Call for Riots/Murder if Zimmerman found Not Guilty

[opendebate]

Late night trip?
It just shows how badly your understanding of the facts are.


Pursue doe snot fit as the simple act of following to maintain surveillance is not a pursuit.
Look up the definition. Pursue does not fit because it entails capturing or attacking.
Zimmerman did none of those, and there is no evidence that he intended to do any of those.



He was not required to stay in his vehicle. He didn't have to.
And the Call-taker asked him twice to inform him if the suspicious person did anything else. He could not do that without getting out of his vehicle.


And ™ did exactly that when he jumped on top of him when he did not need to.


Which is evidence. If there is nothing to dispute it, it remains.


He did not disregard any instructions.
Nor was there an actual instruction not to follow. It was a suggestion that he was not obligated to follow. Yet he did follow it.
You saying he didn't is not in accord with the evidence. So learn the evidence.

I did look up the definition of Pursue and this does fit, it does not always include capturing or attacking. It can also mean "To proceed along the course of; follow"


I didn't say he had to. I said he was told not to and he did it anyway. The 911 operator told him he did not need to follow him I am sure it was not her intention to give him a green light to play cop and follow Martin

Again, you DO NOT KNOW what Zimmerman did when he approached Martin. You are basing your decision on Z's testimony and he could be lying.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

what are they protesting ... or do they have the 'not guilty' verdict figured out already?

idk, the tweet wasn't specific. I'll have to look at it again sometime.

 

[Wehrwolfen]

Is this Obama's post racial era?

​

Who is really perpetrating racial unrest? This is known as the New Black Panther and Holder idea of TOLERANCE.

 

[Caine]

Is this Obama's post racial era?

​

Who is really perpetrating racial unrest? This is known as the New Black Panther and Holder idea of TOLERANCE.

Them are some crazy dumb ass mother ****ers.

 

[Jango]

I really hope a riot doesn't happen either because a lot of innocent people will be hurt/injured/killed and property damaged, but a part of me wants it to. I want to see how the current administration will respond to mostly African-Americans losing their minds over something that has absolutely *zero* to do with them personally. Also, to see how the local and state police respond. I hope they crush the rioters if they do indeed riot. I mean bring the Iron Fist down hard. Rubber bullets, CS/tear gas, water cannons, stun grenades, attack dogs, area denial systems, etc. Open up the arsenal if they want to act like imbeciles. Then long jail/prison sentences for the lot of them, coupled with fines and forced community service that actually means something to the community as a whole.

 

[Excon]

I did look up the definition of Pursue and this does fit, it does not always include capturing or attacking. It can also mean "To proceed along the course of; follow"

That is a misapplication of that specific definition. And grasping.

"3. To proceed along the course of; follow: a ship that pursued the southern course."​

That is not the same.
You are not saying he pursed the same course.
You are saying he pursued him. That is wrong as he was not pursuing him.

I didn't say he had to. I said he was told not to and he did it anyway.

Doesn't matter as you are wrong there too. He was given a suggestion.

Do you not know the difference between being told something, and being given a suggestion?

The 911 operator told him he did not need to follow him I am sure it was not her intention to give him a green light to play cop and follow Martin

And again you are showing you do not know the evidence. He was not "told" any such thing.
A suggestion was made. A suggestion is not the same as being told.

Yet you conveniently ignore that he was "told" twice, to let the call-taker know if the suspicious person did anything else.

Again, you DO NOT KNOW what Zimmerman did when he approached Martin. You are basing your decision on Z's testimony and he could be lying.

:doh
iLOL

Look at how you phrase that. You do not know that Zimmerman actually approached ™ at all.

The fact is that the evidence is that ™ approached Zimmerman hastily from behind. Yelling his question and immediately struck him upon arrival.

Your problem is not understanding that Zimmerman's account stood up to scrutiny of multiple police interviews which are designed to break the person being interviewed.
He passed lie detection efforts.
His account was corroborated by other witnesses and physical evidence.
He cooperated and continued to cooperate from the beginning.
And then most importantly of all, he gave his account not knowing who or how many saw what. And it still was consistent. You would not get that if he was lying. Do you not understand that?

Even the Officers who originally investigated came away believing him.

My G_d yes, he is believable.


But not only that, since we are speaking about evidence .. When you have no other reliable evidence to contradict or suggest something else, you have to go with what you have. Period. That is the bottom line here.

 

[Captain America]

I really hope a riot doesn't happen either because a lot of innocent people will be hurt/injured/killed and property damaged, but a part of me wants it to. I want to see how the current administration will respond to mostly African-Americans losing their minds over something that has absolutely *zero* to do with them personally. Also, to see how the local and state police respond. I hope they crush the rioters if they do indeed riot. I mean bring the Iron Fist down hard. Rubber bullets, CS/tear gas, water cannons, stun grenades, attack dogs, area denial systems, etc. Open up the arsenal if they want to act like imbeciles. Then long jail/prison sentences for the lot of them, coupled with fines and forced community service that actually means something to the community as a whole.

