Case closed, Zimmerman's a gonner

Status
Not open for further replies.
they're playing the part where GZ disobeys Dispatch & starts pursuing the teenage victim



Are you watching HLN? They just got done showing the friend of GZ saying Mr. Martin cursed at him when all he was doing was holding the door for Martin and his wife..

Sure, A-Hole..

Why would he lie? And you have to remember,this is the guy who is raising TM,why would it surprise you he was confrontational ? Look how he raised TM.
 
Last edited:
TK will argue one has the right in public to confront someone who is a threat to him.

Templar is suggesting that TM did not, however, have the right to confront GZ if he felt threatened?

Templar, think your logic through, huh.

TM can confront anyone he wants to..or use to be able to anyway.
He learned the hard way you dont confront someone with your fist.
The other guy just might have an ace up his sleeve.

That's a fact. But if the guy with the gun provoked the confrontation, then killed someone, he is going to jail for a long time.
He may have provoked Treyvon Martin, but a reasonable person would not have escalated the situation into an assault. Martin could have simply walked into his future step mother's home and the situation would have been over. Instead, he chose to attack Mr. Zimmerman. Sadly, he lost his life because he made an incredibly stupid decision.
 
That's a fact. But if the guy with the gun provoked the confrontation, then killed someone, he is going to jail for a long time.

There is zero evidence to support that theory.
All the evidence points to the exact opposite of that.
How you see it any other way is beyond me.

So glad you know all the evidence just by reading talking points about this case on wingnut websites but I think we'll just hear it from the witnesses and forensics. Btw, these objections are being sustained for a reason. The defense doesn't know what he is talking about.

He's talking too long too.

By that, of course, he's saying things you'd rather he didn't.
 
Here's the thing...it didn't take much to "provoke" Trayvon Martin, as anyone who has any insight at all into his behavior leading up to this event, understands.

Boys who are big and scary, and who revel in breaking the law and talking tough, tend to burn out quickly. They end up dead or in prison. This one ended up dead. If he hadn't ended up dead, Zimmerman would be dead or close to it..and that little shit would have his gun to add to his collection. Then he would quickly have been recruited into a gang...if he wasn't already actively pursuing that.

Which of course he was, with the tough talk, and the grill, and the guns, and the weed, and the older girlfriend, and the fighting, and the burglary...and the suspensions, and the getting kicked out of his home by his own mother because he wouldn't go to school...

Yeah. This was just an innocent little boy strolling along with a lollipop.

Progressives are disgusting for denying and accomodating this behavior.
 
Last edited:
There is zero evidence to support that theory.
All the evidence points to the exact opposite of that.
How you see it any other way is beyond me.

So glad you know all the evidence just by reading talking points about this case on wingnut websites but I think we'll just hear it from the witnesses and forensics. Btw, these objections are being sustained for a reason. The defense doesn't know what he is talking about.

He's talking too long too.

By that, of course, he's saying things you'd rather he didn't.

Sarhag thinks the amount of speech allotted to any one person (except The O) must be carefully controlled.
 
Here's the thing...it didn't take much to "provoke" Trayvon Martin, as anyone who has any insight at all into his behavior leading up to this event, understands.

Boys who are big and scary, and who revel in breaking the law and talking tough, tend to burn out quickly. They end up dead or in prison. This one ended up dead. If he hadn't ended up dead, Zimmerman would be dead or close to it..and that little shit would have his gun to add to his collection. Then he would quickly have been recruited into a gang...if he wasn't already actively pursuing that.

Which of course he was, with the tough talk, and the grill, and the guns, and the weed, and the older girlfriend, and the fighting, and the burglary...and the suspensions, and the getting kicked out of his home by his own mother because he wouldn't go to school...

Yeah. This was just an innocent little boy strolling along with a lollipop.

Progressives are disgusting for denying and accomodating this behavior.

WOW just wow..
 
How did TM cause those injuries, how did TM cut his knuckles? You assume GZ's story is correct? I believe you that GZ shot the boy in the chest with his pistol. The evidence will show that. What I have not seen is proof that TM was beating GZ to death. I would have expected some of GZ's DNA to be on TM's hands, no?

They didnt bag his hands and it was raining.

Takes a lot of rain to wash blood completely off hands and skin out of finger nails, what was it Niagara falls? The rain didn't seem to clean off ZM.

Dont ask me. Thats what was said. And the prosecution didnt argue. Sooooo....
Come on! I know if you try really hard you can connect the dots.
 
There is zero evidence to support that theory.
All the evidence points to the exact opposite of that.
How you see it any other way is beyond me.

So glad you know all the evidence just by reading talking points about this case on wingnut websites but I think we'll just hear it from the witnesses and forensics. Btw, these objections are being sustained for a reason. The defense doesn't know what he is talking about.

He's talking too long too.

By that, of course, he's saying things you'd rather he didn't.

Wrong again, Ernie. I stopped listening to his pretend evidence the last time the judge sustained the prosecution's objection. The guy was boring everyone to tears.
 
They didnt bag his hands and it was raining.

Takes a lot of rain to wash blood completely off hands and skin out of finger nails, what was it Niagara falls? The rain didn't seem to clean off ZM.

Dont ask me. Thats what was said. And the prosecution didnt argue. Sooooo....
Come on! I know if you try really hard you can connect the dots.
FYI the opening arguments are what must be proven, they are not facts. Though I get that there was rain.. will be interesting to see what the experts say about DNA evidence being washed away.
 
