Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You don't know that Trayvon beat him in the manner that you consistently claim him to have. It's not a proven fact.Agree to disagree.Your Derangement worsens as I never challenged the testimony of the eye witnesses. Sitting on top of Zimmerman is neither proof of thuggery nor initiating the fight.
Only a thug uses more force than reasonably necessary. TM was a thug.
.
So? Trayvon was walking back to his residence with candy to watch an NBA game with a friend. He wasn't there to start a fight either.well Z called 911 because he wasnt there to start a fight,,,so by that logic if TM didnt start it he would have called 911 because he felt threatened,,,
Regardless, you already proved you were full of shit when you claimed Trayvon started the physical altercation.
You fail to grasp the power of deductive reasoning.
tha candy and drink were to get high not watch TV
and the fact that Z called 911 proves he wasnt there to fight and TM not calling but confronting Z proves he was
Really, how many folks jump out of their truck and chase someone in pitch black darkness if they aren't there for an altercation.
Ridiculous and quite childish observation....goes against George's entire history...he had gone through this type of scenario before boyo and his sop was always to observe and report to the police....which is what he did here...he only got out of his truck to try and help the dispatcher in her quest to find out where Trayvon might be and where to send the police.
Yet you and others who want to defend the indefensible (trayvon) called him a coward.....a coward would never have out of his truck in such a situation.
George had every right to get out of his truck....it was his neighborhood, he lived in the complex and he was trying to be of help to the police who he knew were on the way.
Who would call the police and then knowing they are on the way....start a fight? Ridiculous assumption on your part once again....as pointed out.....a lack of proper deductive reasoning.
SoP?? When other time did Zimmerman follow someone through the neighborhood?
You don't know that Trayvon beat him in the manner that you consistently claim him to have. It's not a proven fact.Agree to disagree.Your Derangement worsens as I never challenged the testimony of the eye witnesses. Sitting on top of Zimmerman is neither proof of thuggery nor initiating the fight.
Only a thug uses more force than reasonably necessary. TM was a thug.
.
Yet you run around pretending that it is.
Telling.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
He could have tried to physically detain Trayvon, for all anyone knows, after expressing frustration at how "these assholes they always get away."That only proves Zimmerman had a reasonable fear of death or great bodily injury at the moment he pulled the trigger. It offers zero insight as to who initiated the physical confrontation.LOLso youre just another troll,,,,
we already knew that,,,
Trying to get you to prove your claims means I'm a troll? Looks like you don't know what a troll is.
my opinion is based on the fact Z was found not guilty,
It has already been noted you lack the ability to engage in deductive reasoning ---I will ax you anyhow boyo....why on earth would Z initiate a confrontation with Trayvon? He knew the police were on the way in fact just a few short minutes away.
So? Trayvon was walking back to his residence with candy to watch an NBA game with a friend. He wasn't there to start a fight either.well Z called 911 because he wasnt there to start a fight,,,so by that logic if TM didnt start it he would have called 911 because he felt threatened,,,
Regardless, you already proved you were full of shit when you claimed Trayvon started the physical altercation.
tha candy and drink were to get high not watch TV
and the fact that Z called 911 proves he wasnt there to fight and TM not calling but confronting Z proves he was
Really, how many folks jump out of their truck and chase someone in pitch black darkness if they aren't there for an altercation.
Ridiculous and quite childish observation....goes against George's entire history...he had gone through this type of scenario before boyo and his sop was always to observe and report to the police....which is what he did here...he only got out of his truck to try and help the dispatcher in her quest to find out where Trayvon might be and where to send the police.
Yet you and others who want to defend the indefensible (trayvon) called him a coward.....a coward would never have out of his truck in such a situation.
George had every right to get out of his truck....it was his neighborhood, he lived in the complex and he was trying to be of help to the police who he knew were on the way.
Who would call the police and then knowing they are on the way....start a fight? Ridiculous assumption on your part once again....as pointed out.....a lack of proper deductive reasoning.
SoP?? When other time did Zimmerman follow someone through the neighborhood?
Zimmerman didn't merely "walk down the street." First he followed Trayvon in his truck from one end of the complex to the other; and then when he ran out of road, he continued his pursuit on foot. Had Trayvon been a woman, Zimmerman could have gotten a face full of pepper spray, and rightfully so.I didn’t say his failure to comply with the police was criminal. It was negligent, however, and contributed to a death.He was trained by police to not follow like he did.Following a suspected criminal so that you can tell the police where to find him, while obviously risky, is not legally nor morally wrong.
I won't even call it stupid. YOu balanced the risk to himself, ie getting attacked, with the potential gain to his community, ie getting a criminal off the streets.
Hey, anyone ever hear if those robberies continued or stopped after Martin died?
