Zimmerman gets 250k for his $500 gun

[PredFan]

How is that justice?

It's not, it's disturbing.

I can't even imagine trying to profit off of having to take another person's life like that.

He wouldn't have to if the violent racists on the left didn't ruin his life.

There's that personal responsibility of RWNJs.......

And there is the stupidity of the left.

Still waiting.........surely you have a answer.

You didn't ask a question idiot. Are you in the right argument? Are you on planet earth even?

 

[PredFan]

 

[bodecea]

so much information from you on this, with so LITTLE TRUTH.....

trayvon was not peeking in people's windows he was being stalked by an unknown perp....

zimmerman didn't take a pounding to his face, nor beat to a pulp, he hardly had any injuries at all...

from the police files of pictures taken of zimmerman the night of the attack

GZ was not a perp; that is simply a lie. GZ was doing what any normal might that wants to protect his neighbors from a lowlife thief walking around in the rain peeping into peoples windows which is what started it all.

There is no reason for Martin to double back and attack GZ; none whatsoever. Had he just gone home nothing would have happened, but he did go aback and attack GZ and paid for it with his life.

when the hell do you liberals ever accept the responsibility and consequences of your fucking actions?

Lol, and yes, there are injuries to GZs face enough that it cleared him of charges and the witnesses corroborated GZ's story.

Do or dont, I dont care, but Martin got what he had coming and you morons should pay attention to the lesson; if you dont want to be put int he ground, dont go around attacking people.

When was Trayvon Martin ever a "lowlife thief"?

Ignorance on parade.........what ya get for just reading talking points

How about you enlighten me...when was Trayvon Martin ever a lowlife thief?

Why ...wont change anything...........

So...you got nothing. Color me surprised.

 

[bodecea]

View attachment 75853

Goes to character. Your lack thereof.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

No, Zimmerman got some justice. Not for defending himself against Martin, but for having his life destroyed for no reason.

How is that justice?

Well, in many ways actually but he can't get a job because of the racist violent leftists that will threaten anyone who hires him. Now, at least for a little while, he won't have to.

I think you meant to say he can't find a job b/c everywhere the son of a bitch goes someone ends up dead or threatened and no employer wants to deal with that.

Liar.
Who else has died?
Fuck off liar.

LOL , this place is like debating with third graders. Care to quote where I said anyone but Trayvon died?

 

[Manonthestreet]

M-DSPD Cover Up – The Curious Case Of Trayvon Martin’s Backpack With Stolen Jewelry and Burglary Tool…

 

[PredFan]

View attachment 75853

Goes to character. Your lack thereof.

All you deserve moron.

 

[bodecea]

see, i knew there would be an idiot out there that would believe the acquittal meant the jury found martin to have started the confrontation.

what they found was that the state couldn't make the case, that is all.

I don't waste time with mental midgets, have a good day.

how could you spend all day with yourself then?

For the rest of the class. Its quite clear that jury didn't think the state made the case because they didn't prove that Zimmerman started the altercation, so of course that means the jury believed Martin must have started the altercation b/c it sure didn't just spontaneously happen.

see, you're proving that you don't understand logic.

if i don't prove 'A' that doesn't mean that 'not A' is true, it just means that 'not A' is possible.

it's possible that martin started the altercation. it's possible that zimmerman did. the state failed to prove that zimmerman was the aggressor, but that doesn't mean that anyone proved the aggressor one way or another.

i will say though that we know without a doubt that zimmerman acted aggressively by following martin.

Zimmerman had the right to do so, Martin had no right to assault him.

And the only person's word we have that that is what happened is cashing in as we speak.....the other one is dead.

His word plus the forensic evidence, plus the witnesses, but aside from that you are right.

You fucking idiot.

Which brought doubt.....which is all that is needed to find someone not guilty.

Are you going to assert that all who are found not guilty by juries are INDEED innocent of the charges against them in reality?

 

[bodecea]

M-DSPD Cover Up – The Curious Case Of Trayvon Martin’s Backpack With Stolen Jewelry and Burglary Tool…

Breitbart blog......

