he
Was.


So, not familiar how the law works?
 
2012-04-10 11:29:13 AM

Phinn: The problem with your intrepid investigative work is that no one in the Get Zimmerman Now lynch mob is actually concerned with evidence, reason or law.


A lynch mob, Jethro, is what gathered up black folk and killed them without trial or jury back during the civil rights crisis in America. I'm sure the irony eludes you. I'm certain the irony eludes you. I do find it interesting that it's always you White-Power mouthbreathers who are the first to start tossing around terms like "lynch mob".
 
2012-04-10 11:30:04 AM

Mavent: I don't get you.


It's a very interesting case with very interesting circumstances. It is a tragedy and I wish George hadn't shot the kid. I really do. I just haven't been given sufficient cause to doubt his story. The more that comes to light, the harder it is to doubt.

If that changes, I will be all for a conviction. I have always thought it needs to go to trial(like the police did).
 
2012-04-10 11:31:47 AM

Hobodeluxe: it requires both parties to completely do a 180 at the same time


No it doesn't.
 
2012-04-10 11:32:06 AM

9beers: Raharu: 9beers: Zimmerman was returning to his vehicle when he was attacked by Martin.

Prove
he
wasn't

Prove
he
Was.

So, not familiar how the law works?


if this thing goes to a jury they will decide what is more likely.
that Zimmerman gave up pursuit of the "asshole who always gets away" or that he continued with his pursuit
or that Trayvon who was actively trying to avoid confrontation (as per Zimmerman's own words) continued to proceed towards home or changed his mind and suddenly became the stalker.
Does trayvon not have the right to stand his ground and defend himself if he feels threatened?
Or does the law not apply to blacks?
If this goes to jury Zimmerman will go to prison.
This I am sure.
 
2012-04-10 11:33:14 AM
I can't believe every single minor blurb on Zimmerman's story is getting national attention.

Take the case of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom which showcased oral, vaginal, and anal rape. The murderers poured cleaning fluid down the girl's throat and the vajayjay. They shot the guy multiple times then set his body on fire. They dumped the girl live and hogtied in a trash can to slowly suffocate to death. The victims were white, the murderers black. Few know the story outside of Tennessee. There were no marches or presidential remarks.

Media darlings doesn't come close to describing skewed race relationships painted by the press.
 
2012-04-10 11:33:40 AM

s2s2s2: Hobodeluxe: it requires both parties to completely do a 180 at the same time

No it doesn't.


sure it does. for Zimmerman's story to hold up he has to break off pursuit and be headed back to his truck and Trayvon has to stop trying to avoid him and follow him back to ambush him
 
2012-04-10 11:34:47 AM

RaceBoatDriver: I can't believe every single minor blurb on Zimmerman's story is getting national attention.

Take the case of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom which showcased oral, vaginal, and anal rape. The murderers poured cleaning fluid down the girl's throat and the vajayjay. They shot the guy multiple times then set his body on fire. They dumped the girl live and hogtied in a trash can to slowly suffocate to death. The victims were white, the murderers black. Few know the story outside of Tennessee. There were no marches or presidential remarks.

Media darlings doesn't come close to describing skewed race relationships painted by the press.


yeah but those farkers were arrested. not let go by the cops carrying their weapons home with them
 
2012-04-10 11:37:03 AM

Hobodeluxe: tirob: Phinn: tirob: Which one? George Zimmerman's father said that the confrontation started when Martin walked up to Zimmerman and addressed him, and Zimmerman's brother claimed that it started after Martin "snuck up" on Zimmerman.

You can't sneak and walk at the same time?

There \All you've got is argument-by-thesaurus. You lose. Just like the Duke lacrosse team. Just like the Jena Six. Just like Tawana Brawley.

I don't like Zimmerman, but he has the right enemies.

