- Joined
- Mar 21, 2012
- Messages
- 40,615
- Reaction score
- 9,087
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Zimmerman: Again.
The new Zimmerman thread (of course) has devolved into a discussion of the actual case between him and Trayvon.
So as to not further take it off topic I will respond to those issues here where it is not off-topic.
He was already out of his vehicle when the call taker made the suggestion. And he did follow the call-takers suggestion and went in a different direction (East) from the one Trayvon had gone (South).
And as can be heard on that call, Trayvon was no-longer in sight. It was Trayvon who returned to the area and attacked Zimmerman.
Getting out of his vehicle is not and was not the catalyst. Trayvon chose to act violently on own when he simply could have remained out of sight like he was.
If you want to refute that evidence you need evidence to do so. You have none.
Someone attacking you because they do not like that, is, and makes them entirely responsible for the making of the situation.
Do you really not know the evidence?
2. You are deliberately being dishonest by saying that is what the Police said, especially as you know they did not say that. A suggestion by a call taker was made to the effect that they did not need him to follow. Zimmerman not only acknowledged this suggestion but he followed it as well, as he went off to the East when Trayvon had gone to the South.
Oy Vey!
The new Zimmerman thread (of course) has devolved into a discussion of the actual case between him and Trayvon.
So as to not further take it off topic I will respond to those issues here where it is not off-topic.
I see you also do not know the evidence of this case.And if Zimmerman had actually done that and stayed in his truck after he said "Ok" then no one's head would have been slammed against the concrete would it? But that's not what happened because Zimmerman didn't stop following Trayvon.
He was already out of his vehicle when the call taker made the suggestion. And he did follow the call-takers suggestion and went in a different direction (East) from the one Trayvon had gone (South).
And as can be heard on that call, Trayvon was no-longer in sight. It was Trayvon who returned to the area and attacked Zimmerman.
Getting out of his vehicle is not and was not the catalyst. Trayvon chose to act violently on own when he simply could have remained out of sight like he was.
Stop. We have evidence that it was Trayvon.We don't know who layed hands on who first,
If you want to refute that evidence you need evidence to do so. You have none.
Wrong. There is no aggressive behavior on Zimmerman's part that implies any such thing.but Zimmerman's aggressive behavior implies that it was he who attacked Trayvon.
What you think is not supported by the known evidence.I think he tried to detain Trayvon and found himself getting his ass beat instead so he shot him.
Wrong. Following to keep under observation until the Police arrive is not the making of any situation.What is absolutely certain is that the situation was entirely of Zimmermam's own making ....
Someone attacking you because they do not like that, is, and makes them entirely responsible for the making of the situation.
What you note is your made up bs and is irrelevant to the actual evidence of this case.and noted that I believe it was Zimmerman who was the aggressor because that is his history and that is how he was behaving prior to the physical altercation.
Because the available evidence does not support that.So if Zimmerman was allowed to claim that he was standing his ground, why was Trayvon not allowed that right?
Do you really not know the evidence?
Wrong. Trayvon was nowhere in sight. Trayvon returned from his place of safety to confront Zimmerman. That means he is the aggressor.If he had survived he could have claimed that the felt threatened by Zimmerman and was just defending himself from a possibly armed stalker.
1. No. Trayvon had no right to jump anyone .And maybe Trayvon had a right to jump the adult that was following him around the neighborhood (after being told by the police to let them handle it).
2. You are deliberately being dishonest by saying that is what the Police said, especially as you know they did not say that. A suggestion by a call taker was made to the effect that they did not need him to follow. Zimmerman not only acknowledged this suggestion but he followed it as well, as he went off to the East when Trayvon had gone to the South.
Sure, he should get punched in the face because he legitimately had to defend himself from an aggressor.Giving this guy attention after everything he has done just blows me away.
I'm surprised all he got was a punch in the face.
Oy Vey!
Last edited: