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.
Let's say, for example, that I'm walking home from the store. I notice some guy stalking me. I think he's stopped, finally, but then I see him again. I do not know what he's up to, and I'm doing nothing wrong.
I want to know why he's following me. I think he's creepy, and I'm getting pissed. So I duck behind some bushes to see if he's still coming after me.
When he pops up AGAIN, I jump his creepy ass--because (1) I'm pissed, (2) he's a threat, and (3) I hope to teach him not to stalk people.
And then he shoots me dead as I'm pounding his creepy dumb ass.
I'd say that the creep should see some jail time. When creepy dumb asses look for trouble and find it--well, that isn't self defense. It's stupidity.
Totally agree. While I think he is going to get off, i can't help but think I would have confronted Zimmerman too if he got out of his car and was following me.
No. The prosecution is NOT saying that Zimmerman's ass wasn't being thrashed, but the political right wing somehow believes it is important to emphasize how badly Zimmerman was getting his ass kicked.
That is not the issue at all. It isn't even relevant.
The central fact is that Zimmerman killed an innocent person due to his own idiocy, cockiness, and stupidity. Call it manslaughter.
If Zimmerman had not had a gun, he would not have stalked that kid.
If the evidence we have in front of us is correct and Trayvon Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating his ass, he isn't innocent. he is the freakin aggressor and Zimmerman has every right to shoot his aggressor in self defense.
You have ZERO evidence that Zimmerman was an aggressor. That's why you are trying to make things up. If you had evidence, you wouldn't be making things up.
So yes, the evidence that Martin was beating Zimmerman's ass is the issue. And it's completely relevant. By pretending he wasnt, you are just lying to yourselves.
Okay, dummie. Try this one on, then:
You're in a bar. Some guy comes over and gropes your wife. You take a swing at him. He takes a swing back. You proceed to pound his creepy ass.
By your standards, he now feels his life is "in danger." He pulls out a gun and LEGALLY protects himself by blowing a hole in your head.
Dumbasses.
To claim self-defense, you have to be in immediate danger of death or severe bodily harm. It -should- be obvious as to how the illiustraton of 'getting his ass kicked' is relevant here.No. The prosecution is NOT saying that Zimmerman's ass wasn't being thrashed, but the political right wing somehow believes it is important to emphasize how badly Zimmerman was getting his ass kicked. That is not the issue at all. It isn't even relevant.I know in the Zimmerman case, they are claiming that his life was in no danger. I'd like to know how a person determines that at the time or even after the fact. People die every day from head injuries. I say if you're being attacked and you didn't start it, don't assume you're just in for a good beating, fight back with whatever you've got.
If Zimmerman was attacked by Martin, then Martin was not innocent.The central fact is that Zimmerman killed an innocent person....
No. The prosecution is NOT saying that Zimmerman's ass wasn't being thrashed, but the political right wing somehow believes it is important to emphasize how badly Zimmerman was getting his ass kicked.
That is not the issue at all. It isn't even relevant.
The central fact is that Zimmerman killed an innocent person due to his own idiocy, cockiness, and stupidity. Call it manslaughter.
If Zimmerman had not had a gun, he would not have stalked that kid.
If the evidence we have in front of us is correct and Trayvon Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating his ass, he isn't innocent. he is the freakin aggressor and Zimmerman has every right to shoot his aggressor in self defense.
You have ZERO evidence that Zimmerman was an aggressor. That's why you are trying to make things up. If you had evidence, you wouldn't be making things up.
So yes, the evidence that Martin was beating Zimmerman's ass is the issue. And it's completely relevant. By pretending he wasnt, you are just lying to yourselves.
Okay, dummie. Try this one on, then:
You're in a bar. Some guy comes over and gropes your wife. You take a swing at him. He takes a swing back. You proceed to pound his creepy ass.
By your standards, he now feels his life is "in danger." He pulls out a gun and LEGALLY protects himself by blowing a hole in your head.
Dumbasses.
Let's say I jump you and scream that I'm going to kill you. What do you do "if" you're armed. That's the question.
If Zimmerman had not had a gun, he would not have stalked that kid.