Read what I wrote again. You can sneak and walk at the same time, but you can't "sneak up on" and "walk up and address" someone at the same time. If I address you I'm not sneaking up on you. This isn't argument by thesaurus, it's two different versions of how the confrontation started.

the whole " I was walking back to my truck and was ambushed" story doesn't wash.
first off it requires both parties to completely do a 180 at the same time.
both have to change their minds
Zimmerman has to break off his pursuit just as he's about to catch up to the "asshole(s) who always gets away" (his words and sentiment not mine)
Trayvon has to stop trying to avoid the strange man with a gun following him (we know he was running because Zimmerman himself said so and it was confirmed by his gf on the phone)

I call bullshiat. I find it highly unlikely Zimmerman broke off the pursuit since that is what happens and the 911 tape backs it up. and just as unlikely that Trayvon wouldn't just go the last few yards to where he was staying, unless he was a gangsta thug wanna-be, which has pretty much been shown. What probably happened is Zimmerman caught up with him lost site of him since he was hiding close by , He tried to detain Trayvon go back to his truck and Trayvon punched him in the nose confronted him after coming out of his hiding spot and a fight started. Once Zimmerman realized his ass was probably going to lose the fight die as his head bounced off the pavement again, he pulled his gun. Trayvon possibly grabbed at the gun to try to avoid being shot and started screaming for help said you die tonight. (seriously listen to the tape it sounds like a kid fearing for their life Zimmerman screaming for help, and the eyewitness accounts back that up. it's farking haunting) and George shot him in self defense.


there, fixed that for you
 
2012-04-10 11:38:26 AM

Cubansaltyballs: Weaver95: Cubansaltyballs: Looks like this thread is going to turn into stormfront.

freerepublic/stormfront/fox news....some days its difficult to tell them apart.

When these types of stories come up, I visit stormfront, freerepublic, etc. The only difference I see is that stormfront is pretty open about being pro-white/anti-black, etc, while freerepublic and foxnews is mostly racism via innuendo.


They're getting more openly racist
 
2012-04-10 11:39:29 AM

RaceBoatDriver: The victims were white, the murderers black.


Well, obviously, THIS is why you're much more concerned with their case. However, I think the point you're probably missing is that these particular murders took place in 2007, and the murderers were actually arrested. One was sentenced to death, one to life in prison, and one to 58 years. But hey, the victims were white, and the murders black, so why SHOULDN'T a a half-decade old crime where the murderers were caught and sentenced be getting more coverage than the Zimmerman/Martin case? THE VICTIMS WERE WHITE, dammit.
 
2012-04-10 11:39:55 AM

Hobodeluxe: RaceBoatDriver: I can't believe every single minor blurb on Zimmerman's story is getting national attention.

Take the case of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom which showcased oral, vaginal, and anal rape. The murderers poured cleaning fluid down the girl's throat and the vajayjay. They shot the guy multiple times then set his body on fire. They dumped the girl live and hogtied in a trash can to slowly suffocate to death. The victims were white, the murderers black. Few know the story outside of Tennessee. There were no marches or presidential remarks.

Media darlings doesn't come close to describing skewed race relationships painted by the press.

yeah but those farkers were arrested. not let go by the cops carrying their weapons home with them


stop it with this bullshiat. it is false, and you know it.
 
2012-04-10 11:43:38 AM

Mavent: why is it that guys like you are spending so much time and effort defending Zimmerman?


I can only speak for myself, but I happen to think that the right of self-defense is the first on the list of human rights. It depends on the distinction between aggressive and defensive violence (i.e., the just and unjust use of force), which is the core issue in all of ethics and law.

Also, I am interested in the overwhelming power of media and propaganda to shape a person's view of the world. Human beings are obsessed with ethics and morality, and go to incredible lengths to justify and defend their normative conclusions about their behavior and that of others. The problem, however, is that the ethical rules (about who should or should not have done this or that) are infinitely malleable. For example, even in this debate, look at the lengths people will go to to attach ethical significance to the "instructions" given by a police dispatcher. Or to the idea that "if only Zimmerman had stayed in his car." Or what the Night Watchman Guidelines say about confronting suspects. None of these assertions remotely qualify as a sound ethical principle, although people attempt to make them appear so. All in an endless effort to justify their media-manipulated emotional responses.

