Ah yes, poor St. Trayvon! Poor, poor, beating a man's head into the pavement St. Trayvon!
After all that's transpired, you still believe that? Or are you just kidding around here? There is something very wrong with George Zimmerman. Every one of these incidents makes the killing of Treyvon Martin look worse.
RE: I also enjoy the phrasing in the thread title Â
Do you have a source, or are you just talking out of your ass? I've read all three linked stories in this thread, and none of them contained the words "road rage".
George Zimmerman gets shot in face = "George Zimmerman involved in shooting". Interesting construction.
No - that means that he was INVOLVED IN A ROAD RAGE INCIDENT that led to shots being fired.
I've never been in one of those. You, Greg?
One of my best friends was shot to death in an alcohol infused, road rage incident back in '83. Only person who had a gun was the person who shot him. It happens...
Do you have a source, or are you just talking out of your ass? I've read all three linked stories in this thread, and none of them contained the words "road rage".
More like you were responding out of your ass
Police said it appeared to be a "road rage incident," according to the FOX 35 television station in Orlando.
Treyvon Martin aside - there is something seriously wrong with this dude.
Apart from the 2012 Martin shooting, Zimmerman has had other encounters with the law, including two incidents in 2005, five incidents in 2013 and other incidents in following years.
July 2005, Zimmerman was arrested and accused of resisting an officer with violence near the University of Central Florida campus after a scuffle with police.
August 2005, Zimmerman's former fiancee filed for a restraining order against him, alleging domestic violence.
September 2013, Zimmerman's estranged wife, Shellie, dials 911 and tells a police dispatcher that he punched her father and threatened her with a gun.
November 2013, Zimmerman is arrested by Seminole County authorities after a disturbance at a home in Apopka.
point is all of these dont make the case of him being the peaceful guy who got beat by a 17 year old
Do you have a source, or are you just talking out of your ass? I've read all three linked stories in this thread, and none of them contained the words "road rage".
More like you were responding out of your ass
Police said it appeared to be a "road rage incident," according to the FOX 35 television station in Orlando.
Then perhaps someone should link that particular story, since the ones linked here say nothing of the sort you dupe motherfucker.
On Tuesday September 9, 2014, George Zimmerman was named by police in a road rage incident where he reportedly threatened and followed another driver. Zimmerman reportedly responded aggressively when he noticed another driver pointing at him. According to the other driver Zimmerman said "Do you know who I am?" before saying, "I'll (expletive) kill you." Zimmerman allegedly followed the other driver to a parking lot while the driver called 911, but he fled before the police arrived. The other driver declined to press charges.
On September 9, 2013, in Lake Mary, police responded to a 911 call by Zimmerman's estranged wife, who reported that Zimmerman had threatened her and her father with a gun and had punched her father in the face.
Only that a man whose head is getting beaten into the pavement has the right to defend himself.....which is why he was acquitted.
Sure. It just seems that in the context of all the other times that Zimmerman has threatened others since and he was chasing Zimmerman, perhaps the right way to look at it now is that Martin was defending himself from a nutjob who ultimately killed him.
You have to look at the situation objectively. At the time, the evidence pointed to Trayvon attacking him (likely because Zimmerman was watching him).
Zimmerman's injuries supported his account.
He can, at the same time, be an insufferable dirtbag, and a victim. He can, at the same time, have legally defended himself against an attacker, and also be a head case.
And, both he and Trayvon both may have been, let's just say, not the finest examples of humanity, where both of their actions contributed to what transpired.
You don't have to believe George Zimmerman is a great guy to believe he was attacked and legally used lethal force to defend himself.
This is what I think of the whole thing... and the jury at the time agreed after reviewing all of the evidence and witness testimony.
aaaaand.....again.....all this has fuck-all to do with the Martin Â
On November 18, 2013, Zimmerman's girlfriend called the police alleging that after she had asked Zimmerman to leave her home, he had pointed a shotgun at her and begun breaking her belongings. The police reported that Zimmerman had barricaded himself inside the apartment before they had made their way inside and arrested him.He was charged with aggravated assault with a weapon – a felony – as well as domestic violence battery and criminal mischief.
Come on - which of YOU haven't been charged with domestic violence battery and criminal mischief???
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
that this guy clearly isn't everyone's favorite law abiding citizen the defense of him being beat up is tarnished when multiple incidents of him being the aggressor surface.
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
that this guy clearly isn't everyone's favorite law abiding citizen the defense of him being beat up is tarnished when multiple incidents of him being the aggressor surface.
and the "Do you know who I am?" suggests pretty clearly that beating the rap went to his head, stupidly. I want a square in the Death Pool that it ends violently for GZ.
Do you have a source, or are you just talking out of your ass? I've read all three linked stories in this thread, and none of them contained the words "road rage".
More like you were responding out of your ass
Police said it appeared to be a "road rage incident," according to the FOX 35 television station in Orlando.
Then perhaps someone should link that particular story, since the ones linked here say nothing of the sort you dupe motherfucker.
What's with the "Poor, poor, St. Trayvon" crap? What's the purpose of interjecting that?
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear, so I don't understand the nasty tone regarding the dead teen.
What happened after that - if Zimmerman was acting in self defense or not was not clear enough to convict him, so the justice system acted appropriately. Could not prove murder, so he walked.
But the incident occurred because Zimmerman is undeniably unstable with serious anger issues.
re: Zimmerman - he was told by dispatch that it was unnecessary for him to follow Martin, as he was not a cop and had no police powers. he ignored that direction and an avoidable encounter ensued, which is exactly why he was told not to follow Martin. He may have been getting the worst of the fight and felt that he had no way out but to use his gun. but again, had he simply followed the advice of the agency he initially contacted, Martin would not have been shot. does not mean he should have been convicted of murder - but to try and portray him as an innocent assault victim is selectively choosing the facts.
And it has precisely what to do with the evidence in that case?
Well there was a big push t paint Martin as a thug, while white washing Zimmerman's past. The facts though are that Zimmerman was the only one with a criminal record. One case involved an altercation with police. In addition the only way you know for sure he was getting beaten on by Martin, Is Zimmerman's story.
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
You have to look at the situation objectively. At the time, the evidence pointed to Trayvon attacking him (likely because Zimmerman was watching him).
Zimmerman's injuries supported his account.
He can, at the same time, be an insufferable dirtbag, and a victim. He can, at the same time, have legally defended himself against an attacker, and also be a head case.
And, both he and Trayvon both may have been, let's just say, not the finest examples of humanity, where both of their actions contributed to what transpired.
You don't have to believe George Zimmerman is a great guy to believe he was attacked and legally used lethal force to defend himself.
This is what I think of the whole thing... and the jury at the time agreed after reviewing all of the evidence and witness testimony.
What injuries supported that? The Medical examiner herself said his injuries were "Insignificant"
wondered why Gary spurned the Giants after we drafted him in the supplemental draft in 1986. He couldn't have been a big part of the Giant success during that period.
RE: RE: RE: OR. Maybe he IS a fucking lunatic... Â
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
Only a fool would suggest someone should wait until the injuries were significant enough to cause unconsciousness, severe bodily injury, or death, before it is justifiable to defend oneself.
Only a fool would suggest someone should wait until the injuries were significant enough to cause unconsciousness, severe bodily injury, or death, before it is justifiable to defend oneself.
I guess you know more then the medical examiner then:
Quote:
n Tuesday, a medical examiner called by prosecutors testified that Mr. Zimmerman's injuries not only were not life-threatening, but also were "very insignificant." Her assessment addresses a key aspect of the trial, in which Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain of his gated community in Sanford, Fla., faces second-degree murder charges in the shooting death of the unarmed teen on Feb. 26, 2012.
Dr. Valerie Rao, the medical examiner for Duval, Clay, and Nassau Counties in northern Florida, said Zimmerman’s injuries could have been the result of a single blow during a confrontation between the two.
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
You're head is getting beaten in to the sidewalk, a single one of those hits can render you unconscious. At that point, you are in a life or death situation.
What is indisputable is that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman.
Martin had zero injuries outside of the gunshot wound to his person.
When you attack someone, if that person is armed, they can justifiably shoot you. End of story.
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
I think the better way to put it is that apparently DOJ thinks what we KNOW about his following and approaching Martin did not rise to the level of a civil rights violation.
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
You adding "approaching Martin" is clear speculation and conjecture on your part. The evidence supported Martin doubled back, hid from Zimmerman, then jumped out and approached him.
Regardless, even if your fictionalizing of events were true, Zimmerman's actions do not have to be justified or advisable for him to have been within his rights to defend himself.
And not you or anyone else is within their rights to attack someone you perceive or is actually following or watching you when in a public place.
But the incident occurred because Zimmerman is undeniably unstable with serious anger issues.
A guy who Angela Corey (who's a worthless sack of shit, btw, for many other cases besides this one - look up Marissa Alexander if you don't believe me) tried to railroad, who the media tried dishonestly to brand a racist, who has received innumerable death threats since as a result.....that guy has serious anger issues now? Shocking! I don't believe it.
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
You're head is getting beaten in to the sidewalk, a single one of those hits can render you unconscious. At that point, you are in a life or death situation.
What is indisputable is that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman.
Martin had zero injuries outside of the gunshot wound to his person.
When you attack someone, if that person is armed, they can justifiably shoot you. End of story.
