A boy named Trayvon Martin is shot and killed by neighborhood watch goon

#651
#651
tvols75 said:
Here's the problem I have. This media circus that has formed has produced all kinds of false information. The only thing that has been corroborated was the evidence of Zimmerman.. None of the evidence has proven anything Zimmerman said was false, but evidence has proven many things that has been said by the parents, the lawyers, and the media were false. Like many people on here have been saying, let the facts come out before you convict the man through the media.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The "hoodie" movement will be long lost when its said and done if mr z is innocent.
 
#655
#655
Nothing is safer than being in a car with a gun. What coaxed him out of his safety zone (car) and then ultimatley led to him KILLING an unarmed kid is the key to this "case". If Z was driving, how did he even notice the kid? When Z did notice him, why did he engage him? Why did Z MURDER him, once he had engaged the kid? -- This was not an accident, but an intentional shooting. The only way it can be a justifiable one is for the shooter to have been in fear of his life. So, we have to believe that the kid was about to murder this "+*<, and the "+*< killed the boy to save his own life. If not, this is a 2nd Degree Murder. So, where are the life threatening injuries? Where was the life threatening weapon used to inflict said life threatening injuries? Since both are presently lacking, this is currently a 2nd Degree Murder.
 
#657
#657
PimpVol said:
Nothing is safer than being in a car with a gun. What coaxed him out of his safety zone (car) and then ultimatley led to him KILLING an unarmed kid is the key to this "case". If Z was driving, how did he even notice the kid? When Z did notice him, why did he engage him? Why did Z MURDER him, once he had engaged the kid? -- This was not an accident, but an intentional shooting. The only way it can be a justifiable one is for the shooter to have been in fear of his life. So, we have to believe that the kid was about to murder this "+*<, and the "+*< killed the boy to save his own life. If not, this is a 2nd Degree Murder. So, where are the life threatening injuries? Where was the life threatening weapon used to inflict said life threatening injuries? Since both are presently lacking, this is currently a 2nd Degree Murder.
Click to expand...

Yeah, everything you said doesn't match anything the police have said or any of the evidence.
 
#658
#658
PimpVol said:
Nothing is safer than being in a car with a gun. What coaxed him out of his safety zone (car) and then ultimatley led to him KILLING an unarmed kid is the key to this "case". If Z was driving, how did he even notice the kid? When Z did notice him, why did he engage him? Why did Z MURDER him, once he had engaged the kid? -- This was not an accident, but an intentional shooting. The only way it can be a justifiable one is for the shooter to have been in fear of his life. So, we have to believe that the kid was about to murder this "+*<, and the "+*< killed the boy to save his own life. If not, this is a 2nd Degree Murder. So, where are the life threatening injuries? Where was the life threatening weapon used to inflict said life threatening injuries? Since both are presently lacking, this is currently a 2nd Degree Murder.
Click to expand...

Knives and guns are not the only weapons a person has on them from time to time. Ernest P Worell said it best- " if i walk down the streets with these fists, i could be arrestes for carrying a deadly weapon." Where is the fine line between being beaten up and tossed around and when you are threatened to where deadly force is necessary. This case might just distinguish it.
 
#659
#659
PimpVol said:
Nothing is safer than being in a car with a gun. What coaxed him out of his safety zone (car) and then ultimatley led to him KILLING an unarmed kid is the key to this "case". If Z was driving, how did he even notice the kid? When Z did notice him, why did he engage him? Why did Z MURDER him, once he had engaged the kid? -- This was not an accident, but an intentional shooting. The only way it can be a justifiable one is for the shooter to have been in fear of his life. So, we have to believe that the kid was about to murder this "+*<, and the "+*< killed the boy to save his own life. If not, this is a 2nd Degree Murder. So, where are the life threatening injuries? Where was the life threatening weapon used to inflict said life threatening injuries? Since both are presently lacking, this is currently a 2nd Degree Murder.
Click to expand...

Looks like you have your mind made up regardless of the evidence.
 
#660
#660
Bassmanbruno said:
So ignorant its funny. I can have my own personal feelings and emotions yet still believe in government and understand he'll have to jump through all the hoops like in every other trial. I never advocated we should just send him to the chair now with no trial.

Do I personally think he is guilty of murder 2 and would like to see him locked up for quite sometime for being a dumbass? Yeah - but that's my opinion on it when we don't have every detail available to us.

It's sad you believe otherwise. I'm sorry, buddy.
Click to expand...

