What % Of Blacks Will Vote in 2018?

[sealybobo]

And you are a "drama queen". I have not said anything regarding "sending him to prison".

What I DID state is that he is every bit as much a "thug" if not more than Martin.

And I DID state that when he was told not to follow, he should have followed the instructions of the dispatcher as opposed to not doing so.

As far as being a "stranger" in a gated community, since when does someone who is not a resident automatically become a "suspect" in committing a crime? Especially when no crime has taken place.

Did Zimmerman observe him looking at cars or loitering in front of a specific home? As far as we know neither happened.

I live in a gated community and we have a patrol service in cars that politely stop people who do.not reside there and ask them if they "need help".

Lastly, your damn right about "street justice" People who have his temperament usually end up on the receiving end of it.

If you don't like that, too bad.

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

Michael Slager, The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn't Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter | The Huffington Post

The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn’t Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter

Scott, a father of four, was likely running away to avoid being arrested for not paying child support. He owed more than $18,000 and there was a bench warrant out for his arrest when the shooting occurred.

None of that matters. Running away from an officer and being behind in child support payments are not crimes punishable by death.

Unless you’re black.

What do I make out of all this? 1. Blacks don't vote so this kind of shit will keep happening until they become good citizens.

2. Black men need to start paying their child support

3. Black women need to stop having sex with guys like this.

A "physical altercation" puts people in a fight of flight mindset. From wikepedia it looks like a bad shooting.

That being said, we don't know why the jury couldn't return a verdict. 11 out of 12 jurors wanted to convict.

The cop is still facing Federal Charges, with the possibility of life in prison.


This isn't about blacks not voting.

If they don't like the outcomes of all these cases perhaps they need a more liberal government who has empathy towards the black community. Do you think Republicans have a problem with this shooting? They will try their hardest to justify it. They will defend the cop.

Michael Slager, The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn't Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter | The Huffington Post

Look back and see who defended the cop after seeing this video. It was Republicans. They said the black guy shouldn't have run. True but is that cause to murder him? The cop lied.

Slager said during his trial that he felt “total fear” as Scott charged toward him. He also claimed that Scott had grabbed his Taser and intended to fire it. “I see him with a Taser in his hand as I see him spinning around,” Slager said. “That’s the only thing I see: that Taser in his hand.”

In fact, the video evidence does not show Scott with a Taser when he is killed ― it shows Slager dropping a Taser near Scott’s body after he is shot.

When pressed by the prosecutor to explain, Slager said, “I don’t remember everything that happened.” He says he was concerned that Scott was “running for some reason” and that he was “going to lose” in a struggle with Scott.

“I pulled my firearm, and I pulled the trigger,” said Slager. “I fired until the threat was stopped, like I’m trained to do.”

Slager’s allusion to the black man’s supposed physical strength and insistence that he was threatening him ― disputed by the video evidence ― demonstrates the officer’s fear of black masculinity and his perception that black people are inherently criminal.

This is also evident in Slager’s interview with South Carolina Law Enforcement Division agents soon after the shooting. Because Scott was on the phone, shouting out his location to someone on the other end, Slager said he worried that he would never see his family again. So he decided to take another man away from his.

The person on the line with Scott was his mother.

Scott, a father of four, was likely running away to avoid being arrested for not paying child support. He owed more than $18,000 and there was a bench warrant out for his arrest when the shooting occurred.

None of that matters. Running away from an officer and being behind in child support payments are not crimes punishable by death.

Unless you’re black.

THe media has cried wolf so many times with "cop shoots unarmed black man" that it is natural for republicans to be suspicious. Blame liberals for that.


THat being said, this does look like a bad shoot.


Yes, republicans DO have a problem with people being shot if they are not an imminent threat.


What more blacks voting will get is NOT a government that is against random shootings of blacks by cops, (republicans are that) but a government that reflexively sides with the black and against the cop for political reasons.

The cop in this situation appears to have let the rush from the fight over come his training and procedure.


Your assumption that he would have reacted differently to a white guy he was in a fight with is unsupported. Whites who resist arrest get shot by cops also, sometimes unfairly.

Or this

Police have shot and killed a young black man (ages 18 to 29) — such as Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo. —175 times since January 2015; 24 of them were unarmed. Over that same period, police have shot and killed 172 young white men, 18 of whom were unarmed. Once again, while in raw numbers there were similar totals of white and black victims, blacks were killed at rates disproportionate to their percentage of the U.S. population. Of all of the unarmed people shot and killed by police in 2015, 40 percent of them were black men, even though black men make up just 6 percent of the nation’s population.

 

[Correll]

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

Michael Slager, The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn't Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter | The Huffington Post

The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn’t Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter

Scott, a father of four, was likely running away to avoid being arrested for not paying child support. He owed more than $18,000 and there was a bench warrant out for his arrest when the shooting occurred.

None of that matters. Running away from an officer and being behind in child support payments are not crimes punishable by death.

Unless you’re black.

What do I make out of all this? 1. Blacks don't vote so this kind of shit will keep happening until they become good citizens.

2. Black men need to start paying their child support

3. Black women need to stop having sex with guys like this.

A "physical altercation" puts people in a fight of flight mindset. From wikepedia it looks like a bad shooting.

That being said, we don't know why the jury couldn't return a verdict. 11 out of 12 jurors wanted to convict.

The cop is still facing Federal Charges, with the possibility of life in prison.


This isn't about blacks not voting.

If they don't like the outcomes of all these cases perhaps they need a more liberal government who has empathy towards the black community. Do you think Republicans have a problem with this shooting? They will try their hardest to justify it. They will defend the cop.

Michael Slager, The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn't Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter | The Huffington Post

Look back and see who defended the cop after seeing this video. It was Republicans. They said the black guy shouldn't have run. True but is that cause to murder him? The cop lied.

Slager said during his trial that he felt “total fear” as Scott charged toward him. He also claimed that Scott had grabbed his Taser and intended to fire it. “I see him with a Taser in his hand as I see him spinning around,” Slager said. “That’s the only thing I see: that Taser in his hand.”

In fact, the video evidence does not show Scott with a Taser when he is killed ― it shows Slager dropping a Taser near Scott’s body after he is shot.

When pressed by the prosecutor to explain, Slager said, “I don’t remember everything that happened.” He says he was concerned that Scott was “running for some reason” and that he was “going to lose” in a struggle with Scott.

“I pulled my firearm, and I pulled the trigger,” said Slager. “I fired until the threat was stopped, like I’m trained to do.”

Slager’s allusion to the black man’s supposed physical strength and insistence that he was threatening him ― disputed by the video evidence ― demonstrates the officer’s fear of black masculinity and his perception that black people are inherently criminal.

This is also evident in Slager’s interview with South Carolina Law Enforcement Division agents soon after the shooting. Because Scott was on the phone, shouting out his location to someone on the other end, Slager said he worried that he would never see his family again. So he decided to take another man away from his.

The person on the line with Scott was his mother.

Scott, a father of four, was likely running away to avoid being arrested for not paying child support. He owed more than $18,000 and there was a bench warrant out for his arrest when the shooting occurred.

None of that matters. Running away from an officer and being behind in child support payments are not crimes punishable by death.

Unless you’re black.

THe media has cried wolf so many times with "cop shoots unarmed black man" that it is natural for republicans to be suspicious. Blame liberals for that.


THat being said, this does look like a bad shoot.


Yes, republicans DO have a problem with people being shot if they are not an imminent threat.


What more blacks voting will get is NOT a government that is against random shootings of blacks by cops, (republicans are that) but a government that reflexively sides with the black and against the cop for political reasons.

The cop in this situation appears to have let the rush from the fight over come his training and procedure.


Your assumption that he would have reacted differently to a white guy he was in a fight with is unsupported. Whites who resist arrest get shot by cops also, sometimes unfairly.

One thing I will say is that it doesn't matter what black people think because they don't vote. Your opinion matters more because you show up and vote every 2 years so the solution is going to come from people who think like you, not people who agree with blacks that these shootings are racist.

Like a black person might point out that

According to the most recent census data, there are nearly 160 million more white people in America than there are black people. White people make up roughly 62 percent of the U.S. population but only about 49 percent of those who are killed by police officers. African Americans, however, account for 24 percent of those fatally shot and killed by the police despite being just 13 percent of the U.S. population. As The Post noted in a new analysis published last week, that means black Americans are 2.5 times as likely as white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.

Which is almost certainly caused almost completely by differences in behavior.

 

[Correll]

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

Michael Slager, The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn't Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter | The Huffington Post

The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn’t Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter

Scott, a father of four, was likely running away to avoid being arrested for not paying child support. He owed more than $18,000 and there was a bench warrant out for his arrest when the shooting occurred.

None of that matters. Running away from an officer and being behind in child support payments are not crimes punishable by death.

Unless you’re black.

What do I make out of all this? 1. Blacks don't vote so this kind of shit will keep happening until they become good citizens.

2. Black men need to start paying their child support

3. Black women need to stop having sex with guys like this.

A "physical altercation" puts people in a fight of flight mindset. From wikepedia it looks like a bad shooting.

That being said, we don't know why the jury couldn't return a verdict. 11 out of 12 jurors wanted to convict.

The cop is still facing Federal Charges, with the possibility of life in prison.


This isn't about blacks not voting.

If they don't like the outcomes of all these cases perhaps they need a more liberal government who has empathy towards the black community. Do you think Republicans have a problem with this shooting? They will try their hardest to justify it. They will defend the cop.

Michael Slager, The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn't Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter | The Huffington Post

Look back and see who defended the cop after seeing this video. It was Republicans. They said the black guy shouldn't have run. True but is that cause to murder him? The cop lied.

Slager said during his trial that he felt “total fear” as Scott charged toward him. He also claimed that Scott had grabbed his Taser and intended to fire it. “I see him with a Taser in his hand as I see him spinning around,” Slager said. “That’s the only thing I see: that Taser in his hand.”

In fact, the video evidence does not show Scott with a Taser when he is killed ― it shows Slager dropping a Taser near Scott’s body after he is shot.

When pressed by the prosecutor to explain, Slager said, “I don’t remember everything that happened.” He says he was concerned that Scott was “running for some reason” and that he was “going to lose” in a struggle with Scott.

“I pulled my firearm, and I pulled the trigger,” said Slager. “I fired until the threat was stopped, like I’m trained to do.”

Slager’s allusion to the black man’s supposed physical strength and insistence that he was threatening him ― disputed by the video evidence ― demonstrates the officer’s fear of black masculinity and his perception that black people are inherently criminal.

This is also evident in Slager’s interview with South Carolina Law Enforcement Division agents soon after the shooting. Because Scott was on the phone, shouting out his location to someone on the other end, Slager said he worried that he would never see his family again. So he decided to take another man away from his.

The person on the line with Scott was his mother.

Scott, a father of four, was likely running away to avoid being arrested for not paying child support. He owed more than $18,000 and there was a bench warrant out for his arrest when the shooting occurred.

None of that matters. Running away from an officer and being behind in child support payments are not crimes punishable by death.

Unless you’re black.

THe media has cried wolf so many times with "cop shoots unarmed black man" that it is natural for republicans to be suspicious. Blame liberals for that.


THat being said, this does look like a bad shoot.


Yes, republicans DO have a problem with people being shot if they are not an imminent threat.


What more blacks voting will get is NOT a government that is against random shootings of blacks by cops, (republicans are that) but a government that reflexively sides with the black and against the cop for political reasons.

The cop in this situation appears to have let the rush from the fight over come his training and procedure.


Your assumption that he would have reacted differently to a white guy he was in a fight with is unsupported. Whites who resist arrest get shot by cops also, sometimes unfairly.

How do you explain this?

U.S. police officers have shot and killed the exact same number of unarmed white people as they have unarmed black people: 50 each. But because the white population is approximately five times larger than the black population, that means unarmed black Americans were five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by a police officer.