So glad you know all the evidence just by reading talking points about this case on wingnut websites but I think we'll just hear it from the witnesses and forensics. Btw, these objections are being sustained for a reason. The defense doesn't know what he is talking about.

He's talking too long too.

By that, of course, he's saying things you'd rather he didn't.

Wrong again, Ernie. I stopped listening to his pretend evidence the last time the judge sustained the prosecution's objection. The guy was boring everyone to tears.

The head in the sand approach. Gotcha.
How the hell can you argue something if you didnt even watch it? Low info moron.
 
So glad you know all the evidence just by reading talking points about this case on wingnut websites but I think we'll just hear it from the witnesses and forensics. Btw, these objections are being sustained for a reason. The defense doesn't know what he is talking about.

He's talking too long too.

By that, of course, he's saying things you'd rather he didn't.

Sarhag thinks the amount of speech allotted to any one person (except The O) must be carefully controlled.

Amount.... maybe. She gets bored by facts, but she can listen to Liberal platitudes all day.
 
I respectfully disagree. GZ's fate lies in the hands of jurors who will be very carefully considering the ramifications of their verdict. They know what danger lies in an acquittal.

Do you think you're slick?? You are saying that he will be found guilty because the jury will be afraid to acquit him. Nice try.

Not nice try... See my rant tizzy fit above so I don't have to repeat myself.

My comment was a response to a post by dilloduck, above. I don't see any "rant" from you.
 
Takes a lot of rain to wash blood completely off hands and skin out of finger nails, what was it Niagara falls? The rain didn't seem to clean off ZM.

Dont ask me. Thats what was said. And the prosecution didnt argue. Sooooo....
Come on! I know if you try really hard you can connect the dots.
FYI the opening arguments are what must be proven, they are not facts. Though I get that there was rain.. will be interesting to see what the experts say about DNA evidence being washed away.

And despite whats been reported there was a transfer of DNA between the two.
 
Dont ask me. Thats what was said. And the prosecution didnt argue. Sooooo....
Come on! I know if you try really hard you can connect the dots.
FYI the opening arguments are what must be proven, they are not facts. Though I get that there was rain.. will be interesting to see what the experts say about DNA evidence being washed away.

And despite whats been reported there was a transfer of DNA between the two.

thx...
 
what if the "child" was beating someone to death? still justice?

That's apparently not what happened, was it??? The child is the one that was shot dead by a man that outweighed him by 45 pounds. If Zimmerman is as fragile as you are claiming then he should not have been playing cop.

Trayvan was no child.

He stopped being one the first time he beat a bus drive up and the first time he was busted for drug possession.

Links???
 
Time will tell whether:

1. Zimmerman was attacked without reason, or even attacked at all, and
2, Zimmerman's "right" to defend himself with deadly force was as all-inclusive as you think.

If you get a "no" to either, "Herr" Zimmerman might become "Inmate" Zimmerman. Who knows, if Zimmerman did what his detractors think he did, the world might be better off with him permanently out of circulation.

And send a message to all the nutters out there just panting for a chance to blow someone away with their precious weapon. Afterall, what's the fun of having a weapon year in and year out if you never get a chance to use it and feel like a tough guy hero?

Its that Mighty Mouse attitude we're seeing with the gun nutters who are just hoping for a way they can play the role of the hero that saves the day.

If Trayvon's mother had not hassled the cops, her son would not have gotten his day in court because the police had already decided on his guilt and let his killer go.
Luddly, dearest, that's purely fiction. Trayvon Martin's mother was incited to go racist over the pot at the end of Al Sharpton's mythmaking cash quest:
Al Sharpton At Trayvon Martin Rally: 'We Are Tired Of Going To Jail For Nothing And Others Going Home For Something' Video

Al was the spokesman for Tawanna Brawley's fictitious rape by racist whites and Crystal Gail Mangum's faery tale about her nonexistent rape by innocent white men on the Duke University LaCross Team whose misfortune it was to hire her to entertain them at their party. She saw a financial windfall in Sharpton's backing, and the rest is history after the DNA showed none of the accused, and not a single Lacross player was involved with her out-of-mind, or body for that matter, experience.

You are welcome.
 
Dont ask me. Thats what was said. And the prosecution didnt argue. Sooooo....
Come on! I know if you try really hard you can connect the dots.
FYI the opening arguments are what must be proven, they are not facts. Though I get that there was rain.. will be interesting to see what the experts say about DNA evidence being washed away.

And despite whats been reported there was a transfer of DNA between the two.

Says who?
 
By that, of course, he's saying things you'd rather he didn't.

Sarhag thinks the amount of speech allotted to any one person (except The O) must be carefully controlled.

Amount.... maybe. She gets bored by facts, but she can listen to Liberal platitudes all day.

So it is boiling down to Repubs vs Dems once again. Don't you ever get tired of it? Try and focus on the case, Ernie not your partisan hackery.
 
Time has told.

Martin wasn't innocent. He was being investigated for burglary, and his mom had told him to move out because she couldn't make him go to school.

Thug.

So he should have been killed for that..

No, he should have been killed for jumping what he thought was an unarmed man, with the intention of doing serious bodily injury to him..if not the intent to kill outright.

Where did you get this from?? Links please??
 
Yeah, my experience is that women aren't all that sympathetic to big, aggressive, bad mannered, foul mouthed thugs...regardless of their age.

His own mother was kicking him out of the house. I don't think the jury is going to be inclined to feel warm and fuzzy towards him. Men are more likely to sympathize with a young guy who is out of control than women are.

Either prove that everything you are saying is true or STFU!! Damn, but you're more ignorant than ever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top