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.

(USA Today)   The audio "expert" who claims it was Trayvon and not Zimmerman screaming for help on the 911 tape will not be allowed to testify at trial   (usatoday.com) divider line 153
    More: Obvious, George Zimmerman, Mark O'Mara, the weekend, jury, screaming  
•       •       •

6083 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Jun 2013 at 7:47 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-06-22 08:08:59 PM
7 votes:

Tat'dGreaser: I don't think there is enough evidence to clearly show Zimmerman instigated the fight. All that matters is he was being attacked and defended himself.

Did he instigate it? Probably. Was he getting his butt kicked? Yes. Guns are the great equalizer, that's why they're perfect for self defense. All that will be be proven is he feared for his life and used his gun.


There is a very narrow window for legally shooting someone. Zimmerman was not dragged out of his vehicle by Trayvon while waiting for the police. Nor was he preventing Trayvon from committing a violent crime, or in fact ANY crime. Zimmerman pursued his victim and then shot him when he got the fight he was looking for. It may not be straight up murder, but a civilized society can't tolerate vigilantes like this moron trying to play cop. And no responsible gun owner, myself included, should be throwing their lot in with this a-hole.
2013-06-22 07:54:32 PM
6 votes:
If you stalk someone, instigate a confrontation, and then shoot them when you start to lose the fight, you deserve to go to prison. I don't know for how long, but we all know Zimmerman wouldn't have said shiat to that kid if he wasn't packing heat.
2013-06-22 08:52:44 PM
5 votes:
Here are the facts:

Zimmerman claimed to be a neighborhood watch captain when he really wasn't.
Zimmerman called 911 like 50 times in a year.
Zimmerman had a history of violence and racist remarks.
Zimmerman directly disobeyed a police order to stand down.
Zimmerman was armed with a gun. Martin was armed with Skittles and tea.
Martin had no bruises on his knuckles, inconsistent with the assault narrative.
Zimmerman had only minor injuries, and did not even require medical assistance.
Voice experts have unanimously confirmed the voice screaming for help was Martin.
Zimmerman has constantly changed his version of events that night.

I could go on and on. This should be an open and shut case. My only concern is Zimmerman walking due to the white privileged system that traditionally rewards his kind of behavior. Even if he walks though, it's only a matter of time before the NBP hunts him down like dog he is.
2013-06-22 07:54:56 PM
5 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: No, I am saying that Zimmy's "OK" does not prove anything.  Why don't we stick to the facts of the case?

It does prove something, that he stopped running after the person on the other end of the phone said that he didn't need to be following. We also know that Zimmerman reported losing sight of Trayvon and that he stayed on the phone for almost two minutes after that.

How about you lay some facts out that prove that Zimmerman is guilty of murder, rather than defending himself from a violent assault? Remember, we don't need to prove that Zimmerman is innocent, we need to prove he's guilty. Now's your chance to do that.


Popcorn Johnny, an affirmative response (especially one as weak as OK) over the phone is not proof of anything. I can't see if someone complied over the phone. It certainly isn't definitive proof that he stopped following or even running after Trayvon. In fact, since Zimmerman ended up in an confrontation of some sort with Trayvon, there is an implication that he did not comply. This should be basic common sense.

You need to stop and re-evaluate your logical methods before contributing. As it is right now someone with your primitive understanding of cause and effect, and your tenuous grasp of the facts, need not comment.
2013-06-22 05:00:23 PM
5 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: superficial scratches

Yes, a broken nose and bleeding wounds to the back of the head are "superficial". Let me guess, you think Zimmerman was obligated to wait until he suffered a skull fracture before defending himself, right?


Compared to a gunshot wound to the chest?

Yes.

Maybe Zimmy shouldn't have started a fight he couldn't finish...
2013-06-22 07:14:31 PM
4 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: No, I am saying that Zimmy's "OK" does not prove anything.  Why don't we stick to the facts of the case?

It does prove something, that he stopped running after the person on the other end of the phone said that he didn't need to be following. We also know that Zimmerman reported losing sight of Trayvon and that he stayed on the phone for almost two minutes after that.

How about you lay some facts out that prove that Zimmerman is guilty of murder, rather than defending himself from a violent assault? Remember, we don't need to prove that Zimmerman is innocent, we need to prove he's guilty. Now's your chance to do that.


Duder, I can speak the words "I had sex with Kristen Bell for several years in the early-to-mid 2000s," but that doesn't prove anything, does it?  Zimmy lied to the court about how much money he had and that wasn't exactly true, was it?

And I never said that Zimmerman is guilty of murder; can we stick to the facts of what I'm saying?

Y U ACKNOWLEDGE ASSAULT OF MARTIN ON ZIMMY

BUT NO ACCEPT AT LEAST POSSIBILITY OF ASSAULT OF ZIMMY ON MARTIN, ESPECIALLY WITH FATAL GUNSHOT WOUND?

Y U UNDERSTAND HOW ZIMMY COULD HAVE BEEN SCARED

BUT NO UNDERSTAND HOW MARTIN COULD HAVE BEEN SCARED?
2013-06-22 07:04:14 PM
4 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: TuteTibiImperes: What seems more likely - that he just decided to chill out on the sidewalk or that he was still searching for Martin?

I'm not saying that he didn't continue looking around the area for Trayvon. Seems like a bit of a coincidence that the altercation took place in pretty much the same spot Zimmerman was when he finished his call to police, but it could have happened. Even if he lingered in the area looking for Trayvon, what does that mean when it comes to his claim that Trayvon attacked him and that he was in fear for his life when he took out his gun and fired?


I dunno.  Zimmerman has a documented history of violence and a documented history of lying to the court; he's not very trustworthy.
2013-06-22 06:56:38 PM
4 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: As I've said a number of times, the main reason I enjoy these threads is because I simply don't understand your inability to grasp---even if you still luv Zim---how Trayvon Martin could have been defending himself or how he could have been afraid of Zim.

I'm not sure if I agree with your conjecture that Martin was the aggressor, seeing as how Zim was the one on a lengthy armed pursuit (that seems pretty aggressive to me!), but I can at least hold the ideas you're saying in my head.

This is intelligence: being able to hold conflicting ideas in one's head.

We don't know who started the fight, I've said that many times in these threads. You keep saying "armed pursuit" and that's not what happened. Zimmerman was never perusing Martin, he briefly followed him around a corner. You seem to want to make it out as if Zimmerman was running through the neighborhood, gun drawn, in pursuit of Trayvon. The reality is that he ran for less than 10 seconds after exiting his vehicle when Trayvon took off running and disappeared around the side of one of the buildings. After that, there's no evidence that Zimmerman regained sight of Trayvon and followed, or chased after him.


I have never believed that Zimmy pursued Martin with gun drawn.  You are having trouble with words.

Armed: Zimmy had a gun and knew it.

Pursuit: "carrying out of a plan, design, order, etc.; the action of proceeding or acting in accordance with a plan, method"  Zimmy PLANNED to keep himself aware of Martin's whereabouts and acted in accordance with that plan.

It was an armed pursuit.

The evidence is incontrovertible, friend.
2013-06-22 06:04:58 PM
4 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: Should Zimmerman have even been following him to get into that position?Under the law it seems like the shooting was justified if he was being attacked. However, there could be a case made that it was Zimmerman's own negligence that put him in a position where he could be attacked in the first place. If he initiated the encounter with Trayvon, criminally negligent manslaughter should be on the table.


It's obvious to me, based upon the 911 call and Zimmerman's own wannabe cop background, that Zimmerman was the aggressor in the incident. As such he wasn't neither standing his ground nor defending others when he fired his weapon.

I hope it's also obvious to the jury by the time they go into deliberations.
2013-06-22 05:08:43 PM
4 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Let me guess, you think Zimmerman was obligated to wait until he suffered a skull fracture before defending himself, right?


No, he was obligated to stay in the car like he was told to instead of stalking the kid for no reason.
2013-06-22 05:08:17 PM
4 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Compared to a gunshot wound to the chest?

Yes.

Maybe Zimmy shouldn't have started a fight he couldn't finish...

Hey look, the people that know absolutely nothing about the case are here to make assumptions.


Friend, a random citizen took it upon himself to follow a kid around in armed pursuit in a vehicle and then on foot.  The target didn't know if he was going to be raped or kidnapped or stabbed or shot in the chest from a few inches away.

But I suppose you wouldn't consider it starting a fight if someone did the same thing to you.
2013-06-22 05:06:04 PM
4 votes:

gimmegimme: Compared to a gunshot wound to the chest?

Yes.

Maybe Zimmy shouldn't have started a fight he couldn't finish...


Hey look, the people that know absolutely nothing about the case are here to make assumptions.
2013-06-22 12:21:36 PM
4 votes:
The paid liar will not be able to lie in court.
2013-06-22 11:41:38 PM
3 votes:

The_Six_Fingered_Man: fredklein: If he was so terrifies of Trayvon, why was he following him? Why not just stay in his car, or not even follow Trayvon at all??

There is no evidence that he continued to follow Martin after being advised that the dispatcher did not need him to do that


So, Zimmerman's fear only started once he was advised that the dispatcher did not need him to follow Trayvon?

Zimmerman
"Um, if they come in through the, uh, (knocking sound) gate, tell them to go straight past the club house, and uh, (knocking sound) straight past the club house and make a left, and then they go past the mailboxes, that's my truck...[unintelligible] "

The conversation that you point to is because he does not know where around the clubhouse he will be, whether at his truck or by the mailboxes.


... or whether he'll be near the clubhouse at all.

There's a world of difference between 'I don't know if I'll be here or there' and 'have them call when they arrive [because I have no idea at all where I'll be then]'

So you are saying that Zimmerman wanted to get into a potentially lethal confrontation (knowing he was carrying a firearm) with the full knowledge that the police were not only on their way, but knew his name and phone number and were on their way to meet him?

No, I'm saying he wanted to confront one of 'these assholes' who 'always get away', and deliberately did not tell the cops where he'd be because he was still following Trayvon.

Is this part of a somewhat prevalent conspiracy theory that Zimmerman called the police in order to give himself an alibi in order to shoot Martin in cold blood?

I don't think that's true at all. At most, I think he decided to be vague about his location 'just in case' something happened. Maybe he hoped to detain Trayvon, and be a hero when the cops arrived. Who knows?

The fact that Zimmerman was involved in an altercation has no bearing on whether or not he wanted police to handle the situation.

Yes it does. If I want YOU to do a job, I DON'T DO IT FOR YOU. If he wanted the POLICE to follow and catch Trayvon, HE WOULDN'T HAVE DONE IT HIMSELF. It's quite obvious he Wanted to catch Trayvon. He followed him, by vehicle and on foot. He made sure the police didn't know where he was. He didn't listen when the police dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that", because he wasn't doing what he "needed" to do, he was doing what he WANTED to do- following Trayvon. Now, why would he want to follow one of "these assholes" who "always get away"? Perhaps to make sure this one ...didn't get away?

It could be that Martin was the First Aggressor and therefore the choice to confront was not in Zimmerman's hands. But again, there is no evidence that Zimmerman continued to pursue Martin after the dispatcher told him that they did not need him to.

As I said before, there is one theory that fits everything, including Zimmerman's (highly questionable, considering the source) statement that he turned around at that point to return to his truck. And that theory is that Trayvon had hidden (so as not to lead the crazy armed guy following him right to his doorstep). Zimmerman passed him, then turned back at that point to return to his truck. Trayvon, seeing the crazy armed guy suddenly turn around and head back toward him, assumes the worst- he's been discovered! So he jumps out and confronts Zimmerman. The rest plays out pretty much as it has been pieced together- Trayvon, fearing for his life, tries to take the gun. Failing that, he tries to knock Zimmerman unconscious. (Those being the only 2 ways to be safe from an attacker with a gun- take the gun, or make it so they cannot pull the trigger. Running only works of they can't shoot you in the back before you find cover.) Zimmerman, now fearing for his life, kills Trayvon.
2013-06-22 10:51:35 PM
3 votes:
I can't believe there are still people defending Zimmerman and trying to rationalize his actions. If he hadn't been out playing vigilante, the kid would still be alive.
2013-06-22 09:37:00 PM
3 votes:

Satan's Girlfriend: Popcorn Johnny: I started to respond to your points, but then realized how ignorant of the actual facts you are that it wasn't worth the time. I'm amazed that there can still be people in these threads with your level of ignorance.