IMO the vastly higher rate of illegitimacy in the black community leads to children growing up to become, not only criminals, but worse criminals at a vastly higher rate than whites.


They are more likely to commit crimes and more likely to violently resist than whites criminals.

 

[Correll]

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

Michael Slager, The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn't Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter | The Huffington Post

The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn’t Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter

Scott, a father of four, was likely running away to avoid being arrested for not paying child support. He owed more than $18,000 and there was a bench warrant out for his arrest when the shooting occurred.

None of that matters. Running away from an officer and being behind in child support payments are not crimes punishable by death.

Unless you’re black.

What do I make out of all this? 1. Blacks don't vote so this kind of shit will keep happening until they become good citizens.

2. Black men need to start paying their child support

3. Black women need to stop having sex with guys like this.

A "physical altercation" puts people in a fight of flight mindset. From wikepedia it looks like a bad shooting.

That being said, we don't know why the jury couldn't return a verdict. 11 out of 12 jurors wanted to convict.

The cop is still facing Federal Charges, with the possibility of life in prison.


This isn't about blacks not voting.

If they don't like the outcomes of all these cases perhaps they need a more liberal government who has empathy towards the black community. Do you think Republicans have a problem with this shooting? They will try their hardest to justify it. They will defend the cop.

Michael Slager, The Cop Who Killed Walter Scott, Wasn't Convicted Because Black Lives Don’t Matter | The Huffington Post

Look back and see who defended the cop after seeing this video. It was Republicans. They said the black guy shouldn't have run. True but is that cause to murder him? The cop lied.

Slager said during his trial that he felt “total fear” as Scott charged toward him. He also claimed that Scott had grabbed his Taser and intended to fire it. “I see him with a Taser in his hand as I see him spinning around,” Slager said. “That’s the only thing I see: that Taser in his hand.”

In fact, the video evidence does not show Scott with a Taser when he is killed ― it shows Slager dropping a Taser near Scott’s body after he is shot.

When pressed by the prosecutor to explain, Slager said, “I don’t remember everything that happened.” He says he was concerned that Scott was “running for some reason” and that he was “going to lose” in a struggle with Scott.

“I pulled my firearm, and I pulled the trigger,” said Slager. “I fired until the threat was stopped, like I’m trained to do.”

Slager’s allusion to the black man’s supposed physical strength and insistence that he was threatening him ― disputed by the video evidence ― demonstrates the officer’s fear of black masculinity and his perception that black people are inherently criminal.

This is also evident in Slager’s interview with South Carolina Law Enforcement Division agents soon after the shooting. Because Scott was on the phone, shouting out his location to someone on the other end, Slager said he worried that he would never see his family again. So he decided to take another man away from his.

The person on the line with Scott was his mother.

Scott, a father of four, was likely running away to avoid being arrested for not paying child support. He owed more than $18,000 and there was a bench warrant out for his arrest when the shooting occurred.

None of that matters. Running away from an officer and being behind in child support payments are not crimes punishable by death.

Unless you’re black.

THe media has cried wolf so many times with "cop shoots unarmed black man" that it is natural for republicans to be suspicious. Blame liberals for that.


THat being said, this does look like a bad shoot.


Yes, republicans DO have a problem with people being shot if they are not an imminent threat.


What more blacks voting will get is NOT a government that is against random shootings of blacks by cops, (republicans are that) but a government that reflexively sides with the black and against the cop for political reasons.

The cop in this situation appears to have let the rush from the fight over come his training and procedure.


Your assumption that he would have reacted differently to a white guy he was in a fight with is unsupported. Whites who resist arrest get shot by cops also, sometimes unfairly.

Or this

Police have shot and killed a young black man (ages 18 to 29) — such as Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo. —175 times since January 2015; 24 of them were unarmed. Over that same period, police have shot and killed 172 young white men, 18 of whom were unarmed. Once again, while in raw numbers there were similar totals of white and black victims, blacks were killed at rates disproportionate to their percentage of the U.S. population. Of all of the unarmed people shot and killed by police in 2015, 40 percent of them were black men, even though black men make up just 6 percent of the nation’s population.

Consider this as evidence supporting my different behavior conclusion.


Race and crime in the United States - Wikipedia


"According to the US Department of Justice, blacks accounted for 52.5% of homicide offenders from 1980 to 2008, with whites 45.3% and "Other" 2.2%. The offending rate for blacks was almost 8 times higher than whites, "



Blacks are over half the murders. If police are supposed to shot people only when they are a threat, and half the murderers are black, and half the people the police shoot are black...

 

[katsteve2012]

The only lack of objectivity here is my unwillingness to agree with a vigilante taking it upon himself to play cop instead of letting trained officers do their duty.

And a thug like him should not be allowed to carry a firearm.....especially one who brags about killing someone.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/wftv.r...agging-about-killing-trayvon-martin/417278308

Calling the cops, even following the thug in question, is not being a vigilante.


That you feel the need the need to lie, shows that you know you are wrong.

Martin defined himself a thug by his actions, when he sat on Zimmerman's chest and beat him as he screamed for help, not stopping even when told the cops were on the way.

Your siding with the thug shows what type of person YOU ARE.

He was told to stop following and decided to do so anyway. There was nothing that who he was following was doing wrong, so why would he do so unless he was looking for trouble?

I do not condone anyone getting beaten up, but he as a supposed responsible adult ( time has proven otherwise) could have prevented this from happening.

And no, you don't know what kind of person I am.

1. Stranger in a gated community. He was looking to have the cops question the stranger.

2. Your snide comments about karma says otherwise.

3. You have revealed more about yourself than you know. You are comfortable with the idea of railroading an innocent man to prison, and you are comfortable with the idea of him receiving street justice.

And you are a "drama queen". I have not said anything regarding "sending him to prison".

What I DID state is that he is every bit as much a "thug" if not more than Martin.

And I DID state that when he was told not to follow, he should have followed the instructions of the dispatcher as opposed to not doing so.

As far as being a "stranger" in a gated community, since when does someone who is not a resident automatically become a "suspect" in committing a crime? Especially when no crime has taken place.

Did Zimmerman observe him looking at cars or loitering in front of a specific home? As far as we know neither happened.

I live in a gated community and we have a patrol service in cars that politely stop people who do.not reside there and ask them if they "need help".

Lastly, your damn right about "street justice" People who have his temperament usually end up on the receiving end of it.

If you don't like that, too bad.

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

Racist is a word that hyberbolic

The only lack of objectivity here is my unwillingness to agree with a vigilante taking it upon himself to play cop instead of letting trained officers do their duty.

And a thug like him should not be allowed to carry a firearm.....especially one who brags about killing someone.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/wftv.r...agging-about-killing-trayvon-martin/417278308

Calling the cops, even following the thug in question, is not being a vigilante.


That you feel the need the need to lie, shows that you know you are wrong.

Martin defined himself a thug by his actions, when he sat on Zimmerman's chest and beat him as he screamed for help, not stopping even when told the cops were on the way.

Your siding with the thug shows what type of person YOU ARE.

He was told to stop following and decided to do so anyway. There was nothing that who he was following was doing wrong, so why would he do so unless he was looking for trouble?

I do not condone anyone getting beaten up, but he as a supposed responsible adult ( time has proven otherwise) could have prevented this from happening.

And no, you don't know what kind of person I am.

1. Stranger in a gated community. He was looking to have the cops question the stranger.

2. Your snide comments about karma says otherwise.

3. You have revealed more about yourself than you know. You are comfortable with the idea of railroading an innocent man to prison, and you are comfortable with the idea of him receiving street justice.

And you are a "drama queen". I have not said anything regarding "sending him to prison".

What I DID state is that he is every bit as much a "thug" if not more than Martin.

And I DID state that when he was told not to follow, he should have followed the instructions of the dispatcher as opposed to not doing so.

As far as being a "stranger" in a gated community, since when does someone who is not a resident automatically become a "suspect" in committing a crime? Especially when no crime has taken place.

Did Zimmerman observe him looking at cars or loitering in front of a specific home? As far as we know neither happened.

I live in a gated community and we have a patrol service in cars that politely stop people who do.not reside there and ask them if they "need help".

Lastly, your damn right about "street justice" People who have his temperament usually end up on the receiving end of it.

If you don't like that, too bad.

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

"Racist" is just a term that hyperbolic paranoids resort to when they know they are spewing nonsense.

A punk thug with a permit to carry a gun shot a minor because he fit the description of people who were robbing houses......he was "Black."

Self defense aside, he still could have followed the instructions that he was given and he could have even approached the "suspect" and volunteered to help him find what he appeared" to be looking for.

My "support" of street justice for that little man Zimmerman is no factor in what happens to him......Karma has already kicked in.

Word is that he is broke and nearly homeless.

Apparently, all of the donations that he got from NRA disciples have run dry, and even trying to sell his prized weapon for a 6 figure amount did not come to fruition......even bragging to patrons at a local restaurant that "he is the guy who killed Martin" only got him punched in the face.

As far as Trump goes, don't blame black voters for being a catalyst in electing a nut.

That is solely on those who identify with his unhinged rhetoric.

 

[Correll]

Calling the cops, even following the thug in question, is not being a vigilante.


That you feel the need the need to lie, shows that you know you are wrong.

Martin defined himself a thug by his actions, when he sat on Zimmerman's chest and beat him as he screamed for help, not stopping even when told the cops were on the way.

Your siding with the thug shows what type of person YOU ARE.

He was told to stop following and decided to do so anyway. There was nothing that who he was following was doing wrong, so why would he do so unless he was looking for trouble?

I do not condone anyone getting beaten up, but he as a supposed responsible adult ( time has proven otherwise) could have prevented this from happening.

And no, you don't know what kind of person I am.

1. Stranger in a gated community. He was looking to have the cops question the stranger.

2. Your snide comments about karma says otherwise.

3. You have revealed more about yourself than you know. You are comfortable with the idea of railroading an innocent man to prison, and you are comfortable with the idea of him receiving street justice.

And you are a "drama queen". I have not said anything regarding "sending him to prison".

What I DID state is that he is every bit as much a "thug" if not more than Martin.

And I DID state that when he was told not to follow, he should have followed the instructions of the dispatcher as opposed to not doing so.

As far as being a "stranger" in a gated community, since when does someone who is not a resident automatically become a "suspect" in committing a crime? Especially when no crime has taken place.

Did Zimmerman observe him looking at cars or loitering in front of a specific home? As far as we know neither happened.

I live in a gated community and we have a patrol service in cars that politely stop people who do.not reside there and ask them if they "need help".

Lastly, your damn right about "street justice" People who have his temperament usually end up on the receiving end of it.

If you don't like that, too bad.

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

Racist is a word that hyberbolic

Calling the cops, even following the thug in question, is not being a vigilante.


That you feel the need the need to lie, shows that you know you are wrong.

Martin defined himself a thug by his actions, when he sat on Zimmerman's chest and beat him as he screamed for help, not stopping even when told the cops were on the way.

Your siding with the thug shows what type of person YOU ARE.

He was told to stop following and decided to do so anyway. There was nothing that who he was following was doing wrong, so why would he do so unless he was looking for trouble?

I do not condone anyone getting beaten up, but he as a supposed responsible adult ( time has proven otherwise) could have prevented this from happening.

And no, you don't know what kind of person I am.

1. Stranger in a gated community. He was looking to have the cops question the stranger.

2. Your snide comments about karma says otherwise.

3. You have revealed more about yourself than you know. You are comfortable with the idea of railroading an innocent man to prison, and you are comfortable with the idea of him receiving street justice.

And you are a "drama queen". I have not said anything regarding "sending him to prison".

What I DID state is that he is every bit as much a "thug" if not more than Martin.

And I DID state that when he was told not to follow, he should have followed the instructions of the dispatcher as opposed to not doing so.

As far as being a "stranger" in a gated community, since when does someone who is not a resident automatically become a "suspect" in committing a crime? Especially when no crime has taken place.

Did Zimmerman observe him looking at cars or loitering in front of a specific home? As far as we know neither happened.