I also resent the assertion that we ought to be meek, subservient little drones and let the "cops handle it." Cops derive all of their authority from us, so we can legitimately do whatever they can do, and more.

I also dislike Obama, his supporters, and everything they stand for, so watching him turn this local criminal issue into a propaganda tool is mildly revolting, albeit not terribly surprising.

I'm sure there are a couple of other reasons rattling around in my head. But those are the main ones.
 
2012-04-10 11:45:03 AM

frepnog: stop it with this bullshiat. it is false, and you know it.


Please tell us why it's such a big deal to you. Zimmerman walked free. Martin is still dead. Why is it that those two facts aren't enough for you? Why is it that you're here "defending the honor" of a guy who ended the life of a black teenager for absolutely no reason whatsoever? Why exactly does it bother you so much that some people aren't cheering over a completely pointless and avoidable death?
 
2012-04-10 11:51:25 AM

Mavent: Please tell us why it's such a big deal to you. Zimmerman walked free. Martin is still dead. Why is it that those two facts aren't enough for you?


Why are those two facts the only ones you'll consider? If they were the only salient facts in any case of homicide, then there would be no such thing as a justifiable homicide on grounds of self-defense.
 
2012-04-10 11:51:48 AM

9beers: So, not familiar how the law works?


Are you in a court of law? Did you get sworn in? Has anyone in this case given testimony under oath? Yet you declare that Zimmerman did not commit a crime. And in fact got a violent thug off the street. We had a case here in Oklahoma City where a pharmacist shot and killed a robber. Seemed like a clear case of self-defense. After the trial that pharmacist is now serving life in prison.
 
2012-04-10 11:53:23 AM

Mavent: frepnog: stop it with this bullshiat. it is false, and you know it.

Please tell us why it's such a big deal to you. Zimmerman walked free. Martin is still dead. Why is it that those two facts aren't enough for you? Why is it that you're here "defending the honor" of a guy who ended the life of a black teenager for absolutely no reason whatsoever? Why exactly does it bother you so much that some people aren't cheering over a completely pointless and avoidable death?


that isn't the point. the point is that when you lie about the facts that we DO know, it clouds the issue, engenders hate, and closes down thoughtful discussion.

Zimmerman should not have left his vehicle. However, it was not illegal to do so. Zimmerman should not have been carrying a gun; however he was legally able to do so.

It doesn't bother me that people aren't cheering over the death.... it bothers me that the media convicted Zimmerman by manipulating the facts that were actually known about the incident and had Zimmerman convicted in the eyes of the public with lies and misinformation, and that as more information comes out it seems more and more like Zimmerman did nothing wrong and more than likely shot in self defense because his own life was in danger.

It also bothers me when people CONTINUE to spout lies and misinformation when the truth is known about certain things, such as that Zimmerman's gun was in fact confiscated by police. Don't lie. It doesn't help your case at all.
 
2012-04-10 11:53:53 AM

Mavent: frepnog: stop it with this bullshiat. it is false, and you know it.

Please tell us why it's such a big deal to you. Zimmerman walked free. Martin is still dead. Why is it that those two facts aren't enough for you? Why is it that you're here "defending the honor" of a guy who ended the life of a black teenager for absolutely no reason whatsoever? Why exactly does it bother you so much that some people aren't cheering over a completely pointless and avoidable death?


That is why you fail. Why do you hate brown people and want them convicted before the have due process?
 
2012-04-10 11:56:12 AM
@tirob

I think we just have a different definition of conjecture. I was taught to use it as a conclusion based on limited or no supportong evidence.

Once again the statement "We know that Zimmerman chased and confronted Martin despite being ordered not to" is a conjecture. It is based on a single out of context and misinterpreted line of the 911 call which continues for 2 minutes afterwards. Thus, it has no supporting evidence to come to that conclusion.