LMAO....Hey Dipshit, the MEDICAL EXAMINER stated that his injuries were most likely caused by one punch, not the "Pounding into the pavement" you keep claiming. If these were such life threatening injuries why did he wait until the next day to get examined at a clinic? Why no x-rays? Why does an actual doctor who examined the evidence claim they were extremely minor injuries?
You can sit here and try to claim this "Well if he falls just right, he might actually get injured" line of stupid, but the actual facts of the case are that his injuries were minor despite you trying to claim otherwise. Don't try to spin your claim now idiot, acknowledge that your wrong
RE: RE: RE: RE: Well, if you aren't a supporter... Â
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
You adding "approaching Martin" is clear speculation and conjecture on your part. The evidence supported Martin doubled back, hid from Zimmerman, then jumped out and approached him.
Regardless, even if your fictionalizing of events were true, Zimmerman's actions do not have to be justified or advisable for him to have been within his rights to defend himself.
And not you or anyone else is within their rights to attack someone you perceive or is actually following or watching you when in a public place.
Are you slow? njm stated that he approached Martin, I just asked how that would justified then
RE: RE: RE: RE: Well, if you aren't a supporter... Â
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
I think the better way to put it is that apparently DOJ thinks what we KNOW about his following and approaching Martin did not rise to the level of a civil rights violation.
Which is an extremely hard case to prove with the best of evidence
A prosecution witness minimized Zimmerman's injuries? Â
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
You're head is getting beaten in to the sidewalk, a single one of those hits can render you unconscious. At that point, you are in a life or death situation.
What is indisputable is that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman.
Martin had zero injuries outside of the gunshot wound to his person.
When you attack someone, if that person is armed, they can justifiably shoot you. End of story.
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
RE: A prosecution witness minimized Zimmerman's injuries? Â
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
RE: RE: A prosecution witness minimized Zimmerman's injuries? Â
The devil you say! I'm nonplussed! Is that the right word?
Apparently she wasn't very convincing.
So based on that logic, I take it you believe OJ is innocent correct?
Since there is virtually no exculpatory evidence that should have cleared OJ....no. But invoking OJ is a pretty good sign that you don't have a whole helluva lot to use here.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Well, if you aren't a supporter... Â
I think the better way to put it is that apparently DOJ thinks what we KNOW about his following and approaching Martin did not rise to the level of a civil rights violation.
Which is an extremely hard case to prove with the best of evidence
Perhaps. But it also contradicts the absolute certitude on the part of some people. Let's be blunt. If DOJ had any reasonable shot at a conviction Holder would have brought the case. The fact that charges were not pressed indicate that he was a lot less certain as to what happened than a lot of people on this thread.
RE: RE: aaaaand.....again.....all this has fuck-all to do with the Martin Â
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
He started some shit. I can't say exactly what it was. Shoulda just left the kid alone. But he chased him right up until it was time to stand his ground.
RE: RE: RE: aaaaand.....again.....all this has fuck-all to do with the Martin Â
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
He started some shit. I can't say exactly what it was. Shoulda just left the kid alone. But he chased him right up until it was time to stand his ground.
For the last fucking time "Stand You Ground" had nothing to do with this case.
Nothing. To. Do. With. It. Completely different scenario. Your cutesy pun only exposes the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.
So, back to your argument - he "chased him right up to the end"? So, you're now positing that Zimmerman just chased Martin the entire time, and what? "Something" happened? An armed man somehow initiated a physical confrontation with an unarmed man and got his ass kicked? Does that make any sense? Unless he in fact was jumped by the unarmed man, who of course had no idea at that point that the guy he was attacked was armed.
Because I believe in the rule of law? I know, I know, crazy thing to believe in the mobocracy we're becoming, but some people actually do take it seriously.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Well, if you aren't a supporter... Â
I think the better way to put it is that apparently DOJ thinks what we KNOW about his following and approaching Martin did not rise to the level of a civil rights violation.
Which is an extremely hard case to prove with the best of evidence
Perhaps. But it also contradicts the absolute certitude on the part of some people. Let's be blunt. If DOJ had any reasonable shot at a conviction Holder would have brought the case. The fact that charges were not pressed indicate that he was a lot less certain as to what happened than a lot of people on this thread.
Of course he was a lot less certain... the only person to dispute Zimmerman's claim is dead. Isn't that nice how that all ties itself together?
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
So is it not plausible that someone with his history, is not looking for a defendable situation to be able to shoot someone? Because it sure seems to me like this guy LOOKS for trouble and reasons to be able to unload a weapon.
is a raving fucking lunatic who needs to be locked away before he kills somebody else.
I'm not sure how anybody with half a brain cannot see that his continued crazy behavior sheds serious doubt on his self-defense story in the Martin case.
So is it not plausible that someone with his history, is not looking for a defendable situation to be able to shoot someone? Because it sure seems to me like this guy LOOKS for trouble and reasons to be able to unload a weapon.
If all he wanted to do was shoot someone, why wait until he's in a fucking fistfight to do it? Why not just plug him right away? Also, enlighten me - when else has Zimmerman "unloaded a weapon"? I'm assuming you have some citation?
is a raving fucking lunatic who needs to be locked away before he kills somebody else.
I'm not sure how anybody with half a brain cannot see that his continued crazy behavior sheds serious doubt on his self-defense story in the Martin case.
Unless you just like to argue..
Honestly I have the feeling that people that are on the side of "every yahoo should be able to carry a gun always" have to defend this particular lunatic asshole because he puts a crimp in the gun logic... lol
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
He started some shit. I can't say exactly what it was. Shoulda just left the kid alone. But he chased him right up until it was time to stand his ground.
For the last fucking time "Stand You Ground" had nothing to do with this case.
Nothing. To. Do. With. It. Completely different scenario. Your cutesy pun only exposes the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.
So, back to your argument - he "chased him right up to the end"? So, you're now positing that Zimmerman just chased Martin the entire time, and what? "Something" happened? An armed man somehow initiated a physical confrontation with an unarmed man and got his ass kicked? Does that make any sense? Unless he in fact was jumped by the unarmed man, who of course had no idea at that point that the guy he was attacked was armed.
Heh, ok Greg. I have no idea why you defend Zimmerman or even why you think it makes sense to apply a logical decision making process to this crazy person who keeps getting involved in shit, threatening people, whatever. I'm sure he's lucky to have you to take up his cause on the internet, though. I'm sure there's a good reason why this time, it wasn't his fault. Also, here are the jury instructions that specifically reference stand your ground. I'm out. - ( New Window )
RE: RE: RE: A prosecution witness minimized Zimmerman's injuries? Â
The devil you say! I'm nonplussed! Is that the right word?
Apparently she wasn't very convincing.
So based on that logic, I take it you believe OJ is innocent correct?
Since there is virtually no exculpatory evidence that should have cleared OJ....no. But invoking OJ is a pretty good sign that you don't have a whole helluva lot to use here.
Yeah I guess those gloves not fitting was a fantasy
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Check out Bernie Goetz. Similar situation IF GZ was trying to instigate a 'justified' shooting. Goetz was found innocent but he was tried for murder. If he had a past like GZ and it was introduced in court what would have happened?
You really are a special kind of stupid. http://abcnews.go.com/2020/george-zimmerman-jury-told-injuries-insignificant/story?id=19552856
Quote:
Dr. Valerie Rao testified that Zimmerman was struck as few as three times by Martin during the fight that night. She also asserted his head may have only been slammed on the concrete a single time.
During the defense's cross examination of Rao, Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara got Rao to concede that his client's injuries could have been caused by more than three impacts. She also indicated that abrasions on Martin's knuckles were consistent with him striking someone.
If is on top of me beating me, and/or banging my head into concrete, I'm not waiting for him to continue to beat me if I can do something about it. If you agree that Martin attacked Zimmerman, if you agree that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, then you have to acknowledge that Zimmerman legally shot Martin. Unless you are a complete moron. Doesn't mean he's a great guy... just means he shot in self-defense as allowable under the law.
Two witnesses called by the prosecution today described George Zimmerman as being on the losing end of a fight with Trayvon Martin in the moments before Zimmerman shot the Florida teenager.
However, an EMT who was on the scene immediately following the shooting testified that she treated Zimmerman for five minutes before releasing him into police care.
Zimmerman, 29, is facing second degree murder charges for shooting and killing Martin on Feb. 26, 2012. He maintains he shot Martin, 17, in self defense after his head was slammed several times against a concrete sidewalk.
John Good told the jury today that he yelled "stop" at both men shortly after realizing that what he at first assumed to be a dog attack was actually two men grappling on the ground.
Catch up on all the details from the George Zimmerman murder trial.
"I said cut it out. I'm calling 911 because it was getting serious," said Good.
Good testified that he saw what he believed to be Martin on top of Zimmerman.
"The color on top was dark and the color at bottom was…red," Good said referring to the men's clothing.
At another point he told the court that the person on the bottom had "lighter skin color."
Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who was wearing a red and black jacket that night. Martin, who was black, was wearing a dark sweatshirt.
"The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help,'" he said.
George Zimmerman Case in Pictures
Under cross examination by Zimmerman's lawyer, Good said he believes he saw Martin on top punching Zimmerman "MMA style," a reference to mixed martial arts.
"The person on top was ground and pounding the person on the bottom?"asked Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara.
"Correct," said Good
Good testified that he did not see Martin banging Zimmerman's head on the concrete.
His account was accompanied by a recording of Good's 911 call to police in which he is heard telling the dispatcher that he heard a gunshot.