I live in a gated community and we have a patrol service in cars that politely stop people who do.not reside there and ask them if they "need help".

Lastly, your damn right about "street justice" People who have his temperament usually end up on the receiving end of it.

If you don't like that, too bad.

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

"Racist" is just a term that hyperbolic paranoids resort to when they know they are spewing nonsense.

A punk thug with a permit to carry a gun shot a minor because he fit the description of people who were robbing houses......he was "Black."

Self defense aside, he still could have followed the instructions that he was given and he could have even approached the "suspect" and volunteered to help him find what he appeared" to be looking for.

My "support" of street justice for that little man Zimmerman is no factor in what happens to him......Karma has already kicked in.

Word is that he is broke and nearly homeless.

Apparently, all of the donations that he got from NRA disciples have run dry, and even trying to sell his prized weapon for a 6 figure amount did not come to fruition......even bragging to patrons at a local restaurant that "he is the guy who killed Martin" only got him punched in the face.

As far as Trump goes, don't blame black voters for being a catalyst in electing a nut.

That is solely on those who identify with his unhinged rhetoric.

He did not shoot Martin because he fit the description of a suspect.

He shot Martin because Martin was sitting on his chest beating him "MMA style".

That you lie about that is further proof that you are siding with the thug.

And removes all credibility from everything else you have to say.

 

[katsteve2012]

He was told to stop following and decided to do so anyway. There was nothing that who he was following was doing wrong, so why would he do so unless he was looking for trouble?

I do not condone anyone getting beaten up, but he as a supposed responsible adult ( time has proven otherwise) could have prevented this from happening.

And no, you don't know what kind of person I am.

1. Stranger in a gated community. He was looking to have the cops question the stranger.

2. Your snide comments about karma says otherwise.

3. You have revealed more about yourself than you know. You are comfortable with the idea of railroading an innocent man to prison, and you are comfortable with the idea of him receiving street justice.

And you are a "drama queen". I have not said anything regarding "sending him to prison".

What I DID state is that he is every bit as much a "thug" if not more than Martin.

And I DID state that when he was told not to follow, he should have followed the instructions of the dispatcher as opposed to not doing so.

As far as being a "stranger" in a gated community, since when does someone who is not a resident automatically become a "suspect" in committing a crime? Especially when no crime has taken place.

Did Zimmerman observe him looking at cars or loitering in front of a specific home? As far as we know neither happened.

I live in a gated community and we have a patrol service in cars that politely stop people who do.not reside there and ask them if they "need help".

Lastly, your damn right about "street justice" People who have his temperament usually end up on the receiving end of it.

If you don't like that, too bad.

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

Racist is a word that hyberbolic

He was told to stop following and decided to do so anyway. There was nothing that who he was following was doing wrong, so why would he do so unless he was looking for trouble?

I do not condone anyone getting beaten up, but he as a supposed responsible adult ( time has proven otherwise) could have prevented this from happening.

And no, you don't know what kind of person I am.

1. Stranger in a gated community. He was looking to have the cops question the stranger.

2. Your snide comments about karma says otherwise.

3. You have revealed more about yourself than you know. You are comfortable with the idea of railroading an innocent man to prison, and you are comfortable with the idea of him receiving street justice.

And you are a "drama queen". I have not said anything regarding "sending him to prison".

What I DID state is that he is every bit as much a "thug" if not more than Martin.

And I DID state that when he was told not to follow, he should have followed the instructions of the dispatcher as opposed to not doing so.

As far as being a "stranger" in a gated community, since when does someone who is not a resident automatically become a "suspect" in committing a crime? Especially when no crime has taken place.

Did Zimmerman observe him looking at cars or loitering in front of a specific home? As far as we know neither happened.

I live in a gated community and we have a patrol service in cars that politely stop people who do.not reside there and ask them if they "need help".

Lastly, your damn right about "street justice" People who have his temperament usually end up on the receiving end of it.

If you don't like that, too bad.

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

"Racist" is just a term that hyperbolic paranoids resort to when they know they are spewing nonsense.

A punk thug with a permit to carry a gun shot a minor because he fit the description of people who were robbing houses......he was "Black."

Self defense aside, he still could have followed the instructions that he was given and he could have even approached the "suspect" and volunteered to help him find what he appeared" to be looking for.

My "support" of street justice for that little man Zimmerman is no factor in what happens to him......Karma has already kicked in.

Word is that he is broke and nearly homeless.

Apparently, all of the donations that he got from NRA disciples have run dry, and even trying to sell his prized weapon for a 6 figure amount did not come to fruition......even bragging to patrons at a local restaurant that "he is the guy who killed Martin" only got him punched in the face.

As far as Trump goes, don't blame black voters for being a catalyst in electing a nut.

That is solely on those who identify with his unhinged rhetoric.

He did not shoot Martin because he fit the description of a suspect.

He shot Martin because Martin was sitting on his chest beating him "MMA style".

That you lie about that is further proof that you are siding with the thug.

And removes all credibility from everything else you have to say.

Zimmerman is a thug who should have never even been licensed to carry a firearm.

He followed Martin because he fit the description of being "black and male".

He ended up shooting him because he was likely looking for a reason to.

What ended up as a killing should have ended with Zimmerman letting the police do their job.

Martin was 17 years old. How many 17 year olds have the emotional maturity to walk away from a fight? Especially if they feel threatened?.

You have the same mentality of most gun toting, vigilante thugs who want to be cowboys, but probably could not defend themselves without a weapon.

If you had your way the streets would be full of your kind. Following, confronting and gunning down people, even kids, because "they fit a general description".

Then would brag about it afterward.

 

[Correll]

1. Stranger in a gated community. He was looking to have the cops question the stranger.

2. Your snide comments about karma says otherwise.

3. You have revealed more about yourself than you know. You are comfortable with the idea of railroading an innocent man to prison, and you are comfortable with the idea of him receiving street justice.

And you are a "drama queen". I have not said anything regarding "sending him to prison".

What I DID state is that he is every bit as much a "thug" if not more than Martin.

And I DID state that when he was told not to follow, he should have followed the instructions of the dispatcher as opposed to not doing so.

As far as being a "stranger" in a gated community, since when does someone who is not a resident automatically become a "suspect" in committing a crime? Especially when no crime has taken place.

Did Zimmerman observe him looking at cars or loitering in front of a specific home? As far as we know neither happened.

I live in a gated community and we have a patrol service in cars that politely stop people who do.not reside there and ask them if they "need help".

Lastly, your damn right about "street justice" People who have his temperament usually end up on the receiving end of it.

If you don't like that, too bad.

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

Racist is a word that hyberbolic

1. Stranger in a gated community. He was looking to have the cops question the stranger.

2. Your snide comments about karma says otherwise.

3. You have revealed more about yourself than you know. You are comfortable with the idea of railroading an innocent man to prison, and you are comfortable with the idea of him receiving street justice.

And you are a "drama queen". I have not said anything regarding "sending him to prison".

What I DID state is that he is every bit as much a "thug" if not more than Martin.

And I DID state that when he was told not to follow, he should have followed the instructions of the dispatcher as opposed to not doing so.

As far as being a "stranger" in a gated community, since when does someone who is not a resident automatically become a "suspect" in committing a crime? Especially when no crime has taken place.

Did Zimmerman observe him looking at cars or loitering in front of a specific home? As far as we know neither happened.

I live in a gated community and we have a patrol service in cars that politely stop people who do.not reside there and ask them if they "need help".

Lastly, your damn right about "street justice" People who have his temperament usually end up on the receiving end of it.

If you don't like that, too bad.

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

"Racist" is just a term that hyperbolic paranoids resort to when they know they are spewing nonsense.

A punk thug with a permit to carry a gun shot a minor because he fit the description of people who were robbing houses......he was "Black."

Self defense aside, he still could have followed the instructions that he was given and he could have even approached the "suspect" and volunteered to help him find what he appeared" to be looking for.

My "support" of street justice for that little man Zimmerman is no factor in what happens to him......Karma has already kicked in.

Word is that he is broke and nearly homeless.

Apparently, all of the donations that he got from NRA disciples have run dry, and even trying to sell his prized weapon for a 6 figure amount did not come to fruition......even bragging to patrons at a local restaurant that "he is the guy who killed Martin" only got him punched in the face.

As far as Trump goes, don't blame black voters for being a catalyst in electing a nut.

That is solely on those who identify with his unhinged rhetoric.

He did not shoot Martin because he fit the description of a suspect.

He shot Martin because Martin was sitting on his chest beating him "MMA style".

That you lie about that is further proof that you are siding with the thug.

And removes all credibility from everything else you have to say.

He followed Martin because he fit the description of being "black and male".

He ended up shooting him because he was likely looking for a reason to.

What ended up as a killing should have ended with Zimmerman letting the police do their job.

Martin was 17 years old. How many 17 year olds have the emotional maturity to walk away from a fight?

You have the same mentality of most gun toting vigilantes who want to be cowboys, but probably could not defend themselves without a weapon.

If you had your way the streets would be full of your kind. Following, confronting and gunning down "people......even kids,,,,,because "they fit a general description".

1. That was the description of the suspect. Sorry if reality offends you. NOt.

2. When someone is sitting on your chest beating you "MMA style" while you scream for help, the"reason" to shoot him is readily apparent.

3. Lots of 17 year olds have the maturity to walk away from a fight. Lots of 17 year olds don't have the sadism to sit on some one's chest and beat them while they scream.

4. Your attempt to challenge my manhood is telling. NOt having the ability to defend yourself with out a gun, doesn't mean you have to let people sit on your chest and beat you while you scream. Once again you are siding with the thug.

5. "kids" my ass. He was big enough to do the crime. He was big enough to pay the price.

 

[katsteve2012]

And you are a "drama queen". I have not said anything regarding "sending him to prison".

What I DID state is that he is every bit as much a "thug" if not more than Martin.

And I DID state that when he was told not to follow, he should have followed the instructions of the dispatcher as opposed to not doing so.

As far as being a "stranger" in a gated community, since when does someone who is not a resident automatically become a "suspect" in committing a crime? Especially when no crime has taken place.

Did Zimmerman observe him looking at cars or loitering in front of a specific home? As far as we know neither happened.

I live in a gated community and we have a patrol service in cars that politely stop people who do.not reside there and ask them if they "need help".

Lastly, your damn right about "street justice" People who have his temperament usually end up on the receiving end of it.

If you don't like that, too bad.

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

Racist is a word that hyberbolic

And you are a "drama queen". I have not said anything regarding "sending him to prison".

What I DID state is that he is every bit as much a "thug" if not more than Martin.

And I DID state that when he was told not to follow, he should have followed the instructions of the dispatcher as opposed to not doing so.

As far as being a "stranger" in a gated community, since when does someone who is not a resident automatically become a "suspect" in committing a crime? Especially when no crime has taken place.

Did Zimmerman observe him looking at cars or loitering in front of a specific home? As far as we know neither happened.

I live in a gated community and we have a patrol service in cars that politely stop people who do.not reside there and ask them if they "need help".

Lastly, your damn right about "street justice" People who have his temperament usually end up on the receiving end of it.

If you don't like that, too bad.

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

"Racist" is just a term that hyperbolic paranoids resort to when they know they are spewing nonsense.

A punk thug with a permit to carry a gun shot a minor because he fit the description of people who were robbing houses......he was "Black."

Self defense aside, he still could have followed the instructions that he was given and he could have even approached the "suspect" and volunteered to help him find what he appeared" to be looking for.

My "support" of street justice for that little man Zimmerman is no factor in what happens to him......Karma has already kicked in.

Word is that he is broke and nearly homeless.

Apparently, all of the donations that he got from NRA disciples have run dry, and even trying to sell his prized weapon for a 6 figure amount did not come to fruition......even bragging to patrons at a local restaurant that "he is the guy who killed Martin" only got him punched in the face.