In other words you got nothin. Pretty typical of Z supporters. They only base their arguments on emotion and ignorance.


George Zimmerman has placed at least 46 calls to 911 in the last eight years. In the last year, his calls focused on blacks in his gated community:
April 22, 2011: Reports "black male, 7 to 9 years old with skinny build," walking around the neighborhood.
Aug. 3, 2011: Calls in a black male he "believes is involved in
recent burglaries in the neighborhood."
Aug. 6, 2011: Fingers two black teens he thinks "have been burglarizing homes in this area."
Oct. 1, 2011: Reports two black males, approximately 20 to 30 years old, whom he does not recognize. He says he's "concerned due to recent burglaries in the area."
Feb. 2, 2012: Drops dime on a black male because it is "unknown what he is doing."
Feb. 26: Calls about Trayvon Martin
Hey, we've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there is a real suspicious guy.
Asked by the dispatcher what the suspect looks like, he says:
He looks black ... Now he's coming towards me. He's got his hand in his waistband.
 http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/cop_wannabe_on_paranoid_patro l_l fV4L1N0W6y0mEwgoU0L7K/1
2013-06-22 09:27:40 PM
3 votes:

Thoguh: You're gonna have to help me out here. What was Trayvon's effort to avoid confrontation?


He ran away from Zimmemerman. From which we can draw another inference, of course. That inference being that Zimmerman menaced Trayvon at that point in the conversation. Trayvon was conducting himself lawfully at the time, so he had no other reason to flee.

The inference that Zimmerman menaced Trayvon, maybe by brandishing his firearm, adds weight to the inference that Zimmerman wanted to fight, and therefore started it.
2013-06-22 08:34:31 PM
3 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: What's wrong is the people, mostly on your side, that speculate as to what they think happened and then come to a conclusion


Popcorn Johnny: I'm not sure, there was a lot of speculation that the whole reason he went to the 7-11 was to sell weed.

2013-06-22 08:19:40 PM
3 votes:
It's curious that I've seen virtually nothing written about the fact the Martin had years of football training in his past. Not only has it been documented that he was into a culture of orchestrated fight club type fighting scenes, but his football training. i.e., violent aggression training and toughening process for full contact interaction with other large and powerful young adults, also is a major factor in understanding his willingness to initial a violent confrontation.  Don't most of you understand just how completely football drilling and training separates out athletes (especially full-contact sport athletes) from the general public?  Among other things, Martin has given the youth football programs a black eye by grossly abusing and misusing his skills, power, and strength, God Rest His Soul and may he rest in peace.

Zimmerman?  Well, he's a fat and excitable young man; much fatter now that the stress factors in his life are through the roof. He had no chance in a fight with Martin. He was screaming on that tape. Any fool can hear it. He most likely WOULD have died had he not shot Martin.
2013-06-22 08:19:18 PM
3 votes:
I have to say as a tangential comment that these threads really bum me out in some ways.  I'm not pointing fingers at anyone specific, even the folks I've been talking to in the thread, but it really is undeniable that there is some clear and sad racism in the way people see this case.

I would go into specifics, but that would indicate I'm placing specific blame.
2013-06-22 07:07:44 PM
3 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Are you aware that phone calls are only audio?

Are you aware that you can clearly hear Zimmerman slamming a car door and that if you were on the phone with a person that was running, you would be able to tell?

Are you seriously trying to claim that Zimmerman may have kept running after Trayvon for the additional 2 minutes that he was on the phone with the police?


No, I am saying that Zimmy's "OK" does not prove anything.  Why don't we stick to the facts of the case?

Not only that, Zimmerman has a documented history of violence and a documented history of lying to the court; he's not very trustworthy.
2013-06-22 06:43:41 PM
3 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Perhaps he knew that he had the right to self-defense.  Who knows?

///Gosh, I hate when people come into the thread and start speculating about things they don't know.

So which one is your side going with, Trayvon was a scared little kid trying to get away from a stalker, or that he was a man standing his ground? Considering his close proximity to his home, it has to be one or the other.

As for speculations, there's nothing wrong with them in these threads. What's wrong is the people, mostly on your side, that speculate as to what they think happened and then come to a conclusion that Zimmerman is guilty based on those speculations.

I say that Zimmerman is innocent not based on my speculations, but because there's no evidence that contradicts his version of events, and no evidence that he was the aggressor, or that he was not defending himself from great bodily harm when the shot was fired.


The 911 call recording has the operator telling Zimmerman that he doesn't need to Trayvon, but he does anyway.  While Trayvon may have started the physical altercation later, none of it would have happened had Zimmerman just phoned in the suspicious person sighting and let the police handle it from there.
2013-06-22 05:29:08 PM
3 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: As for your question. I'm 6'2, 210 pounds and very capable of defending myself. If I was walking home from the store and suddenly thought I was being followed, or even chased and was in fear for my life, here's what I would do. First I would take off running, calling 911 at the same time. I would also be shouting my ass off for help while running through the neighborhood. I'd also start banging on the nearest door screaming for help if I couldn't make it home.

Now let me ask you, if Trayvon was a scared little kid, why didn't he do any of these things?


Okay so Zimmerman had the right to stand his ground because when he was stalking Trayvon, Trayvon refused to scream and find a phone to call 911 and chose to stand his ground.

This argument is a Mobius strip.
2013-06-22 05:16:53 PM
3 votes:

gimmegimme: Friend, a random citizen took it upon himself to follow a kid around in armed pursuit in a vehicle and then on foot.  The target didn't know if he was going to be raped or kidnapped or stabbed or shot in the chest from a few inches away.


A concerned citizen, who happened to be armed, reported a suspicious person to the police and then attempted to regain sight of that person after they fled. The suspicious person then launched a violent assault on the citizen, leading the concerned citizen to pull their legally carried firearm and defend them self from great bodily harm or possibly death.
2013-06-22 04:57:35 PM
3 votes:

gimmegimme: superficial scratches


Yes, a broken nose and bleeding wounds to the back of the head are "superficial". Let me guess, you think Zimmerman was obligated to wait until he suffered a skull fracture before defending himself, right?
2013-06-22 01:01:13 PM
3 votes:

Summer Glau's Love Slave: "We need more ice." ~ Midget passenger aboard the Titanic.

This isn't going to end well.


I don't really care what the verdict is, I just want to see some good legal wrangling. The judge sounds level-headed, the prosecutor and defense are both pros, and unless there's someone with an axe to grind on the jury, chances are good they'll arrive at a verdict. That ends well.
2013-06-22 11:05:57 PM
2 votes:
img.fark.net
2013-06-22 09:23:44 PM
2 votes:

The_Six_Fingered_Man: "Advocates for gun rights under current law." What the hell does this mean? The man is a well respected lawyer. I certainly would hope that he advocates that a citizen should be able to exercise their rights under current law.


He pretends to be a "reasonable" "anti-gun" guy to make Fox viewers feel good.

He claims to be for an extreme stance, 2nd amendment repeal. Which is absolutely scheduled to happen immediately after my legal polygamous marriage with Scarlett Johansson, Freida Pinto and Maria Sharapova. How brave of him.

"Look at me, I'm a far left liberal who sides with FOX viewers on every practical issue. You must all be independent thinkers!"
2013-06-22 09:03:32 PM
2 votes:

Satan's Girlfriend: Here are the facts:

Zimmerman claimed to be a neighborhood watch captain when he really wasn't....and?
Zimmerman called 911 like 50 times in a year....and?
Zimmerman had a history of violence and racist remarks....Trayvon has a history of violence and possession of burglary tools
Zimmerman directly disobeyed a police order to stand down....not a police order, a suggestion by a radio room clerk
Zimmerman was armed with a gun. Martin was armed with Skittles and tea.....Your point?
Martin had no bruises on his knuckles, inconsistent with the assault narrative.......heart has to be pumping to create bruises, Trayvon was killed thus not enough time to bruise
Zimmerman had only minor injuries, and did not even require medical assistance.....broken nose and open head trauma does not require medical assistance? He did seek medical assistance
Voice experts have unanimously confirmed the voice screaming for help was Martin....Trayvons own father said it was not his sons voice when they played the other guys 9-11 call reporting the incident
Zimmerman has constantly changed his version of events that night....citations?

I could go on and on. This should be an open and shut case. My only concern is Zimmerman walking due to the white privileged system that traditionally rewards his kind of behavior. Even if he walks though, it's only a matter of time before the NBP hunts him down like dog he is.

2013-06-22 08:58:58 PM
2 votes:

Satan's Girlfriend: Zimmerman claimed to be a neighborhood watch captain when he really wasn't.
Zimmerman called 911 like 50 times in a year.
Zimmerman had a history of violence and racist remarks.
Zimmerman directly disobeyed a police order to stand down.
Zimmerman was armed with a gun. Martin was armed with Skittles and tea.
Martin had no bruises on his knuckles, inconsistent with the assault narrative.
Zimmerman had only minor injuries, and did not even require medical assistance.
Voice experts have unanimously confirmed the voice screaming for help was Martin.
Zimmerman has constantly changed his version of events that night.


I started to respond to your points, but then realized how ignorant of the actual facts you are that it wasn't worth the time. I'm amazed that there can still be people in these threads with your level of ignorance.
2013-06-22 08:39:46 PM
2 votes:
The moronic replies in this place just amazes me. Anyone that has read the details could never decide that Zimmerman is guilty of anything but stopping his own death. You don't attempt to beat someone like that unless you mean to maim or kill...period. But I guess one of these days you people will get your wish and see a law enforcement officer railroaded into jail or worse. As long as we have idiot reporters, lying "witnesses", lopsided media outlets, and minorities just "minding their own business"

/rolls eyes
2013-06-22 08:14:26 PM
2 votes:

Giltric: Mrtraveler01: Giltric: http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/discovery_3/extraction_reports/r e port6a.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L04Vh4do6bY

Trayvon has a history of putting stitches on snitches....1st link

Trayvon knew Zimmerman was on the phone snitching on his prowling....2nd link.

And all of that is relevant to what happened the night he got killed how?

Shows Trayvon had a habit of starting fights with people.

Why would he not start a fight with Zimmerman?


How did Martin start a fight with a guy who stayed in his car and didn't decide he was judge, jury and...yes...executioner?
2013-06-22 07:30:47 PM
2 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: I am saying we don't know the facts.  All we have is testimony from a demonstrably unreliable and obviously biased witness.

We also have an eyewitness that say Trayvon on top of Zimmerman throwing punches just before the gunshot was fired. In the end, that's all that matters.

gimmegimme: What worries me most is your lack of empathy.  Even if you think Zimmy should walk free and clear, that's fine.  But you should be able to understand the possibility that Martin was scared for his life.

If Martin was scared for his life, he would have been home long before Zimmerman even finished his phone call. You are aware that when Trayvon went running around the corner of the building, he was less than 100 yards away from home right? Aside from the proximity to his home, Martin didn't call 911, run around screaming for help, or bang on doors looking for help. There's not one bit of evidence that he was scared, and a whole lot that he wasn't.


If I'm being chased by a potential rapist or murderer, someone who is making me fear for my life, I'm certainly not going to lead that creepy weirdo to my loved ones.

Seriously, it's disturbing that you can't even understand how Martin could have been afraid, even if you don't think he was.
2013-06-22 06:53:24 PM
2 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: The 911 call recording has the operator telling Zimmerman that he doesn't need to Trayvon, but he does anyway.


No, what the call recording (it was the non-emergency number) has is an operator hearing Zimmerman exit his vehicle and take off running. The operator asks if Zimmerman is following and Zimmerman replies "yes". The operator then says "we don't need you to do that", to which Zimmerman replies "okay" and stops running.

So you see how you've just misrepresented the facts of the case, right?
2013-06-22 06:42:18 PM
2 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Perhaps he knew that he had the right to self-defense.  Who knows?

///Gosh, I hate when people come into the thread and start speculating about things they don't know.

So which one is your side going with, Trayvon was a scared little kid trying to get away from a stalker, or that he was a man standing his ground? Considering his close proximity to his home, it has to be one or the other.