"I'm pretty sure the guy is dead out there. Holy sh**. .. There's a black guy down and he's been shot. It looks like he is dead," Good said.
Jonathan Manalo, who also lived near the shooting scene, testified today that Zimmerman told him just moments after Martin was killed to call his wife and say "Just tell her I shot someone."
Manalo did not see the confrontation between Zimmerman and the unarmed teenager, but walked outside of his home with a flashlight moments after hearing a gunshot.
He said Zimmerman looked like he had "got his butt beat," but was "speaking clearly."
Manalo took photos of Zimmerman's bloody nose, the back of his bloody head, Martin's body lying face down in the grass and a flashlight on the ground.
He says Zimmerman told him as he approached, "This guy was beating me up. I was defending myself and I shot him."
Stacy Livingston, an EMT who arrived on the scene, said she treated Zimmerman -- who was complaining of dizziness -- for five minutes before releasing him into police custody.
In addition, Police Officer Tim Smith told the court he took Zimmerman into custody on the night of the shooting and that the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet and had bits of grass on it, and the back of his pants appeared wet. It had been raining that night and the ground was wet.
Again, you don't have to wait until injuries are "life-threatening" before using deadly force if you are being attacked. Even the notion of this is laughably stupid.
So you can cherry-pick one comment made by the medical examiner who was dealing in "maybe's" and "could have's" all you want... but the jury considered the totality of the evidence, and most fair-minded people do the same. At least 3 blows, lmao.
Again, anyone who says Zimmerman "approached" Martin is being speculative, btw, and really is immaterial as to the legality of using lethal force.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Well, if you aren't a supporter... Â
I think the better way to put it is that apparently DOJ thinks what we KNOW about his following and approaching Martin did not rise to the level of a civil rights violation.
Which is an extremely hard case to prove with the best of evidence
Perhaps. But it also contradicts the absolute certitude on the part of some people. Let's be blunt. If DOJ had any reasonable shot at a conviction Holder would have brought the case. The fact that charges were not pressed indicate that he was a lot less certain as to what happened than a lot of people on this thread.
Of course he was a lot less certain... the only person to dispute Zimmerman's claim is dead. Isn't that nice how that all ties itself together?
Then perhaps the way to leave this is that this is one case where we wished there was a surveillance camera. And without that we really don't know what happened in those final minutes after the 911 call Zimmerman made.
RE: RE: RE: RE: aaaaand.....again.....all this has fuck-all to do with the Martin Â
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Check out Bernie Goetz. Similar situation IF GZ was trying to instigate a 'justified' shooting. Goetz was found innocent but he was tried for murder. If he had a past like GZ and it was introduced in court what would have happened?
Well you have to take into account different state laws. Goetz never would have been tried in Florida
Also, here are the jury instructions that specifically reference stand your ground. I'm out. - ( New Window )
Whoops!
[quote]That matched the assessment of legal experts who earlier Monday were describing the verdict on Saturday as the result of successful, garden-variety self-defense arguments that could sway a jury in any state.
Though these observers said Florida's expanded self-defense law, which says citizens can "stand their ground" rather than retreat in the face of a deadly threat has emboldened citizens to take unnecessary risks and led to an increase in homicides, they detected little impact on the Zimmerman case.
[quote] Link - ( New Window )
Much more interesting than this train wreck of a conversation... Â
You really are a special kind of stupid. http://abcnews.go.com/2020/george-zimmerman-jury-told-injuries-insignificant/story?id=19552856
Quote:
Dr. Valerie Rao testified that Zimmerman was struck as few as three times by Martin during the fight that night. She also asserted his head may have only been slammed on the concrete a single time.
During the defense's cross examination of Rao, Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara got Rao to concede that his client's injuries could have been caused by more than three impacts. She also indicated that abrasions on Martin's knuckles were consistent with him striking someone.
If is on top of me beating me, and/or banging my head into concrete, I'm not waiting for him to continue to beat me if I can do something about it. If you agree that Martin attacked Zimmerman, if you agree that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, then you have to acknowledge that Zimmerman legally shot Martin. Unless you are a complete moron. Doesn't mean he's a great guy... just means he shot in self-defense as allowable under the law.
Two witnesses called by the prosecution today described George Zimmerman as being on the losing end of a fight with Trayvon Martin in the moments before Zimmerman shot the Florida teenager.
However, an EMT who was on the scene immediately following the shooting testified that she treated Zimmerman for five minutes before releasing him into police care.
Zimmerman, 29, is facing second degree murder charges for shooting and killing Martin on Feb. 26, 2012. He maintains he shot Martin, 17, in self defense after his head was slammed several times against a concrete sidewalk.
John Good told the jury today that he yelled "stop" at both men shortly after realizing that what he at first assumed to be a dog attack was actually two men grappling on the ground.
Catch up on all the details from the George Zimmerman murder trial.
"I said cut it out. I'm calling 911 because it was getting serious," said Good.
Good testified that he saw what he believed to be Martin on top of Zimmerman.
"The color on top was dark and the color at bottom was…red," Good said referring to the men's clothing.
At another point he told the court that the person on the bottom had "lighter skin color."
Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who was wearing a red and black jacket that night. Martin, who was black, was wearing a dark sweatshirt.
"The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help,'" he said.
George Zimmerman Case in Pictures
Under cross examination by Zimmerman's lawyer, Good said he believes he saw Martin on top punching Zimmerman "MMA style," a reference to mixed martial arts.
"The person on top was ground and pounding the person on the bottom?"asked Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara.
"Correct," said Good
Good testified that he did not see Martin banging Zimmerman's head on the concrete.
His account was accompanied by a recording of Good's 911 call to police in which he is heard telling the dispatcher that he heard a gunshot.
"I'm pretty sure the guy is dead out there. Holy sh**. .. There's a black guy down and he's been shot. It looks like he is dead," Good said.
Jonathan Manalo, who also lived near the shooting scene, testified today that Zimmerman told him just moments after Martin was killed to call his wife and say "Just tell her I shot someone."
Manalo did not see the confrontation between Zimmerman and the unarmed teenager, but walked outside of his home with a flashlight moments after hearing a gunshot.
He said Zimmerman looked like he had "got his butt beat," but was "speaking clearly."
Manalo took photos of Zimmerman's bloody nose, the back of his bloody head, Martin's body lying face down in the grass and a flashlight on the ground.
He says Zimmerman told him as he approached, "This guy was beating me up. I was defending myself and I shot him."
Stacy Livingston, an EMT who arrived on the scene, said she treated Zimmerman -- who was complaining of dizziness -- for five minutes before releasing him into police custody.
In addition, Police Officer Tim Smith told the court he took Zimmerman into custody on the night of the shooting and that the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet and had bits of grass on it, and the back of his pants appeared wet. It had been raining that night and the ground was wet.
Again, you don't have to wait until injuries are "life-threatening" before using deadly force if you are being attacked. Even the notion of this is laughably stupid.
So you can cherry-pick one comment made by the medical examiner who was dealing in "maybe's" and "could have's" all you want... but the jury considered the totality of the evidence, and most fair-minded people do the same. At least 3 blows, lmao.
Again, anyone who says Zimmerman "approached" Martin is being speculative, btw, and really is immaterial as to the legality of using lethal force.
What a shocker, dipshit here conveniently left out this testimony:
Quote:
Two eyewitnesses, meanwhile, said they thought Trayvon cried out for help during a struggle on the sidewalk.
testimony on Wednesday by Ms. Surdyka and another neighbor, Jeannee Manalo.
Ms. Manalo said she thought Zimmerman was astride Trayvon during a violent struggle. But she also said it was too dark to see exactly what was going on, and she made the judgment about who was the aggressor by looking at photos of Zimmerman and Trayvon afterward. She said she still believed she saw Zimmerman “hitting down” on a prone Trayvon.
Surdyka testifed she heard from her second-floor window two loud voices, including an “aggressive voice” and a voice that belonged to “a boy.”
“I felt like it was the boy’s voice,” Jayne Surdyka told jurors about the deadly scene that unfolded on a rainy February night last year in her Sanford, Fla., neighborhood.
If your going to pull testimony out of your ass, at least include all of it, not just that which you want to use.
I'm also going to tell you for the last time, no one but njm stated he approached Martin, so stop tryiung to use that as some angle. That is a weak attempt at parsing what has been said
There is way more to this story than you guys understand. The headlines are very deceiving.
The fellow who tried to kill Zimmerman yesterday is the same fellow who alleged "road rage" in September of last year. This whacko stalker's name is Matt Apperson - a fairly unhinged guy.
so, your big gotcha is a woman who claims to have seen something Â
Also, here are the jury instructions that specifically reference stand your ground. I'm out. - ( New Window )
Whoops!
[quote]That matched the assessment of legal experts who earlier Monday were describing the verdict on Saturday as the result of successful, garden-variety self-defense arguments that could sway a jury in any state.
Though these observers said Florida's expanded self-defense law, which says citizens can "stand their ground" rather than retreat in the face of a deadly threat has emboldened citizens to take unnecessary risks and led to an increase in homicides, they detected little impact on the Zimmerman case.
[quote] Link - ( New Window )
At least you've stopped pretending it was irrelevant when it was clearly in the instructions. I'm not pretending he got off and should have been convicted. The law is the law. It was applied correctly. With stand your ground, it was nearly impossible to convict that dumbfuck.
