Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Zimmerman video testimony - Does this change anything for anyone?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by on2muchcoffee View Post
    Sure it does. Sympathy is a requirement in the court of public opinion.
    But Treyvon wasn't a white woman. Your statement makes no sense.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by jcr View Post
      If not, then the only part left is who threw the first punch. Which, again, is irrelevant. Z went looking for trouble and he found it. Then he was a big pussy who could not back up his wanna-be tough guy shit .. so pulled a gun and killed a kid.
      that's nonsense. that's akin to saying that she wouldn't have gotten raped if she weren't wearing that mini skirt and a shirt with her tits hanging out. Getting asked "HEY! What are you doing?!" isn't sufficient cause to beat someone's ass.







      y'know those abortion threads when y'all tell me that I've gone full retard?

      Comment


      • #48
        LOL, Z is the only testimony and only witness to this part of the story.
        Correct and what evidence has been presented to even suggest he is lying? Have the police called him a liar? Have any neighbors spoken up and called him a liar? Hell, has there even been anyone step forward with an allegation that he lied in the past?

        We know he followed him around for a while. We know he complained about him "getting away." We know that after he lost sight of him he got out of his car to keep following him. Do you dispute any of this?
        I dispute none of this because its the only factually based thing you've said


        then the only part left is who threw the first punch. Which, again, is irrelevant.
        No, it is not irrelevant. Zimmerman did nothing illegal by getting out of his car. Nothing. If Martin ambushed him as the only testimony we have suggests then it is entirely relevant as the attacker is the person who escalated it from a verbal situation to a physical one.


        Originally posted by jcr View Post
        Z went looking for trouble and he found it. Then he was a big pussy who could not back up his wanna-be tough guy shit .. so pulled a gun and killed a kid.
        Maybe in your fairy tale make believe world but there has been nothing but your picture painting to suggest that

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by MegaTideFan View Post
          that's nonsense. that's akin to saying that she wouldn't have gotten raped if she weren't wearing that mini skirt and a shirt with her tits hanging out. Getting asked "HEY! What are you doing?!" isn't sufficient cause to beat someone's ass.
          No, but I would possibly say getting harassed is reason to beat someone's ass. Of course in school today we say you have to go to a teacher, so maybe he should have done what the libby mclibbers at his high school always say and run away to find a parent/authority. But he was being harassed and instead chose to confront his tormentor. And got shot. Which is perfectly legal?

          Comment


          • #50
            we are all overlooking the most important fact. Treyvon jumped out of a bush


            ZOMG ITS BUSH'S FAULT AGAIN!!!!

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by posthuman View Post
              No, but I would possibly say getting harassed is reason to beat someone's ass. Of course in school today we say you have to go to a teacher, so maybe he should have done what the libby mclibbers at his high school always say and run away to find a parent/authority. But he was being harassed and instead chose to confront his tormentor. And got shot. Which is perfectly legal?
              sticks and stones. getting harassed isn't reason to beat someones ass. maybe America is getting more violent than it should be. Just ask a Treyvon supporter. The beating was justified.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by posthuman View Post
                No, but I would possibly say getting harassed is reason to beat someone's ass. Of course in school today we say you have to go to a teacher, so maybe he should have done what the libby mclibbers at his high school always say and run away to find a parent/authority. But he was being harassed and instead chose to confront his tormentor. And got shot. Which is perfectly legal?
                Not in any court in America

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by posthuman View Post
                  But Treyvon wasn't a white woman. Your statement makes no sense.
                  He would only need to be a white woman if Z was black.
                  But since Z was white-ish, a cute 12yr of any dark-ish color works.
                  I have racial outrage charts I can send you.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by posthuman View Post
                    No, but I would possibly say getting harassed is reason to beat someone's ass. Of course in school today we say you have to go to a teacher, so maybe he should have done what the libby mclibbers at his high school always say and run away to find a parent/authority. But he was being harassed and instead chose to confront his tormentor. And got shot. Which is perfectly legal?
                    getting tailed for a few minutes, while annoying I'm sure, still doesn't warrant assaulting someone.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Whip View Post
                      Depends on the person, then. I suppose that's where Trayvon's character witnesses would come into play.

                      Because like I said in my previous post, I can easily see someone getting pissed off at being followed and confronting that person about it. But, as you say, if Trayvon isn't that "type of person," then sure...it makes more sense that he wouldn't confront his follower in that situation.