As for speculations, there's nothing wrong with them in these threads. What's wrong is the people, mostly on your side, that speculate as to what they think happened and then come to a conclusion that Zimmerman is guilty based on those speculations.

I say that Zimmerman is innocent not based on my speculations, but because there's no evidence that contradicts his version of events, and no evidence that he was the aggressor, or that he was not defending himself from great bodily harm when the shot was fired.


As I've said a number of times, the main reason I enjoy these threads is because I simply don't understand your inability to grasp---even if you still luv Zim---how Trayvon Martin could have been defending himself or how he could have been afraid of Zim.

I'm not sure if I agree with your conjecture that Martin was the aggressor, seeing as how Zim was the one on a lengthy armed pursuit (that seems pretty aggressive to me!), but I can at least hold the ideas you're saying in my head.

This is intelligence: being able to hold conflicting ideas in one's head.
2013-06-22 06:36:38 PM
2 votes:

gimmegimme: Perhaps he knew that he had the right to self-defense.  Who knows?

///Gosh, I hate when people come into the thread and start speculating about things they don't know.


So which one is your side going with, Trayvon was a scared little kid trying to get away from a stalker, or that he was a man standing his ground? Considering his close proximity to his home, it has to be one or the other.

As for speculations, there's nothing wrong with them in these threads. What's wrong is the people, mostly on your side, that speculate as to what they think happened and then come to a conclusion that Zimmerman is guilty based on those speculations.

I say that Zimmerman is innocent not based on my speculations, but because there's no evidence that contradicts his version of events, and no evidence that he was the aggressor, or that he was not defending himself from great bodily harm when the shot was fired.
2013-06-22 05:29:57 PM
2 votes:

gimmegimme: Livingroom: gimmegimme: Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Compared to a gunshot wound to the chest?

Yes.

Maybe Zimmy shouldn't have started a fight he couldn't finish...

Hey look, the people that know absolutely nothing about the case are here to make assumptions.

Friend, a random citizen took it upon himself to follow a kid around in armed pursuit in a vehicle and then on foot.  The target didn't know if he was going to be raped or kidnapped or stabbed or shot in the chest from a few inches away.

But I suppose you wouldn't consider it starting a fight if someone did the same thing to you.

no, i wouldnt be wearing a goddamn hoody slinking through a rich neighbourhood at night IN THE SUMMER. that spells disaster, always has, always will.

February is summer for you?  Do you live in the Southern Hemisphere?

Livingroom: gimmegimme: Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Friend, a random citizen took it upon himself to follow a kid around in armed pursuit in a vehicle and then on foot.  The target didn't know if he was going to be raped or kidnapped or stabbed or shot in the chest from a few inches away.

A concerned citizen, who happened to be armed, reported a suspicious person to the police and then attempted to regain sight of that person after they fled. The suspicious person then launched a violent assault on the citizen, leading the concerned citizen to pull their legally carried firearm and defend them self from great bodily harm or possibly death.

I ask out of genuine curiosity.  What would be your reaction if, the next time you're walking through your neighborhood, you notice someone rolling alongside you in a car and then they begin to follow you on foot?

it wouldnt be to turn around and beat the hell out of my follower, thats for damn sure.

Friend, in the United States have a right to self-defense.


self defense  does not mean preemptively attacking somebody just "because they're following you" hoodie or not. self defense is what zimmerman did: after suffering a broken nose and having his head bashed in, he used self defense.
2013-06-22 05:27:35 PM
2 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: I ask out of genuine curiosity.  What would be your reaction if, the next time you're walking through your neighborhood, you notice someone rolling alongside you in a car and then they begin to follow you on foot?

Trayvon never knew he was being followed on foot, he took off running around a corner before Zimmerman exited his vehicle.

As for your question. I'm 6'2, 210 pounds and very capable of defending myself. If I was walking home from the store and suddenly thought I was being followed, or even chased and was in fear for my life, here's what I would do. First I would take off running, calling 911 at the same time. I would also be shouting my ass off for help while running through the neighborhood. I'd also start banging on the nearest door screaming for help if I couldn't make it home.



Why would he "take off running behind a corner" unless he feared for his safety, knowing he was in danger?


Now let me ask you, if Trayvon was a scared little kid, why didn't he do any of these things?

Perhaps he knew that he had the right to self-defense.  Who knows?

///Gosh, I hate when people come into the thread and start speculating about things they don't know.
2013-06-22 05:18:03 PM
2 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: A concerned citizen, who happened to be armed, reported a suspicious person to the police and then attempted to regain sight of that person after they fled. The suspicious person then launched a violent assault on the citizen, leading the concerned citizen to pull their legally carried firearm and defend them self from great bodily harm or possibly death


That's how the jury will see it. The pussy gun nuts will win again.
2013-06-22 04:15:19 PM
2 votes:
So, what are the Vegas odds of a murder2 conviction? 10-1? 50-1? Murder 2 is a bridge too far and he is gonna walk because Prosecutors, under political pressure, overcharged him.
2013-06-22 12:18:03 PM
2 votes:

"We need more ice." ~ Midget passenger aboard the Titanic.



This isn't going to end well.
2013-06-23 09:04:45 PM
1 votes:

Frederick: I feel I am fairly neutral on this case.  As an observer reading the comments of both sides I see a lot of emotion in the arguments.  But it is my opinion that the Zimmerman opponents are arguing from an emotional aspect more than the Zimmerman supporters.  The opponents of Zimmerman use words like "should have" a lot in seeming ignorance of rights by law.

ex.  "Zimmerman should have stayed in his car."  Perhaps so, but he is not required to by law.


Well, there's the legal aspect, and then there's whether he should have been smarter.  A lot of training in a lot of pursuits are all about not putting yourself in a situation where something bad can happen:  pack your own parachute; go through the pre-flight checklist yourself; stack your own rounds.  In the national Neighborhood Watch training materials and classes, you're told not to pursue suspects yourself.  It's not because it's illegal.  It's because the risk/reward calculus is decidedly against you, as is clearly the case here.  Zimmerman did not prevent a crime and he is now on trial to see whether he has totally ruined his own life - not because he shot someone in self-defense, but whether he should have avoided that possibility to begin with.

Was he required, by law, to stay in his car?  No.  Did he put himself in a situation where he ended up using his gun to kill someone, possibly justifiably, and possibly illegally?  Yep.  Would he have done the same thing had he not been armed?  I doubt it.  The guy was playing cop and it bit him in the ass.

I'm neutral on whether he is guilty or not.  I'm not neutral as to whether his decisions virtually every step along the way were stupid.

As for Trayvon, we know even less.  If, for example, he lay in wait to confront Zimmerman as Zim claims, that was pretty farking stupid.  Someone is following you, you'd best flee and call the cops yourself.  Don't try to turn and solve things with some dickbag with your fists because, sometimes, that dickbag has a gun, and you dun goofed.  Can I construct a scenario where Zimmerman is a murdering fark and Trayvon did nothing wrong?  You bet.  Can I construct a scenario that matches the facts and Zimmerman used his weapon in self-defense?  You bet.  Anyone who is convinced one way or another and expresses a high degree of confidence is articulating a thought-process that is alien to me.
2013-06-23 07:46:20 PM
1 votes:
.

Keizer_Ghidorah: You're the one who keeps making these retarded leaps of "Well by YOUR definition, anyone who's moving in the same direction as you is STALKING you, so that means you must have God's permission to beat their heads into the cement, right?!", dude, stop trying to say we're the crazy ones.


Really? So I'm the person hyperbolically claiming, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again, that by merely following Martin Zimmerman was stalking, hunting, harassing, etc him?
Sorry, I don't think you'll find that anywhere either.

I've maintained all along Zimmerman was following Martin, and as Cataholic pointed out to you

Cataholic: It may be textbook, but it isn't the legal definition of stalking. The crime of stalking involves following someone on a repeated number of occasions for the sole and intended purpose of harassing or intimidating them. It's very very difficult to follow someone for an entire day and have it meet that definition, much less to do so over he course of 10 minutes.


What else you got kiddo?
2013-06-23 07:39:51 PM
1 votes:

Keizer_Ghidorah: Yet you think that a few tweets and some hearsay is unshakable proof that Trayvon was a monster worthy of being executed.

Zimemrman's given three contradicting accounts of what Trayvon was doing that aroused his suspicions, and "These assholes always get away!" is not something that someone who is merely suspicious of a stranger. Zimemrman had pronounced Trayvon guilty of the break-ins and was seeking justice for them and someone to punish. There's little other rational reason that Zimmerman would have been so desperate to catch him, to the point of not simply letting the police meet with him at a specific point and go from there and even getting out of his car to continue chasing Trayvon on foot.


I do? Really? Please quote where I said that. Since Martin wasn't executed, like you hyperbolically claim, I think you'll have a hard time with that one.

Please quote these contradicting accounts you keep referencing.
Why are you fixated on a comment he made to a dispatcher when it proves nothing except his frustration with alleged law breakers getting away? Stop tilting at windmills.
Please explain how Zimmerman was desperate to catch him when he wasn't running very fast, if at all? You don't catch someone running away by speed walking after them. No, his reasoning for following Martin, as has been said at least a hundred times already, was to continue gathering information to feed to the police dispatcher on the phone. When the dispatcher told him that wasn't needed he stopped following Martin.

What other misinformation you got that I can correct you on?
2013-06-23 06:58:16 PM
1 votes:

orbister: Molavian: Once he assaulted Zimmerman, Martin took it to a whole new level.

What's so hard for people to understand about this?

If you're being followed around by an armed stalker, why should you wait to be attacked?What I find hard to understand is why Mr Martin is not seen by some as having any right to confront the man stalking him. Would that have been too uppity?


How do you know the person following you is armed?
2013-06-23 05:25:56 PM
1 votes:

fredklein: ChaosStar: Zimmerman also has a documented history of anger and violence, assaulting an officer and beating his wife, which is a lot more substantial and concrete than Trayvon's few tweet pictures, hearsay, and lack of criminal record.

Stupid and wrong all in the same post. Congrats.
Oh and please cite source for above

In 2005, Zimmerman was charged with assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest, after shoving an officer while a friend of Zimmerman's was being questioned about underage drinking. The charges were reduced, then dropped when Zimmerman entered a pre-trial diversion program. Also in 2005, Zimmerman's ex-fiance filed a restraining order against him, alleging domestic violence.
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin#George_Zimme r man


Oh you mean the undercover cop that was hassling his friend? I'd push some guy in plain clothes to if they were bothering my friends.
Alleged domestic violence is a far cry from "beating his wife"
Both are very short of a "history of anger and violence".

Keep lying to yourself though.
2013-06-23 05:19:28 PM
1 votes:

Giltric: If I spot someone swerving in their car around mile post 123.5 I'm going to follow their vehicle for as long as it takes for the police to catch up.


Are you also going to get into a fight with them and shoot them dead? No? Oh.

What's so bad about giving the police up to date information?

"We don't need you to do that."

You have no evidence that shows that ZImmerman engaged Trayvon first.

Zimmerman was chasing Trayvon. He was the pursuer. The hunter.

Trayvon was running away.

Now, which person is more likely to be the one to initiate a physical confrontation- the hunter, or the prey? (Ignore the fact that chasing someone is itself a type of violence).

img.fark.net
2013-06-23 04:51:48 PM
1 votes:
Zimmerman strapped on a gun, chased someone down at night, started a fight, shot and killed the guy he was fighting with.  I don't think he planned all that out ahead of time, but that's certainly how it ended up.

And many of you think "Oh, yeah, obviously that's self defense, nothing wrong with that".  Completely nuts.
2013-06-23 04:46:13 PM
1 votes:

Keizer_Ghidorah: Zimmerman wanted justice and punishment done that night. Several break-ins had occurred previously, with the perpetrators escaping. They were described as "young black men". Zimmerman sees a young black wan walking down the street, immediately assumes that's he's responsible for the break-ins, and starts pursuing him. "These assholes always get away!" isn't a phrase someone who is merely suspicious of a stranger would use. Zimmerman had already judged and pronounced sentence on Trayvon solely because he was a young black man walking at night through a neighborhood that had experienced some trouble and he wanted someone to pay for it.

And what "suspicious activity" did Trayvon do to earn Zimmerman's wrath? Zimmerman's given three different stories: Trayvon was peering into windows; Trayvon was staring at houses; Trayvon was skipping down the street. So which was it?