But the fucking tragic reality is that the law (especially when it leaves room for standing your ground) allows for a numbnuts wannabe cop with a gun to watch the neighborhood -> follow a kid who wasn't doing anything -> chase a kid who wasn't doing anything leading to an altercation -> Then numbnuts is losing a fistfight and kills the kid who wasn't doing anything. And this fuckface, numbnuts wannabe asshole who goes on to show what a non-model citizen fuckup he really is can claim self defense when the reality is that if he'd just have stayed home that night, none of this shit would have happened and the kid would still be alive. If he had just not assumed the black kid walking in the neighborhood was a criminal the kid would be alive. If he had just let the cops follow up on it as directed by 911 the kid would still be alive.
But, I'm glad you feel the need to defend numbnuts GZ. He's terrific.
One man in the incident had been punched. It was Zimmerman. One had knuckles that were busted up. That was Martin.
But yeah, some woman who admits she doesn't really know what she saw think that Zimmerman was the one beating on Martin. You've got me.
So from the fact that Zimmerman got punched, and Martin had scrapes on his hand we can throw out any kind of theory that Zimmerman initiated this? That those scrapes are proof positive that Martin started this? Never seen a fight where one idiot decides to shove someone and gets clocked? Never seen a fight where one guy takes a swing and misses and then gets his ass handed to him? Must be nice to live in such a proof positive world where scrapes on a knuckle is all you need
See the ONLY one who has had a say in what actually happened at the start was the guy fighting not to go to jail.
never seen a fight where an armed man up and takes a swing Â
Amusing how you just gloss over, yknow, how the fight starts. He's CHASING him! And then he's losing a fight.....why is there a fight?
Ok...come on, you can definitely defend the law and the outcome of the case without having to be so obtuse that you can't see Zimmerman for what he is, a total jackass cop-wannabe, who put himself into a shitty situation (even when he was advised not to follow by a police dispatcher) that eventually led to the altercation that resulted in him having to kill Martin.
Not sure if you're just bored on Monday and choose to be extra argumentative or if you seriously believe that Zimmerman didn't put himself into a shitty situation by his own action that night that required him to defend himself.
Zimmerman had moved away from Florida and was back home visiting family when this stalker spotted him on Lake Worth Blvd and fired a single shot into George's truck (this is the same truck he was in the night of the TM incident).
Because he was chasing him? Why the fuck is he allowed to do that? Zimmerman started all this shit. Martin was trying to go home.
And yet, somehow, with more than enough time to get home from the time Zimmerman lost sight of him, he didn't actually go home. That's odd. Wonder why that was??
Following someone is against the law - yes or no? Simple question, simple answer.
RE: never seen a fight where an armed man up and takes a swing Â
As if some fucking phone operator making ten bucks an hour is the voice of God or something.
Really? So a police dispatcher's advice is just that of a $10 an hour nobody?
Definitely a head scratching comment. Much better that a wanna be vigilanti on meds take matters into his own hands instead of listening. I mean what could actually happen, someone getting killed?
It's just another dumb fucking thing that GZ did that led to Martin being dead.
What led to Martin being dead was jumping a guy he didn't know was armed.
Which, by the way, is something else the people who latch on to "crazy man with a gun stalking him!!1!" tend to gloss over. Either Martin got into a fistfight with an armed man, which is insanely stupid, or he didn't know Zimmerman was armed and thus the the narrative is incorrect.
Because he was chasing him? Why the fuck is he allowed to do that? Zimmerman started all this shit. Martin was trying to go home.
And yet, somehow, with more than enough time to get home from the time Zimmerman lost sight of him, he didn't actually go home. That's odd. Wonder why that was??
Following someone is against the law - yes or no? Simple question, simple answer.
I already said it's not illegal and the case was decided correctly based on the facts. Don't be obtuse.
The point is that George Zimmerman is a gaping asshole who, like all of us, deserved defense in a court of law but not on a message board, which makes your dedication to defending him kinda weird.
RE: RE: never seen a fight where an armed man up and takes a swing Â
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
He was several inches shorter, and at night, in the dark, I'm guessing it may have been difficult to gauge the build of someone wearing a big sweatshirt. And, no, he doesn't want to start a fight. Are you being deliberately obtuse? Why the hell is he going to start a fight instead of drawing his weapon? That makes absolutely no sense.
RE: RE: RE: I also love the 'as directed by 911' Â
It's just another dumb fucking thing that GZ did that led to Martin being dead.
What led to Martin being dead was jumping a guy he didn't know was armed.
Which, by the way, is something else the people who latch on to "crazy man with a gun stalking him!!1!" tend to gloss over. Either Martin got into a fistfight with an armed man, which is insanely stupid, or he didn't know Zimmerman was armed and thus the the narrative is incorrect.
LOL. Yeah, Martin is the stupid one who fucked up. You're a lost cause.
scrutinizing witnesses... I'm game. The fact is, Good was and is the only reliable eyewitness in the case. You seriously want to cite Surdyka, who testified she heard three gunshots? These witnesses admitted they really couldn't see what was going on. Surdyka was chasing the media to try to catch some celebrity before it went to trial. She was the least reliable "witness" in the case.
Early in the day, they called two neighbor eyewitnesses who heard and saw part of the confrontation between Trayvon and Zimmerman the night of the shooting.
If jurors wanted clarity from them, they did not get it.
By the time they stepped down from the witness stand, both had been damaged.
The first was Jayne Surdyka, a former Olympic-caliber marathoner. Just minutes before the shooting, she heard someone make two desperate cries for help — the second she described as a "yelp."
She is convinced, she said, that the second voice was Trayvon's.
"Someone sounded very angry, very agitated," she said. The other person spoke with "a lighter, softer, higher-pitched voice."
She also reported seeing two figures on the ground fighting or wrestling.
But her account does not mesh with other evidence on three key points.
She testified that Trayvon was on the bottom, facedown when Zimmerman shot him. But Trayvon was shot at near-point-blank range in the chest — not the back.
Surdyka said she heard three gunshots. There was one.
She also got their clothing confused, saying the figure wearing black clothing survived, and she saw him stand up and walk around after the shooting.
Trayvon was wearing a charcoal-colored hoodie, Zimmerman a red jacket.
The second neighbor, Jeannee Manalo, also had credibility problems. She testified that she heard "a howling sound," looked out a glass door and saw two figures on the ground fighting.
The one on top was moving his hands "like he's hitting him," she said.
"That's when my husband told me to sit down and mind my own business," she said.
A few seconds later, she heard a shot, she said.
When she was interviewed immediately after the shooting, she told police she could not tell who was on top, but a few weeks later, after seeing photos of Trayvon on television, she told investigators that she was convinced it was Zimmerman because he is bigger.
On Wednesday, that was her testimony again until defense attorney Mark O'Mara pointed out that the photos of Trayvon on which she had relied showed him at about age 10 to 12.
"You're not sure as you sit here today who was where in the altercation?" O'Mara asked.
"No," she answered.
Only John Good had a vantage point where he could even tell who was who, and if memory serves his apartment was the closest to the altercation. The "witnesses" you are citing had contrary accounts of what happened, and contrary accounts as to the physical evidence in the case. John Good's account he gave to police matched the evidence, matched Zimmerman's story he also gave to police, without collaboration, and matched the evidence.
Dude, I have no desire to sit here and re-hash this case. The verdict was made, it was the correct verdict, and every point you have made is irrelevant or refuted.
You clearly don't have an understanding of this case, self-defense laws, or the ability to use basic logic.
I'm done, you can have the last word if you want. I'm no Zimmerman supporter, but the main point in this case is you can be an asshole and still have the right to defend yourself when attacked, and you don't have the right to attack someone because they are an asshole.
RE: RE: RE: RE: I also love the 'as directed by 911' Â
LOL. Yeah, Martin is the stupid one who fucked up. You're a lost cause.
Seeing as how he's dead because he jumped a guy who turned out to have a gun rather than just going home....yeah, I'd say there were bad decisions made by both parties.
RE: RE: RE: never seen a fight where an armed man up and takes a swing Â
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
He was several inches shorter, and at night, in the dark, I'm guessing it may have been difficult to gauge the build of someone wearing a big sweatshirt. And, no, he doesn't want to start a fight. Are you being deliberately obtuse? Why the hell is he going to start a fight instead of drawing his weapon? That makes absolutely no sense.