But we state, "the 911 call indicates Zimmerman followed Martin for a limited time to attempt to get a better view to direct the 911 operator of Zimmermans location and then stopped when he lost sight of hin" this is supported by 1) Zimmermans words on the call 2) the operators words of the call, 3) the location of Zimmermans truck, 4) the location of the altercation. 5) witness statements

And this isn't even a conclusion. It's really just a hypothesis that is supported by numerous peices of a puzzle that all add up togethor. It rejectd the media inspire axiom, that is not supported by any evidence, by raise an alternative view.

Of course anything can come out of the police report. I mean literally every statement made in these threads and every statement made by the media may end up being proven false. That doesn't make them conjecture, or literally everything ever said could be a conjecture. Even conclusions made in the police report can be over turned years later by subsequent investigations. so this is just not a helpful view of what a conjecture is.


Personally, i welcome reviewing the evidence by the state and i think it was a monumental misstep to disband the grand jury and having an open hearing of what is known and what is not known. It is rediculous that the prosecuter is stalling this case further despite the hyper tensions the nation is in, and indicates that the available evidence expected that the grand jury would fail to indict. So now we'll get some weak charges levied, people won't review the evidece as presented and simply rally for their cause. This is going to be duke lacrosse all over again.
 
2012-04-10 11:58:28 AM

Phinn: I can only speak for myself, but I happen to think that the right of self-defense is the first on the list of human rights. It depends on the distinction between aggressive and defensive violence (i.e., the just and unjust use of force), which is the core issue in all of ethics and law.


So the right of Martin to walk down the street to his house without being chased by an armed man means nothing to you? If Martin did attack Zimmerman, he may have every right to under stand your ground laws.

Phinn: I also dislike Obama, his supporters, and everything they stand for, so watching him turn this local criminal issue into a propaganda tool is mildly revolting, albeit not terribly surprising.


Yes, no other politician has ever commented on a local crime. Did you forgot about Newt and the comments he made about Susan Smith. I didn't.
 
2012-04-10 12:03:43 PM

NightOwl2255: 9beers: So, not familiar how the law works?

Are you in a court of law? Did you get sworn in? Has anyone in this case given testimony under oath? Yet you declare that Zimmerman did not commit a crime. And in fact got a violent thug off the street. We had a case here in Oklahoma City where a pharmacist shot and killed a robber. Seemed like a clear case of self-defense. After the trial that pharmacist is now serving life in prison.


Bad example, he should have walked. It was self defense.
 
2012-04-10 12:04:08 PM

Mavent: effort defending Zimmerman


No, most of us are defending everyone's right to due process, not specifically Zimmerman's. Even guilty criminals deserve it, as well as innocent convicts.

It's to avoid the later, the innocent convicts. You don't live by that conviction, only to change it when someone "looks" guilty without proof. We, as a country, don't convict on popular vote, or base convictions on appearance, or on what Spike Lee has to say about the scenerio.

Being responsible for the death of a person is not murder, by definition. And now that you've ammended with "killer" it's not any due to your equivatory manner. Did you look up "murderer" in a thesaurus or what?

kill·er/ˈkilər/
Noun:
A person, animal, or thing that kills.
A formidable or excellent person or thing.
Synonyms:
murderer - assassin - homicide - slayer - cutthroat

s2s2s2: omeganuepsilon: lazy side to carry it out effectively

Yeah, staying up late to try to get someone making claims that I made claims while refusing to support their own claims, and I'm lazy.

I'm back....You going to get to the point, pre-trial convictistan?


Yes, lazy, you're certainly not reading my posts before laying labels on me. [Disclaimer: Poe's Law]
 
2012-04-10 12:15:51 PM

Joe Blowme: Bad example, he should have walked. It was self defense.


No, it wasn't. It was murder. He was tried and convicted. You obviously don't know the facts of the case.
 
2012-04-10 12:16:45 PM

NightOwl2255: So the right of Martin to walk down the street to his house without being chased by an armed man means nothing to you? If Martin did attack Zimmerman, he may have every right to under stand your ground laws.