And because he did, a teenager who had every right to be there, ended up dead. Martin made his own mistakes which contributed to his own death, but Zimmerman was the adult in that situation and Zimmerman was the one with formal training who abandoned everything he was taught.
1. Every failure of training, is not a crime nor even morally wrong.
2. The reason that neighborhood watch are trained to not follow suspected criminals, is that bad actors can react badly, even violently to being followed. That being said, while avoiding a situation were a violent response is possible is the goal of that, the person committing the violence is still the one responsible for the violence.
1. Thank you for admitting that his following Martin was not a criminal act.
2. It was not negligent, it was reckless. It did not directly contribute to Martin's death. It did set up a potential situation that had further potential to turn dangerous. But further actions were needed before that happened, actions that were much more directly responsible for Martin's death that Zimmerman walking down the street.
Why should I prove that when I never made any such claim?Which you’ve been proven insane for asserting since you failed miserably to prove it.We’re talking about who initiated the physical confrontation. Please try harder to keep up.To support the claim that Zimmerman is responsible for Martin's death, it is on you, as it was in the court, to support the claim that Zimmerman attacked Martin.
and that was TM
Said the man that can't prove the Zimmerman initiated the physcial confrontation.
..I am all for being security aware in your neighborhood/etcexcept the world is a better place without travon in it,,,,Zimmerman clearly was the aggressor and IDIOT
........he is the perfect example of an idiot who should never have been armed because his idiocy CAUSED a death
..some humans are just stupid/idiots [ undeniable ] --and should not carry weapons
...but TM was doing NOTHING wrong..nothing wrong at all
.....of all the shootings of blacks, THIS is the one that should've been protested big time
He was witnessed sitting on Zimmerman's chest beating him "MMA style".
That's what happens when you stalk people. Zimmerman was told to keep his fat ass in the car
LOLOLLOLPeeking in windows as he trespassed on private property. Dont these crackers understand blacks can walk where they damn well please!What a fucking joke, this coward wasn't protecting no damn community. He was harassing a black teenager who was walking home minding his own business talking on his cellphone, but to punk ass rightwing, racist that is heroic
I love how zimbots make up all sorts of bullshit. There's no evidence he was peeking in windows.
'We now know that George Zimmerman did not mouth the racial slurs claimed by mainstream media sources, nor did he target Martin because he was "black"; rather he found Martin's behavior - looking in windows, walking between houses - suspect in a gated community that had experienced an inordinate number of residential burglaries; and that, when asked by police dispatch for the race of the individual he was following, told them he thought Martin might be black. A long way from what the mainstream media spread across the airwaves'
Lynn Stuter -- The reality of the Trayvon Martin fiasco
NBC issues apology for edited Zimmerman 911 call
No matter what nonsense you spew, running around PRETENDING that a non-fact, is a fact, is dishonest.You are a simpleton.....not understanding how truth is arrived at.
Perhaps like milennials you do not believe anything unless you can see it on a video. heh heh
Wise up boyo.............
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition I
Who witnessed it?Zimmerman's actions, while provocative, were not a physical attack that justifies the violence from Martin, that was witnessed.
So? Trayvon was walking back to his residence with candy to watch an NBA game with a friend. He wasn't there to start a fight either.
Regardless, you already proved you were full of shit when you claimed Trayvon started the physical altercation.
You fail to grasp the power of deductive reasoning.
tha candy and drink were to get high not watch TV
and the fact that Z called 911 proves he wasnt there to fight and TM not calling but confronting Z proves he was
Really, how many folks jump out of their truck and chase someone in pitch black darkness if they aren't there for an altercation.
Ridiculous and quite childish observation....goes against George's entire history...he had gone through this type of scenario before boyo and his sop was always to observe and report to the police....which is what he did here...he only got out of his truck to try and help the dispatcher in her quest to find out where Trayvon might be and where to send the police.
Yet you and others who want to defend the indefensible (trayvon) called him a coward.....a coward would never have out of his truck in such a situation.
George had every right to get out of his truck....it was his neighborhood, he lived in the complex and he was trying to be of help to the police who he knew were on the way.
Who would call the police and then knowing they are on the way....start a fight? Ridiculous assumption on your part once again....as pointed out.....a lack of proper deductive reasoning.
SoP?? When other time did Zimmerman follow someone through the neighborhood?
I never said Z followed Trayvon through the neighborhood....i have though stated a very logical fact....you cannot follow someone you cannot see. George at best was 'attempting' to follow Trayvon for a little while until the dispatcher told him they did not need him to do that at which time he ceased.
When the dispatcher asked George if he was following Trayvon ...George mispoke...he just meant he was walking in the direction trayvon had run off to.