How do you know he didn't want to start something? Every action he took that night appeared that he wanted to start something, be it a questioning Martin, or a confrontation. And if he did walk up to him with his gun drawn, that right there is a criminal act. That gun emboldened him to act the way he did. Every arrest he has had since that trial involved a physical act or threat with a gun by Martin shows where this guys head is at with regards to guns and his bravery
Quote:
In July 2005, when he was 21, Zimmerman was arrested after shoving an undercover alcohol-control agent while a friend of Zimmerman's was being arrested for underage drinking. The officer alleged that Zimmerman had said, "I don't care who you are," followed by a profanity, and had refused to leave the area after the officer had shown their badge.[27] The charges were subsequently dropped when Zimmerman entered a pre-trial diversion program that included anger-management classes.[3][28] Also in 2005, Zimmerman's ex-fiancée filed a restraining order against him, alleging domestic violence. Zimmerman requested a reciprocal restraining order. Both orders were granted.[3][29] These incidents were raised by prosecutors at Zimmerman's initial bond hearing. The judge described them as "run of the mill."[30][31]
On September 9, 2013, in Lake Mary, police responded to a 911 call by Zimmerman's estranged wife, who reported that Zimmerman had threatened her and her father with a gun and had punched her father in the face. Zimmerman was briefly detained and questioned by police.[32] No gun was found at the scene. Police took a broken iPad from the scene for examination of a video recording of the incident to determine whether to press charges against either Zimmerman or his wife.[33] His wife declined to press charges, later expressing regret about her decision.[34] After determining that the iPad video could not be recovered, the Lake Mary police department announced they would not be pressing charges against Zimmerman, his wife, or her father.[35]
On November 18, 2013, Zimmerman's girlfriend called the police alleging that after she had asked Zimmerman to leave her home, he had pointed a shotgun at her and begun breaking her belongings.[36] The police reported that Zimmerman had barricaded himself inside the apartment before they had made their way inside and arrested him.[37] He was charged with aggravated assault with a weapon – a felony – as well as domestic violence battery and criminal mischief.[38][39] On December 6, Zimmerman's girlfriend asked that the charges against Zimmerman be dropped and that the restraining order barring him from seeing her be lifted, after which prosecutors said that they would no longer be pursuing a case against him.[40][41]
On Tuesday September 9, 2014, George Zimmerman was named by police in a road rage incident where he reportedly threatened and followed another driver.[42] Zimmerman reportedly responded aggressively when he noticed another driver pointing at him. According to the other driver Zimmerman said "Do you know who I am?" before saying, "I'll (expletive) kill you." Zimmerman allegedly followed the other driver to a parking lot while the driver called 911, but he fled before the police arrived.[43] The other driver declined to press charges.
Todays incident involves the same guy he threatened during his last road rage incident. He is constantly looking for fights
that tried to kill Zimmerman yesterday. Matt Apperson. As I said earlier, this is same guy who made a fictitious complaint to police last September about a "road rage" incident. After he fired the weapon into Zimmerman's truck, he actually bragged to someone that he shot George Zimmerman
If I am not mistaken, he is in police custody right now.
scrutinizing witnesses... I'm game. The fact is, Good was and is the only reliable eyewitness in the case. You seriously want to cite Surdyka, who testified she heard three gunshots? These witnesses admitted they really couldn't see what was going on. Surdyka was chasing the media to try to catch some celebrity before it went to trial. She was the least reliable "witness" in the case.
Early in the day, they called two neighbor eyewitnesses who heard and saw part of the confrontation between Trayvon and Zimmerman the night of the shooting.
If jurors wanted clarity from them, they did not get it.
By the time they stepped down from the witness stand, both had been damaged.
The first was Jayne Surdyka, a former Olympic-caliber marathoner. Just minutes before the shooting, she heard someone make two desperate cries for help — the second she described as a "yelp."
She is convinced, she said, that the second voice was Trayvon's.
"Someone sounded very angry, very agitated," she said. The other person spoke with "a lighter, softer, higher-pitched voice."
She also reported seeing two figures on the ground fighting or wrestling.
But her account does not mesh with other evidence on three key points.
She testified that Trayvon was on the bottom, facedown when Zimmerman shot him. But Trayvon was shot at near-point-blank range in the chest — not the back.
Surdyka said she heard three gunshots. There was one.
She also got their clothing confused, saying the figure wearing black clothing survived, and she saw him stand up and walk around after the shooting.
Trayvon was wearing a charcoal-colored hoodie, Zimmerman a red jacket.
The second neighbor, Jeannee Manalo, also had credibility problems. She testified that she heard "a howling sound," looked out a glass door and saw two figures on the ground fighting.
The one on top was moving his hands "like he's hitting him," she said.
"That's when my husband told me to sit down and mind my own business," she said.
A few seconds later, she heard a shot, she said.
When she was interviewed immediately after the shooting, she told police she could not tell who was on top, but a few weeks later, after seeing photos of Trayvon on television, she told investigators that she was convinced it was Zimmerman because he is bigger.
On Wednesday, that was her testimony again until defense attorney Mark O'Mara pointed out that the photos of Trayvon on which she had relied showed him at about age 10 to 12.
"You're not sure as you sit here today who was where in the altercation?" O'Mara asked.
"No," she answered.
Only John Good had a vantage point where he could even tell who was who, and if memory serves his apartment was the closest to the altercation. The "witnesses" you are citing had contrary accounts of what happened, and contrary accounts as to the physical evidence in the case. John Good's account he gave to police matched the evidence, matched Zimmerman's story he also gave to police, without collaboration, and matched the evidence.
Dude, I have no desire to sit here and re-hash this case. The verdict was made, it was the correct verdict, and every point you have made is irrelevant or refuted.
You clearly don't have an understanding of this case, self-defense laws, or the ability to use basic logic.
I'm done, you can have the last word if you want. I'm no Zimmerman supporter, but the main point in this case is you can be an asshole and still have the right to defend yourself when attacked, and you don't have the right to attack someone because they are an asshole.
You do realize that Good testified he could not confirm the man on top (who he says appeared to be Martin) hit Zimmerman, or pound his head into the concrete correct? Trhat he admitted that in trial. Also he claimed that the only way he could tell who was who was by the color of their clothes and what he thought was lighter skin color with regards to the guy on the bottom. He said this even though he could not say if the guys shirt was white or red. How can you not tell the difference between white and red, but you can discern skin color even though you cant see if someone is getting punched?
that tried to kill Zimmerman yesterday. Matt Apperson. As I said earlier, this is same guy who made a fictitious complaint to police last September about a "road rage" incident. After he fired the weapon into Zimmerman's truck, he actually bragged to someone that he shot George Zimmerman
If I am not mistaken, he is in police custody right now.
I don't know the particulars of that Road Rage incident, but it was Zimmerman who left the scene not this guy
into custody. There are witnesses who reported that Apperson opened fire on Zimmerman's vehicle. It missed Zimmerman and shattered glass on the other side.
He said he couldn't be certain that he saw that... yet, he described what he thinks he saw, and it matched the physical evidence and GZ's account. It was dusk when the altercation occurred. He certainly got pretty close to the details. He did not say the jacket was white. He said red or light-colored. It would be fair to say in compromised visibility that GZ's jacket is both to the casual observer.
His description of the clothing of both parties made his testimony particularly strong.
criminal record reveals he was convicted of DUI, drug possession, careless driving, several probation violations, and a citation for not registering his current place of residence, as required by law.
criminal record reveals he was convicted of DUI, drug possession, careless driving, several probation violations, and a citation for not registering his current place of residence, as required by law.
I would never intentionally pick a fight with you, but there are more complete details of the September incident which completely flip around who was stalking whom. Zimmerman left because Apperson left his gun visible in the seat of his car.
This guy has some weird fascination with Zimmerman and wants to kill him. Called him a baby killer.
You can pick a fight with montanagiant... it's ok. You'll win because people like him only like to deal with speculation, maybe's, emotion, what MSM/the internet tells them to think, and their imagination. People like us try to be objective and look at the totality of evidence and consider all the facts, without preconceived notions and biases.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
"According to Cornell, the man told him that he and Zimmerman have had three disputes. This time, Zimmerman waved a gun and the man shot at him, according to Cornell.
Police arrived minutes after he called 911, Cornell said.
Police have not verified Cornell's account to CNN.
History of run-ins with the law
It is the latest headline-grabbing incident for Zimmerman since his acquittal in July 2013 on a murder charge in the death of Martin, a 17-year-old African-American.
Zimmerman fatally shot Martin on February 26, 2012.
On that day, Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida, called 911 to report "a suspicious person" in the neighborhood.
The dispatcher asked him if he was following the person and Zimmerman replied that he was "trying to find out where he went."
He ignored the dispatcher's advice not to follow the person, and according to later accounts by Zimmerman, Martin jumped toward him and a fight ensued."
To this day, I can't see how some defend Zimmerman. How they instead of feeling bad for the kid who was running an errand, instead mocking his death because "he wasn't a saint". And that a zealot with a gun and an itchy finger initiated the whole incident by breaking his own neighborhood's rules about involvement, creating a situation where TM felt he needed to defend himself from the guy who was following him...And TM turned out to be right--he was being followed by a guy who would later kill him. He was right! Yet some blame this victim.
You can pick a fight with montanagiant... it's ok. You'll win because people like him only like to deal with speculation, maybe's, emotion, what MSM/the internet tells them to think, and their imagination. People like us try to be objective and look at the totality of evidence and consider all the facts, without preconceived notions and biases.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
Awww Allstar is all upset because he was made to look a fool...Awww.
Hey Dickstain, Bake and I are actually friends. Both from the same upstate city. We are about as diverse in our thinking as it gets but we always have a rational discussion. Unlike you he has quite a bit ofknowledge on subjects and he can write a ratinal post.
"According to Cornell, the man told him that he and Zimmerman have had three disputes. This time, Zimmerman waved a gun and the man shot at him, according to Cornell.
Police arrived minutes after he called 911, Cornell said.
Police have not verified Cornell's account to CNN.
History of run-ins with the law
It is the latest headline-grabbing incident for Zimmerman since his acquittal in July 2013 on a murder charge in the death of Martin, a 17-year-old African-American.
Zimmerman fatally shot Martin on February 26, 2012.
On that day, Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida, called 911 to report "a suspicious person" in the neighborhood.
The dispatcher asked him if he was following the person and Zimmerman replied that he was "trying to find out where he went."