Zimmerman also has a documented history of anger and violence, assaulting an officer and beating his wife, which is a lot more substantial and concrete than Trayvon's few tweet pictures, hearsay, and lack of criminal record.


Stupid and wrong all in the same post. Congrats.
Oh and please cite source for above
2013-06-23 04:44:29 PM
1 votes:

fredklein: ChaosStar: He made that quite clear when he said:
Dispatcher: What's your apartment number?
Zimmerman: It's a home. It's 1950, Oh, crap. I don't want to give it all out. I don't know where this kid is.
So yes, he was afraid to give out his information, because Martin could have followed him home to do anything.

So, you think Trayvon, who's been running away this whole time, actually wanted to follow the crazy guy with the gun back to his house??

That makes absolutely no sense.

Besides, that's Zimmerman's reasoning for not saying his address out loud. Which has absolutely nothing to do with not setting a meeting place (far from his house, if he wishes).

Giving out where he was going to be to meet the police meant Martin could have been waiting for him when he got there, or could have followed him there.

Again, makes no sense. Why would Trayvon, who is actively seeking to AVOID Zimmerman, suddenly decide to turn around and FOLLOW him?? Especially follow him to a meeting with the cops??

Average police response time is high, he had no idea when a officer was going to show up.

No it's not, you yourself said "The first officer was on scene about a minute and a half after the end of the phone call."

Kiddo look at the map, seriously, look at it. Zoom in if you can.
Here, look at the Google map.
https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=203577346 16 7583507267.0004bbdcc7c71244ae865
Where is Martin hiding? It's a farking open area of lawns. Even the trees aren't big enough to hide an Ethiopian behind.

Try looking at a different angle.

[img.fark.net image 392x594]

There are plenty of places to hide. There are fences and bushes and pillars (oh, my!).

Stop making shiat up .

Indeed.


Yes, Martin's ESP allowed him to know Zimmerman had a gun.
It all makes perfect sense when you stop trying to turn Martin into the sweet face little boy the media portrayed him as and instead think of him at a football playing teenager with a chip on his shoulder, a perchance for violence, and a knack for trouble.
Stop confusing what you know now with what either party knew at the time of the incident.

ft

fredklein: Contains facts not in evidence.


Such as what?

fredklein: Look up 'stalking'. Following someone can be a crime, and even if it's not, it can be taken as an aggressive act. And, EVEN IF it isn't, we still don't know what happened when they met each other. But the safe bet is they continued to act in accordance with their personalities- hunter / prey.


No you look up stalking. Just following someone is not a crime, and it's not an aggressive act. It doesn't matter what happened when they met, all that matters is Martin put Zimmerman's life in danger and Zimmerman defended himself from that threat to his life with deadly force. Clear self defense. None of all the other shiat you spew matters.
2013-06-23 04:27:16 PM
1 votes:
Zimmerman wanted justice and punishment done that night. Several break-ins had occurred previously, with the perpetrators escaping. They were described as "young black men". Zimmerman sees a young black wan walking down the street, immediately assumes that's he's responsible for the break-ins, and starts pursuing him. "These assholes always get away!" isn't a phrase someone who is merely suspicious of a stranger would use. Zimmerman had already judged and pronounced sentence on Trayvon solely because he was a young black man walking at night through a neighborhood that had experienced some trouble and he wanted someone to pay for it.

And what "suspicious activity" did Trayvon do to earn Zimmerman's wrath? Zimmerman's given three different stories: Trayvon was peering into windows; Trayvon was staring at houses; Trayvon was skipping down the street. So which was it?

Zimmerman also has a documented history of anger and violence, assaulting an officer and beating his wife, which is a lot more substantial and concrete than Trayvon's few tweet pictures, hearsay, and lack of criminal record.
2013-06-23 02:25:15 PM
1 votes:

Oh_Enough_Already: gimmegimme: Giltric: fredklein: Giltric: Zimmerman could have been an off duty cop for all Trayvon knew.

Even more reason to fear him.

And run away right?

Or do you think assaulting an off duty cop is justifiable?

It's a moot point because Zimmy was not a law enforcement officer of any kind.  Just a self-important douche with a gun who liked to chase little boys around.

In what universe is a violent 17-year old thug a "little boy?"


Harlem?
2013-06-23 02:23:22 PM
1 votes:

Oh_Enough_Already: In what universe is a violent 17-year old thug a "little boy?"


In what universe was Martin a "17-year-old thug"?

/Oh, I forgot. I was black.
2013-06-23 02:18:54 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Giltric: fredklein: Giltric: Zimmerman could have been an off duty cop for all Trayvon knew.

Even more reason to fear him.

And run away right?

Or do you think assaulting an off duty cop is justifiable?

It's a moot point because Zimmy was not a law enforcement officer of any kind.  Just a self-important douche with a gun who liked to chase little boys around.


In what universe is a violent 17-year old thug a "little boy?"
2013-06-23 01:54:12 PM
1 votes:

fredklein: Giltric: Exactly.

Trayvon started the assault. Zimmerman was justified in using deadly force to defend himself.

No, by chasing Trayvon, Zimmerman started it.


Citation as to an event being an assault based on the criteria of following someone?
2013-06-23 12:41:12 PM
1 votes:

Kyosuke: Giltric: ZImmerman said...

Oh, hell, let's call the whole thing off then. He says he's innocent, he certainly must be.


Do you have evidence that counters his claims?

Actual evidence instead of speculation, emotion etc?
2013-06-23 07:58:41 AM
1 votes:
As an Aussie I really have no interest in this case. But I lived in Savannah, GA for a short while during the Reagan years and saw the white jocks at my military school taunt the black kids by saying "Your grand daddy was my grand daddies slave, boy".

I don't see that as the typical American viewpoint.

I do, however, find it quite interesting that Popcorn Johnny(who I have previously tagged as "Utter Scum" for some reason) has been continuously posting on this thread for fourteen farking hours.

Get a farking life, son.

Seriously, grow the fark up. Try to be something other than a piss poor excuse for a human being, there's a good lad.
2013-06-23 04:26:04 AM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Friend, a random citizen took it upon himself to follow a kid around in armed pursuit in a vehicle and then on foot.  The target didn't know if he was going to be raped or kidnapped or stabbed or shot in the chest from a few inches away.

A concerned citizen, who happened to be armed, reported a suspicious person to the police and then attempted to regain sight of that person after they fled. The suspicious person then launched a violent assault on the citizen, leading the concerned citizen to pull their legally carried firearm and defend them self from great bodily harm or possibly death.


Oh yeah, he was 'concerned' all right. Enough to force a confrontation after being advised not to.

That sounds sensible.
2013-06-23 03:59:10 AM
1 votes:

squirrelflavoredyogurt: Florida has a stand your ground law that says if you've tried everything within your power to get away from someone and they follow you, you are allowed to defend yourself with everything up to and including deadly force.


Florida's law says no such thing, and "following" doesn't even begin to approach the threshold actually defined in the law.  I still haven't figured out why all of the folks that believe Zimmerman deliberately stalked and murdered the kid think that anyone would do such a thing while on the phone with a 911 dispatcher, knowing full well the call was being recorded and also knowing full well that the police would be arriving very shortly.  I mean, when I set out to kill someone in cold blood, I always want to make sure there's a recording being made of it, and that the police will be along in a moment.
2013-06-23 03:16:11 AM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: superficial scratches

Yes, a broken nose and bleeding wounds to the back of the head are "superficial". Let me guess, you think Zimmerman was obligated to wait until he suffered a skull fracture before defending himself, right?


You mean a broken nose and bleeding wounds that required exactly no medical attention? I was all cut up and bloody but I totally refused medical treatment because I'm that much of a bad ass. Zimmerman refusing medical attention either shows that he wasn't badly hurt or proves that he's one of the dumbest human being on the planet. I just shot and killed someone in "self defense" but hey he didn't even hurt me bad enough that I want a doctor to check me out.
2013-06-23 01:48:32 AM
1 votes:

ChaosStar: See the bold up there? "catch" "overtake", these are two key words. Since Zimmerman wasn't running very fast, and in fact going by his breathing on the phone wasn't running at all, he wasn't "chasing" Martin.


1) One doesn't need to go fast to chase. It helps to go fast if you want to chase successfully, but you can still chase slowly.
2) What, exactly was his purpose in regards to "these assholes" who "always get away"- to NOT catch this one?

Even if your latter scenario was the case, which it's not, Travyon didn't have the grounds to use DEADLY FORCE


Why not? Crazy guy following you in a a car at night, you duck between buildings, he get out and follows you. You, not wanting to lead this nutter to your front door, hide. He walks past you. Phew. He's walking away. He's putting his cell phone in his pocket- wait- is that a gun? Oh boy, this guy's armed! And he's turning around and walking towards you!! He must know where you're hiding! Oh, shiat!!!

I can see that being grounds for deadly force.

which is what pounding someone's head into the pavement and trying to take their gun to use it against them is considered.

1) Pounding someones head can cause unconsciousness as well.
2) You sayTrayvon wanted to get the gun to use it on Zimmerman. That's a big ASSumption.

As I've said before, the only way to be safe around an enemy with a gun is if they are unconscious, or you take the gun away. If they have a knife, meh- knock them down and step back, and (barring any knife-throwing skills), you're safely out of reach. But a guy with a gun can be knocked down, 100 feet away, have two broken legs and one broken arm, and still be a threat. It's certainly possible that Trayvon was simply trying to get the gun away from the crazy guy who was following him (Zimmerman), not to use it himself, but to... disarm the crazy guy who was following him. And when that failed, he moved to plan 'B'- knock the crazy guy unconscious.

Remember that reasonable means of retreat we have pointed out to you at least six times now? Yeah, that's kinda important, especially when the person you're trying to paint as the victim is on top of the other person pummeling them.

And (if my scenario is correct, or close to it) exactly what 'reasonable means of retreat' did Trayvon have, facing a guy holding a gun? Turn to run, and get shot in the back. His only chance was to fight. And that would explain him jumping Zimmerman.
2013-06-23 01:33:19 AM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: jaytkay: Gun "rights" people are gonna be bummed if Zimmerman is convicted.

They dream day and night of shooting some dark-hued "bad guy".

Stop being unfair to Responsible Gun Owners™.

[img.fark.net image 275x345]


I am sorry to say this is largely true.

 I am a gun owner, but also one that was once involved in a very publicized self-defense shooting. Afterward, total strangers who recognized me from the news, even a random waiter in a restaurant, went on about how cool it would be to shoot someone and 'get away with it'. The idiot waiter even kept excitedly asking shiat like how it felt to actually kill someone, both giddy and then with a wistful look on his face. I was not sure which one made me want to cock punch him more.

 It actually seems to be a common fantasy for a particularly offensively immature brand of loser in one of the mall ninja/itg/left behind/turner diary/rahowa type of personalities, if the morons seeking me out were any indication. at least none asked for an autograph.
 I even got mailed an invitation to join an exclusive shooting club with a normally several year wait list. I declined. Never had much use for gun culture/shooting sports after that, though i still keep firearms around i don't enjoy them as a sport anymore. not because i had to use them against people, just because the redneck morons at the range offend me now.
2013-06-23 01:29:31 AM
1 votes:
Trayvon Martin had every right to confront his stalker. Zimmerman had every right to follow Trayvon.  Unfortunately, they didn't use words in the confrontation, but decided to escalate into fisticuffs, and then shooticuffs.  I expect a teenager to react to confrontation in a stupid manner. I expect a gun owner to use his gun if he is getting assaulted.

All in all, this happened because two people failed to act civilized. Now one is dead, and the other's life is ruined.  Unfortunately, every farktard with an unrelated agenda managed to hook their wagon to one side or the other, and used these two assbags as posterboys for their side.

No, Zimm doesn't represent a responsible gun owner. No, Trayvon wasn't a choirboy. Shame a kid died, I don't think he deserved to, but when you start punching people with guns, you tend to get more than you deserve.
2013-06-23 01:21:53 AM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Y U UNDERSTAND HOW ZIMMY COULD HAVE BEEN SCARED

BUT NO UNDERSTAND HOW MARTIN COULD HAVE BEEN SCARED?


because of teh black.

sorry, but its true. the one consistent factor in all of these threads is that the people ignoring that martin could have legitimately felt threatened also are, to the last ITG, people who would also claim the right to self-defense to shoot a black man pursuing them in the same aggressive manner that martin was pursued by zimmerman.