In other words, just another day down on MLK Blvd.

 

[Caine]

In other words, just another day down on MLK Blvd.

iLOL.

Chris Rock is a funny guy........

 

[Captain America]

iLOL.

Chris Rock is a funny guy........

AND.....

It's cool when he uses racial slurs. He gets a pass.

It's like he has a racist, "get out of jail free," card.

Love his humor.

 

[Caine]

AND.....

It's cool when he uses racial slurs. He gets a pass.

It's like he has a racist, "get out of jail free," card.

Love his humor.

He does....

he can talk **** about white people and everything.

And I don't care, because he is funny...... most of the time.

 

[Jango]

In other words, just another day down on MLK Blvd.

What?

 

[Captain America]

He does....

he can talk **** about white people and everything.

And I don't care, because he is funny...... most of the time.

Remember this one? Didn't THAT just make you snort Mountain Dew out you nose laughing so hard?

 

[opendebate]

That is a misapplication of that specific definition. And grasping.

"3. To proceed along the course of; follow: a ship that pursued the southern course."​

That is not the same.
You are not saying he pursed the same course.
You are saying he pursued him. That is wrong as he was not pursuing him.


Doesn't matter as you are wrong there too. He was given a suggestion.

Do you not know the difference between being told something, and being given a suggestion?


And again you are showing you do not know the evidence. He was not "told" any such thing.
A suggestion was made. A suggestion is not the same as being told.

Yet you conveniently ignore that he was "told" twice, to let the call-taker know if the suspicious person did anything else.

:doh
iLOL

Look at how you phrase that. You do not know that Zimmerman actually approached ™ at all.

The fact is that the evidence is that ™ approached Zimmerman hastily from behind. Yelling his question and immediately struck him upon arrival.

Your problem is not understanding that Zimmerman's account stood up to scrutiny of multiple police interviews which are designed to break the person being interviewed.
He passed lie detection efforts.
His account was corroborated by other witnesses and physical evidence.
He cooperated and continued to cooperate from the beginning.
And then most importantly of all, he gave his account not knowing who or how many saw what. And it still was consistent. You would not get that if he was lying. Do you not understand that?

Even the Officers who originally investigated came away believing him.

My G_d yes, he is believable.


But not only that, since we are speaking about evidence .. When you have no other reliable evidence to contradict or suggest something else, you have to go with what you have. Period. That is the bottom line here.

PURSUED: Okay, first of all if you want to nit pick fine. Only because I do not know if Zimmermans intentions were to overtake, capture of kill. It is easy to assume, but I am trying to avoid that so I will give you that one. I stand by the opinion that he was following Martin when it was not wise and I can understand if Martin felt threatened or like he was being pursued.

SUGGESTION: If I call a 911 operator and they suggest I stay in my house I will defer to their expertise. If you want to call it a suggestion fine, but he should have acknowledged their expertise and stayed in his car.

EVIDENCE REGARDING THE ATTACK: None of that is evidence. What specifically are you calling evidence? Zimmerman's testimony? Not evidence. And Z's testimony did change. There were no witnesses. There were auditory witnesses but that is different. You are making assumptions based on what you are reading into the story of what happened. The fact that Z cooperated gives you reason to assume something about his testimony but that is not evidence of the truth of his statement.

Also, no you don't have to go with what you have. The evidence must stand based on its own merits.

 

[Caine]

Remember this one? Didn't THAT just make you snort Mountain Dew out you nose laughing so hard?

This isn't funny......

 

[Captain America]

This isn't funny......

Exactly.

 

[Caine]

PURSUED: Okay, first of all if you want to nit pick fine. Only because I do not know if Zimmermans intentions were to overtake, capture of kill. It is easy to assume, but I am trying to avoid that so I will give you that one. I stand by the opinion that he was following Martin when it was not wise and I can understand if Martin felt threatened or like he was being pursued.

SUGGESTION: If I call a 911 operator and they suggest I stay in my house I will defer to their expertise. If you want to call it a suggestion fine, but he should have acknowledged their expertise and stayed in his car.

EVIDENCE REGARDING THE ATTACK: None of that is evidence. What specifically are you calling evidence? Zimmerman's testimony? Not evidence. And Z's testimony did change. There were no witnesses. There were auditory witnesses but that is different. You are making assumptions based on what you are reading into the story of what happened. The fact that Z cooperated gives you reason to assume something about his testimony but that is not evidence of the truth of his statement.

Also, no you don't have to go with what you have. The evidence must stand based on its own merits.

You clearly don't know what evidence was given in court do you?

What did the ME say about where Zimmerman and Trayvon were when the shot was fired?

What did the witnesses say about what they saw when they witnessed the fight?