I believe other wise, you are unbelievable
 
#662
#662
PimpVol said:
Nothing is safer than being in a car with a gun. What coaxed him out of his safety zone (car) and then ultimatley led to him KILLING an unarmed kid is the key to this "case". If Z was driving, how did he even notice the kid? When Z did notice him, why did he engage him? Why did Z MURDER him, once he had engaged the kid? -- This was not an accident, but an intentional shooting. The only way it can be a justifiable one is for the shooter to have been in fear of his life. So, we have to believe that the kid was about to murder this "+*<, and the "+*< killed the boy to save his own life. If not, this is a 2nd Degree Murder. So, where are the life threatening injuries? Where was the life threatening weapon used to inflict said life threatening injuries? Since both are presently lacking, this is currently a 2nd Degree Murder.
Click to expand...

From listening to the 911 call, Zimm was in the car until TM ran. At that point Zimm got out to try to see where TM had gone so that he could let the police know where TM was when the police arrived. Zimm was told by the dispatched to stop the following and, according to Zimm and the eyewitnesses, he disengaged and was walking back to his truck when he was attacked.
No evidence was been brought to dispute that story as of today.
Once again, should Zimm have shot TM, HELL NO, do we know what TM was saying to Zimm as he beat the crap out of him, no. What if TM was saying, "I am going to kil you" as he was hitting Zimm? Zimm says that TM kept reaching into his waiste band. That is where most weapons are carried. Zimm was probably scared for his life and not thinking staight in the moment.
 
#665
#665
tvols75 said:
Yeah, everything you said doesn't match anything the police have said or any of the evidence.
Click to expand...

Every thing he said is what the family/activists WANTS to believe happened. I am not saying that it didn't, but the evidence does not back that version up.
 
#666
#666
tvols75 said:
Would it be easier for a man to get owned by a scrawny kid had said man been blindsided with a punch and fell to ground? Guess what.... that is consistent with his story. Like I said, he is the most well-organized criminal with a story that meshes with the evidence of the case.
Click to expand...

He didn't say he was blindsided. He said he and TM exchanged words before he punched him.
 
#667
#667
Bassmanbruno said:
He didn't say he was blindsided. He said he and TM exchanged words before he punched him.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure he said he was on his way back to truck and got punched. Sounds like being blindsided to me.

Edit: You are right, he turned around and they exchanged words. Still I doubt Zimmerman was expected to get decked.
 
Last edited:
#669
#669
tvols75 said:
I'm pretty sure he said he was on his way back to truck and got punched. Sounds like being blindsided to me.

Edit: You are right, he turned around and they exchanged words. Still I doubt Zimmerman was expected to get decked.
Click to expand...


If TM actually said well you have a problem now you actually believe that Zimmerman wasn't expecting a fight? Lol. How?
 
#670
#670
Bassmanbruno said:
If TM actually said well you have a problem now you actually believe that Zimmerman wasn't expecting a fight? Lol. How?
Click to expand...

Is it not just more proof that Zimm was not the aggresor if that, as you say, puny 140lb kid knocked him to the ground?
 
#671
#671
Bassmanbruno said:
If TM actually said well you have a problem now you actually believe that Zimmerman wasn't expecting a fight? Lol. How?
Click to expand...

I doubt that he paused to give time for Zimmerman to brace himself. Have you ever been in a fight? So are you willing to admit that the story his parents put out along with all these activists that there was no way Trayvon could take this man on 1 on 1 is wrong? Because if it's not wrong, that means he decked Zimmerman unexpectedly which sent Zimmerman to the ground and then began beating him on the ground. The opposing viewpoint wants to have it both ways, but it's simply impossible.
 
#673
#673
Bassmanbruno said:
Not really it sys he was knocked down in one punch. Doesn't mean nothing happened before that punch.
Click to expand...

So you are wanting to assume based on no knowledge of what happened before that Zimmerman instigated the fight with words/push/etc... You want to hang a guy as you said before based on no evidence to support your claim.
 
#674
#674
tvols75 said:
I doubt that he paused to give time for Zimmerman to brace himself. Have you ever been in a fight? So are you willing to admit that the story his parents put out along with all these activists that there was no way Trayvon could take this man on 1 on 1 is wrong? Because if it's not wrong, that means he decked Zimmerman unexpectedly which sent Zimmerman to the ground and then began beating him on the ground. The opposing viewpoint wants to have it both ways, but it's simply impossible.
Click to expand...

I'm just forming my opinion. I don't need to believe exactly what the family believes in order to think he's guilty of a crime.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top