As far as Trump goes, don't blame black voters for being a catalyst in electing a nut.

That is solely on those who identify with his unhinged rhetoric.

He did not shoot Martin because he fit the description of a suspect.

He shot Martin because Martin was sitting on his chest beating him "MMA style".

That you lie about that is further proof that you are siding with the thug.

And removes all credibility from everything else you have to say.

He followed Martin because he fit the description of being "black and male".

He ended up shooting him because he was likely looking for a reason to.

What ended up as a killing should have ended with Zimmerman letting the police do their job.

Martin was 17 years old. How many 17 year olds have the emotional maturity to walk away from a fight?

You have the same mentality of most gun toting vigilantes who want to be cowboys, but probably could not defend themselves without a weapon.

If you had your way the streets would be full of your kind. Following, confronting and gunning down "people......even kids,,,,,because "they fit a general description".

1. That was the description of the suspect. Sorry if reality offends you. NOt.

2. When someone is sitting on your chest beating you "MMA style" while you scream for help, the"reason" to shoot him is readily apparent.

3. Lots of 17 year olds have the maturity to walk away from a fight. Lots of 17 year olds don't have the sadism to sit on some one's chest and beat them while they scream.

4. Your attempt to challenge my manhood is telling. NOt having the ability to defend yourself with out a gun, doesn't mean you have to let people sit on your chest and beat you while you scream. Once again you are siding with the thug.

5. "kids" my ass. He was big enough to do the crime. He was big enough to pay the price.

"Suspect was black and male" is a very broad description that subjects too many to suspicion. the fact that he was wearing a hooded sweatshirt makes the description even more vague. But of course your type of thinking makes "anyone who is black" a suspect.

You keep referring to Zimmerman "screamimg" The forensic experts who testified at the trial concluded that it was Martin not Zimmerman who was "screaming".

As far as your "manhood", I didn't challenge it, so no need to defend it with me....you're just a stranger on a message bosrd.

 

[Correll]

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

Racist is a word that hyberbolic

1. If his Justified Self Defense shooting of Martin was declared falsely to NOT be justified, he would have been sent to prison.

2. Crimes had taken place. Martin fit the description of the suspect. Zimmerman reported that Martin was wandering around looking at houses.

3. Zimmerman was trying to help a Police Patrol come talk to Martin.

4. And your support of "Street Justice" for Zimmerman, based on your biased conclusion about his self defense shooting shows what type of person you are.

5. I don't like it. The Jury disagreed with you. Your type of racist support of violent thugs helped alienate white democrats to elect Donald Trump. If you don't like that, too bad.

"Racist" is just a term that hyperbolic paranoids resort to when they know they are spewing nonsense.

A punk thug with a permit to carry a gun shot a minor because he fit the description of people who were robbing houses......he was "Black."

Self defense aside, he still could have followed the instructions that he was given and he could have even approached the "suspect" and volunteered to help him find what he appeared" to be looking for.

My "support" of street justice for that little man Zimmerman is no factor in what happens to him......Karma has already kicked in.

Word is that he is broke and nearly homeless.

Apparently, all of the donations that he got from NRA disciples have run dry, and even trying to sell his prized weapon for a 6 figure amount did not come to fruition......even bragging to patrons at a local restaurant that "he is the guy who killed Martin" only got him punched in the face.

As far as Trump goes, don't blame black voters for being a catalyst in electing a nut.

That is solely on those who identify with his unhinged rhetoric.

He did not shoot Martin because he fit the description of a suspect.

He shot Martin because Martin was sitting on his chest beating him "MMA style".

That you lie about that is further proof that you are siding with the thug.

And removes all credibility from everything else you have to say.

He followed Martin because he fit the description of being "black and male".

He ended up shooting him because he was likely looking for a reason to.

What ended up as a killing should have ended with Zimmerman letting the police do their job.

Martin was 17 years old. How many 17 year olds have the emotional maturity to walk away from a fight?

You have the same mentality of most gun toting vigilantes who want to be cowboys, but probably could not defend themselves without a weapon.

If you had your way the streets would be full of your kind. Following, confronting and gunning down "people......even kids,,,,,because "they fit a general description".

1. That was the description of the suspect. Sorry if reality offends you. NOt.

2. When someone is sitting on your chest beating you "MMA style" while you scream for help, the"reason" to shoot him is readily apparent.

3. Lots of 17 year olds have the maturity to walk away from a fight. Lots of 17 year olds don't have the sadism to sit on some one's chest and beat them while they scream.

4. Your attempt to challenge my manhood is telling. NOt having the ability to defend yourself with out a gun, doesn't mean you have to let people sit on your chest and beat you while you scream. Once again you are siding with the thug.

5. "kids" my ass. He was big enough to do the crime. He was big enough to pay the price.

"Suspect was black and male" is a very broad description that subjects too many to suspicion. the fact that he was wearing a hooded sweatshirt makes the description even more vague. But of course your type of thinking makes "anyone who is black" a suspect.

Your race care use is noted. Your point is invalid.

And that's the way general descriptions work. Take it up with the criminal, who didn't let people get a better look at him.

BTW, what ever happened with those breakins? Was the burglar ever caught? Or did the breakins mysteriously stop about the time Martin got his ass shot?

You keep referring to Zimmerman "screamimg" The forensic experts who testified at the trial concluded that it was Martin not Zimmerman who was "screaming".

LOL!!! The eyewitness said otherwise.

As far as your "manhood", I didn't challenge it, so no need to defend it with me....you're just a stranger on a message bosrd.

My point stands. The idea that not being able to fight well, means that you don't have the right to defend yourself, which is what you were implying, is indefensible.


It is the type of pathetic rationalization that someone comes up with when they know they are in the wrong but can't admit it, even to themselves.


Tell me, what would happen to you if you told your friends that you thought that Martin was a Good Shot?

 

[katsteve2012]

Racist is a word that hyberbolic
"Racist" is just a term that hyperbolic paranoids resort to when they know they are spewing nonsense.

A punk thug with a permit to carry a gun shot a minor because he fit the description of people who were robbing houses......he was "Black."

Self defense aside, he still could have followed the instructions that he was given and he could have even approached the "suspect" and volunteered to help him find what he appeared" to be looking for.

My "support" of street justice for that little man Zimmerman is no factor in what happens to him......Karma has already kicked in.

Word is that he is broke and nearly homeless.

Apparently, all of the donations that he got from NRA disciples have run dry, and even trying to sell his prized weapon for a 6 figure amount did not come to fruition......even bragging to patrons at a local restaurant that "he is the guy who killed Martin" only got him punched in the face.

As far as Trump goes, don't blame black voters for being a catalyst in electing a nut.

That is solely on those who identify with his unhinged rhetoric.

He did not shoot Martin because he fit the description of a suspect.

He shot Martin because Martin was sitting on his chest beating him "MMA style".

That you lie about that is further proof that you are siding with the thug.

And removes all credibility from everything else you have to say.

He followed Martin because he fit the description of being "black and male".

He ended up shooting him because he was likely looking for a reason to.

What ended up as a killing should have ended with Zimmerman letting the police do their job.

Martin was 17 years old. How many 17 year olds have the emotional maturity to walk away from a fight?

You have the same mentality of most gun toting vigilantes who want to be cowboys, but probably could not defend themselves without a weapon.

If you had your way the streets would be full of your kind. Following, confronting and gunning down "people......even kids,,,,,because "they fit a general description".

1. That was the description of the suspect. Sorry if reality offends you. NOt.

2. When someone is sitting on your chest beating you "MMA style" while you scream for help, the"reason" to shoot him is readily apparent.

3. Lots of 17 year olds have the maturity to walk away from a fight. Lots of 17 year olds don't have the sadism to sit on some one's chest and beat them while they scream.

4. Your attempt to challenge my manhood is telling. NOt having the ability to defend yourself with out a gun, doesn't mean you have to let people sit on your chest and beat you while you scream. Once again you are siding with the thug.

5. "kids" my ass. He was big enough to do the crime. He was big enough to pay the price.

"Suspect was black and male" is a very broad description that subjects too many to suspicion. the fact that he was wearing a hooded sweatshirt makes the description even more vague. But of course your type of thinking makes "anyone who is black" a suspect.

Your race care use is noted. Your point is invalid.

And that's the way general descriptions work. Take it up with the criminal, who didn't let people get a better look at him.

BTW, what ever happened with those breakins? Was the burglar ever caught? Or did the breakins mysteriously stop about the time Martin got his ass shot?

You keep referring to Zimmerman "screamimg" The forensic experts who testified at the trial concluded that it was Martin not Zimmerman who was "screaming".

LOL!!! The eyewitness said otherwise.

As far as your "manhood", I didn't challenge it, so no need to defend it with me....you're just a stranger on a message bosrd.

My point stands. The idea that not being able to fight well, means that you don't have the right to defend yourself, which is what you were implying, is indefensible.


It is the type of pathetic rationalization that someone comes up with when they know they are in the wrong but can't admit it, even to themselves.


Tell me, what would happen to you if you told your friends that you thought that Martin was a Good Shot?

No one has a "point" here, this is an discussion forum and people have opinions, in case you forgot that.

. If a white 17 year old kid had been strolling in the neighborhood and was "looking at houses" and there had happened to have been a recent burglary by another white person, you're saying that just the fact that he was "white" would have made him a suspect?

I never said that not being able to defend oneself without a gun means that someone shouldn't be able to defend themselves.

YOU got your feelings hurt because you are defensive about your "manhood", and that's YOUR problem, not mine.

What I have said from the beginning is that if Zimmerman had followed the advice of dispatch, the need to even use a gun would have been unneccesary.

Why would I ask anyone if Martin was a good shot? He did not have a gun.

So here is a question for you... the gun owners that I know would not be proud of themselves for killing someone, nor would they seek to profit from it.

Why would Zimmerman seek to sell the weapon that he used for over 100k?

He's not a bounty hunter......or does he and those like you who think like him, have that kind of mentality?

 

[Correll]

He did not shoot Martin because he fit the description of a suspect.

He shot Martin because Martin was sitting on his chest beating him "MMA style".

That you lie about that is further proof that you are siding with the thug.

And removes all credibility from everything else you have to say.

He followed Martin because he fit the description of being "black and male".

He ended up shooting him because he was likely looking for a reason to.

What ended up as a killing should have ended with Zimmerman letting the police do their job.

Martin was 17 years old. How many 17 year olds have the emotional maturity to walk away from a fight?

You have the same mentality of most gun toting vigilantes who want to be cowboys, but probably could not defend themselves without a weapon.

If you had your way the streets would be full of your kind. Following, confronting and gunning down "people......even kids,,,,,because "they fit a general description".

1. That was the description of the suspect. Sorry if reality offends you. NOt.

2. When someone is sitting on your chest beating you "MMA style" while you scream for help, the"reason" to shoot him is readily apparent.

3. Lots of 17 year olds have the maturity to walk away from a fight. Lots of 17 year olds don't have the sadism to sit on some one's chest and beat them while they scream.

4. Your attempt to challenge my manhood is telling. NOt having the ability to defend yourself with out a gun, doesn't mean you have to let people sit on your chest and beat you while you scream. Once again you are siding with the thug.

5. "kids" my ass. He was big enough to do the crime. He was big enough to pay the price.

"Suspect was black and male" is a very broad description that subjects too many to suspicion. the fact that he was wearing a hooded sweatshirt makes the description even more vague. But of course your type of thinking makes "anyone who is black" a suspect.

Your race care use is noted. Your point is invalid.

And that's the way general descriptions work. Take it up with the criminal, who didn't let people get a better look at him.

BTW, what ever happened with those breakins? Was the burglar ever caught? Or did the breakins mysteriously stop about the time Martin got his ass shot?

You keep referring to Zimmerman "screamimg" The forensic experts who testified at the trial concluded that it was Martin not Zimmerman who was "screaming".

LOL!!! The eyewitness said otherwise.