Martin didn't say he was chased. He said he was "followed." His girlfriend said so.

There is no indication Martin knew he was armed prior to the initiation of physical violence.

So, when we edit those two falsehoods out of your question, we are left with: "So the right of Martin to walk down the street to his house without being followed by a man means nothing to you?"

My answer is: He had no such right. Being followed on foot (at the distance indicated by the map and phone calls) is not, by itself, grounds for the use of force in self-defense. Only the imminent threat of serious bodily injury is grounds for the legitimate use of violent force. If, for example, Martin was merely annoyed or insulted by being followed, then he had no right to use force.

NightOwl2255: If Martin did attack Zimmerman, he may have every right to under stand your ground laws.


Yes, that may be true, but only if he was reasonably believed there was an imminent threat of serious bodily injury.

However, the statement of the girlfriend indicates that Zimmerman's purpose was to investigate, not to use force. Martin spoke first ("What are you following me for?"), to which Zimmerman said, "What are you doing here?" If Zimmerman's intention was to kill or even injure Martin, then the more likely response to being asked "What are you following me for?" would probably have been "BANG!" However, the gunshot only occurred after a physical altercation.

If it is true that Zimmerman was either standing still or walking toward his truck at the moment that Martin approached him with that question, and Zimmerman responded with his question, whereupon Martin physically attacked, then Zimmerman had the right to defend himself.

There is no evidence to refute that explanation, but there is corroborating evidence to support it (the moisture on Zimmerman's back, the injuries to Zimmerman's nose and back of head, a witness who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman while in a prone position, the gunshot to Martin's anterior chest, and the statements of the girlfriend, which Zimmerman would not have known when he explained his actions to the police).
 
2012-04-10 12:18:13 PM

Hobodeluxe: 9beers: Raharu: 9beers: Zimmerman was returning to his vehicle when he was attacked by Martin.

Prove
he
wasn't

Prove
he
Was.

So, not familiar how the law works?

if this thing goes to a jury they will decide what is more likely.

that Zimmerman gave up pursuit of the "asshole who always gets away" or that he continued with his pursuit
or that Trayvon who was actively trying to avoid confrontation (as per Zimmerman's own words) continued to proceed towards home or changed his mind and suddenly became the stalker.
Does trayvon not have the right to stand his ground and defend himself if he feels threatened?
Or does the law not apply to blacks?
If this goes to jury Zimmerman will go to prison.
This I am sure.


It is not the jury's place to determine likelyhood, it is their job to judge the evidence.
This case, as far as we know, has no evidence that proves anything without a doubt
That you claim Zimmerman WILL go to prison, despite lack of any evidence, is motivation to not put him in court at all, because he's got no chance at a fair trial.

Mavent: Phinn: The problem with your intrepid investigative work is that no one in the Get Zimmerman Now lynch mob is actually concerned with evidence, reason or law.

A lynch mob, Jethro, is what gathered up black folk and killed them without trial or jury back during the civil rights crisis in America. I'm sure the irony eludes you. I'm certain the irony eludes you. I do find it interesting that it's always you White-Power mouthbreathers who are the first to start tossing around terms like "lynch mob".


Oh, now you're suddenly qualified to make that call, attempting to teach others what a word means, even though you can't manage to refrain from misapplying murderer and killer.

A lynch mob, need not be strictly literal. When spike Lee gave out Zimmerman's supposed info(which was that of some unrelated party), and that poor family had to move out of their house for fear of their safety....yeah, that definitely qualifies as a modern lynch mob.

That you all now flood fark, and threaten to bankrupt him through paypal, etc, only proves that it exists, we're only now determining if you're actually a part of that.

The way you toss around murderer and killer as terms to describe the situation, kind of points the way for us like a neon sign.
 