 

[Mason66]

I did look up the definition of Pursue and this does fit, it does not always include capturing or attacking. It can also mean "To proceed along the course of; follow"


I didn't say he had to. I said he was told not to and he did it anyway. The 911 operator told him he did not need to follow him I am sure it was not her intention to give him a green light to play cop and follow Martin

Again, you DO NOT KNOW what Zimmerman did when he approached Martin. You are basing your decision on Z's testimony and he could be lying.

You are saying Zimmerman approached Martin and there was no evidence of that at trial.

I see you like to get your information off the net but I watched the trial and that is the evidence that is important.

Nowhere in the trial was there evidence of Martin not being able to find his home, because if that had been true the prosecution surely would have used it. That would have explained why he didn't go straight home, but since it didn't happen, they didn't.

Did you also see where the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that" and Zimmerman said "OK"

Now what makes you beleive Zimmerman was following Martin in the pitch black that it was that night?

 

[Mason66]

I really hope a riot doesn't happen either because a lot of innocent people will be hurt/injured/killed and property damaged, but a part of me wants it to. I want to see how the current administration will respond to mostly African-Americans losing their minds over something that has absolutely *zero* to do with them personally. Also, to see how the local and state police respond. I hope they crush the rioters if they do indeed riot. I mean bring the Iron Fist down hard. Rubber bullets, CS/tear gas, water cannons, stun grenades, attack dogs, area denial systems, etc. Open up the arsenal if they want to act like imbeciles. Then long jail/prison sentences for the lot of them, coupled with fines and forced community service that actually means something to the community as a whole.

I don't think, if a riot or riots happen, that the administration will even comment on it. They might say, when asked, it is a local matter and the pólice are handling it.

I know that fact didn't stop Obama from commenting on the case last year or sending watchers to a pro Martin rally, but I am sure that is what they would say now.

 

[Mason66]

PURSUED: Okay, first of all if you want to nit pick fine. Only because I do not know if Zimmermans intentions were to overtake, capture of kill. It is easy to assume, but I am trying to avoid that so I will give you that one. I stand by the opinion that he was following Martin when it was not wise and I can understand if Martin felt threatened or like he was being pursued.

SUGGESTION: If I call a 911 operator and they suggest I stay in my house I will defer to their expertise. If you want to call it a suggestion fine, but he should have acknowledged their expertise and stayed in his car.

EVIDENCE REGARDING THE ATTACK: None of that is evidence. What specifically are you calling evidence? Zimmerman's testimony? Not evidence. And Z's testimony did change. There were no witnesses. There were auditory witnesses but that is different. You are making assumptions based on what you are reading into the story of what happened. The fact that Z cooperated gives you reason to assume something about his testimony but that is not evidence of the truth of his statement.

Also, no you don't have to go with what you have. The evidence must stand based on its own merits.

His vehicle was never mentioned so I am not sure how you come to think he was told to stay anywhere.

 

[Caine]

I don't think, if a riot or riots happen, that the administration will even comment on it. They might say, when asked, it is a local matter and the pólice are handling it.

I know that fact didn't stop Obama from commenting on the case last year or sending watchers to a pro Martin rally, but I am sure that is what they would say now.

Obama has a history of inserting his foot into his mouth on local issues.

"The police officers acted stupidly" for example....


Thats okay.... I guess we can always get another "Beer Summit" out of it when he realizes he F-ed up.

 

[Mason66]

You clearly don't know what evidence was given in court do you?

What did the ME say about where Zimmerman and Trayvon were when the shot was fired?

What did the witnesses say about what they saw when they witnessed the fight?

I have to admit I don't know that one either. I couldn't take any more testimony from the ME. It was grating on my nerves.

 

[Josie]

I have to admit I don't know that one either. I couldn't take any more testimony from the ME. It was grating on my nerves.

I'm sure he said, "I don't know. I wasn't there! That's my opinion, not fact."

 

[Mason66]

Obama has a history of inserting his foot into his mouth on local issues.

"The police officers acted stupidly" for example....


Thats okay.... I guess we can always get another "Beer Summit" out of it when he realizes he F-ed up.

That is the problem. He doesn't think he F-ed up.

 

[Caine]

I have to admit I don't know that one either. I couldn't take any more testimony from the ME. It was grating on my nerves.

Based on the ME's testimony because of the evidence on Trayvon's shirt and the bullet wound, Trayvon was leaning over top of Zimmerman at the time Zimmerman fired the shot.... and was shot from a distance of approximately 4 inches (I think that was the number, it was under 6) from barrel to body....

That is the general synopsis of it....... Im sure someone will come back and tell me "But he actually said X and X" but not change the outcome of what I have said.

 

[Mason66]

Based on the ME's testimony because of the evidence on Trayvon's shirt and the bullet wound, Trayvon was leaning over top of Zimmerman at the time Zimmerman fired the shot.... and was shot from a distance of approximately 4 inches (I think that was the number, it was under 6) from barrel to body....

That is the general synopsis of it....... Im sure someone will come back and tell me "But he actually said X and X" but not change the outcome of what I have said.

That I got but I thought you were talking about where onthe grass it happened.

Sorry my bad.