/if in doubt, shoot the negro. also, its always his fault.  thats pretty much the takeaway from all these ardent zimmerman defenders the last few months
2013-06-23 01:17:22 AM
1 votes:

fredklein: Loaded Six String: If you consider every person who carries a weapon, be it a gun, knife, sword, or kubotan to be looking for a confrontation you have a definite bias against said people, despite how they may actually feel about being involved in a violent altercation.

Not everyone who carries a weapon is spoiling for a fight. But they often are more likely to get into one, knowing they have a weapon. Having a weapon makes you more powerful. And, for some, that leads to... lets say, overconfidence.


Oh man
I'm gonna need to see a citation for that one sparky
2013-06-23 01:09:23 AM
1 votes:

fredklein: The_Six_Fingered_Man: fredklein: A reasonable means to escape danger... is not to get into dangerous situations. "The only winning move is not to play."

How erudite. By your logic, there is no need for the statute in the first place, since everyone should just avoid assaulting everyone else on the off chance that an altercation may ensue.

FTFY.

fredklein: Saying "Stop" does not mean 'I wish to withdraw'. In fact, far from 'terminate the use of force', Zimmerman escalated again, to deadly force, killing Trayvon.

What does "Stop" mean, then?

It means "Stop". it means that the one speaking wishes that the one being spoken to would cease doing what they are doing.

Nothing there about "withdrawing"

fredklein: He followed Trayvon, by vehicle and on foot, with a gun on his hip, chasing after one of "these assholes" who "always get away". That's how he 'put himself in position'.

None of which is illegal, nor rises to the level at which Martin would be justified in beating Zimmerman to the point where he felt in fear for his life. If you feel that being followed by someone with a gun on their hip is justification for beating the crap out of them, I suggest you try this on your nearest law enforcement official and see how far you get with it.

There is a certain amount of time during which we do not have any idea what happened. I certainly find it possible that Zimmerman tried to take Trayvon into custody, perhaps by flashing his gun. IF that happened, would you not agree that, IN THAT CASE, Trayvon would have been justified in fearing for his life? I mean, Trayvon's just walking home when a guy who was following him in a car, got out and followed him on foot, and is now confronting him, showing a gun? I think any reasonable person would fear for their life. Would you?

Now, the real question is, is that (or something similar) what actually happened? To judge that, we need to look at Zimmerman's actions and mental being. He was upset, cursing at at "these asshole ...

"his owning (and carrying) a gun, etc. All these thing paint a picture of a man who, well... wanted to confront Trayvon that night."

If you consider every person who carries a weapon, be it a gun, knife, sword, or kubotan to be looking for a confrontation you have a definite bias against said people, despite how they may actually feel about being involved in a violent altercation.
2013-06-23 12:55:32 AM
1 votes:

Satan's Girlfriend: Popcorn Johnny: Satan's Girlfriend: The Z supporters are only happy since a black child was murdered.

You're only outraged because a black kid was killed. You're a goddamn racist and don't even realize it.

Racism is privileged combined with power. Since I am a minority myself I can not by definition be racist. I can forgive your ignorance as you probably never went to college. Consider this a lesson learned.


Racism is hatred or intolerance of another race or other races. Privilege and power might enable racism, or institutionalize it, but your alternative definition is a license to be a bigot, and that's just perverse.
2013-06-22 11:55:14 PM
1 votes:

Thingster: Every state I've lived in has a "you can start a fight, but if you back away and the other guy keeps after you, he's the aggressor" law.


So, I can slap you, then quickly step back. And if you hit me back, you are the aggressor.
Cool. So, I step forward and punch you, and quickly step back, and if you hit me back, you are the aggressor.
I step forward and shoot you, and quickly step back, and if you shoot me back, you are the aggressor.

Does this make any sense?
2013-06-22 11:53:02 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme:
As I've said a number of times, the main reason I enjoy these threads is because I simply don't understand your inability to grasp---even if you still luv Zim---how Trayvon Martin could have been defending himself or how he could have been afraid of Zim.


I enjoy them because I get to add a bunch of racists to my ignore list.
2013-06-22 11:51:36 PM
1 votes:

The_Six_Fingered_Man: 776.041Use of force by aggressor.-The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter (776, Justifiable Use of Force) is not available to a person who:
(1)Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or(2)Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:(a)Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or(b)In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

Let me put that in layman's terms. You can start a fight, but as soon as you are being beaten so badly that you are about to die or have great bodily harm inflicted on you and you have exhausted all reasonable means of escape, you can shoot the person you started a fight with.


ONLY IF you have "exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger".

Did Zimmerman say "I give up"?

Or, how about not putting oneself into such a position to begin with? I'd say that's a very reasonable way to escape danger- not get into dangerous situations to begin with. Gee, if only Zimmerman had done that....
2013-06-22 11:47:59 PM
1 votes:

ChaosStar: He had it right.
Even if you are the aggressor, if your life is in danger you can defend yourself with lethal force.



So, I can go up to a random passerby, punch him in the face. And when he draws his gun, I can, perfectly legally, kill him.

If the law allows that, the law is farked up.
2013-06-22 11:44:13 PM
1 votes:
img.fark.net
Um, no. "Everyday" means "ordinary". "Every day" means "daily.
2013-06-22 11:42:44 PM
1 votes:
When Team Trayvon can't convince anybody based on wild speculation, they bring out their ace in the hole, "you're racist".
2013-06-22 11:14:29 PM
1 votes:
Popcorn Johnny:  had every right, even if he was the aggressor, to use deadly force to protect himself.


No. He doesn't. You can't initiate a conflict then claim self defense. I know you're a known troll but even this is a stretch for you.
2013-06-22 11:10:59 PM
1 votes:

whatshisname: Oh_Enough_Already: whatshisname: I can't believe there are still people defending Zimmerman and trying to rationalize his actions. If he hadn't been out playing vigilante, the kid would still be alive.

Maybe, and his Thug Life course trajectory would have inevitably seen him getting killed days or weeks or months later and not one single fark would have been given by you or anybody else.

Why does anybody care now?

Oh, that's right, we can magically whiten up the Hispanic guy and "Blame Whitey" for this because not one single black person has ever been killed by another black person in the whole entire history of black people, right?

You've just made a great argument as to why everyone should care about this case.


The only thing fueling any interest in this case is the fact that it's a pleasant distraction from the incurable dysfunction destroying the black community and any whites that have the misfortune if getting exposed to it.

Man bites dog instead of dog bites man.

Nobody loves it more than the mainstream media as it allows them a nice bit of sleight-of-hand to prop up their absurd narrative about "racist whites" (even if the white guy really isn't) when, in fact, the number of violent crimes committed by whites against blacks is less than 12% of inter-racial crime, black on white crime accounting for the remaining 85%.

But shhh! Don't mention that! That would be racist!!!
2013-06-22 10:56:21 PM
1 votes:

whatshisname: I can't believe there are still people defending Zimmerman and trying to rationalize his actions. If he hadn't been out playing vigilante, the kid would still be alive.


Maybe, and his Thug Life course trajectory would have inevitably seen him getting killed days or weeks or months later and not one single fark would have been given by you or anybody else.

Why does anybody care now?

Oh, that's right, we can magically whiten up the Hispanic guy and "Blame Whitey" for this because not one single black person has ever been killed by another black person in the whole entire history of black people, right?
2013-06-22 10:48:50 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Lets put some of the blame for this where it belongs, Trayvon's parents. The kid has a very checkered past and was currently serving a suspension from school. Mom deals with it by telling him to go stay with dad, and dad lets the kid roam the streets. Maybe if the kid had a little discipline in his life and had been grounded, he'd still be alive.


Oh come off it. I have tried to give both sides the benefit of the doubt, but this is just utter horseshiat.

Trayvon was a teenager. They go out late and roam around. It's been the way they work for millennia. There's a reason some places have instituted curfews. He had every right to go to the store and buy soda and skittles or sell weed or whatever it was he was doing.

Zimmerman didn't know him and took the whole "zomg black dude in a white neighborhood must be there to rob the place" to a paranoid extreme, by taking "casually following and observing" to an aggressive stance.

Everyone involved did dumbshiat things. However it happened, someone died because of suspicion and fear and chose to attack rather than getting to a safe spot and calling the cops.

Like they teach in every goddamn CCW class on the planet: the gun is a last resort.

Let's not make a massive clusterfark any more stupid by now suggesting that the parents by being separated and not locking their teenager up at night are somehow party to this because they had a difficult time dealing with their son.

I grew up around the ghetto with ghetto friends. When the majority of your peers are doing the gang thing and you have a lot of pressure from them to join in (as opposed to harassment and exile), you're going to get involved to some extent just to fit in and stay under the radar. It's that or your life is a living hell.

As much as I think gimme gimme is full of shiat and just wants to be a contrarian, neither one of you is expressly wrong, merely reading into the evidence what you want to see.

Guilty or not, it boils down to a tragic mound of shiat that got unevenly distributed, and a shiatty situation for the courts.

Let's not pretend that this trial is anything portentous, and admit its just another moment of human stupidity.
2013-06-22 10:44:09 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: I ask out of genuine curiosity. What would be your reaction if, the next time you're walking through your neighborhood, you notice someone rolling alongside you in a car and then they begin to follow you on foot?


I would tell the person I'm talking to on my cellphone that I'm concerned and then call the police. I'd also flee and not return to confront them.

Two things Martin failed to do because he was pissed off that someone gave him the stink eye and he wanted to beat some respect into the guy.
2013-06-22 10:41:54 PM
1 votes:

Bravo Two: lantawa: Lionel Mandrake: lantawa: Satan's Girlfriend: Even if he walks though, it's only a matter of time before the NBP hunts him down like dog he is.

What does the National Bank of Pakistan have to do with the price of tea in China?

About as much as a guy with skittles has to do with being a deadly threat.

You're not getting it. Come back to reality, young Lionel Mandrake. Come back.........

So, on top of an admitted clusterfark, you're advocating/condoning vigilante justice and murder? If what Zimmerman did was wrong, how is hoping/condoning the NBP's murder of him any better?


You do, I hope, realize that I was responding, sarcastically, to some douchebag insinuation that Zimmerman is going to be hunted down by vigilante douchebags, right? Beer-like typing detected.....
2013-06-22 10:19:07 PM
1 votes:

Satan's Girlfriend: When people say thug they are using it as a code word for black people. You're like a child who calls someone gay, and then pretends you really meant happy.


Seconded.
2013-06-22 10:18:41 PM
1 votes:

ChaosStar: The_Six_Fingered_Man: I'm bored and I have writer's block on this article I am supposed to write.

Others, however, when they present long debunked "evidence" as gospel are well worth trouncing into a mudhole.

It could be worse, you could have chosen gimmegimme.
That's one whackadoodle that doesn't have a firm grasp on much of anything, much less this case or the laws involved with it.


Calling me names does not help your argument.
2013-06-22 10:16:18 PM
1 votes:
It looks like vigilante justice will prevail in this case. Thanks but no thanks State of Florida, you had you chance. Your legal system is a sick joke.
2013-06-22 10:12:39 PM
1 votes:

ChaosStar: Again Mr Troll, you made the connection, not the op. You're the one assuming to know what the op meant by thug, whether he meant it that way or not is irrelevant, as you had no possible way of knowing what he meant unless you can read minds through tcp/ip connections.


Calling me names does not help your argument. When people say thug they are using it as a code word for black people. You're like a child who calls someone gay, and then pretends you really meant happy. Everybody here knows what you meant. You know deep down what you really meant. Why don't you just admit it?
2013-06-22 10:07:22 PM
1 votes:

The_Six_Fingered_Man: From the Florida Bar Associations General Rules for Closing Arguments:
Misstatingthe Evidence.Although counsel may argue regarding inferences from evidence in the record, counsel may not create evidence without factual support.

You are asking the prosecution to make an inference that is, at this point, not supported by the evidence. To do so would result in an admonishment from the trial judge.