As far as your "manhood", I didn't challenge it, so no need to defend it with me....you're just a stranger on a message bosrd.

My point stands. The idea that not being able to fight well, means that you don't have the right to defend yourself, which is what you were implying, is indefensible.


It is the type of pathetic rationalization that someone comes up with when they know they are in the wrong but can't admit it, even to themselves.


Tell me, what would happen to you if you told your friends that you thought that Martin was a Good Shot?

No one has a "point" here, this is an discussion forum and people have opinions, in case you forgot that.

. If a white 17 year old kid had been strolling in the neighborhood and was "looking at houses" and there had happened to have been a recent burglary by another white person, you're saying that just the fact that he was "white" would have made him a suspect?

Happens all the time.

I never said that not being able to defend oneself without a gun means that someone shouldn't be able to defend themselves.

You implied it.

YOU got your feelings hurt because you are defensive about your "manhood", and that's YOUR problem, not mine.

Standard lib tactic. Attack and then be snide about your target being "Defensive".

Effective. But very dishonest.

What I have said from the beginning is that if Zimmerman had followed the advice of dispatch, the need to even use a gun would have been unneccesary.

Irrelevant. At the point the gun was used, Martin was sitting on Zimmerman's chest beating him "MMA style".

Why would I ask anyone if Martin was a good shot? He did not have a gun.

Law enforcement slang. Means it was a legitimate use of deadly force.

What would happen to you if you told your friends that you believed that Zimmerman was right to shoot Martin?

So here is a question for you... the gun owners that I know would not be proud of themselves for killing someone, nor would they seek to profit from it.


Why would Zimmerman seek to sell the weapon that he used for over 100k?

He's not a bounty hunter......or does he and those like you who think like him, have that kind of mentality?

Probably because he needs the money, because asshole libs have ruined his life.

 

[katsteve2012]

He followed Martin because he fit the description of being "black and male".

He ended up shooting him because he was likely looking for a reason to.

What ended up as a killing should have ended with Zimmerman letting the police do their job.

Martin was 17 years old. How many 17 year olds have the emotional maturity to walk away from a fight?

You have the same mentality of most gun toting vigilantes who want to be cowboys, but probably could not defend themselves without a weapon.

If you had your way the streets would be full of your kind. Following, confronting and gunning down "people......even kids,,,,,because "they fit a general description".

1. That was the description of the suspect. Sorry if reality offends you. NOt.

2. When someone is sitting on your chest beating you "MMA style" while you scream for help, the"reason" to shoot him is readily apparent.

3. Lots of 17 year olds have the maturity to walk away from a fight. Lots of 17 year olds don't have the sadism to sit on some one's chest and beat them while they scream.

4. Your attempt to challenge my manhood is telling. NOt having the ability to defend yourself with out a gun, doesn't mean you have to let people sit on your chest and beat you while you scream. Once again you are siding with the thug.

5. "kids" my ass. He was big enough to do the crime. He was big enough to pay the price.

"Suspect was black and male" is a very broad description that subjects too many to suspicion. the fact that he was wearing a hooded sweatshirt makes the description even more vague. But of course your type of thinking makes "anyone who is black" a suspect.

Your race care use is noted. Your point is invalid.

And that's the way general descriptions work. Take it up with the criminal, who didn't let people get a better look at him.

BTW, what ever happened with those breakins? Was the burglar ever caught? Or did the breakins mysteriously stop about the time Martin got his ass shot?

You keep referring to Zimmerman "screamimg" The forensic experts who testified at the trial concluded that it was Martin not Zimmerman who was "screaming".

LOL!!! The eyewitness said otherwise.

As far as your "manhood", I didn't challenge it, so no need to defend it with me....you're just a stranger on a message bosrd.

My point stands. The idea that not being able to fight well, means that you don't have the right to defend yourself, which is what you were implying, is indefensible.


It is the type of pathetic rationalization that someone comes up with when they know they are in the wrong but can't admit it, even to themselves.


Tell me, what would happen to you if you told your friends that you thought that Martin was a Good Shot?

No one has a "point" here, this is an discussion forum and people have opinions, in case you forgot that.

. If a white 17 year old kid had been strolling in the neighborhood and was "looking at houses" and there had happened to have been a recent burglary by another white person, you're saying that just the fact that he was "white" would have made him a suspect?

Happens all the time.

I never said that not being able to defend oneself without a gun means that someone shouldn't be able to defend themselves.

You implied it.

YOU got your feelings hurt because you are defensive about your "manhood", and that's YOUR problem, not mine.

Standard lib tactic. Attack and then be snide about your target being "Defensive".

Effective. But very dishonest.

What I have said from the beginning is that if Zimmerman had followed the advice of dispatch, the need to even use a gun would have been unneccesary.

Irrelevant. At the point the gun was used, Martin was sitting on Zimmerman's chest beating him "MMA style".

Why would I ask anyone if Martin was a good shot? He did not have a gun.

Law enforcement slang. Means it was a legitimate use of deadly force.

What would happen to you if you told your friends that you believed that Zimmerman was right to shoot Martin?

So here is a question for you... the gun owners that I know would not be proud of themselves for killing someone, nor would they seek to profit from it.


Why would Zimmerman seek to sell the weapon that he used for over 100k?

He's not a bounty hunter......or does he and those like you who think like him, have that kind of mentality?

Probably because he needs the money, because asshole libs have ruined his life.

Your feelings got hurt because you are defensive about your own manhood.

Are you really that insecure?
Zimmerman has ruined his own life. He is an abuser of women as well as a thug.

Futhermore you have no idea if I am a so called "lib" or not.

So is the witress in this link the same one who claimed that Martin was beating Zimmerman "MMA style"?...as I recall, he was not 100% certain about exactly what he saw.

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSBRE95Q0EE20130628

 

[Correll]

1. That was the description of the suspect. Sorry if reality offends you. NOt.

2. When someone is sitting on your chest beating you "MMA style" while you scream for help, the"reason" to shoot him is readily apparent.

3. Lots of 17 year olds have the maturity to walk away from a fight. Lots of 17 year olds don't have the sadism to sit on some one's chest and beat them while they scream.

4. Your attempt to challenge my manhood is telling. NOt having the ability to defend yourself with out a gun, doesn't mean you have to let people sit on your chest and beat you while you scream. Once again you are siding with the thug.

5. "kids" my ass. He was big enough to do the crime. He was big enough to pay the price.

"Suspect was black and male" is a very broad description that subjects too many to suspicion. the fact that he was wearing a hooded sweatshirt makes the description even more vague. But of course your type of thinking makes "anyone who is black" a suspect.

Your race care use is noted. Your point is invalid.

And that's the way general descriptions work. Take it up with the criminal, who didn't let people get a better look at him.

BTW, what ever happened with those breakins? Was the burglar ever caught? Or did the breakins mysteriously stop about the time Martin got his ass shot?

You keep referring to Zimmerman "screamimg" The forensic experts who testified at the trial concluded that it was Martin not Zimmerman who was "screaming".

LOL!!! The eyewitness said otherwise.

As far as your "manhood", I didn't challenge it, so no need to defend it with me....you're just a stranger on a message bosrd.

My point stands. The idea that not being able to fight well, means that you don't have the right to defend yourself, which is what you were implying, is indefensible.


It is the type of pathetic rationalization that someone comes up with when they know they are in the wrong but can't admit it, even to themselves.


Tell me, what would happen to you if you told your friends that you thought that Martin was a Good Shot?

No one has a "point" here, this is an discussion forum and people have opinions, in case you forgot that.

. If a white 17 year old kid had been strolling in the neighborhood and was "looking at houses" and there had happened to have been a recent burglary by another white person, you're saying that just the fact that he was "white" would have made him a suspect?

Happens all the time.

I never said that not being able to defend oneself without a gun means that someone shouldn't be able to defend themselves.

You implied it.

YOU got your feelings hurt because you are defensive about your "manhood", and that's YOUR problem, not mine.

Standard lib tactic. Attack and then be snide about your target being "Defensive".

Effective. But very dishonest.

What I have said from the beginning is that if Zimmerman had followed the advice of dispatch, the need to even use a gun would have been unneccesary.

Irrelevant. At the point the gun was used, Martin was sitting on Zimmerman's chest beating him "MMA style".

Why would I ask anyone if Martin was a good shot? He did not have a gun.

Law enforcement slang. Means it was a legitimate use of deadly force.

What would happen to you if you told your friends that you believed that Zimmerman was right to shoot Martin?

So here is a question for you... the gun owners that I know would not be proud of themselves for killing someone, nor would they seek to profit from it.


Why would Zimmerman seek to sell the weapon that he used for over 100k?

He's not a bounty hunter......or does he and those like you who think like him, have that kind of mentality?

Probably because he needs the money, because asshole libs have ruined his life.

Your feelings got hurt because you are defensive about your own manhood.

Are you really that insecure?
Zimmerman has ruined his own life. He is an abuser of women as well as a thug.

Futhermore you have no idea if I am a so called "lib" or not.

So is the witress in this link the same one who claimed that Martin was beating Zimmerman "MMA style"?...as I recall, he was not 100% certain about exactly what he saw.

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSBRE95Q0EE20130628

Totally secure, just calling your on your crap.

Zimmerman has been targeted by lefties who reflexively side with criminals. He did nothing morally or legally wrong.

You are a lefty.

He testified to what he saw. Asshole lawyers tried to gin up some doubt. They failed. He saw and heard Martin sitting on top of Zimmerman beating him MMA style, while Zimmerman screamed for help.

 

[katsteve2012]

"Suspect was black and male" is a very broad description that subjects too many to suspicion. the fact that he was wearing a hooded sweatshirt makes the description even more vague. But of course your type of thinking makes "anyone who is black" a suspect.

Your race care use is noted. Your point is invalid.

And that's the way general descriptions work. Take it up with the criminal, who didn't let people get a better look at him.

BTW, what ever happened with those breakins? Was the burglar ever caught? Or did the breakins mysteriously stop about the time Martin got his ass shot?

You keep referring to Zimmerman "screamimg" The forensic experts who testified at the trial concluded that it was Martin not Zimmerman who was "screaming".

LOL!!! The eyewitness said otherwise.

As far as your "manhood", I didn't challenge it, so no need to defend it with me....you're just a stranger on a message bosrd.

My point stands. The idea that not being able to fight well, means that you don't have the right to defend yourself, which is what you were implying, is indefensible.


It is the type of pathetic rationalization that someone comes up with when they know they are in the wrong but can't admit it, even to themselves.


Tell me, what would happen to you if you told your friends that you thought that Martin was a Good Shot?

No one has a "point" here, this is an discussion forum and people have opinions, in case you forgot that.

. If a white 17 year old kid had been strolling in the neighborhood and was "looking at houses" and there had happened to have been a recent burglary by another white person, you're saying that just the fact that he was "white" would have made him a suspect?

Happens all the time.

I never said that not being able to defend oneself without a gun means that someone shouldn't be able to defend themselves.

You implied it.

YOU got your feelings hurt because you are defensive about your "manhood", and that's YOUR problem, not mine.

Standard lib tactic. Attack and then be snide about your target being "Defensive".

Effective. But very dishonest.

What I have said from the beginning is that if Zimmerman had followed the advice of dispatch, the need to even use a gun would have been unneccesary.

Irrelevant. At the point the gun was used, Martin was sitting on Zimmerman's chest beating him "MMA style".

Why would I ask anyone if Martin was a good shot? He did not have a gun.

Law enforcement slang. Means it was a legitimate use of deadly force.

What would happen to you if you told your friends that you believed that Zimmerman was right to shoot Martin?

So here is a question for you... the gun owners that I know would not be proud of themselves for killing someone, nor would they seek to profit from it.


Why would Zimmerman seek to sell the weapon that he used for over 100k?

He's not a bounty hunter......or does he and those like you who think like him, have that kind of mentality?

Probably because he needs the money, because asshole libs have ruined his life.

Your feelings got hurt because you are defensive about your own manhood.