Curious Case indeed.

 

[PredFan]

No, Zimmerman got some justice. Not for defending himself against Martin, but for having his life destroyed for no reason.

How is that justice?

Well, in many ways actually but he can't get a job because of the racist violent leftists that will threaten anyone who hires him. Now, at least for a little while, he won't have to.

I think you meant to say he can't find a job b/c everywhere the son of a bitch goes someone ends up dead or threatened and no employer wants to deal with that.

Liar.
Who else has died?
Fuck off liar.

LOL , this place is like debating with third graders. Care to quote where I said anyone but Trayvon died?

What's the matter idiot? Can't read?

 

[bodecea]

View attachment 75853

Goes to character. Your lack thereof.

All you deserve moron.

Awwwww, now your delicate feelings are hurt. You should have warned me that you were a delicate snowflake.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Breibart???? didnt read all those links did ya where police chief got fired over the whole issue and stolen goods returned,,,,ooooops

 

[Fair&Balanced]

View attachment 75852

So, if someone is acquitted, that means they are not guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt?

No, but it does mean people with a life accept the verdict and move on with said life.

That being said, I'll say this, I believe George should have been culpable at some level and wasn't for one reason. Juries are getting tired of what they see to be overzealous prosecutions and are using the only tool they have to reject such. Acquittals. Sometimes even in cases where there is SOME level of culpability, juries are saying "fuck this, these prosecutors need to start going after REAL criminals"

 

[JimBowie1958]

BUT for the fact...

But for the fact that an American soldier wandered away from his base, he would not have been kidnapped by the Taliban.

Similarly, but for the fact that Zimmerman continued to stalk Martin after he was told not to, Martin would not have been killed.

Except that GZ had every RIGHT to walk wherever he damned well wanted to and Bergdoff did not.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

How is that justice?

Well, in many ways actually but he can't get a job because of the racist violent leftists that will threaten anyone who hires him. Now, at least for a little while, he won't have to.

I think you meant to say he can't find a job b/c everywhere the son of a bitch goes someone ends up dead or threatened and no employer wants to deal with that.

Liar.
Who else has died?
Fuck off liar.

LOL , this place is like debating with third graders. Care to quote where I said anyone but Trayvon died?

What's the matter idiot? Can't read?

I can read just fine, you CLEARLY implied that I was claiming someone else had died, when I did no such thing. You are a dishonest person, are you sure you aren't a liberal?

 

[PredFan]

I don't waste time with mental midgets, have a good day.

how could you spend all day with yourself then?

For the rest of the class. Its quite clear that jury didn't think the state made the case because they didn't prove that Zimmerman started the altercation, so of course that means the jury believed Martin must have started the altercation b/c it sure didn't just spontaneously happen.

see, you're proving that you don't understand logic.

if i don't prove 'A' that doesn't mean that 'not A' is true, it just means that 'not A' is possible.

it's possible that martin started the altercation. it's possible that zimmerman did. the state failed to prove that zimmerman was the aggressor, but that doesn't mean that anyone proved the aggressor one way or another.

i will say though that we know without a doubt that zimmerman acted aggressively by following martin.

Zimmerman had the right to do so, Martin had no right to assault him.

And the only person's word we have that that is what happened is cashing in as we speak.....the other one is dead.

His word plus the forensic evidence, plus the witnesses, but aside from that you are right.

You fucking idiot.

Which brought doubt.....which is all that is needed to find someone not guilty.

Are you going to assert that all who are found not guilty by juries are INDEED innocent of the charges against them in reality?

No moron, it all corroborated Zimmermans account of the events.

You idiot lefties have trouble reading and remembering even the things YOU said. Let me help you this one time. You said that "all we have is the word of Zimmerman" and I proved you wrong. Now you want to take that in a different direction. Forget it. You are way too stupid for me to spend any more effort on.

 

[JimBowie1958]

No, but it does mean people with a life accept the verdict and move on with said life.