He ignored the dispatcher's advice not to follow the person, and according to later accounts by Zimmerman, Martin jumped toward him and a fight ensued."
To this day, I can't see how some defend Zimmerman. How they instead of feeling bad for the kid who was running an errand, instead mocking his death because "he wasn't a saint". And that a zealot with a gun and an itchy finger initiated the whole incident by breaking his own neighborhood's rules about involvement, creating a situation where TM felt he needed to defend himself from the guy who was following him...And TM turned out to be right--he was being followed by a guy who would later kill him. He was right! Yet some blame this victim.
Ultimately, does it matter? Nope. People do all sorts of stupid things that make them crime victims. Doesn't change the facts.
I guess it depends on how you look at it. Legally, probably not as the law is written in Florida. However, when it comes to culpability, you can't just classify this as another person doing something stupid. Most stupid actions don't amount to a person putting themselves in a potential dangerous situation that should be reserved for the police. And this leading to the death of an innocent person gives an entire demographic a sense of injustice. And you can say whatever you want, but people have a strong feeling about this, so obviously this will continue to be used/seen as a prime example of injustice.
You can pick a fight with montanagiant... it's ok. You'll win because people like him only like to deal with speculation, maybe's, emotion, what MSM/the internet tells them to think, and their imagination. People like us try to be objective and look at the totality of evidence and consider all the facts, without preconceived notions and biases.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
By the way Ace, before getting your panties in an uproar, you were the one to take the first personal shot, so don't sit here crying like a little bitch because you got it back. Here, because knowing you, your going to lie and say I'm wrong:
Quote:
Again
allstarjim : 3:20 pm : link : reply
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
This not understanding who wrote what seems to be a trend with you. I suggest you read slower and it will help you to follow all the ignorant shit you write.
You can pick a fight with montanagiant... it's ok. You'll win because people like him only like to deal with speculation, maybe's, emotion, what MSM/the internet tells them to think, and their imagination. People like us try to be objective and look at the totality of evidence and consider all the facts, without preconceived notions and biases.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
Awww Allstar is all upset because he was made to look a fool...Awww.
Hey Dickstain, Bake and I are actually friends. Both from the same upstate city. We are about as diverse in our thinking as it gets but we always have a rational discussion. Unlike you he has quite a bit ofknowledge on subjects and he can write a ratinal post.
LMAO... I bet you disagree with him an awful lot.
Only you would think I was the one that looked like a fool in this thread. All I did was link articles proving your inaccuracies and that you were full of shit. Good times.
BTW, I'm not upset in the least tiniest bit. I quite enjoyed using you as a punching bag. Until next time, junior... brush up on... well, something.
"According to Cornell, the man told him that he and Zimmerman have had three disputes. This time, Zimmerman waved a gun and the man shot at him, according to Cornell.
Police arrived minutes after he called 911, Cornell said.
Police have not verified Cornell's account to CNN.
History of run-ins with the law
It is the latest headline-grabbing incident for Zimmerman since his acquittal in July 2013 on a murder charge in the death of Martin, a 17-year-old African-American.
Zimmerman fatally shot Martin on February 26, 2012.
On that day, Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida, called 911 to report "a suspicious person" in the neighborhood.
The dispatcher asked him if he was following the person and Zimmerman replied that he was "trying to find out where he went."
He ignored the dispatcher's advice not to follow the person, and according to later accounts by Zimmerman, Martin jumped toward him and a fight ensued."
To this day, I can't see how some defend Zimmerman. How they instead of feeling bad for the kid who was running an errand, instead mocking his death because "he wasn't a saint". And that a zealot with a gun and an itchy finger initiated the whole incident by breaking his own neighborhood's rules about involvement, creating a situation where TM felt he needed to defend himself from the guy who was following him...And TM turned out to be right--he was being followed by a guy who would later kill him. He was right! Yet some blame this victim.
You can pick a fight with montanagiant... it's ok. You'll win because people like him only like to deal with speculation, maybe's, emotion, what MSM/the internet tells them to think, and their imagination. People like us try to be objective and look at the totality of evidence and consider all the facts, without preconceived notions and biases.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
Awww Allstar is all upset because he was made to look a fool...Awww.
Hey Dickstain, Bake and I are actually friends. Both from the same upstate city. We are about as diverse in our thinking as it gets but we always have a rational discussion. Unlike you he has quite a bit ofknowledge on subjects and he can write a ratinal post.
LMAO... I bet you disagree with him an awful lot.
Only you would think I was the one that looked like a fool in this thread. All I did was link articles proving your inaccuracies and that you were full of shit. Good times.
BTW, I'm not upset in the least tiniest bit. I quite enjoyed using you as a punching bag. Until next time, junior... brush up on... well, something.
Your still looking like a fool because you have a habit of parsing the discussion and taking portions out of context while ignoring your own actions. Its a habit of fools
Police press conference where they say that not only was Zimmerman not the shooter this time but that the 911 call was made by a 3rd party on behalf of Matthew Apperson. Sounds like the road rage was on Apperson's part. The Daily Mail has an article but I'll simply line the NBC coverage of the police announcement.
But Zimmerman is an out of control lunatic who seems to cause shots to be fired.
Lunatic? pretty sure he was found to be mentally competent to stand trial before he was aquitted.Out of control? whose control, in what way? are you saying he should be arrested? for what? Something specific, or you just don't like him.Should he "die in a fire"? Let's have a witch hunt. He must have done something, right?
You can pick a fight with montanagiant... it's ok. You'll win because people like him only like to deal with speculation, maybe's, emotion, what MSM/the internet tells them to think, and their imagination. People like us try to be objective and look at the totality of evidence and consider all the facts, without preconceived notions and biases.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
By the way Ace, before getting your panties in an uproar, you were the one to take the first personal shot, so don't sit here crying like a little bitch because you got it back. Here, because knowing you, your going to lie and say I'm wrong:
Quote:
Again
allstarjim : 3:20 pm : link : reply
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
This not understanding who wrote what seems to be a trend with you. I suggest you read slower and it will help you to follow all the ignorant shit you write.
This is not true at all. Re-read the thread.
Quote:
RE: Because one thing is true
montanagiant : 3:10 pm : link : reply
What injuries supported that? The Medical examiner herself said his injuries were "Insignificant"
Quote:
montanagiant
allstarjim : 3:14 pm : link : reply
http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/george-zimmermans-injuries/
Only a fool would suggest someone should wait until the injuries were significant enough to cause unconsciousness, severe bodily injury, or death, before it is justifiable to defend oneself.
That's not personal attack, it's a valid, relevant point. Same here:
Quote:
Again
allstarjim : 3:20 pm : link : reply
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
Then this is you:
Quote:
RE: Again
montanagiant : 3:28 pm : link : reply
LMAO....Hey Dipshit, the MEDICAL EXAMINER stated that his injuries were most likely caused by one punch, not the "Pounding into the pavement" you keep claiming. If these were such life threatening injuries why did he wait until the next day to get examined at a clinic? Why no x-rays? Why does an actual doctor who examined the evidence claim they were extremely minor injuries?
You can sit here and try to claim this "Well if he falls just right, he might actually get injured" line of stupid, but the actual facts of the case are that his injuries were minor despite you trying to claim otherwise. Don't try to spin your claim now idiot, acknowledge that your wrong
Which is hilarious, because your point was shown to be incorrect, despite you writing it with such amazing conviction, lol.
This is also you:
Quote:
RE: RE: Well, if you aren't a supporter...
montanagiant : 3:19 pm : link : reply
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
I was responding to all of you (njm, xmeadowlander included)... but you clearly were in the "Zimmerman approached Martin" camp, as your question indicated acceptance that this statement was factual.
Seriously, I would just give it up if I were you. Maybe you could try another topic.
Ah yes, poor St. Trayvon! Poor, poor, beating a man's head into the pavement St. Trayvon!
If someone confronted me, I discovered it was George Zimmerman, and I couldn't run, I sure hope I could beat his head into the pavement. Might be the only way to survive that encounter.
I actually believe you and I started on this site the same week many years ago.
We probably have complete opposite views on many subjects but I know you are a passionate guy and I respect that. As I have said in the past, your dad was a major figure in our fair city and that tells me something about you.
You guys should know by now not to trust the headlines with little or no detail.
Lastly, after the last incident where the Lake Mary police issued a press release announcing the arrest and releasing Zimmerman's phone number and address, he had to move out of the state of Florida. The fact that this guy found him driving around after Zimmerman was visiting his mom is beyond creepy
RE: has he been charged with a crime in any of those incidents? Â
No? So what's your point? Unless your SOP is to assume guilt in every arrest, that is. Is that your belief?
Hey, Freddie Gray was arrested a whole bunch of times! Who cares what happened to him, amirite?
If it was freddie gray, there would be riots,and then the police would be told to stand down while the city burned and then we could blame it on racism because black mayor black DA black police chief plus Al Sharpton came to town to help straighten it all out.Everyone knows whitey runs baltimore.It's the system, man.
Zimmerman deserves what he gets. Poor freddie gray though.Just like Rodney King, innocent guy being picked on.
And dont bring up that nonsense about double standards.If Al Sharpton says it, it has to be true. Just ask Tawana Brawley.
You may think that if someone is doing that to you, it give you the right to confront that person with physical violence.
You'd be horribly wrong, too.
How about if they're actively stalking you? Your narrative is a garden of disinformation and begs the question.
I have zero interest in schooling more BBIers who didn't follow the case closely enough to have an informed opinion.