Are you really that insecure?
Zimmerman has ruined his own life. He is an abuser of women as well as a thug.

Futhermore you have no idea if I am a so called "lib" or not.

So is the witress in this link the same one who claimed that Martin was beating Zimmerman "MMA style"?...as I recall, he was not 100% certain about exactly what he saw.

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSBRE95Q0EE20130628

Totally secure, just calling your on your crap.

Zimmerman has been targeted by lefties who reflexively side with criminals. He did nothing morally or legally wrong.

You are a lefty.

He testified to what he saw. Asshole lawyers tried to gin up some doubt. They failed. He saw and heard Martin sitting on top of Zimmerman beating him MMA style, while Zimmerman screamed for help.

"Asshole lawyers" on the prosecution and the defense side are obligated to present their cases...that's why it is called a "trial".....SMGDH.

The following is copied text from the witness statement...NO MENTION of Zimmerman screaming for help.


Fri Jun 28, 2013 | 8:46 PM EDT
Eyewitness describes Trayvon Martin's fatal struggle to Florida jury
Jun 27, 2013 | 01:28
Zimmerman's defense tries to undermine witness
By Barbara Liston | SANFORD, FLORIDA
(Reuters) - A witness in the murder trial of neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman testified on Friday that he saw Trayvon Martin on top of Zimmerman during a struggle that led to the unarmed black teenager's shooting death in a central Florida gated community last year.

But Jonathan Good, a former resident at the townhouse complex, told the jury in Seminole County criminal court that he never saw Martin slam Zimmerman's head into the concrete sidewalk, undermining a key element in Zimmerman's defense.

"I did not see that," Good told the court under questioning by a state prosecutor about the racially charged case that triggered civil rights protests and debates about the treatment of black Americans in the U.S. justice system.

Police did not arrest Zimmerman, who is white and Hispanic, for 44 days. Zimmerman does not deny killing Martin but he says he did so in self-defense after he was attacked and Martin smashed his head repeatedly into the sidewalk.

Good was the fourth former neighbor who partially witnessed the death of Martin on February 26, 2012 to testify in the trial. Each has given a slightly different account, but Good is the first to state that Martin was on top during the struggle.

Zimmerman, 29, was a neighborhood watch volunteer in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community in Sanford at the time of the killing. He has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder and could face life imprisonment if convicted.

Martin, 17, was a student at a Miami-area high school and a guest of one of the homeowners. He was returning after buying snacks at a convenience store when he was shot in the chest during a confrontation with Zimmerman.

Several former Twin Lakes residents have testified for the prosecution that they heard and caught glimpses of the fight between Zimmerman and Martin, and heard cries for help, on a dark and rainy night near a walkway between units in the community of townhomes.

Good said he was watching TV with his wife when he heard a noise outside and saw two people wrestling on the ground, with "a lighter-skinned man" on the bottom. He identified the other man, Martin, by his race and clothing.

Good initially told police the person on top was pummeling the other in mixed martial arts style, but backed off that account, later saying the person on top was straddling the other man, but his arms might have been holding the other down rather than punching.

I'm not a lefty as you claim....I'm just not agreeing with your misinformed, selective, right wing rhetoric.

 

[Correll]

Your race care use is noted. Your point is invalid.

And that's the way general descriptions work. Take it up with the criminal, who didn't let people get a better look at him.

BTW, what ever happened with those breakins? Was the burglar ever caught? Or did the breakins mysteriously stop about the time Martin got his ass shot?


LOL!!! The eyewitness said otherwise.


My point stands. The idea that not being able to fight well, means that you don't have the right to defend yourself, which is what you were implying, is indefensible.


It is the type of pathetic rationalization that someone comes up with when they know they are in the wrong but can't admit it, even to themselves.


Tell me, what would happen to you if you told your friends that you thought that Martin was a Good Shot?

No one has a "point" here, this is an discussion forum and people have opinions, in case you forgot that.

. If a white 17 year old kid had been strolling in the neighborhood and was "looking at houses" and there had happened to have been a recent burglary by another white person, you're saying that just the fact that he was "white" would have made him a suspect?

Happens all the time.

I never said that not being able to defend oneself without a gun means that someone shouldn't be able to defend themselves.

You implied it.

YOU got your feelings hurt because you are defensive about your "manhood", and that's YOUR problem, not mine.

Standard lib tactic. Attack and then be snide about your target being "Defensive".

Effective. But very dishonest.

What I have said from the beginning is that if Zimmerman had followed the advice of dispatch, the need to even use a gun would have been unneccesary.

Irrelevant. At the point the gun was used, Martin was sitting on Zimmerman's chest beating him "MMA style".

Why would I ask anyone if Martin was a good shot? He did not have a gun.

Law enforcement slang. Means it was a legitimate use of deadly force.

What would happen to you if you told your friends that you believed that Zimmerman was right to shoot Martin?

So here is a question for you... the gun owners that I know would not be proud of themselves for killing someone, nor would they seek to profit from it.


Why would Zimmerman seek to sell the weapon that he used for over 100k?

He's not a bounty hunter......or does he and those like you who think like him, have that kind of mentality?

Probably because he needs the money, because asshole libs have ruined his life.

Your feelings got hurt because you are defensive about your own manhood.

Are you really that insecure?
Zimmerman has ruined his own life. He is an abuser of women as well as a thug.

Futhermore you have no idea if I am a so called "lib" or not.

So is the witress in this link the same one who claimed that Martin was beating Zimmerman "MMA style"?...as I recall, he was not 100% certain about exactly what he saw.

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSBRE95Q0EE20130628

Totally secure, just calling your on your crap.

Zimmerman has been targeted by lefties who reflexively side with criminals. He did nothing morally or legally wrong.

You are a lefty.

He testified to what he saw. Asshole lawyers tried to gin up some doubt. They failed. He saw and heard Martin sitting on top of Zimmerman beating him MMA style, while Zimmerman screamed for help.

"Asshole lawyers" on the prosecution and the defense side are obligated to present their cases...that's why it is called a "trial".....SMGDH.

The following is copied text from the witness statement...NO MENTION of Zimmerman screaming for help.


Fri Jun 28, 2013 | 8:46 PM EDT
Eyewitness describes Trayvon Martin's fatal struggle to Florida jury
Jun 27, 2013 | 01:28
Zimmerman's defense tries to undermine witness
By Barbara Liston | SANFORD, FLORIDA
(Reuters) - A witness in the murder trial of neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman testified on Friday that he saw Trayvon Martin on top of Zimmerman during a struggle that led to the unarmed black teenager's shooting death in a central Florida gated community last year.

But Jonathan Good, a former resident at the townhouse complex, told the jury in Seminole County criminal court that he never saw Martin slam Zimmerman's head into the concrete sidewalk, undermining a key element in Zimmerman's defense.

"I did not see that," Good told the court under questioning by a state prosecutor about the racially charged case that triggered civil rights protests and debates about the treatment of black Americans in the U.S. justice system.

Police did not arrest Zimmerman, who is white and Hispanic, for 44 days. Zimmerman does not deny killing Martin but he says he did so in self-defense after he was attacked and Martin smashed his head repeatedly into the sidewalk.

Good was the fourth former neighbor who partially witnessed the death of Martin on February 26, 2012 to testify in the trial. Each has given a slightly different account, but Good is the first to state that Martin was on top during the struggle.

Zimmerman, 29, was a neighborhood watch volunteer in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community in Sanford at the time of the killing. He has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder and could face life imprisonment if convicted.

Martin, 17, was a student at a Miami-area high school and a guest of one of the homeowners. He was returning after buying snacks at a convenience store when he was shot in the chest during a confrontation with Zimmerman.

Several former Twin Lakes residents have testified for the prosecution that they heard and caught glimpses of the fight between Zimmerman and Martin, and heard cries for help, on a dark and rainy night near a walkway between units in the community of townhomes.

Good said he was watching TV with his wife when he heard a noise outside and saw two people wrestling on the ground, with "a lighter-skinned man" on the bottom. He identified the other man, Martin, by his race and clothing.

Good initially told police the person on top was pummeling the other in mixed martial arts style, but backed off that account, later saying the person on top was straddling the other man, but his arms might have been holding the other down rather than punching.

I'm not a lefty as you claim....I'm just not agreeing with your misinformed, selective, right wing rhetoric.

The eyewitness was a good witness, very honest. He was asked clear questions about what he did and did not see.

Your article was written to focus on the fact that he did not see part of Zimmerman's story. This is true.


Your article left out the stuff that supported Zimmerman's story, because the press are a bunch of lefty jackals worthy of nothing but contempt.


Here is a partial transcript from the trial that includes the portion I was referring to.


ZIMMERMAN TRIAL BLOCKBUSTER — TRANSCRIPT -- Eyewitness Good: Black guy in black hoodie on top punching down Mixed Martial Arts style


"O’Mara: Just to clarify what was actually talked about with Chris Serino, Investigator Serino, during this, we’re going to call it for the moment the Ground-and-Pound conversation. We have a rule called completeness, so what I want to do is put it in context for you, ask you if this is what you said to Chris Serino. OK?

“Yeah I pretty much heard somebody yelling outside. I wasn’t sure if it was, you know, a fight or something going wrong. So I opened my blinds and I see kind of like a person out there. I didn’t know if it was a dog attack or something. So I open my door. It was a black man with a black hoodie on top of the other, either a white guy or now I found out I think it was a Hispanic guy with a red sweatshirt on the ground yelling out help! And I tried to tell them, get out of here, you know, stop or whatever, and then one guy on top in the black hoodie was pretty much just throwing down blows on the guy kind of MMA-style.”

Is that the context in which that happened?

Good: Yes.
"


NOte "yelling out for help".


BTW, you never answered my question, "What would happen if you told your friends that you thought Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin"?

 

[katsteve2012]

No one has a "point" here, this is an discussion forum and people have opinions, in case you forgot that.

. If a white 17 year old kid had been strolling in the neighborhood and was "looking at houses" and there had happened to have been a recent burglary by another white person, you're saying that just the fact that he was "white" would have made him a suspect?

Happens all the time.

I never said that not being able to defend oneself without a gun means that someone shouldn't be able to defend themselves.

You implied it.

YOU got your feelings hurt because you are defensive about your "manhood", and that's YOUR problem, not mine.

Standard lib tactic. Attack and then be snide about your target being "Defensive".

Effective. But very dishonest.

What I have said from the beginning is that if Zimmerman had followed the advice of dispatch, the need to even use a gun would have been unneccesary.

Irrelevant. At the point the gun was used, Martin was sitting on Zimmerman's chest beating him "MMA style".

Why would I ask anyone if Martin was a good shot? He did not have a gun.

Law enforcement slang. Means it was a legitimate use of deadly force.

What would happen to you if you told your friends that you believed that Zimmerman was right to shoot Martin?

So here is a question for you... the gun owners that I know would not be proud of themselves for killing someone, nor would they seek to profit from it.


Why would Zimmerman seek to sell the weapon that he used for over 100k?

He's not a bounty hunter......or does he and those like you who think like him, have that kind of mentality?

Probably because he needs the money, because asshole libs have ruined his life.

Your feelings got hurt because you are defensive about your own manhood.

Are you really that insecure?
Zimmerman has ruined his own life. He is an abuser of women as well as a thug.

Futhermore you have no idea if I am a so called "lib" or not.

So is the witress in this link the same one who claimed that Martin was beating Zimmerman "MMA style"?...as I recall, he was not 100% certain about exactly what he saw.

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSBRE95Q0EE20130628

Totally secure, just calling your on your crap.

Zimmerman has been targeted by lefties who reflexively side with criminals. He did nothing morally or legally wrong.

You are a lefty.

He testified to what he saw. Asshole lawyers tried to gin up some doubt. They failed. He saw and heard Martin sitting on top of Zimmerman beating him MMA style, while Zimmerman screamed for help.