2012-04-10 12:24:19 PM

Hobodeluxe: tirob: Phinn: tirob: Which one? George Zimmerman's father said that the confrontation started when Martin walked up to Zimmerman and addressed him, and Zimmerman's brother claimed that it started after Martin "snuck up" on Zimmerman.

You can't sneak and walk at the same time?

There \All you've got is argument-by-thesaurus. You lose. Just like the Duke lacrosse team. Just like the Jena Six. Just like Tawana Brawley.

I don't like Zimmerman, but he has the right enemies.

Read what I wrote again. You can sneak and walk at the same time, but you can't "sneak up on" and "walk up and address" someone at the same time. If I address you I'm not sneaking up on you. This isn't argument by thesaurus, it's two different versions of how the confrontation started.

the whole " I was walking back to my truck and was ambushed" story doesn't wash.
first off it requires both parties to completely do a 180 at the same time.
both have to change their minds
Zimmerman has to break off his pursuit just as he's about to catch up to the "asshole(s) who always gets away" (his words and sentiment not mine)
Trayvon has to stop trying to avoid the strange man with a gun following him (we know he was running because Zimmerman himself said so and it was confirmed by his gf on the phone)

I call bullshiat. I find it highly unlikely Zimmerman broke off the pursuit. and just as unlikely that Trayvon wouldn't just go the last few yards to where he was staying. What probably happened is Zimmerman caught up with him , He tried to detain Trayvon and Trayvon punched him in the nose and a fight started. Once Zimmerman realized his ass was probably going to lose the fight he pulled his gun. Trayvon grabbed at the gun to try to avoid being shot and started screaming for help. (seriously listen to the tape it sounds like a kid fearing for their life. it's farking haunting) and George shot him.


This! This is the conjecture I was talking about!

Notice

1) Complete lack of supporting evidenve of any kind whatsoever.

2) Presents a strawman scenario to refute when other plausible scenarios have been mentioned.

3) Takes lines completely out of context ("assholes get away" was made at the beginning of the call, while zimmerman was still in his truck). (Also zimmerman "running" not being said, and the call continuing for 2 minutes after the "following"remark).

4) Suggests Zimmerman had his gun drawn from the beggining, with no supporting evidence of any kind.

5) proposes alternate theory that does not explain the position of Zimmermand truck

6) proposes alternate theory that does not explain the position of the altercation

8) proposes alternate theory that does not explain how Martin could not run 70 yards while Zimmerman admits on the call he lost him, and for 2 minutes he discusses with the 911 operator prior to hanging up with Martin nowhere in sight.

9) finishes it off with a completely fictional pulled-straight-out-of-the-ass scenario that nobody could possibly know one way or the other.



THANK YOU Hobodeluxe for providing the perfect example of conjecture! Not sure if it was intentional or not, but useful nonetheless!

/yes, i realize the numbers are off. This shiat is hard to do on a phone while attempting to "work"
 
2012-04-10 12:33:05 PM

NightOwl2255: he may have


You are absolutely correct. Same applies to Zimmerman, does it not?

What does the fact that we have Zimmerman on tape, asking police to come tell you?

I think it tells you that Zimmerman was a criminal mastermind, able to think ahead and have a cover for his bloodlust.
That about right?
 
2012-04-10 12:35:51 PM

omeganuepsilon: Yes, lazy, you're certainly not reading my posts before laying labels on me.


I am sleep deprived. Plus, I thought I saw skittles in your waistband as you approached me, threateningly.
 
2012-04-10 12:51:37 PM

Phinn: There is no indication Martin knew he was armed prior to the initiation of physical violence.


Yet there is none that he didn't know, but you immediately call it a falsehood. Seems you are very biased. That's okay, you can bend the story to fit your preconceived notion all day. It's what Fark is for.
 
2012-04-10 01:00:50 PM

s2s2s2: omeganuepsilon: Yes, lazy, you're certainly not reading my posts before laying labels on me.

I am sleep deprived. Plus, I thought I saw skittles in your waistband as you approached me, threateningly.