First you need to look up the definition of stalking and then see if it applies to this case (it doesn't). Other than that... feel free to let your imagination run wild.
Further, I've simply posted articles from credible news sources like ABC News and quoted them. I am far from providing disinformation. I have studied this case far more than most people outside of the legal authorities charged with doing so. If you have not done the same then do so before starting in with me. Btw this includes hearing all of the 911 calls, looking at overhead maps with incident overlays (critical to understanding what happened), reading the police reports, watching testimony on youtube, watching news interviews of eyewitnesses shortly after the altercation, and more. So, if you have more information I have not seen, I'd be glad to see it. Otherwise, bark up another tree.
What's with the "Poor, poor, St. Trayvon" crap? What's the purpose of interjecting that?
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear, so I don't understand the nasty tone regarding the dead teen.
What happened after that - if Zimmerman was acting in self defense or not was not clear enough to convict him, so the justice system acted appropriately. Could not prove murder, so he walked.
But the incident occurred because Zimmerman is undeniably unstable with serious anger issues.
So let me get this straight, you are saying Zimmerman was insane, therefore he should never have been charged in the first place, and should have put in a mental health care facility where he could get the assistance he needs. It was wrong for him to be prosecuted in the first place, due to reason of insanity. I see.
And it has precisely what to do with the evidence in that case?
Well there was a big push t paint Martin as a thug, while white washing Zimmerman's past. The facts though are that Zimmerman was the only one with a criminal record. One case involved an altercation with police. In addition the only way you know for sure he was getting beaten on by Martin, Is Zimmerman's story.
Right. Forensic evidence be damned.
RE: RE: RE: RE: OR. Maybe he IS a fucking lunatic... Â
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
As if some fucking phone operator making ten bucks an hour is the voice of God or something.
This is a good point. What right do we have to criticize Zimmerman for pursuing the guy counter to the 911 dispatcher's advice? That kind of reverence for the law and those whose job it is to uphold it is reserved only towards those that make triple her salary.
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
I'm sorry, is approaching someone a crime? Is there a statue for it somewhere? He needs to show justification for approaching someone? Or can I walk through your hood and you better stay the fuck away from me, is that the law? Pretty sure it isn't.
And it has precisely what to do with the evidence in that case?
Well there was a big push t paint Martin as a thug, while white washing Zimmerman's past. The facts though are that Zimmerman was the only one with a criminal record. One case involved an altercation with police. In addition the only way you know for sure he was getting beaten on by Martin, Is Zimmerman's story.
Right. Forensic evidence be damned.
Wasn't there a thread posted not too long ago citing a study that found a lot of forensic evidence is completely flawed? I think some namby-pamby liberal posted that, if I recall correctly.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: OR. Maybe he IS a fucking lunatic... Â
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
He started some shit. I can't say exactly what it was. Shoulda just left the kid alone. But he chased him right up until it was time to stand his ground.
Right, "He started some shit" could you POSSIBLY have any less of a clue what the fuck you are talking about. You don't know what he did wrong but it must have been something. How about you dont like the fact he was guilty of being white? Cause apparently that's all he was guilty of. What else, you're not sure of, but it must have been something.
BURN THE WITCH!!! ignorant asshole.
You can pick a fight with montanagiant... it's ok. You'll win because people like him only like to deal with speculation, maybe's, emotion, what MSM/the internet tells them to think, and their imagination. People like us try to be objective and look at the totality of evidence and consider all the facts, without preconceived notions and biases.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
By the way Ace, before getting your panties in an uproar, you were the one to take the first personal shot, so don't sit here crying like a little bitch because you got it back. Here, because knowing you, your going to lie and say I'm wrong:
Quote:
Again
allstarjim : 3:20 pm : link : reply
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
This not understanding who wrote what seems to be a trend with you. I suggest you read slower and it will help you to follow all the ignorant shit you write.
This is not true at all. Re-read the thread.
Quote:
RE: Because one thing is true
montanagiant : 3:10 pm : link : reply
What injuries supported that? The Medical examiner herself said his injuries were "Insignificant"
Quote:
montanagiant
allstarjim : 3:14 pm : link : reply
http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/george-zimmermans-injuries/
Only a fool would suggest someone should wait until the injuries were significant enough to cause unconsciousness, severe bodily injury, or death, before it is justifiable to defend oneself.
That's not personal attack, it's a valid, relevant point. Same here:
Quote:
Again
allstarjim : 3:20 pm : link : reply
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
Then this is you:
Quote:
RE: Again
montanagiant : 3:28 pm : link : reply
LMAO....Hey Dipshit, the MEDICAL EXAMINER stated that his injuries were most likely caused by one punch, not the "Pounding into the pavement" you keep claiming. If these were such life threatening injuries why did he wait until the next day to get examined at a clinic? Why no x-rays? Why does an actual doctor who examined the evidence claim they were extremely minor injuries?
You can sit here and try to claim this "Well if he falls just right, he might actually get injured" line of stupid, but the actual facts of the case are that his injuries were minor despite you trying to claim otherwise. Don't try to spin your claim now idiot, acknowledge that your wrong
Which is hilarious, because your point was shown to be incorrect, despite you writing it with such amazing conviction, lol.
This is also you:
Quote:
RE: RE: Well, if you aren't a supporter...
montanagiant : 3:19 pm : link : reply
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
I was responding to all of you (njm, xmeadowlander included)... but you clearly were in the "Zimmerman approached Martin" camp, as your question indicated acceptance that this statement was factual.
Seriously, I would just give it up if I were you. Maybe you could try another topic.
Holy shit, are you for real here? You come out calling people fools and morons first, and then want to sit here and claim that is not a personal attack? Then double down with that ignorance and act like a twat and whine because you get hit back....You have to have some mental issues to apply such a warped logic to what you said. This is like dealing with a 12 year old. LOL...unbelievable the constant attempts at twisting the truth.
By the way, what point was found to be incorrect? Â
The devil you say! I'm nonplussed! Is that the right word?
Apparently she wasn't very convincing.
So based on that logic, I take it you believe OJ is innocent correct?
Since there is virtually no exculpatory evidence that should have cleared OJ....no. But invoking OJ is a pretty good sign that you don't have a whole helluva lot to use here.
Yeah I guess those gloves not fitting was a fantasy
Which just shows how twisted partial and lacking credibility anything you have to say is.Tell us how OJ is innocent, but martin is guilty. Hypocrite. It's clear what you think and who you support is based not on facts but the color of their skin.
And it has precisely what to do with the evidence in that case?
Well there was a big push t paint Martin as a thug, while white washing Zimmerman's past. The facts though are that Zimmerman was the only one with a criminal record. One case involved an altercation with police. In addition the only way you know for sure he was getting beaten on by Martin, Is Zimmerman's story.
Right. Forensic evidence be damned.
What forensic evidence? The fact no DNA of Martins was found on the Holster despite Zimmermans claim he made a grab for the gun there?
RE: RE: RE: RE: Well, if you aren't a supporter... Â
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
I'm sorry, is approaching someone a crime? Is there a statue for it somewhere? He needs to show justification for approaching someone? Or can I walk through your hood and you better stay the fuck away from me, is that the law? Pretty sure it isn't.
Why do I have to explain to the second person who can't follow a fucking thread discussion? IT WAS NJM WHO SAID HE APPROACHED HIM in response to someone else claiming he it happened unjustly...Holy fuck is it really that hard to follow a discussion?
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
So by this statement "A jury found him innocent" Does that mean everyone found innocent was not guilty of the crime? Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, OJ? they were all innocent and did not do the crime correct?
Why the hell is he going to start a fight instead of drawing his weapon? That makes absolutely no sense.
You can't just draw your firearm in Florida. The only time you can draw your firearm is in a stand your ground situation where your life is in danger, and you pretty much have to fire it.
RE: RE: so, your big gotcha is a woman who claims to have seen something Â
One man in the incident had been punched. It was Zimmerman. One had knuckles that were busted up. That was Martin.
But yeah, some woman who admits she doesn't really know what she saw think that Zimmerman was the one beating on Martin. You've got me.
So from the fact that Zimmerman got punched, and Martin had scrapes on his hand we can throw out any kind of theory that Zimmerman initiated this? That those scrapes are proof positive that Martin started this? Never seen a fight where one idiot decides to shove someone and gets clocked? Never seen a fight where one guy takes a swing and misses and then gets his ass handed to him? Must be nice to live in such a proof positive world where scrapes on a knuckle is all you need
See the ONLY one who has had a say in what actually happened at the start was the guy fighting not to go to jail.
Don't need proof. Had a trial. He was found innocent. Unless maybe you want to argue against jury trials.I find it hilarious how a guy get shot in the face, and a whole segment of the community cheers it on based on nothing but racial hatred of this guy saying he deserved it. based on nothing but ourageous unsubstantiated assumptions it must be his fault.It's crystal clear who the racists and haters are. Blame the victim some more why don't you.
RE: RE: never seen a fight where an armed man up and takes a swing Â
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
If he didnt want to start a fight why did he go back? why did his girlfriend find it necessarry to tell him to just go home and not go looking for trouble? Your case has no merits, thus why Zimmerman was found not guilty.
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
So by this statement "A jury found him innocent" Does that mean everyone found innocent was not guilty of the crime? Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, OJ? they were all innocent and did not do the crime correct?
lives not too far from me. He's involved in all sorts of incidents. Allowing him to possess a firearm of any type just doesn't make sense. I'm a big supporter of firearms rights and I feel the government would be doing everyone a favor by disarming this person once and for all.