"Asshole lawyers" on the prosecution and the defense side are obligated to present their cases...that's why it is called a "trial".....SMGDH.

The following is copied text from the witness statement...NO MENTION of Zimmerman screaming for help.


Fri Jun 28, 2013 | 8:46 PM EDT
Eyewitness describes Trayvon Martin's fatal struggle to Florida jury
Jun 27, 2013 | 01:28
Zimmerman's defense tries to undermine witness
By Barbara Liston | SANFORD, FLORIDA
(Reuters) - A witness in the murder trial of neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman testified on Friday that he saw Trayvon Martin on top of Zimmerman during a struggle that led to the unarmed black teenager's shooting death in a central Florida gated community last year.

But Jonathan Good, a former resident at the townhouse complex, told the jury in Seminole County criminal court that he never saw Martin slam Zimmerman's head into the concrete sidewalk, undermining a key element in Zimmerman's defense.

"I did not see that," Good told the court under questioning by a state prosecutor about the racially charged case that triggered civil rights protests and debates about the treatment of black Americans in the U.S. justice system.

Police did not arrest Zimmerman, who is white and Hispanic, for 44 days. Zimmerman does not deny killing Martin but he says he did so in self-defense after he was attacked and Martin smashed his head repeatedly into the sidewalk.

Good was the fourth former neighbor who partially witnessed the death of Martin on February 26, 2012 to testify in the trial. Each has given a slightly different account, but Good is the first to state that Martin was on top during the struggle.

Zimmerman, 29, was a neighborhood watch volunteer in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community in Sanford at the time of the killing. He has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder and could face life imprisonment if convicted.

Martin, 17, was a student at a Miami-area high school and a guest of one of the homeowners. He was returning after buying snacks at a convenience store when he was shot in the chest during a confrontation with Zimmerman.

Several former Twin Lakes residents have testified for the prosecution that they heard and caught glimpses of the fight between Zimmerman and Martin, and heard cries for help, on a dark and rainy night near a walkway between units in the community of townhomes.

Good said he was watching TV with his wife when he heard a noise outside and saw two people wrestling on the ground, with "a lighter-skinned man" on the bottom. He identified the other man, Martin, by his race and clothing.

Good initially told police the person on top was pummeling the other in mixed martial arts style, but backed off that account, later saying the person on top was straddling the other man, but his arms might have been holding the other down rather than punching.

I'm not a lefty as you claim....I'm just not agreeing with your misinformed, selective, right wing rhetoric.

The eyewitness was a good witness, very honest. He was asked clear questions about what he did and did not see.

Your article was written to focus on the fact that he did not see part of Zimmerman's story. This is true.


Your article left out the stuff that supported Zimmerman's story, because the press are a bunch of lefty jackals worthy of nothing but contempt.


Here is a partial transcript from the trial that includes the portion I was referring to.


ZIMMERMAN TRIAL BLOCKBUSTER — TRANSCRIPT -- Eyewitness Good: Black guy in black hoodie on top punching down Mixed Martial Arts style


"O’Mara: Just to clarify what was actually talked about with Chris Serino, Investigator Serino, during this, we’re going to call it for the moment the Ground-and-Pound conversation. We have a rule called completeness, so what I want to do is put it in context for you, ask you if this is what you said to Chris Serino. OK?

“Yeah I pretty much heard somebody yelling outside. I wasn’t sure if it was, you know, a fight or something going wrong. So I opened my blinds and I see kind of like a person out there. I didn’t know if it was a dog attack or something. So I open my door. It was a black man with a black hoodie on top of the other, either a white guy or now I found out I think it was a Hispanic guy with a red sweatshirt on the ground yelling out help! And I tried to tell them, get out of here, you know, stop or whatever, and then one guy on top in the black hoodie was pretty much just throwing down blows on the guy kind of MMA-style.”

Is that the context in which that happened?

Good: Yes.
"


NOte "yelling out for help".


BTW, you never answered my question, "What would happen if you told your friends that you thought Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin"?

The following is in the same link that you sent, so what is your point.

Good: It looked like that position was a Ground-and-Pound type of position, but I couldn’t tell 100% that there were actually fists hitting faces.

O’Mara: But you did see [reading] “the guy in the top in the black hoodie pretty much just throwing down blows on the guy kind of MMA-style.”

Good: Meaning arm motions going down on the person on the bottom. Correct.

O’Mara: You’re’ not going to tell the jury here today that you saw fists hit flesh or face if you didn’t actually see it, right?

Good: I wouldn’t tell them that anyway, because i didn’t actually see ithe.

As for your "question", If I told anyone that I know that Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin their response would likely be:

"What was he doing following him when he was told that he didn't need to do that, because the police were on their way"

What's your point?

 

[Correll]

Happens all the time.

You implied it.

Standard lib tactic. Attack and then be snide about your target being "Defensive".

Effective. But very dishonest.



Irrelevant. At the point the gun was used, Martin was sitting on Zimmerman's chest beating him "MMA style".

Law enforcement slang. Means it was a legitimate use of deadly force.

What would happen to you if you told your friends that you believed that Zimmerman was right to shoot Martin?


Probably because he needs the money, because asshole libs have ruined his life.

Your feelings got hurt because you are defensive about your own manhood.

Are you really that insecure?
Zimmerman has ruined his own life. He is an abuser of women as well as a thug.

Futhermore you have no idea if I am a so called "lib" or not.

So is the witress in this link the same one who claimed that Martin was beating Zimmerman "MMA style"?...as I recall, he was not 100% certain about exactly what he saw.

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSBRE95Q0EE20130628

Totally secure, just calling your on your crap.

Zimmerman has been targeted by lefties who reflexively side with criminals. He did nothing morally or legally wrong.

You are a lefty.

He testified to what he saw. Asshole lawyers tried to gin up some doubt. They failed. He saw and heard Martin sitting on top of Zimmerman beating him MMA style, while Zimmerman screamed for help.

"Asshole lawyers" on the prosecution and the defense side are obligated to present their cases...that's why it is called a "trial".....SMGDH.

The following is copied text from the witness statement...NO MENTION of Zimmerman screaming for help.


Fri Jun 28, 2013 | 8:46 PM EDT
Eyewitness describes Trayvon Martin's fatal struggle to Florida jury
Jun 27, 2013 | 01:28
Zimmerman's defense tries to undermine witness
By Barbara Liston | SANFORD, FLORIDA
(Reuters) - A witness in the murder trial of neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman testified on Friday that he saw Trayvon Martin on top of Zimmerman during a struggle that led to the unarmed black teenager's shooting death in a central Florida gated community last year.

But Jonathan Good, a former resident at the townhouse complex, told the jury in Seminole County criminal court that he never saw Martin slam Zimmerman's head into the concrete sidewalk, undermining a key element in Zimmerman's defense.

"I did not see that," Good told the court under questioning by a state prosecutor about the racially charged case that triggered civil rights protests and debates about the treatment of black Americans in the U.S. justice system.

Police did not arrest Zimmerman, who is white and Hispanic, for 44 days. Zimmerman does not deny killing Martin but he says he did so in self-defense after he was attacked and Martin smashed his head repeatedly into the sidewalk.

Good was the fourth former neighbor who partially witnessed the death of Martin on February 26, 2012 to testify in the trial. Each has given a slightly different account, but Good is the first to state that Martin was on top during the struggle.

Zimmerman, 29, was a neighborhood watch volunteer in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community in Sanford at the time of the killing. He has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder and could face life imprisonment if convicted.

Martin, 17, was a student at a Miami-area high school and a guest of one of the homeowners. He was returning after buying snacks at a convenience store when he was shot in the chest during a confrontation with Zimmerman.

Several former Twin Lakes residents have testified for the prosecution that they heard and caught glimpses of the fight between Zimmerman and Martin, and heard cries for help, on a dark and rainy night near a walkway between units in the community of townhomes.

Good said he was watching TV with his wife when he heard a noise outside and saw two people wrestling on the ground, with "a lighter-skinned man" on the bottom. He identified the other man, Martin, by his race and clothing.

Good initially told police the person on top was pummeling the other in mixed martial arts style, but backed off that account, later saying the person on top was straddling the other man, but his arms might have been holding the other down rather than punching.

I'm not a lefty as you claim....I'm just not agreeing with your misinformed, selective, right wing rhetoric.

The eyewitness was a good witness, very honest. He was asked clear questions about what he did and did not see.

Your article was written to focus on the fact that he did not see part of Zimmerman's story. This is true.


Your article left out the stuff that supported Zimmerman's story, because the press are a bunch of lefty jackals worthy of nothing but contempt.


Here is a partial transcript from the trial that includes the portion I was referring to.


ZIMMERMAN TRIAL BLOCKBUSTER — TRANSCRIPT -- Eyewitness Good: Black guy in black hoodie on top punching down Mixed Martial Arts style


"O’Mara: Just to clarify what was actually talked about with Chris Serino, Investigator Serino, during this, we’re going to call it for the moment the Ground-and-Pound conversation. We have a rule called completeness, so what I want to do is put it in context for you, ask you if this is what you said to Chris Serino. OK?

“Yeah I pretty much heard somebody yelling outside. I wasn’t sure if it was, you know, a fight or something going wrong. So I opened my blinds and I see kind of like a person out there. I didn’t know if it was a dog attack or something. So I open my door. It was a black man with a black hoodie on top of the other, either a white guy or now I found out I think it was a Hispanic guy with a red sweatshirt on the ground yelling out help! And I tried to tell them, get out of here, you know, stop or whatever, and then one guy on top in the black hoodie was pretty much just throwing down blows on the guy kind of MMA-style.”

Is that the context in which that happened?

Good: Yes.
"


NOte "yelling out for help".


BTW, you never answered my question, "What would happen if you told your friends that you thought Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin"?

The following is in the same link that you sent, so what is your point.

Good: It looked like that position was a Ground-and-Pound type of position, but I couldn’t tell 100% that there were actually fists hitting faces.

O’Mara: But you did see [reading] “the guy in the top in the black hoodie pretty much just throwing down blows on the guy kind of MMA-style.”

Good: Meaning arm motions going down on the person on the bottom. Correct.

O’Mara: You’re’ not going to tell the jury here today that you saw fists hit flesh or face if you didn’t actually see it, right?

Good: I wouldn’t tell them that anyway, because i didn’t actually see ithe.

1. My point that Zimmerman was witnessed screaming for help stands.

2. The above is the asshole lawyer trying to create reasonable doubt, where there isn't any. The blows were raining down on Zimmerman. He may have been protecting his face with his arms. THe eyewitness could not actually see the blows strike Zimmerman. So what?

Do you really think he was NOT actually striking Zimmerman?

As for your "question", If I told anyone that I know that Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin their response would likely be:

"What was he doing following him when he was told that he didn't need to do that, because the police were on their way"

What's your point?

My point is that you would be ostracized if you broke ranks. That you are emotionally invested in your position, which is why you keep lying.

You CAN'T admit the obvious realities of the case, like the man being sat on screaming for help was actually being hit by the blows being rained down on him.

 

[katsteve2012]

Your feelings got hurt because you are defensive about your own manhood.

Are you really that insecure?
Zimmerman has ruined his own life. He is an abuser of women as well as a thug.

Futhermore you have no idea if I am a so called "lib" or not.

So is the witress in this link the same one who claimed that Martin was beating Zimmerman "MMA style"?...as I recall, he was not 100% certain about exactly what he saw.

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSBRE95Q0EE20130628

Totally secure, just calling your on your crap.

Zimmerman has been targeted by lefties who reflexively side with criminals. He did nothing morally or legally wrong.

You are a lefty.

He testified to what he saw. Asshole lawyers tried to gin up some doubt. They failed. He saw and heard Martin sitting on top of Zimmerman beating him MMA style, while Zimmerman screamed for help.

"Asshole lawyers" on the prosecution and the defense side are obligated to present their cases...that's why it is called a "trial".....SMGDH.

The following is copied text from the witness statement...NO MENTION of Zimmerman screaming for help.