LOLOLHe could have tried to physically detain Trayvon, for all anyone knows, after expressing frustration at how "these assholes they always get away."That only proves Zimmerman had a reasonable fear of death or great bodily injury at the moment he pulled the trigger. It offers zero insight as to who initiated the physical confrontation.LOL
Trying to get you to prove your claims means I'm a troll? Looks like you don't know what a troll is.
my opinion is based on the fact Z was found not guilty,
It has already been noted you lack the ability to engage in deductive reasoning ---I will ax you anyhow boyo....why on earth would Z initiate a confrontation with Trayvon? He knew the police were on the way in fact just a few short minutes away.
Still out dere in neva neval land eh....pathetic.
Again....you lack good reasoning skills....study up on deductive reasoning....might help you or it might not.....all I can do is lead a jackass to the water....I cannot force him to drink....git mah drift boyo?
You fail to grasp the power of deductive reasoning.
tha candy and drink were to get high not watch TV
and the fact that Z called 911 proves he wasnt there to fight and TM not calling but confronting Z proves he was
Really, how many folks jump out of their truck and chase someone in pitch black darkness if they aren't there for an altercation.
Ridiculous and quite childish observation....goes against George's entire history...he had gone through this type of scenario before boyo and his sop was always to observe and report to the police....which is what he did here...he only got out of his truck to try and help the dispatcher in her quest to find out where Trayvon might be and where to send the police.
Yet you and others who want to defend the indefensible (trayvon) called him a coward.....a coward would never have out of his truck in such a situation.
George had every right to get out of his truck....it was his neighborhood, he lived in the complex and he was trying to be of help to the police who he knew were on the way.
Who would call the police and then knowing they are on the way....start a fight? Ridiculous assumption on your part once again....as pointed out.....a lack of proper deductive reasoning.
SoP?? When other time did Zimmerman follow someone through the neighborhood?
I never said Z followed Trayvon through the neighborhood....i have though stated a very logical fact....you cannot follow someone you cannot see. George at best was 'attempting' to follow Trayvon for a little while until the dispatcher told him they did not need him to do that at which time he ceased.
When the dispatcher asked George if he was following Trayvon ...George mispoke...he just meant he was walking in the direction trayvon had run off to.
You obviously can’t prove the shit you claim because you’re making it up from your racist imagination.
You said, ”he had gone through this type of scenario before.”
We know he was following Martin because he said he was following Martin. That’s not a “misspeak,” that’s what he was doing. Staying behind someone in their direction, even as they change direction, is following them.
So show where Zimmerman had done that before.... oh, wait, you can’t. You were lying.
All you prove is you’re a nut who has to twist his own words because your own words are bullshit.
So? Trayvon was walking back to his residence with candy to watch an NBA game with a friend. He wasn't there to start a fight either.
Regardless, you already proved you were full of shit when you claimed Trayvon started the physical altercation.
tha candy and drink were to get high not watch TV
and the fact that Z called 911 proves he wasnt there to fight and TM not calling but confronting Z proves he was
Really, how many folks jump out of their truck and chase someone in pitch black darkness if they aren't there for an altercation.
Ridiculous and quite childish observation....goes against George's entire history...he had gone through this type of scenario before boyo and his sop was always to observe and report to the police....which is what he did here...he only got out of his truck to try and help the dispatcher in her quest to find out where Trayvon might be and where to send the police.
Yet you and others who want to defend the indefensible (trayvon) called him a coward.....a coward would never have out of his truck in such a situation.
George had every right to get out of his truck....it was his neighborhood, he lived in the complex and he was trying to be of help to the police who he knew were on the way.
Who would call the police and then knowing they are on the way....start a fight? Ridiculous assumption on your part once again....as pointed out.....a lack of proper deductive reasoning.
SoP?? When other time did Zimmerman follow someone through the neighborhood?
George Zimmerman made several neighborhood watch phone calls to police dispatchers in the months before Trayvon Martin's death.
'Donald O'Brien stressed that the homeowners association had nothing to do with the neighborhood watch program but that he did attend a meeting to start it.
He said he once text messaged Zimmerman with praises for a group of workers who followed a burglar. Their actions led to the arrest of a young black man, who was charged with burglaries in the neighborhood, O'Brien said.'
O'Brien added that police indicated it was acceptable to follow suspicious persons at a safe distance. He also said he signed an agreement with police to increase patrol of the area and to tow illegally parked cars.
Z never had a problem with suspects before and there would have been no problem with Trayvon and trayvon would be alive and with his family if had not made the decision to assault George. simple as dat boyo....
