- Joined
- Jan 20, 2014
- Messages
- 51,768
- Reaction score
- 14,180
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Why does that make sense? Why would Trayvon do that? What motive can you give for Trayvon to do that? Doesn't it make far more sense that the wanna be cop would try to perform some citizens arrest, tried grabbing the kid, and then got his ass beat?
Yeah, we all know the end result. We know Trayvon was on top beating the hell out of GZ, but I think context matters and how they got into that fight matters. I choose to not believe the guy who has shown himself to be a giant piece of ****. You do what you want.
Nope, I followed the case closely, I watched the trial, looked at various sources and evidence. What you are saying simply is not proven, implied, or even consistent with evidence.
I certainly think he has a problem with women. But the trayvon case was clear cut self defense.
He did push the wrong person, he got his ass kicked, and then he shot the guy. It's one of the most cowardly acts in the past few years.
I agree with the verdict in the case however I think he wouldn't have gotten in the situation if he didn't have the gun. That gun gave him confidence to follow Trayvon.
Even assuming what you're saying is true, which a jury didn't buy, how much of an ass beating are you obligated to take for being wrong? Is getting into a fight now death penalty offense if you're losing? One blow to the head? To blows to the head? Exactly how much are you supposed to allow the other person to kick your ass before you can finally disengage yourself from the fight?
That I agree with you with.
true.. a truly heroic person would allow himself to be beaten to death.
only cowards defend themselves with superior force.
You are talking about a 17-year-old male with known drug use issues, and you want me to come up with a rational cause for why he acted a certain way? There's many things I did when I was 17 that I cannot provide your rational reason for.
I also followed the case. I don't know how you can say it was "clear cut self-defense". It is only self-defense if you believe GZ's version that he was merely following the kid, and Trayvon circled back, hid in a bush, and then attacked him from behind.
That version makes zero ****ing sense and I've never believed it.
Didn't they go for Murder II?
well, the evidence supports his story...and there is a distinct lack of evidence to contradict it.
nobody can make you believe anything you don't want to believe... but i think it's kinda wise to take evidence into the equation in cases like this.
Known drug issues? Didn't he test positive for trace amounts of THC?
Yeah, a real psycho of a teenager.
Yes, they did and that was a mistake. They should have gone for a manslaughter charge, IMHO.
So, by your theory it's cool to:
-Start a fight
-Begin losing fight
-Get scared for life
-Shoot person who is winning
It's not that he couldn't be scared and shoot the kid, it's that it was his fault he was in that position and we don't know what he did to end up there that bothers me.
I doubt that would have gotten a conviction. Definitely wouldn't have survived appeal
there is no evidence that Z started a fight.
if you are going to attribute a theory to me.. you should be sure it is, in fact, my theory
the theory you have put forth here is not mine.. it's yours.
The only evidence that supports his story are his own words and the timestamps of where they were. That's it.
His story is 100% illogical and there is absolutely no reason to believe it.
why are you ignoring physical evidence?
sorry, but none of the evidence contradicts his story... and no, it is not 100% illogical, that's just you refusing to look at it objectively.
You don't think GZ acted recklessly? That's all that would have to be proven to get a manslaughter charge.
Manslaughter requires acting with the reckless disregard for human life, or a death in which you didn't intend to kill somebody but you should have reasonably known that the results would include death.
Even if you believed Zimmerman acted recklessly you would still have to prove that in a court of law which is not always the same as your opinion on what is reckless.
There is no evidence he didn't. Oh, you're right, the kid who was on the phone with his girlfriend decided to hide in the bushes and jump out behind GZ because... you know, Thug stuff.
I would say policing your neighborhood and confronting random people with a gun has to come with some relative chance of a death.
the evidence corroborated/supported Z's story...and it directly contradicts your version of what you imagined happening.... there really isn't anything else i can add to the story here. <shrug>
What physical evidence? The only evidence, besides GZs word, is that he followed Trayvon and then lost a fight.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?