- Joined
- Apr 13, 2011
- Messages
- 34,951
- Reaction score
- 16,311
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
:doh
You are speaking nonsense to what is known.
Read the police report for the theft.
So we are now back again to what was previously stated.
So again I ask; What do you not understand about the word reengaged?
Do you not understand that it means there was one engagement and then another?
Let's try it this way.
What do you call it when an Officer engages you to tell you to get out of the road, pulls away for a few, only to reverse and reengage you about a theft that occurred?
Huh? What do you call that?
Now you are just being ridiculously absurd and deflecting.Apparently a dead black unarmed 18 year old with his hands in the air
Now you are just being ridiculously absurd and deflecting.
That has nothing to do with you being wrong about the engagement between the two or of the actual theft.
Secondly, he didn't have his hands up surrendering but was moving towards the Officer he had already assaulted.
You are speaking nonsense again.First it you tried to justify a murder with something that had nothing to do with the actual murder. Then it was provided that he did buy the items. Then it was provided also no one called the police to file some sort of "theft". Then it was provided the police admitted that the individual was stopped not because of a false "shoplifting incident" but because of jaywalking.
What exactly do you think matters about them?How about those construction workers there?
:doh
We know what you said. It is why it was quoted and corrected.
I find it sad that you posted something that needed correcting and then tried to defend it. :shrug:I find it kind of sad that I was on some level agreeing with your idea that the protesters were being somewhat disingenuous (in fact, going further than you did), but you feel the need to "correct me."
I find it sad that you posted something that needed correcting and then tried to defend it. :shrug:
Your comment was "most about" and is wrong, that only addresses a few.I said people were projecting rather than caring about the particulars about the case. That goes further than your pathetic notion that these people are only interested in the specifics of the case.
What you just said does not even coincide with the evidence of either case.Just as in the Dunn and Davis case the unarmed black teen disrespected the white racist and paid with his life.
Dunn was found guilty of first degree murder and so will Wison.
"Are you talkin' to me?"What you just said does not even coincide with the evidence of either case.
Davis's friends testified that Dunn was not showing any signs of agitation, or anger etc.. that could be interpreted as feeling disrespected.
But of course you wish to ignore the evidence to speak such nonsense as you always do.
You are the only one saying that. But then again, if we talk about gun control, thats a no no..
Utter absurdity. :dohBlack people peacefully protest: Get Tear Gassed
Black people not-so-peacefully protest: Met with military grade weaponry
Black people pay for admission into an event and voice their concerns: Get ridiculed
I guess the moral of the story is how do you suppose black people voice their concerns? Everything they seem to do you people take up issue with. Or maybe it is the principle of white people not having the only say....?
Sounds pretty agitated to me? You are making things up that you want to believe."Are you talkin' to me?"What you just said does not even coincide with the evidence of either case.
Davis's friends testified that Dunn was not showing any signs of agitation, or anger etc.. that could be interpreted as feeling disrespected.
But of course you wish to ignore the evidence to speak such nonsense as you always do.
You can't talk to me like that"
Bam bam bam ...
bam bam bam bam...
bam bam bam...
He punctuated his sentence with gunfire.
Sounds pretty agitated to me...
Oh yes, so beautiful for them to interrupt a paid for symphony where the musicians practiced hard to bring much better music. So so beautiful. Surely there could not have been a better venue for such an auspicious performance such as in front of a police station or a court house or even a park!
/sarcasm
I am so sick of these protestors that won't even wait for the GJ to render their verdict and then if it goes on to a court trial to see the actual evidence. Of course I'm convinced that it won't matter what the verdict is. These clowns will continue to be idiots.
Sounds pretty agitated to me? You are making things up that you want to believe.
Secondly; "You can't talk to me like that", is also made up.
Stop making things up.
As also previously pointed out, Tevin Thompson did not actually hear Dunn say "Are you talking to me?"
So again, nothing you just said coincides with the evidence.
None of Davis's friends said Dunn showed any signs of feeling disrespected.
He did not get angry, raise his voice or swear at Davis like Davis did towards Dunn when they could hear him or after they turned the music back up.
And yet you want us to believe that he felt so disrespected (while having not shown any such signs that he was), that he is just going to shoot someone he doesn't know.
That is bs!
He felt threaten because of Davis's threats and actions.
Especially as Leland testified that Davis did try to get out of the vehicle.
:naught Lying? Racism? Cold blooded? :doh Not!Funny that nobody except the guy lying to save his ass from a murder conviction heard a threat or saw a lethal tripod.
If he opened fire on a car full of kids without being "agitated" then he is a cold blooded murderer...That's not better excon... nor is that a defense.
Dunn is a racist murderer who thought he could take advantage of Florida's SYG law and kill some black kids who like loud rap music and everybody knows that now...
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?