Exactly.
ATTENTION ALL NEIGBORHOOD WATCHMEN:
IF YOU ARE WORKING IN A ***PRIVATE GATED *****COMMUNITY where you may encounter members of any race which enjoys a special privilege status, you must leave your firearm home.
You have a duty , a responsibility to die , or get a concussion , protecting the community.
.
not mine, i'd have shot him from the startIf the evidence we have in front of us is correct and Trayvon Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating his ass, he isn't innocent. he is the freakin aggressor and Zimmerman has every right to shoot his aggressor in self defense.
You have ZERO evidence that Zimmerman was an aggressor. That's why you are trying to make things up. If you had evidence, you wouldn't be making things up.
So yes, the evidence that Martin was beating Zimmerman's ass is the issue. And it's completely relevant. By pretending he wasnt, you are just lying to yourselves.
Okay, dummie. Try this one on, then:
You're in a bar. Some guy comes over and gropes your wife. You take a swing at him. He takes a swing back. You proceed to pound his creepy ass.
By your standards, he now feels his life is "in danger." He pulls out a gun and LEGALLY protects himself by blowing a hole in your head.
Dumbasses.
You clearly do not understand the necessary components of "self-defense",No. The prosecution is NOT saying that Zimmerman's ass wasn't being thrashed, but the political right wing somehow believes it is important to emphasize how badly Zimmerman was getting his ass kicked.
That is not the issue at all. It isn't even relevant.
The central fact is that Zimmerman killed an innocent person due to his own idiocy, cockiness, and stupidity. Call it manslaughter.
If Zimmerman had not had a gun, he would not have stalked that kid.
If the evidence we have in front of us is correct and Trayvon Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating his ass, he isn't innocent. he is the freakin aggressor and Zimmerman has every right to shoot his aggressor in self defense.
You have ZERO evidence that Zimmerman was an aggressor. That's why you are trying to make things up. If you had evidence, you wouldn't be making things up.
So yes, the evidence that Martin was beating Zimmerman's ass is the issue. And it's completely relevant. By pretending he wasnt, you are just lying to yourselves.
Okay, dummie. Try this one on, then:
You're in a bar. Some guy comes over and gropes your wife. You take a swing at him. He takes a swing back. You proceed to pound his creepy ass.
By your standards, he now feels his life is "in danger." He pulls out a gun and LEGALLY protects himself by blowing a hole in your head.
Dumbasses.
Is this supposed to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt ? Bernie is throwing out speculations like a usmb troll. Hard to listen to this shit. Seems like George is testifying against himself.
TM can be upset and scared that GZ was following. Crackers always up in his grille like dat.
But, then again, being upset is not the same thing as being allowed to then pummel the cracker.
If you are truly frightened by somebody, possibly a rapist?, following you in the dark, what is the more likely scenario? You run away when you have the chance? Or you jump him and start a fight? That alone to me puts enough question into the prosecution's case to merit reasonable doubt in a verdict.
If you are truly frightened by somebody, possibly a rapist?, following you in the dark, what is the more likely scenario? You run away when you have the chance? Or you jump him and start a fight? That alone to me puts enough question into the prosecution's case to merit reasonable doubt in a verdict.
Or the 3rd option. Tell your friend you'll call her back and use your cell phone to call 9-1-1.
Or the 3rd option. Tell your friend you'll call her back and use your sail foam to call 9-1-1.
My best friend when I was five was run over and killed by a car. He ran out to get his ball.I was driving down the street going the speed limit and kid jumps out from inbetween some parked cars. I hit my brakes, but it was to late and I hit the kid, killing him. Now I'm in court today fighting for my life because I'm charged with Third Degree Murder and Child Abuse. It was an accident and I broke no laws but because I'm white and the kid is black, I'm going to prison for 25 years.
I saw that on the Tweeter - that's hispanic woman
Aren't there 9 jurors in the box? the 6 and 3 alternates, that incidentally don't now they are alternates.
6 and 4 alts - lost an alt for personal reasons so 9 total and the alts know they're alts.
hispanic woman is a juror juror not an alt.