Do you understand what an argument by inference is? Because it doesn't look like you do. "Inference" claims that a given fact makes another fact more or less likely to be true.

Let's look at an example from this very thread. I'll spell it out more for illustration.

 The 911 recording is evidence. The 911 tape holds evidencre that Zimmerman used foul language, and referred to Trayvon by the epithets "punk" and "asshole."

Argument:

1) A person who calls another person a "punk" and "asshole" is likely to be angry at them.
2) A person who is angry at another person is more likely to start a fight than is a person who is not angry.

Conclusion:

The evidence of Zimmerman's use of epithets increases the strength of the inference that Zimmerman started the fight.

Now here, I've spelled it out more completely than usual. Usually, I just say "Zimmerman was angry with Trayvon, so he was more likely to start a fight." But the fact is, all of the inferences I've made are supported by evidence. My arguments would draw no admonition from any judge with a lick of sense.
2013-06-22 10:04:47 PM
1 votes:

ChaosStar: My "dog whistle terminology"?
Are you saying I'm using words only canines can hear? Or is this some other stupid term people like you use to sound educated?
Fact of the matter is the op said thug, you equated thug to black person not the op, then you called the op racist.
Tell me I'm wrong, please do.


Let's see here. He called Martin a thug. Martin is black. Yeah, how could I ever make that connection *rolls eyes*
2013-06-22 10:00:47 PM
1 votes:

ThatDarkFellow: One less thug dead, no one cares


Read that back to yourself. Slowly if you have to.
2013-06-22 09:57:26 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Lionel Mandrake: Nice.  Not that there was any doubt about you being an asshole, but even assholes aren't generally so up front about being assholes.

If you want to waste your time feeling sorry for piece of shiat gang scum shooting each other, knock yourself out.


It's much easier to throw a blanket over hundreds of individual lives and righteously call them scum.

Jesus, dude.  You just keep upping the ante...I'll have to reevaluate my estimates of the upper limits of human assholishness.
2013-06-22 09:54:34 PM
1 votes:

Satan's Girlfriend: ThatDarkFellow: One less thug dead, no one cares

This is the attitude I'm talking about. The Z supporters are only happy since a black child was murdered. I wish more more of your kind were willing to own up to it like you have.


He said thug, you're the one who brought up skin color.
/whites, browns, and yellows can be thugs to
2013-06-22 09:51:25 PM
1 votes:

Satan's Girlfriend: The Z supporters are only happy since a black child was murdered.


You're only outraged because a black kid was killed. You're a goddamn racist and don't even realize it.
2013-06-22 09:48:23 PM
1 votes:

Mrtraveler01: If you're calling someone a liar. You shouldn't lie yourself.


Nothing better than confronting a crackpot liberal like yourself with a little truth. All of the NBC News 911 call doctoring, all the bulllsh*t you idiots saturated the mainstream media with, yet that simple truth has risen to the top.

"If I had a son it would look like Trayvon" - Barack Hussein Obama.

Yep, it sure would. A juvenile delinquent with photographs of petty crimes and drugs on his phone, walking through a rich neighborhood to steal something, then picking a fight with a homeowner in his front yard. Yep, sounds like Barry Hussein's son to me.
2013-06-22 09:47:57 PM
1 votes:
I don't even care who did what at that point. The instant Zimmerman ignored police orders not to follow Martin, his "stand your ground" protections should have been voided.
2013-06-22 09:47:48 PM
1 votes:

ThatDarkFellow: One less thug dead, no one cares


This is the attitude I'm talking about. The Z supporters are only happy since a black child was murdered. I wish more more of your kind were willing to own up to it like you have.
2013-06-22 09:39:46 PM
1 votes:
One less thug dead, no one cares
2013-06-22 09:38:55 PM
1 votes:

bugontherug: He ran away from Zimmemerman.


Uh, no. He walked into his yard and started swinging. Keep spouting off that NBC News faked 911 call horsesh*t.
2013-06-22 09:38:20 PM
1 votes:
in my opinion we know exactly jack squat about what happened that night. Zimmerman's story is dubious at best as he has a vested interested in being cleared. so has every reason to spin it to make him look good and no reason to be 100% honest.

Not sure if he will walk or not but if he does I would not want to be a white man in a black neighbor hood.
2013-06-22 09:37:50 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Lionel Mandrake: About as much as a guy with skittles has to do with being a deadly threat.

You know one side can't make a case when all they do is resort to cracking jokes.


I'm not trying to "make a case"

And I'm not on "one side"

Damn, you really suck
2013-06-22 09:17:00 PM
1 votes:

lantawa: Satan's Girlfriend: Even if he walks though, it's only a matter of time before the NBP hunts him down like dog he is.

What does the National Bank of Pakistan have to do with the price of tea in China?


About as much as a guy with skittles has to do with being a deadly threat.
2013-06-22 09:13:38 PM
1 votes:

bugontherug: Tat'dGreaser: I do not believe they will be able to prove that Zimmerman clearly instigated the end fight where Martin was shot. All that can be proven is Zimmerman was being attacked and shot Martin, that's it.

The standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not "beyond whatever could of dust a gaggle of defense lawyers can kick up and call 'doubt.'" The angry, confrontational, lethally armed Zimmerman started a fight with the unarmed minor who sought to avoid confrontation, and who had no motive to start a fight. Zimmerman did so because he was angry about break-ins in his neighborhood, just knew Trayon was involved in them, and thought himself some kind of an authority figure with a right to physically detain the boy.

When Zimmerman's partisans say "there's no evidence Zimmerman started the fight," they're just wrong. The only claim the defense can legitimately make is that there's no direct evidence he started the fight. There's no video recording, and no eyewitness. But there rarely is. Most criminal cases are proven by inferences from other evidence, rather than by direct evidence.

Here, there is a mountain of indirect evidence Zimmerman started the fight. Zimmerman's anger, desire to confront, belief in Trayvon's criminality, and possession of a lethal weapon are all but indisputable. Just as are Trayvon's effort to avoid confrontation, his lack of any weapon, and complete absence of any motive to start a fight.

When it boils down to it, only two pieces of evidence suggest Trayvon started the fight. The first is Zimmerman's self-serving, ever-evolving account which sensible people will disregard. The other is Trayvon's history of juvenile fisticuffs, which may not even enter evidence. Assuming it does, and disregarding the lack of morals assassinating the character of an unarmed boy you've shot to death shows, the fact is, it is a) a molehill of evidence only, and b) canceled out by Zimmerman's own history of violence, including violence against the police.
...

You're gonna have to help me out here.  What was Trayvon's effort to avoid confrontation?
2013-06-22 09:07:25 PM
1 votes:

Tat'dGreaser: I do not believe they will be able to prove that Zimmerman clearly instigated the end fight where Martin was shot. All that can be proven is Zimmerman was being attacked and shot Martin, that's it.


The standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt." Not "beyond whatever could of dust a gaggle of defense lawyers can kick up and call 'doubt.'" The angry, confrontational, lethally armed Zimmerman started a fight with the unarmed minor who sought to avoid confrontation, and who had no motive to start a fight. Zimmerman did so because he was angry about break-ins in his neighborhood, just knew Trayon was involved in them, and thought himself some kind of an authority figure with a right to physically detain the boy.

When Zimmerman's partisans say "there's no evidence Zimmerman started the fight," they're just wrong. The only claim the defense can legitimately make is that there's no direct evidence he started the fight. There's no video recording, and no eyewitness. But there rarely is. Most criminal cases are proven by inferences from other evidence, rather than by direct evidence.

Here, there is a mountain of indirect evidence Zimmerman started the fight. Zimmerman's anger, desire to confront, belief in Trayvon's criminality, and possession of a lethal weapon are all but indisputable. Just as are Trayvon's effort to avoid confrontation, his lack of any weapon, and complete absence of any motive to start a fight.

When it boils down to it, only two pieces of evidence suggest Trayvon started the fight. The first is Zimmerman's self-serving, ever-evolving account which sensible people will disregard. The other is Trayvon's history of juvenile fisticuffs, which may not even enter evidence. Assuming it does, and disregarding the lack of morals assassinating the character of an unarmed boy you've shot to death shows, the fact is, it is a) a molehill of evidence only, and b) canceled out by Zimmerman's own history of violence, including violence against the police.

There is a doubt Zimmerman started the fight. It is not a reasonable one.
2013-06-22 09:06:57 PM
1 votes:

Satan's Girlfriend: Here are the facts:

Zimmerman claimed to be a neighborhood watch captain when he really wasn't.
Zimmerman called 911 like 50 times in a year.
Zimmerman had a history of violence and racist remarks.
Zimmerman directly disobeyed a police order to stand down.
Zimmerman was armed with a gun. Martin was armed with Skittles and tea.
Martin had no bruises on his knuckles, inconsistent with the assault narrative.
Zimmerman had only minor injuries, and did not even require medical assistance.
Voice experts have unanimously confirmed the voice screaming for help was Martin.
Zimmerman has constantly changed his version of events that night.

I could go on and on. This should be an open and shut case. My only concern is Zimmerman walking due to the white privileged system that traditionally rewards his kind of behavior. Even if he walks though, it's only a matter of time before the NBP hunts him down like dog he is.


It's tough to take you seriously when you continue to repeat things that are very, very, very easy to unequivocally show to not be true.
2013-06-22 09:02:39 PM
1 votes:

The_Six_Fingered_Man: Vehemently against the censorship of pornography, wants the Second Amendment repealed. Yes, these are the views of a "FoxNews 'liberal'."


1)
Porn consumption (like divorce, and child abuse) is higher in Red States. Hardly a liberal issue.

2)
Dershowitz claims to want the 2nd amendment repealed
WHICH WILL NEVER HAPPEN

3)
At the same time Dershowitz advocates for gun rights under current law
LIKE FLORIDA'S "STAND YOUR GROUND"

Dershowitz is a FOX News "liberal". He's there to make conservatives feel "Fair and Balanced".

Normal people know better.
2013-06-22 09:01:40 PM
1 votes:
Suppose this whole incident didn't happen. Suppose Trayvon found another community to rob. Support the Mexican dude was just watching TV that day.

Who would end up standing trial, who would end up in prison, who would be a thug you would have never have heard of out of those two? Yeah.
2013-06-22 08:43:07 PM
1 votes:

Lionel Mandrake: If Johnny ever had credibility, that would be the end of it.


Maybe you should stop posting until you've actually taken 10 minutes to learn the basic facts of the case. You still think that a police officer ordered Zimmerman not to leave his vehicle, don't you?

You're also not paying very close attention. Unlike the frothing at the mouth mob, I label things as fact or speculation.
2013-06-22 08:41:53 PM
1 votes:

The_Six_Fingered_Man: Lionel Mandrake: The_Six_Fingered_Man: Lionel Mandrake: Popcorn Johnny: Some legal experts

[citation needed]

See: Alan Dershowitz. Or is a law professor and 50 year practitioner of criminal law not "expert" enough?

You need to look up the definition of "citation"

Are you looking for a citation that some legal experts think Corey overcharged? Because Alan Dershowitz is a legal expert who thought Corey overcharged. Did you not quote correctly when asking for your citation?


So, given that she has a crazy high conviction rate - why would she risk that by overcharging? She could have gone with a much lesser murder charge. Are you suggesting that there's a conspiratorial ring pushing a brilliant attorney to risk her career over a fat man with a gun? She doesn't have a history of overcharging so why start now?

And this is speculating from a man who probably hasn't read every deposition.

If you can't see the alarming absurdity in your belief system then I can't help you.
2013-06-22 08:40:25 PM
1 votes:

jaytkay: Gun "rights" people are gonna be bummed if Zimmerman is convicted.

They dream day and night of shooting some dark-hued "bad guy".


As a responsible gun owner, and having been in bad spots, I am more afraid of ignorant white trash than I ever have been of anyone else. They're the ones who have been the most violent and callous.

I grew up in a predominantly ghetto black school system, and knew a lot of the gangs and their members. Most of these guys, unless they had a reason to go after you, you were fine. Stay off their turf, stay out of their way, and respect them, and they might hassle you a little but wouldn't get violent. No reason to. Very much a territorial/pack mentality. Don't be prey, don't piss on the lead dog.

Most white trash guys I've met would be violent for no good reason, and would attack you for fun.