No skittles, but I may be waving a bottle of tea around menacingly, holding it by the neck, obviously intent on physical harm.

If I was, surely, no one in this thread will ever know.
 
2012-04-10 01:01:24 PM

ChuDogg: Your Boss: ChuDogg: ...

Thanks, appreciate it.

Did you see my first link? I have the google maps overlay with the entirety of the audio transcript word for word.


Yes, that's what really helps open minded folks understand the timeline better. I still battle some folks who have already convicted Zimmerman based on how their mind 'sees' it all (he chased down this kid, stood over him and blasted him to bits for no reason other than he was black). Folks need facts, and not necessarily the media's presentation, to determine their own version of this case.
--YB out.
 
2012-04-10 01:11:30 PM

NightOwl2255: Are you in a court of law? Did you get sworn in? Has anyone in this case given testimony under oath? Yet you declare that Zimmerman did not commit a crime. And in fact got a violent thug off the street. We had a case here in Oklahoma City where a pharmacist shot and killed a robber. Seemed like a clear case of self-defense. After the trial that pharmacist is now serving life in prison.


Based on the limited facts that have been made public, I believe that Zimmerman was attacked by Martin and acted in self defense.

The case you point out seemed like self defense until the surveillance video was made public, horrible comparison.
 
2012-04-10 01:12:26 PM

Your Boss: (he chased down this kid, stood over him and blasted him to bits for no reason other than he was black)


I believe the evidence clearly shows that Zimmerman pulled out an unregistered M60 machine gun, blasted several hundred rounds into the air, and chased Martin at full speed while screaming that he was the "rootinest, tootinest, shootinest hombre north, south, east AND west of the pecos!!!!"

There might have been some statement by Zimmerman that he was "a-gonna blast [Martin's] black ass to smithereens!!!" but the audio at that point is a little garbled.
 
2012-04-10 01:15:59 PM

9beers: The case you point out seemed like self defense until the surveillance video was made public, horrible comparison


Even then, he was convicted because he shot the guy the subsequent 5 times*. He was ruled to have been justified for the shot to the head.

So if all things were comperable, Zimmerman would have had to shoot Martin again, after he was incapacitated, for the comparison to work.

*I just watched the video.
 
2012-04-10 01:16:42 PM

Joe Blowme: PastaFazoole: 9beers: I sent 50 bucks earlier today.

You know what? I actually believe you. You are a piece of slime.

Why do you hate brown people?


I don't hate people of any color. But Zimmerman has changed his story so many times now that I'm finding it hard to believe anything he says, so I sure wouldn't be contributing to his defense fund.

We may never know what happened that night, but it's just as easy to believe that Zimmerman threatened or grabbed Martin first as it is to believe the story the other way around.
 
2012-04-10 01:17:34 PM
An attorney for Trayvon Martin's family blasted George Zimmerman's new website in an appearance with Trayvon's mother on Good Morning America on Tuesday.

Just like the case, the media takes it and ran without checking validity...


Not his, thanks for playing though. (new window)
 
2012-04-10 01:17:47 PM
I'm glad to have a news story that is simple enough for me to wrap my head around it, yet ambiguous enough to have two sides so sure they are correct. I'm sick of the confusing news stories about Occupy Wall Street, Syria, the Eurozone, etc. That stuff doesn't make sense. The newspapermen need to stop covering that.
 
2012-04-10 01:18:10 PM
Would also like to state that if George is convicted on good evidence. That's too bad for him. I am all for SYG, but there is a risk it won't pan out for you if you use it to its limit.

This is why I am not a gun fan.
 
2012-04-10 01:19:40 PM

NightOwl2255: Joe Blowme: Bad example, he should have walked. It was self defense.

No, it wasn't. It was murder. He was tried and convicted. You obviously don't know the facts of the case.