That being said, I'll say this, I believe George should have been culpable at some level and wasn't for one reason. Juries are getting tired of what they see to be overzealous prosecutions and are using the only tool they have to reject such. Acquittals. Sometimes even in cases where there is SOME level of culpability, juries are saying "fuck this, these prosecutors need to start going after REAL criminals"

GZ reasonably could have been charged with second degree manslaughter or excessive use of force, but the jury was not givne those options, were they?

Personally, I dont see GZ as guilty of a god damned thing other than being an unlucky bastard.

 

[ogibillm]

no, the jury did not decide that. the jury decided the state did not make the case for murder.

Incorrect. Please educate yourself before commenting further.

The jury had SEVERAL choices, they could have found George guilty of 2nd degree murder, they could have found him guilty of manslaughter. They found him NOT GUILTY of all charges. Ipso facto , they found that George did NOT precipitate the events that led to the shooting, which obviously means they found that Trayvon did, meaning that obviously Trayvon was not exercising his right to self defense in the eyes of the jury.

George Zimmerman found not guilty of murder in Trayvon Martin's death - CNN.com


What you believe, think, feel, or imagine is completely irrelevant to the subject. A jury decided that Trayvon was NOT defending himself when shot by Zimmerman.

see, i knew there would be an idiot out there that would believe the acquittal meant the jury found martin to have started the confrontation.

what they found was that the state couldn't make the case, that is all.

I don't waste time with mental midgets, have a good day.

how could you spend all day with yourself then?

For the rest of the class. Its quite clear that jury didn't think the state made the case because they didn't prove that Zimmerman started the altercation, so of course that means the jury believed Martin must have started the altercation b/c it sure didn't just spontaneously happen.

see, you're proving that you don't understand logic.

if i don't prove 'A' that doesn't mean that 'not A' is true, it just means that 'not A' is possible.

it's possible that martin started the altercation. it's possible that zimmerman did. the state failed to prove that zimmerman was the aggressor, but that doesn't mean that anyone proved the aggressor one way or another.

i will say though that we know without a doubt that zimmerman acted aggressively by following martin.

Zimmerman had the right to do so, Martin had no right to assault him.

zimmerman had the right to act aggressively toward martin but martin didn't have the right to act aggressively toward zimmerman?

again, we don't know who assaulted whom.

 

[PredFan]

Well, in many ways actually but he can't get a job because of the racist violent leftists that will threaten anyone who hires him. Now, at least for a little while, he won't have to.

I think you meant to say he can't find a job b/c everywhere the son of a bitch goes someone ends up dead or threatened and no employer wants to deal with that.

Liar.
Who else has died?
Fuck off liar.

LOL , this place is like debating with third graders. Care to quote where I said anyone but Trayvon died?

What's the matter idiot? Can't read?

I can read just fine, you CLEARLY implied that I was claiming someone else had died, when I did no such thing. You are a dishonest person, are you sure you aren't a liberal?

Apparently you cannot. It's right there in your own post. Come back to talk when you have found it.

 

[ogibillm]

see, i knew there would be an idiot out there that would believe the acquittal meant the jury found martin to have started the confrontation.

what they found was that the state couldn't make the case, that is all.

I don't waste time with mental midgets, have a good day.

how could you spend all day with yourself then?

For the rest of the class. Its quite clear that jury didn't think the state made the case because they didn't prove that Zimmerman started the altercation, so of course that means the jury believed Martin must have started the altercation b/c it sure didn't just spontaneously happen.

see, you're proving that you don't understand logic.

if i don't prove 'A' that doesn't mean that 'not A' is true, it just means that 'not A' is possible.

it's possible that martin started the altercation. it's possible that zimmerman did. the state failed to prove that zimmerman was the aggressor, but that doesn't mean that anyone proved the aggressor one way or another.

i will say though that we know without a doubt that zimmerman acted aggressively by following martin.

Zimmerman had the right to do so, Martin had no right to assault him.

And the only person's word we have that that is what happened is cashing in as we speak.....the other one is dead.

His word plus the forensic evidence, plus the witnesses, but aside from that you are right.

You fucking idiot.

there is no forensic evidence or witnesses that say who attacked whom.