Fri Jun 28, 2013 | 8:46 PM EDT
Eyewitness describes Trayvon Martin's fatal struggle to Florida jury
Jun 27, 2013 | 01:28
Zimmerman's defense tries to undermine witness
By Barbara Liston | SANFORD, FLORIDA
(Reuters) - A witness in the murder trial of neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman testified on Friday that he saw Trayvon Martin on top of Zimmerman during a struggle that led to the unarmed black teenager's shooting death in a central Florida gated community last year.

But Jonathan Good, a former resident at the townhouse complex, told the jury in Seminole County criminal court that he never saw Martin slam Zimmerman's head into the concrete sidewalk, undermining a key element in Zimmerman's defense.

"I did not see that," Good told the court under questioning by a state prosecutor about the racially charged case that triggered civil rights protests and debates about the treatment of black Americans in the U.S. justice system.

Police did not arrest Zimmerman, who is white and Hispanic, for 44 days. Zimmerman does not deny killing Martin but he says he did so in self-defense after he was attacked and Martin smashed his head repeatedly into the sidewalk.

Good was the fourth former neighbor who partially witnessed the death of Martin on February 26, 2012 to testify in the trial. Each has given a slightly different account, but Good is the first to state that Martin was on top during the struggle.

Zimmerman, 29, was a neighborhood watch volunteer in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community in Sanford at the time of the killing. He has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder and could face life imprisonment if convicted.

Martin, 17, was a student at a Miami-area high school and a guest of one of the homeowners. He was returning after buying snacks at a convenience store when he was shot in the chest during a confrontation with Zimmerman.

Several former Twin Lakes residents have testified for the prosecution that they heard and caught glimpses of the fight between Zimmerman and Martin, and heard cries for help, on a dark and rainy night near a walkway between units in the community of townhomes.

Good said he was watching TV with his wife when he heard a noise outside and saw two people wrestling on the ground, with "a lighter-skinned man" on the bottom. He identified the other man, Martin, by his race and clothing.

Good initially told police the person on top was pummeling the other in mixed martial arts style, but backed off that account, later saying the person on top was straddling the other man, but his arms might have been holding the other down rather than punching.

I'm not a lefty as you claim....I'm just not agreeing with your misinformed, selective, right wing rhetoric.

The eyewitness was a good witness, very honest. He was asked clear questions about what he did and did not see.

Your article was written to focus on the fact that he did not see part of Zimmerman's story. This is true.


Your article left out the stuff that supported Zimmerman's story, because the press are a bunch of lefty jackals worthy of nothing but contempt.


Here is a partial transcript from the trial that includes the portion I was referring to.


ZIMMERMAN TRIAL BLOCKBUSTER — TRANSCRIPT -- Eyewitness Good: Black guy in black hoodie on top punching down Mixed Martial Arts style


"O’Mara: Just to clarify what was actually talked about with Chris Serino, Investigator Serino, during this, we’re going to call it for the moment the Ground-and-Pound conversation. We have a rule called completeness, so what I want to do is put it in context for you, ask you if this is what you said to Chris Serino. OK?

“Yeah I pretty much heard somebody yelling outside. I wasn’t sure if it was, you know, a fight or something going wrong. So I opened my blinds and I see kind of like a person out there. I didn’t know if it was a dog attack or something. So I open my door. It was a black man with a black hoodie on top of the other, either a white guy or now I found out I think it was a Hispanic guy with a red sweatshirt on the ground yelling out help! And I tried to tell them, get out of here, you know, stop or whatever, and then one guy on top in the black hoodie was pretty much just throwing down blows on the guy kind of MMA-style.”

Is that the context in which that happened?

Good: Yes.
"


NOte "yelling out for help".


BTW, you never answered my question, "What would happen if you told your friends that you thought Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin"?

The following is in the same link that you sent, so what is your point.

Good: It looked like that position was a Ground-and-Pound type of position, but I couldn’t tell 100% that there were actually fists hitting faces.

O’Mara: But you did see [reading] “the guy in the top in the black hoodie pretty much just throwing down blows on the guy kind of MMA-style.”

Good: Meaning arm motions going down on the person on the bottom. Correct.

O’Mara: You’re’ not going to tell the jury here today that you saw fists hit flesh or face if you didn’t actually see it, right?

Good: I wouldn’t tell them that anyway, because i didn’t actually see ithe.

1. My point that Zimmerman was witnessed screaming for help stands.

2. The above is the asshole lawyer trying to create reasonable doubt, where there isn't any. The blows were raining down on Zimmerman. He may have been protecting his face with his arms. THe eyewitness could not actually see the blows strike Zimmerman. So what?

Do you really think he was NOT actually striking Zimmerman?

As for your "question", If I told anyone that I know that Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin their response would likely be:

"What was he doing following him when he was told that he didn't need to do that, because the police were on their way"

What's your point?

My point is that you would be ostracized if you broke ranks. That you are emotionally invested in your position, which is why you keep lying.

You CAN'T admit the obvious realities of the case, like the man being sat on screaming for help was actually being hit by the blows being rained down on him.

You're full of shit. First of all if ANYONE does not "like" my opinion about something, no matter what it is, I couldnt care less.

Secondly, there are NO "ranks" for me to break, whatever you mean by that.

I showed you in your own link where the so called "witness" could not validate that "punches were making contact"...so who is lying here?

If you are old enough, you may have heard about an incident in New York years ago of a subway where a white guy was being bullied by a group of young black men....he shot ALL of them, and I AGREED with him doing so and had no problem saying that I

So now what?

 

[Correll]

Totally secure, just calling your on your crap.

Zimmerman has been targeted by lefties who reflexively side with criminals. He did nothing morally or legally wrong.

You are a lefty.

He testified to what he saw. Asshole lawyers tried to gin up some doubt. They failed. He saw and heard Martin sitting on top of Zimmerman beating him MMA style, while Zimmerman screamed for help.

"Asshole lawyers" on the prosecution and the defense side are obligated to present their cases...that's why it is called a "trial".....SMGDH.

The following is copied text from the witness statement...NO MENTION of Zimmerman screaming for help.


Fri Jun 28, 2013 | 8:46 PM EDT
Eyewitness describes Trayvon Martin's fatal struggle to Florida jury
Jun 27, 2013 | 01:28
Zimmerman's defense tries to undermine witness
By Barbara Liston | SANFORD, FLORIDA
(Reuters) - A witness in the murder trial of neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman testified on Friday that he saw Trayvon Martin on top of Zimmerman during a struggle that led to the unarmed black teenager's shooting death in a central Florida gated community last year.

But Jonathan Good, a former resident at the townhouse complex, told the jury in Seminole County criminal court that he never saw Martin slam Zimmerman's head into the concrete sidewalk, undermining a key element in Zimmerman's defense.

"I did not see that," Good told the court under questioning by a state prosecutor about the racially charged case that triggered civil rights protests and debates about the treatment of black Americans in the U.S. justice system.

Police did not arrest Zimmerman, who is white and Hispanic, for 44 days. Zimmerman does not deny killing Martin but he says he did so in self-defense after he was attacked and Martin smashed his head repeatedly into the sidewalk.

Good was the fourth former neighbor who partially witnessed the death of Martin on February 26, 2012 to testify in the trial. Each has given a slightly different account, but Good is the first to state that Martin was on top during the struggle.

Zimmerman, 29, was a neighborhood watch volunteer in the Retreat at Twin Lakes community in Sanford at the time of the killing. He has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder and could face life imprisonment if convicted.

Martin, 17, was a student at a Miami-area high school and a guest of one of the homeowners. He was returning after buying snacks at a convenience store when he was shot in the chest during a confrontation with Zimmerman.

Several former Twin Lakes residents have testified for the prosecution that they heard and caught glimpses of the fight between Zimmerman and Martin, and heard cries for help, on a dark and rainy night near a walkway between units in the community of townhomes.

Good said he was watching TV with his wife when he heard a noise outside and saw two people wrestling on the ground, with "a lighter-skinned man" on the bottom. He identified the other man, Martin, by his race and clothing.

Good initially told police the person on top was pummeling the other in mixed martial arts style, but backed off that account, later saying the person on top was straddling the other man, but his arms might have been holding the other down rather than punching.

I'm not a lefty as you claim....I'm just not agreeing with your misinformed, selective, right wing rhetoric.

The eyewitness was a good witness, very honest. He was asked clear questions about what he did and did not see.

Your article was written to focus on the fact that he did not see part of Zimmerman's story. This is true.


Your article left out the stuff that supported Zimmerman's story, because the press are a bunch of lefty jackals worthy of nothing but contempt.


Here is a partial transcript from the trial that includes the portion I was referring to.


ZIMMERMAN TRIAL BLOCKBUSTER — TRANSCRIPT -- Eyewitness Good: Black guy in black hoodie on top punching down Mixed Martial Arts style


"O’Mara: Just to clarify what was actually talked about with Chris Serino, Investigator Serino, during this, we’re going to call it for the moment the Ground-and-Pound conversation. We have a rule called completeness, so what I want to do is put it in context for you, ask you if this is what you said to Chris Serino. OK?

“Yeah I pretty much heard somebody yelling outside. I wasn’t sure if it was, you know, a fight or something going wrong. So I opened my blinds and I see kind of like a person out there. I didn’t know if it was a dog attack or something. So I open my door. It was a black man with a black hoodie on top of the other, either a white guy or now I found out I think it was a Hispanic guy with a red sweatshirt on the ground yelling out help! And I tried to tell them, get out of here, you know, stop or whatever, and then one guy on top in the black hoodie was pretty much just throwing down blows on the guy kind of MMA-style.”

Is that the context in which that happened?

Good: Yes.
"


NOte "yelling out for help".


BTW, you never answered my question, "What would happen if you told your friends that you thought Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin"?

The following is in the same link that you sent, so what is your point.

Good: It looked like that position was a Ground-and-Pound type of position, but I couldn’t tell 100% that there were actually fists hitting faces.

O’Mara: But you did see [reading] “the guy in the top in the black hoodie pretty much just throwing down blows on the guy kind of MMA-style.”

Good: Meaning arm motions going down on the person on the bottom. Correct.

O’Mara: You’re’ not going to tell the jury here today that you saw fists hit flesh or face if you didn’t actually see it, right?

Good: I wouldn’t tell them that anyway, because i didn’t actually see ithe.

1. My point that Zimmerman was witnessed screaming for help stands.

2. The above is the asshole lawyer trying to create reasonable doubt, where there isn't any. The blows were raining down on Zimmerman. He may have been protecting his face with his arms. THe eyewitness could not actually see the blows strike Zimmerman. So what?

Do you really think he was NOT actually striking Zimmerman?

As for your "question", If I told anyone that I know that Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin their response would likely be:

"What was he doing following him when he was told that he didn't need to do that, because the police were on their way"

What's your point?

My point is that you would be ostracized if you broke ranks. That you are emotionally invested in your position, which is why you keep lying.

You CAN'T admit the obvious realities of the case, like the man being sat on screaming for help was actually being hit by the blows being rained down on him.

You're full of shit. First of all if ANYONE does not "like" my opinion about something, no matter what it is, I couldnt care less.

Secondly, there are NO "ranks" for me to break, whatever you mean by that.

I showed you in your own link where the so called "witness" could not validate that "punches were making contact"...so who is lying here?

If you are old enough, you may have heard about an incident in New York years ago of a subway where a white guy was being bullied by a group of young black men....he shot ALL of them, and I AGREED with him doing so and had no problem saying that I

So now what?

1. Something is driving a lot of dishonesty from you.

2. You showed me where an asshole lawyer tried and failed to generate reasonable doubt by getting a witness to admit that, while he saw Martin raining down blows on Zimmerman, who was screaming for help, that he could not actually see the punches hitting flesh.

I guess the implication is that Martin was somehow incompetent and unable to hit a man he was sitting on.

Only a Willing DUpe would even think of buying that line of bullshit.