I know that he was convicted, hence the words "SHOULD HAVE WALKED"
 
2012-04-10 01:20:13 PM

Hobodeluxe: tirob: Phinn: tirob:

the whole " I was walking back to my truck and was ambushed" story doesn't wash.
first off it requires both parties to completely do a 180 at the same time.
both have to change their minds


Anything's possible. Martin may have been situated between Zimmerman and his truck when the confrontation started. We just don't know at this stage.

Hobodeluxe: tirob: Zimmerman has to break off his pursuit just as he's about to catch up to the "asshole(s) who always gets away" (his words and sentiment not mine) Trayvon has to stop trying to avoid the strange man with a gun following him (we know he was running because Zimmerman himself said so and it was confirmed by his gf on the phone)

I call bullshiat. I find it highly unlikely Zimmerman broke off the pursuit. and just as unlikely that Trayvon wouldn't just go the last few yards to where he was staying. What probably happened is Zimmerman caught up with him , He tried to detain Trayvon and Trayvon punched him in the nose and a fight started. Once Zimmerman realized his ass was probably going to lose the fight he pulled his gun. Trayvon grabbed at the gun to try to avoid being shot and started screaming for help. (seriously listen to the tape it sounds like a kid fearing for their life. it's farking haunting) and George shot him.


Entirely possible based on the evidence that has been made public to this point but all conjecture as ChuDogg points out.
 
2012-04-10 01:21:00 PM

PastaFazoole: But Zimmerman has changed his story so many times


He has? Amazing since we've yet to hear from Zimmerman at all. We've heard from Zimmerman's father and a friend and both tell the same story.
 
2012-04-10 01:22:28 PM

Joe Blowme: I know that he was convicted, hence the words "SHOULD HAVE WALKED"


Unfortunately for Dirty Harry: Pharmacist, those last three words should be bookended by "He(the pharmacist)" and "past the kid he shot in the head(ruled justifiable by the court that convicted him of murder), instead of pumping an additional 5 rounds into his abdomen in full view of a security camera."
 
2012-04-10 01:23:33 PM

Phinn: Your Boss: (he chased down this kid, stood over him and blasted him to bits for no reason other than he was black)

I believe the evidence clearly shows that Zimmerman pulled out an unregistered M60 machine gun, blasted several hundred rounds into the air, and chased Martin at full speed while screaming that he was the "rootinest, tootinest, shootinest hombre north, south, east AND west of the pecos!!!!"

There might have been some statement by Zimmerman that he was "a-gonna blast [Martin's] black ass to smithereens!!!" but the audio at that point is a little garbled.


He was also 'Purple-Nurple'd', but the sister of the funeral director's cousin's ex-fiancee's grandmother's step-sister was unable to confirm. (i.e. it was pure conjecture)
 
2012-04-10 01:31:54 PM

Joe Blowme: I know that he was convicted, hence the words "SHOULD HAVE WALKED"


No, he should not have walked. He shot an unarmed, unconscious person that was laying on the floor bleeding from a serious head wound 5 times from less than 2 feet away. He executed a person that posed no threat. He murdered him, as in the legal definition of the word murder.
 
2012-04-10 01:35:00 PM
Really, the only facts anyone can prove in this case is that Zimmerman took to the streets with a gun, and neighborhood kid ended up dead. Zimmerman walks the streets, a free man.

So given that, I'm still a little confused by the motivations of people like ChuDogg, who has apparently quit his job at the Doc Martin boot factory and devoted his every waking hour to his own version of CSI: Florida. Am I saying he's racist? Yes. You bet your ass I'm saying he's racist. Because in lieu of any other motivating factor, "racism" is all there is left. Occam's Razor, and all that. Because given a situation where there are two men on the street: One a teenager heading home from the store, and the other a guy who purposely took a gun into the streets to confront strangers, and the unarmed teenager ends up dead while the armed guy walks free, I can think of no motivation other than "racism" for people to be constantly defending the shooter. Since, you know, he's WALKING THE STREETS ENTIRELY FREE. But hey, that's not enough for some of you. You damn well want to make sure that we all understand how completely in favor of dead black teenagers you are.
 
Displayed 50 of 738 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report