However, all race aside, I would and have followed strange people I didn't recognize when they were slowly cruising the neighborhood or showing signs they were out of place. I've also been armed while doing so. If they take off and leave, no skin off my nose. I keep an eye on where they go, and call the cops if necessary. I do this because we have a lot of elderly around and we're way out. Prime targets for people looking to rob a place.

My criteria for suspicious, you ask? Driving excessively slow past a house. Pulling into driveways and not exiting your vehicle, then leaving again after loitering for a long period of time. Parking by the side of the road and heading towards a house across a field, especially towards dusk.

I'm also, in a lot of cases, way more direct than Zimmerman. If you're out of your car I'll stop and politely ask if you're lost or need help. I'll kindly ask what their business is and if they have no business or don't know the owner, I'll remind them they're on private property.

Had a lot of folks take off real quick, none ever turn around and get nasty or try to pick a fight. Never had to unconceal my weapon, either.

Only ever had to do that when some redneck whiskey tango fark with drop crotch pants and acting like a retard started waving a gun around and pointing it at people, or walk up to me out of the blue and start pushing me around for no reason (and he was later arrested for dealing meth).
2013-06-22 08:36:26 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: This coming from the guy who said a zillion times in this thread that we should stick to the facts.


I said I'd stick to the facts in determining whether or not Zimmerman was guilty. I'm free to speculate about everything else, just like you. The difference is I separate the facts and speculations, while you think that one is the same as the other.
2013-06-22 08:35:16 PM
1 votes:

Mrtraveler01: Yeah, it's a horribly written law since both of them could have used the Stand Your Ground claim.


I don't think anyone will argue that it isn't a horribly written law. Except the gun nuts who fap to the thought of being able to gun someone down legally.
2013-06-22 08:31:37 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Mrtraveler01: Was he doing anything illegal prior to the assault?

I'm not sure, there was a lot of speculation that the whole reason he went to the 7-11 was to sell weed. The surveillance video shows him loitering around the front of the store for a while after buying his Skittles.


So no then?
2013-06-22 08:31:27 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Electrify: Livingroom: gimmegimme: Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Compared to a gunshot wound to the chest?

Yes.

Maybe Zimmy shouldn't have started a fight he couldn't finish...

Hey look, the people that know absolutely nothing about the case are here to make assumptions.

Friend, a random citizen took it upon himself to follow a kid around in armed pursuit in a vehicle and then on foot.  The target didn't know if he was going to be raped or kidnapped or stabbed or shot in the chest from a few inches away.

But I suppose you wouldn't consider it starting a fight if someone did the same thing to you.

no, i wouldnt be wearing a goddamn hoody slinking through a rich neighbourhood at night IN THE SUMMER. that spells disaster, always has, always will.

You know how I know you're racist?

/either that, or a fashionista to the point of retardation
//pick one

You're forgetting the part where he thought February was summer.


Either or, but the fact that he feels that he brought it on himself because of what he was wearing says volumes. Bonus, it isn't because he was wearing the wrong coloured bandana in the wrong neighbourhood, it was because he was wearing the wrong kind of shirt through the RICH neighbourhood. Apparently fashion trends are enough to convict these days. Bet he thinks that rape victims brought on themselves because they shouldn't have been wearing such a short skirt.

The stupid in this guy's comment is so strong that admitting to be a racist may in fact be the lesser of two evils
2013-06-22 08:30:44 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Bontesla: I also think the Special Prosecutor wouldn't have brought charges if she didn't have the evidence. She has a brilliant reputation and one of the highest conviction rate among her peers. She doesn't have a reputation for bringing charges that she can't prove in court.

We know what the evidence is, there isn't any. Hell, in the probable cause hearing, they were forced to admit to having no proof of most of the points in their probable cause affidavit.

She has a reputation for bringing charges on everything, including murder charges against a 12 year old that accidentally killed their brother. Think about it, why wouldn't she bring charges? She solidifies her reputation of being tough on crime and can throw her hands up and blame the legal system when she loses the case.

Some legal experts have even suggested that she should face sanctions for bringing charges in this case, given the lack of evidence.


LOL

Yeah. No. The lead detective thought there was enough evidence to charge Zimmerman. As did the Special Prosecutor. If she felt pressured to charge, she would have gone with something much easier to prove.

Hell, even Zimmerman bet against himself. If he couldn't even establish justifiable homicide under the low bar of SYG...

Either you're trolling or you're too invested in your beliefs that you're unreasonable.
2013-06-22 08:29:44 PM
1 votes:

falcon176: Trayvon was standing his ground cuz he felt threatened by Zimmerman who also stood his ground after Trayvon stood his ground and everybody stood their ground case dismissed too bad libs


Yeah, it's a horribly written law since both of them could have used the Stand Your Ground claim.

Well that is until one of them got shot.
2013-06-22 08:27:48 PM
1 votes:
Kyosuke:
It's obvious to me, based upon the 911 call and Zimmerman's own wannabe cop background, that Zimmerman was the aggressor in the incident. As such he wasn't neither standing his ground nor defending others when he fired his weapon.

This so much.
2013-06-22 08:27:39 PM
1 votes:

Giltric: Do you have other evidence to counter the known evidence of it being a righteous shoot?


That's what's so infuriating about these threads. They don't have one goddamn bit of evidence so they keep passing off speculations as facts as if they can sneak them by people that have actually taken some time to read up on the facts of the case. All of the evidence is available online, you'd think they'd take some time to educate themselves on something they're so passionate about.
2013-06-22 08:25:16 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Well we know as a matter of fact he was doing something illegal. He was assaulting somebody.


Was he doing anything illegal prior to the assault?

Popcorn Johnny: Oh I know, you're going to come back with "he was standing his ground", right?

Lets go with that then. Trayvon was standing his ground and beating up Zimmerman. You do realize that Florida law allows Zimmerman to use deadly force to protect himself at that point, even if he was the aggressor, right?


And I think that's moronic that one can start a fight, shoot someone, and try to use the self-defense excuse to get out of it.

So the moral of the lesson is Trayvon should've had a gun?
2013-06-22 08:23:12 PM
1 votes:

HindiDiscoMonster: Mugato: The jury are 5 whites and one hispanic. Case dismissed.

ummm... shouldn't there be like twice that number? the others get routed to null0 or something?


You sill be shocked to hear that Florida law is...different.
2013-06-22 08:22:39 PM
1 votes:

Giltric: The case stinks to high heaven, but all the actual evidence favors Zimmerman.


What actual evidence?

Did he actually get charged with burglary or is this something you pulled out of your ass?
2013-06-22 08:22:17 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Garble: It is so beyond pathetic and sad that you look at this case in this way.
What's pathetic is that people like you want to send a person to prison based on speculation. It's pretty much the most disgusting thing I can imagine.


I think a society where stalking and shooting someone is legal so long as you make sure your victim isn't alive to tell his side is even more disgusting.
2013-06-22 08:21:11 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Some legal experts have even suggested that she should face sanctions for bringing charges in this case, given the lack of evidence.


The FOX News legal experts, or the ones on AM radio?
2013-06-22 08:17:11 PM
1 votes:

Livingroom: gimmegimme: Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Compared to a gunshot wound to the chest?

Yes.

Maybe Zimmy shouldn't have started a fight he couldn't finish...

Hey look, the people that know absolutely nothing about the case are here to make assumptions.

Friend, a random citizen took it upon himself to follow a kid around in armed pursuit in a vehicle and then on foot.  The target didn't know if he was going to be raped or kidnapped or stabbed or shot in the chest from a few inches away.

But I suppose you wouldn't consider it starting a fight if someone did the same thing to you.

no, i wouldnt be wearing a goddamn hoody slinking through a rich neighbourhood at night IN THE SUMMER. that spells disaster, always has, always will.


Summer comes really early in Florida now a days. (02-28-2012)

/pondering whether your "slinking" description is part of you sarcastic intent
//decided I don't care as I have been turned off by people trying to make light of a questionable shooting that even the cops didn't care about until the media got involved
///yeah, yeah I know welcome to Fark
xcv
2013-06-22 08:14:45 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: If Zim had let Martin get away, the kid would have added a bottle of cough syrup to the other 2 ingredients he just purchased and made some deliciously sweet purple drank.

 eaten Skittles and had some Arizona while watching the second half of a basketball game.
2013-06-22 08:13:08 PM
1 votes:

Giltric: Mrtraveler01: Giltric: http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/discovery_3/extraction_reports/r e port6a.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L04Vh4do6bY

Trayvon has a history of putting stitches on snitches....1st link

Trayvon knew Zimmerman was on the phone snitching on his prowling....2nd link.

And all of that is relevant to what happened the night he got killed how?

Shows Trayvon had a habit of starting fights with people.

Why would he not start a fight with Zimmerman?


Zimmerman had fights with people too. So should that be considered as well?
2013-06-22 08:12:43 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: superficial scratches

Yes, a broken nose and bleeding wounds to the back of the head are "superficial". Let me guess, you think Zimmerman was obligated to wait until he suffered a skull fracture before defending himself, right?

Compared to a gunshot wound to the chest?

Yes.

Maybe Zimmy shouldn't have started a fight he couldn't finish...


Looks like Zimmy did finish it.

/ain't read the whole thread yet.
2013-06-22 08:11:33 PM
1 votes:

Tat'dGreaser: Kome: Almost by definition it isn't, unless the other person also has a gun.

Well if you're 5'5" 98lbs being attacked by a 6'6" 230lbs attacker, you're now sort of equal.


No. Guns are great for self-defense because they turn the situation from imbalanced against your favor to imbalanced in your favor; regardless of a large number of variables (though not all variables; for example close proximity can sometimes trump trying to pull the weapon out and take aim). It's a minor point, but I have noticed a trend lately in a few contexts where people use the word incorrectly. It's mildly irritating to me, as it's being used to mean the antithesis of what it actually means.

I'm not saying your other points are valid or invalid, I was just pointing out that you used a word incorrectly such that it detracts from the very point you were trying to make.
2013-06-22 08:09:04 PM
1 votes:

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Kome: Tat'dGreaser: Guns are the great equalizer, that's why they're perfect for self defense.

Almost by definition it isn't, unless the other person also has a gun.

To be fair to Zimmerman, most urban youths do carry guns. He was just playing the odds.


That's the big lesson of the Trayvon Martin case.  If you're a skinny black 17-year-old, you better have a gun because you know the other guy has one.
2013-06-22 08:07:50 PM
1 votes:

sheep snorter: What?? Hasn't Zimmerman been executed yet for his malicious stalking and then murder of an innocent person?

/Oh right, Zimmerman is white enough to get a free pass for his committing murder.


You're a racist, you realize that, right?
2013-06-22 08:06:16 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Alunan: It certainly isn't definitive proof that he stopped following or even running after Trayvon.

That's just flat out ridiculous. A marathon runner wouldn't be able to carry on a phone conversation without the person on the other end of the line knowing they were running and you think it's possible for a chubby, out of shape guy to do it.


I would concede that point, but obviously he kept following Trayvon. Your inability to address the structural problems of your argument, and in fact exclusively concentrate on a non-critical fact, reinforces my earlier assertion that you shouldn't be part of this conversation.

You are incapable of comprehending the base logic necessary to contribute in a constructive way. At this point while you have a 1st Amendment right to free speech, you have an obligation to the community and society to refrain from exercizing it. Much in the same way someone with no medical experience shouldn't be shouting at a surgeon about the best way to make an incision.
2013-06-22 08:05:53 PM
1 votes:
What?? Hasn't Zimmerman been executed yet for his malicious stalking and then murder of an innocent person?

/Oh right, Zimmerman is white enough to get a free pass for his committing murder.
2013-06-22 08:05:05 PM
1 votes:

Tat'dGreaser: Guns are the great equalizer, that's why they're perfect for self defense.


Almost by definition it isn't, unless the other person also has a gun.
2013-06-22 08:04:45 PM
1 votes:

Garble: It is so beyond pathetic and sad that you look at this case in this way.


What's pathetic is that people like you want to send a person to prison based on speculation. It's pretty much the most disgusting thing I can imagine.
2013-06-22 08:04:03 PM
1 votes:
Zimmerman is going to prison. I'm not sure if he's going to plea or be convicted but I'd wager (if I had money) that Zimmerman is going to prison.
2013-06-22 08:03:49 PM
1 votes:

jaytkay: Gun "rights" people are gonna be bummed if Zimmerman is convicted.