Trial turns to Zimmerman's neighborhood-watch role
next
We’ll never know since we’ll never know who initiated the physical altercation.Zimmerman didn't merely "walk down the street." First he followed Trayvon in his truck from one end of the complex to the other; and then when he ran out of road, he continued his pursuit on foot. Had Trayvon been a woman, Zimmerman could have gotten a face full of pepper spray, and rightfully so.I didn’t say his failure to comply with the police was criminal. It was negligent, however, and contributed to a death.He was trained by police to not follow like he did.
And because he did, a teenager who had every right to be there, ended up dead. Martin made his own mistakes which contributed to his own death, but Zimmerman was the adult in that situation and Zimmerman was the one with formal training who abandoned everything he was taught.
1. Every failure of training, is not a crime nor even morally wrong.
2. The reason that neighborhood watch are trained to not follow suspected criminals, is that bad actors can react badly, even violently to being followed. That being said, while avoiding a situation were a violent response is possible is the goal of that, the person committing the violence is still the one responsible for the violence.
1. Thank you for admitting that his following Martin was not a criminal act.
2. It was not negligent, it was reckless. It did not directly contribute to Martin's death. It did set up a potential situation that had further potential to turn dangerous. But further actions were needed before that happened, actions that were much more directly responsible for Martin's death that Zimmerman walking down the street.
Zimmerman's actions, while provocative, were not a physical attack that justifies the violence from Martin, that was witnessed.
I never blamed him for the fight. You should try arguing with what I actually say and not what you think I mean.Why should I prove that when I never made any such claim?Which you’ve been proven insane for asserting since you failed miserably to prove it.We’re talking about who initiated the physical confrontation. Please try harder to keep up.
and that was TM
Said the man that can't prove the Zimmerman initiated the physcial confrontation.
Because unless you can show that Zimmerman initiated the fight, you desire to blame Zimmerman for the fight, fails.
Exactly.Who witnessed it?Zimmerman's actions, while provocative, were not a physical attack that justifies the violence from Martin, that was witnessed.
You fail to grasp the power of deductive reasoning.
tha candy and drink were to get high not watch TV
and the fact that Z called 911 proves he wasnt there to fight and TM not calling but confronting Z proves he was
Really, how many folks jump out of their truck and chase someone in pitch black darkness if they aren't there for an altercation.
Ridiculous and quite childish observation....goes against George's entire history...he had gone through this type of scenario before boyo and his sop was always to observe and report to the police....which is what he did here...he only got out of his truck to try and help the dispatcher in her quest to find out where Trayvon might be and where to send the police.
Yet you and others who want to defend the indefensible (trayvon) called him a coward.....a coward would never have out of his truck in such a situation.
George had every right to get out of his truck....it was his neighborhood, he lived in the complex and he was trying to be of help to the police who he knew were on the way.
Who would call the police and then knowing they are on the way....start a fight? Ridiculous assumption on your part once again....as pointed out.....a lack of proper deductive reasoning.
SoP?? When other time did Zimmerman follow someone through the neighborhood?
I never said Z followed Trayvon through the neighborhood....i have though stated a very logical fact....you cannot follow someone you cannot see. George at best was 'attempting' to follow Trayvon for a little while until the dispatcher told him they did not need him to do that at which time he ceased.
When the dispatcher asked George if he was following Trayvon ...George mispoke...he just meant he was walking in the direction trayvon had run off to.
You obviously can’t prove the shit you claim because you’re making it up from your racist imagination.
You said, ”he had gone through this type of scenario before.”
We know he was following Martin because he said he was following Martin. That’s not a “misspeak,” that’s what he was doing. Staying behind someone in their direction, even as they change direction, is following them.
So show where Zimmerman had done that before.... oh, wait, you can’t. You were lying.
All you prove is you’re a nut who has to twist his own words because your own words are bullshit.
We’ll never know since we’ll never know who initiated the physical altercation.Zimmerman didn't merely "walk down the street." First he followed Trayvon in his truck from one end of the complex to the other; and then when he ran out of road, he continued his pursuit on foot. Had Trayvon been a woman, Zimmerman could have gotten a face full of pepper spray, and rightfully so.I didn’t say his failure to comply with the police was criminal. It was negligent, however, and contributed to a death.1. Every failure of training, is not a crime nor even morally wrong.
2. The reason that neighborhood watch are trained to not follow suspected criminals, is that bad actors can react badly, even violently to being followed. That being said, while avoiding a situation were a violent response is possible is the goal of that, the person committing the violence is still the one responsible for the violence.
1. Thank you for admitting that his following Martin was not a criminal act.
2. It was not negligent, it was reckless. It did not directly contribute to Martin's death. It did set up a potential situation that had further potential to turn dangerous. But further actions were needed before that happened, actions that were much more directly responsible for Martin's death that Zimmerman walking down the street.
Zimmerman's actions, while provocative, were not a physical attack that justifies the violence from Martin, that was witnessed.