                      Of course, on any given day, people can surprise you. Trayvon could've been a perfectly sweet, mild-tempered person and, for some reason, on that particular night, he was in a confrontational mood and decided to act out. The converse is also true. He could've been a hotheaded, prone-to-confrontation kid, and for some reason, on that particular night, decided it wasn't worth it and tried to run off rather than confront.
                      Here's your reasonable doubt and a tie goes to the defendant.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Turfmunch View Post
                        Correct and what evidence has been presented to even suggest he is lying? Have the police called him a liar? Have any neighbors spoken up and called him a liar? Hell, has there even been anyone step forward with an allegation that he lied in the past?
                        It does not take any intellect at all to decide to lie about who threw the first punch.

                        Originally posted by Turfmunch View Post
                        No, it is not irrelevant. Zimmerman did nothing illegal by getting out of his car. Nothing. If Martin ambushed him as the only testimony we have suggests then it is entirely relevant as the attacker is the person who escalated it from a verbal situation to a physical one.
                        The only testimony AT ALL to this is the guy who did the killing. That fact alone makes his testimony less than believable. Add in the likely intent.

                        Which do you think is more likely? That the guy chasing someone around the neighborhood and getting out of his car to continue chasing is A) looking for a confrontation or B) avoiding a confrontation?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by jcr View Post
                          It does not take any intellect at all to decide to lie about who threw the first punch.



                          The only testimony AT ALL to this is the guy who did the killing. That fact alone makes his testimony less than believable. Add in the likely intent.

                          Which do you think is more likely? That the guy chasing someone around the neighborhood and getting out of his car to continue chasing is A) looking for a confrontation or B) avoiding a confrontation?
                          And yet you have no evidence whatsoever that he is lying. Not a single human being has come forward or testified that Zimmerman is lying or has even lied in the past. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, there have been zero people even saying anything negative about George Zimmerman's character leading up to that night.

                          Why is it that you want to believe this man a liar so badly that you are willing to ignore everything to the contrary?

                          First of all, following does not equal chasing. Secondly, what evidence is there to suggest that Zimmerman got out of his car to chase Martin? I already explained to you the importance of situation escalation so what Zimmerman was "looking for" is irrelevant and not only because you are placing thoughts and words into a context that doesnt exist.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Whip View Post
                            Now's where it gets tricky. Which scenario sounds more plausible?

                            1) Zimmerman, in amped-up hero mode (I've gotta save our community!), ends up spotting Trayvon, chases him down, beats on him, pulls his gun and shoots him dead.

                            2) Trayvon, in amped-up victim mode (why are you following me, sucka?!), leaps out of the bushes, beats on Zimmerman, who then pulls his gun and pops him in self-defense.
                            More like Z gets out of the car and runs up to T and pulls some citizen arrest type shit: "What are you doing here?! (pulls out phone) Wait here I'm calling the cops! To where T reacts angrily and starts hitting him for getting into his face for what he percieves as an unwarranted situation. Then upon losing the altercation Z pulls out his gun and shoots him. I don't think it takes much deliberation on Z's part to say, hmmm should I say I got out of the car and bumrushed the kid or should I say I got out of the car to call 911 when I was ambushed. Yeah, tough choice.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Turfmunch View Post
                              Secondly, what evidence is there to suggest that Zimmerman got out of his car to chase Martin? I already explained to you the importance of situation escalation so what Zimmerman was "looking for" is irrelevant and not only because you are placing thoughts and words into a context that doesnt exist.
                              As repulsive as she was, the testimony of Jeantel, the girl talking to him on the phone, does support that Z confronted T by saying "what are you doing here?". What evidence do you have that she's lying?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by stymiegreen View Post
                                More like Z gets out of the car and runs up to T and pulls some citizen arrest type shit: "What are you doing here?! (pulls out phone) Wait here I'm calling the cops! To where T reacts angrily and starts hitting him for getting into his face for what he percieves as an unwarranted situation. Then upon losing the altercation Z pulls out his gun and shoots him. I don't think it takes much deliberation on Z's part to say, hmmm should I say I got out of the car and bumrushed the kid or should I say I got out of the car to call 911 when I was ambushed. Yeah, tough choice.

                                Yeah, Zimmerman had a habit of doing that. In all the times he called the cops, he had chased down the perps and confronted them.
                                That's where a person's history plays in court.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X