They dream day and night of shooting some dark-hued "bad guy".


Stop being unfair to Responsible Gun Owners™.

img.fark.net
2013-06-22 08:02:45 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: So which one is your side going with


It is so beyond pathetic and sad that you look at this case in this way.
2013-06-22 07:59:33 PM
1 votes:

Alunan: It certainly isn't definitive proof that he stopped following or even running after Trayvon.


That's just flat out ridiculous. A marathon runner wouldn't be able to carry on a phone conversation without the person on the other end of the line knowing they were running and you think it's possible for a chubby, out of shape guy to do it.
2013-06-22 07:58:44 PM
1 votes:
http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/discovery_3/extraction_reports/r e port6a.pdf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L04Vh4do6bY

Trayvon has a history of putting stitches on snitches....1st link

Trayvon knew Zimmerman was on the phone snitching on his prowling....2nd link.
2013-06-22 07:55:51 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: By your own admission, Zimmy left his car and "followed" Martin.  You said he was just standing around for a while...that's fine.  If you're scared of someone, do you just stand around?  These are not the actions of a man who is scared.  Martin ran away from Zimmy...this is something a scared person does, right?

So because Zimmerman wasn't too scared to leave his vehicle and follow Martin, he shouldn't have been scared while being assaulted? Is that what you're trying to say here?

gimmegimme: I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand your inability to empathize.  Your inability---even if you remain a Zim fan---to understand how Martin may have been defending himself.

Even if he was, Zimmerman also has the right to defend himself, right? I see no evidence that Trayvon was anything other than a violent attacker. A scared kid had a lot of options, none of which Trayvon exercised.


Okay, let's try this.  For the time being, forget the fatal confrontation, no matter who caused it.  Just for now.

Zimmy did not go home.  He left his car to figure out where Martin was and at some point stopped.

Behavior of someone who is scared?  I dunno, 1-10?

Martin did not go home.  He ran away, trying to elude the person who was "following him."

Behavior of someone who is scared?  1-10?
2013-06-22 07:44:34 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: By your logic, Zimmy was not scared.  He did not stay in his car.  He did not tell 911 where he would be waiting for the police.

If Zimmy no scared, Zimmy no self-defense?

See, now you're just being a moron. Zimmerman was being assaulted and had every right, even if he was the aggressor, to use deadly force to protect himself. If all you're interested in is trolling, find somebody else.


By your own admission, Zimmy left his car and "followed" Martin.  You said he was just standing around for a while...that's fine.  If you're scared of someone, do you just stand around?  These are not the actions of a man who is scared.  Martin ran away from Zimmy...this is something a scared person does, right?

I'm not trolling, I'm just trying to understand your inability to empathize.  Your inability---even if you remain a Zim fan---to understand how Martin may have been defending himself.
2013-06-22 07:36:33 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: If I'm being chased by a potential rapist or murderer, someone who is making me fear for my life, I'm certainly not going to lead that creepy weirdo to my loved ones.

Yes, a scared kid is thinking about anything other than getting back to the safety of their home and family.


By your logic, Zimmy was not scared.  He did not stay in his car.  He did not tell 911 where he would be waiting for the police.

If Zimmy no scared, Zimmy no self-defense?
2013-06-22 07:21:42 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Duder, I can speak the words "I had sex with Kristen Bell for several years in the early-to-mid 2000s," but that doesn't prove anything, does it?  Zimmy lied to the court about how much money he had and that wasn't exactly true, was it?

What does the lying about his bank account have to do with what you're claiming in regards to Zimmerman remaining on the phone with the police for 2 minutes after he stopped running? Come on man, lets hear where you're going with this. Are you saying that the whole time he was on the phone, he had Trayvon in his sights and was just waiting to end his call before pulling out his gun and busting a cap?


I am saying we don't know the facts.  All we have is testimony from a demonstrably unreliable and obviously biased witness.

What worries me most is your lack of empathy.  Even if you think Zimmy should walk free and clear, that's fine.  But you should be able to understand the possibility that Martin was scared for his life.
2013-06-22 06:59:26 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: TuteTibiImperes: The 911 call recording has the operator telling Zimmerman that he doesn't need to Trayvon, but he does anyway.

No, what the call recording (it was the non-emergency number) has is an operator hearing Zimmerman exit his vehicle and take off running. The operator asks if Zimmerman is following and Zimmerman replies "yes". The operator then says "we don't need you to do that", to which Zimmerman replies "okay" and stops running.

So you see how you've just misrepresented the facts of the case, right?


Are you aware that phone calls are only audio?
2013-06-22 06:50:05 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: As I've said a number of times, the main reason I enjoy these threads is because I simply don't understand your inability to grasp---even if you still luv Zim---how Trayvon Martin could have been defending himself or how he could have been afraid of Zim.

I'm not sure if I agree with your conjecture that Martin was the aggressor, seeing as how Zim was the one on a lengthy armed pursuit (that seems pretty aggressive to me!), but I can at least hold the ideas you're saying in my head.

This is intelligence: being able to hold conflicting ideas in one's head.


We don't know who started the fight, I've said that many times in these threads. You keep saying "armed pursuit" and that's not what happened. Zimmerman was never perusing Martin, he briefly followed him around a corner. You seem to want to make it out as if Zimmerman was running through the neighborhood, gun drawn, in pursuit of Trayvon. The reality is that he ran for less than 10 seconds after exiting his vehicle when Trayvon took off running and disappeared around the side of one of the buildings. After that, there's no evidence that Zimmerman regained sight of Trayvon and followed, or chased after him.
2013-06-22 06:45:14 PM
1 votes:

TuteTibiImperes: Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Perhaps he knew that he had the right to self-defense.  Who knows?

///Gosh, I hate when people come into the thread and start speculating about things they don't know.

So which one is your side going with, Trayvon was a scared little kid trying to get away from a stalker, or that he was a man standing his ground? Considering his close proximity to his home, it has to be one or the other.

As for speculations, there's nothing wrong with them in these threads. What's wrong is the people, mostly on your side, that speculate as to what they think happened and then come to a conclusion that Zimmerman is guilty based on those speculations.

I say that Zimmerman is innocent not based on my speculations, but because there's no evidence that contradicts his version of events, and no evidence that he was the aggressor, or that he was not defending himself from great bodily harm when the shot was fired.

The 911 call recording has the operator telling Zimmerman that he doesn't need to Trayvon, but he does anyway.  While Trayvon may have started the physical altercation later, none of it would have happened had Zimmerman just phoned in the suspicious person sighting and let the police handle it from there.


Think about what you're saying and the consequences.  If Zim had let Martin get away, the kid would have eaten Skittles and had some Arizona while watching the second half of a basketball game.
2013-06-22 05:39:28 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme:


Maybe Zimmy shouldn't have started a fight he couldn't finish...


Looks like he finished the fight to me.
2013-06-22 05:32:05 PM
1 votes:

Livingroom: self defense does not mean preemptively attacking somebody just "because they're following you" hoodie or not. self defense is what zimmerman did: after suffering a broken nose and having his head bashed in, he used self defense.


Let me guess, you think Martin was obligated to wait until he suffered a skull fracture before defending himself, right?
2013-06-22 05:24:20 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: I ask out of genuine curiosity.  What would be your reaction if, the next time you're walking through your neighborhood, you notice someone rolling alongside you in a car and then they begin to follow you on foot?


Trayvon never knew he was being followed on foot, he took off running around a corner before Zimmerman exited his vehicle.

As for your question. I'm 6'2, 210 pounds and very capable of defending myself. If I was walking home from the store and suddenly thought I was being followed, or even chased and was in fear for my life, here's what I would do. First I would take off running, calling 911 at the same time. I would also be shouting my ass off for help while running through the neighborhood. I'd also start banging on the nearest door screaming for help if I couldn't make it home.

Now let me ask you, if Trayvon was a scared little kid, why didn't he do any of these things?
2013-06-22 05:22:53 PM
1 votes:

Livingroom: gimmegimme: Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Compared to a gunshot wound to the chest?

Yes.

Maybe Zimmy shouldn't have started a fight he couldn't finish...

Hey look, the people that know absolutely nothing about the case are here to make assumptions.

Friend, a random citizen took it upon himself to follow a kid around in armed pursuit in a vehicle and then on foot.  The target didn't know if he was going to be raped or kidnapped or stabbed or shot in the chest from a few inches away.

But I suppose you wouldn't consider it starting a fight if someone did the same thing to you.

no, i wouldnt be wearing a goddamn hoody slinking through a rich neighbourhood at night IN THE SUMMER. that spells disaster, always has, always will.


February is summer for you?  Do you live in the Southern Hemisphere?

Livingroom: gimmegimme: Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Friend, a random citizen took it upon himself to follow a kid around in armed pursuit in a vehicle and then on foot.  The target didn't know if he was going to be raped or kidnapped or stabbed or shot in the chest from a few inches away.

A concerned citizen, who happened to be armed, reported a suspicious person to the police and then attempted to regain sight of that person after they fled. The suspicious person then launched a violent assault on the citizen, leading the concerned citizen to pull their legally carried firearm and defend them self from great bodily harm or possibly death.

I ask out of genuine curiosity.  What would be your reaction if, the next time you're walking through your neighborhood, you notice someone rolling alongside you in a car and then they begin to follow you on foot?

it wouldnt be to turn around and beat the hell out of my follower, thats for damn sure.


Friend, in the United States have a right to self-defense.
2013-06-22 05:20:50 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Friend, a random citizen took it upon himself to follow a kid around in armed pursuit in a vehicle and then on foot.  The target didn't know if he was going to be raped or kidnapped or stabbed or shot in the chest from a few inches away.

A concerned citizen, who happened to be armed, reported a suspicious person to the police and then attempted to regain sight of that person after they fled. The suspicious person then launched a violent assault on the citizen, leading the concerned citizen to pull their legally carried firearm and defend them self from great bodily harm or possibly death.

I ask out of genuine curiosity.  What would be your reaction if, the next time you're walking through your neighborhood, you notice someone rolling alongside you in a car and then they begin to follow you on foot?


it wouldnt be to turn around and beat the hell out of my follower, thats for damn sure.
2013-06-22 05:18:05 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: gimmegimme: Friend, a random citizen took it upon himself to follow a kid around in armed pursuit in a vehicle and then on foot.  The target didn't know if he was going to be raped or kidnapped or stabbed or shot in the chest from a few inches away.

A concerned citizen, who happened to be armed, reported a suspicious person to the police and then attempted to regain sight of that person after they fled. The suspicious person then launched a violent assault on the citizen, leading the concerned citizen to pull their legally carried firearm and defend them self from great bodily harm or possibly death.


I ask out of genuine curiosity.  What would be your reaction if, the next time you're walking through your neighborhood, you notice someone rolling alongside you in a car and then they begin to follow you on foot?
2013-06-22 05:11:03 PM
1 votes:

Mugato: Popcorn Johnny: Let me guess, you think Zimmerman was obligated to wait until he suffered a skull fracture before defending himself, right?

No, he was obligated to stay in the car like he was told to instead of stalking the kid for no reason.


Hey!  It wasn't for no reason.  Martin was WALKING.  In public, no less!  And he was wearing a hoodie.  Be fair.
2013-06-22 04:47:41 PM
1 votes:
He'll get off.  White guys who shoot black guys always do.  It's the code of the country.
2013-06-22 04:33:50 PM
1 votes:

Mugato: Just making a simple observation.


What's really interesting about the jury, in my opinion, is that it's all women.
2013-06-22 04:30:56 PM
1 votes:

Popcorn Johnny: Mugato: The jury are 5 whites and one hispanic. Case dismissed.

What kind of jury should a Hispanic-American have, 6 African-Americans?


Just making a simple observation.
2013-06-22 04:16:50 PM
1 votes:
The jury are 5 whites and one hispanic. Case dismissed.
2013-06-22 01:24:49 PM
1 votes:

Summer Glau's Love Slave: "We need more ice." ~ Midget passenger aboard the Titanic.

This isn't going to end well.


Sure ain't.  I'm looking forward to the riots.
 
Displayed 153 of 153 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report