Re: George Zimmerman punched in face for bragging about killing Trayvon Martin [W:153
Excon,
I'm not going to do a hatchet job on your posts which tends to be your MO.
Butcher?
It is appropriate in debate to break it down individual comments and refute them.
It is the only way to get to the specifics and the truth.
In your post #212, you attempted to point out similarities between 4 out of 5 statements taken by police concerning this latest incident involving George Zimmerman. (We exclude Zimmerman's testimony for obvious reasons.)
1. I didn't attempt. I did.
2. No we do not exclude Zimmerman's account. Doing that would be absurd.
Again the similarities were - "Zimmerman admired tattoos, introduced himself, was confronted, was hit, and the police were called."
In my post #229, I pointed out to you that you conveniently left out the part where 3 of the 4 witnesses stated Zimmerman was bragging about having killed Trayvon Martin.
No, you did not say conveniently as you do now.
And no I did not leave out anything relevant, and what you have asserted is wrong. Three people did not say he was bragging.
You then challenged me on this (post #230) claiming that I was wrong whereby in post #235 I pulled accounts from the police report you twice posted to this thread where the three witnesses did in fact say Zimmerman was bragging.
And you were wrong. Three witnesses did not in fact say Zimmerman was bragging.
One witness said he was bragging about killing Trayvon.
One witness said he bragged by identifying himself.
The third did not say he bragged at all.
Those two accounts are dissimilar in form and substance. Her's being an account which the evidence shows to be unlikely, as the evidence shows he ID to verify who he was, not to brag as she absurdly claimed.
And no, you do not get to substitute your opinion of what was said as bragging for multiple reasons.
1. He does not say he bragged.
2, He did not write it.
3. You do not get to interpret it as bragging because that takes pure speculation.
4. Two similar accounts, one from each side, makes it more likely than not that the action of identifying himself was to verify who he was, not to brag. (This also discounts her interpretation of the action.)
So you are really only left with one account.
The account of a person who initially flked when the police were called, is the one who knocked Zimmerman's friend's phone out of his hand, and who is the friend of the person who called Zimmerman a "nigger lover". Go figure. Yeah, that is a great witness alright.
As to your "pay attention" retort, I did. I was responding to Chomsky who had responded to you where he didn't see anything in the OP article that explained why "Eddie" punched Zimmerman. To that, I let him know the justification given was in the police report, not in the OP article.
And thereby proving you were not paying attention, not only did you not see I had informed him, but that he, in the second sentence after that question, indicating that he got where it came from. And you think you are paying attention. Sheeesh.
... because it's you simply trying to prove yourself right and save face when it's clear that you're clearly wrong in this case.
Hilarious.
No, iLOL, that is what you are trying to do, but you can't because you were shown to be wrong.