My opinion of Zimmerman has nothing to do with the case that made him infamous. I'd feel the same about any person who is involved in all sorts of disputes that turn violent and usually involve a firearm. He disgusts me as a fellow human. I hope there is some law on the books somewhere that can ensure he goes gunless or goes to prison.
If you drank it would give you cover for being a Â
You have to look at the situation objectively. At the time, the evidence pointed to Trayvon attacking him (likely because Zimmerman was watching him).
Zimmerman's injuries supported his account.
He can, at the same time, be an insufferable dirtbag, and a victim. He can, at the same time, have legally defended himself against an attacker, and also be a head case.
And, both he and Trayvon both may have been, let's just say, not the finest examples of humanity, where both of their actions contributed to what transpired.
You don't have to believe George Zimmerman is a great guy to believe he was attacked and legally used lethal force to defend himself.
This is what I think of the whole thing... and the jury at the time agreed after reviewing all of the evidence and witness testimony.
Unfortunately, dead people cannot defend themselves. George can say all he wants. We will never know the truth except that a young man was killed. The police specifically told George not to follow the kid. If he didn't follow kid, we would not be discussing this.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: OR. Maybe he IS a fucking lunatic... Â
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
So by this statement "A jury found him innocent" Does that mean everyone found innocent was not guilty of the crime? Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, OJ? they were all innocent and did not do the crime correct?
Didn't you already say OJ was innocent?
No I did not...And really that is a weak attempt at not answering the question because you know it will make you look silly when you do.
So lets try this again:
Since you feel that a jury finding someone not guilty means they are innocent, does that mean you believe Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, and OJ are innocent and did not commit those crimes?
And it has precisely what to do with the evidence in that case?
Well there was a big push t paint Martin as a thug, while white washing Zimmerman's past. The facts though are that Zimmerman was the only one with a criminal record. One case involved an altercation with police. In addition the only way you know for sure he was getting beaten on by Martin, Is Zimmerman's story.
Right. Forensic evidence be damned.
Wasn't there a thread posted not too long ago citing a study that found a lot of forensic evidence is completely flawed? I think some namby-pamby liberal posted that, if I recall correctly.
There WAS a study showing a lot of ferensic evidence is flawed, and I mean a LOT of it. If i recall correctly it was evidence that was used to obtain convictions, meaning, evidence presented by the state, the prosecutiion.I seem to think it largely concerned DNA evidence, if we are talking about the same thing. Not evidence used by the defense, in general, as would have been the case with Zimmerman here.Your point isn't applicable with respect to the report about faulty evidence and george zimmerman. There is not connection there, but I think you knew that.
It's my practice to try and keep dialogue civilized until the other party decides they don't need to do that.What I'll say is that I followed the Zimmerman case, I don't think much of the man, but in the end I concluded 2 things. 1)Trayvon martin assaulted Zimmerman.Had Zimmerman NOT fired I think it would have been next to impossible to not have found Martin guilty of assault.My review of what I saw as evidence presented told me that, told me that in fact reports on his injuries were minimized by the media.
2)I also thought had the jury come back with a verdict of manslaughter or misadventure, I wouldn't have been too upset about it. The prosecution had no business charging him with murder in the first place. On the other hand I thought Zimmerman should have served some time. He was guilty of Harrasment at the very least.Manslaughter at most.
Some tweets from the reporting done on the guy who tried to shoot GZ Â
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
If he didnt want to start a fight why did he go back? why did his girlfriend find it necessarry to tell him to just go home and not go looking for trouble? Your case has no merits, thus why Zimmerman was found not guilty.
So if your going to use his GF testimony as evidence, you would then have to use all of it correct? If that is the case then you have right there all the evidence of Zimmerman starting the fight and being the one on top while martin was the one calling for help. That makes all of Zimmermans testimony a lie then threatening Martin. I mean, we can't just claim one part was accurate (Her claiming Martin said he was almost back to his house) and ignore the rest can we?
RE: RE: RE: What are the odds of another George Zimmerman Â
You mean like with rodney king who kept getting in trouble until he was killed, not by the police? Like that? Or is it different?
Just to be clear, this is a white vs black issue for you?
To be clear, I think there are a lot of racists on this forum, and they aren't all white.The most vocal ones aren't.I think it's a double standard issue.I think you can't go about spreading racist attitudes, and then crying about racial injustice. I think integrity is the basis for any real discussion , and integrity is replaced by hatred in the minds of many of those who post most often.I think a lot of sophistry and back patting goes on amongst a certain group, whereby the reinforce each others false beliefs and sense of self righteousness.
Do I think it's a black and white issue?I do. I don't think it should be, but I think it is.I don't think it's whites who make it a racial issue, however.
Just like I don't think Daniel Gray should have been a race issue. Had it been a white guy arrested 20 times, with an arrest record getting increasingly frequent and increasingly violent as time wore on, I don't think anyone gives a flying fuck if he dies after a "rough ride" obviously getting arrested and apprehended by the police means shit in Baltimore, as he just keeps getting released, no matter what he does. I'll take it a step further and point to a mayor who like Nero watched her city burn while ordering law not to be enforced.
You have a black mayor, a black DA, a black Police chief, 3 out of 6 officers involved in that incident are black, and a mayor that lets riot run rampant because "the system" is at fault, a system in a city , and state, run by black democrats for 50 years, their system, that they run, and have run, for half a century, and then try and blame outside forces for the awful state of affairs in Baltimore, one of their own making one where the only real outside forces consist of massive amounts of federal cash flowing into both the city and state for education, making it like I think the third highest recipient in the country, with math and reading skills both below 20th%, regardless of how much money is thrown at them.They bring in al Sharpton, the famous conciliator to work his Magic, like he did in the Tawana Brawley case.I know parasites and opportunists posing as leaders and healers when I see them.They exist in real life, in politics, and on the interwebz as well.
I think it's a black and white issue when one side says the other side is guilty of this that and the other thing, and then refuse to own their own stinky shit, and pretend like the rest of us have to portend it doesn't stink. Your shit stinks. Bad.
Why the hell is he going to start a fight instead of drawing his weapon? That makes absolutely no sense.
You can't just draw your firearm in Florida. The only time you can draw your firearm is in a stand your ground situation where your life is in danger, and you pretty much have to fire it.
Wrong.
Stand your ground in Florida means nothing more than you don't have to retreat.
Why stand your ground was never used as a defense in the Martin case? It didn't apply and wouldn't fly.
Self defense was the was the defense used and is damn near the same in every state.
A concealed weapons permitted carrier can draw and use his weapon of choice in any of a number of situations legally.
RE: If you drank it would give you cover for being a Â
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
So by this statement "A jury found him innocent" Does that mean everyone found innocent was not guilty of the crime? Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, OJ? they were all innocent and did not do the crime correct?
Didn't you already say OJ was innocent?
No I did not...And really that is a weak attempt at not answering the question because you know it will make you look silly when you do.
So lets try this again:
Since you feel that a jury finding someone not guilty means they are innocent, does that mean you believe Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, and OJ are innocent and did not commit those crimes?
I think what is silly is you pretending it's some eort of established fact Zimmerman is guilty of anything, especially since he was tried. What is silly is you assuming everyone like you wishes him harm and sees it as just he got shot in the face. I don't look silly, but you look like the sick vengeful hateful person you are.
Pretty sure we've known each other (here) for years and years. BTW: Just to de-rail the thread, I finally got a very good job last month. C#.NET+SQL+Web+mvc+WebAPI stuff. I really like this job! Haven't had a good job in a long time.
Do you still place programmers? Are most positions perm, contract or contract-to-hire? I went through Vaco and it was going to be contract-to-hire but went perm at the last minute, which is what I really wanted.
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
If he didnt want to start a fight why did he go back? why did his girlfriend find it necessarry to tell him to just go home and not go looking for trouble? Your case has no merits, thus why Zimmerman was found not guilty.
So if your going to use his GF testimony as evidence, you would then have to use all of it correct? If that is the case then you have right there all the evidence of Zimmerman starting the fight and being the one on top while martin was the one calling for help. That makes all of Zimmermans testimony a lie then threatening Martin. I mean, we can't just claim one part was accurate (Her claiming Martin said he was almost back to his house) and ignore the rest can we?
You make fallacious statements and when cornered you dont own your shit, you continually try and expand the point, the scope of initial claims in the hope you can obfuscate the issue,and attempt to turn the argument on it's head. As far as what "we can believe" we can believe whatever we find to be credible, and not believe that which is not.
Your claims that Zimmerman was the one on top and the one that started the fight make you look like the idiot you are. Even the witness said martin was on top.You're just not very bright, are you. Go chase your tail, bumpkin.
Hahaha....everybody's a racist except you. The legend of Great White Power continues.
Right, that's what I said. Don't jherk your little stump too hard pretending you have somethign to say, or that anyone is listening, or that you have a clue what you're talking about.You're a punk ass bitch jumping on someone else's bandwagon to try and get some street cred here. You're a non entity, now fuckoff, boy.
Hahaha....everybody's a racist except you. The legend of Great White Power continues.
Right, that's what I said. Don't jherk your little stump too hard pretending you have somethign to say, or that anyone is listening, or that you have a clue what you're talking about.You're a punk ass bitch jumping on someone else's bandwagon to try and get some street cred here. You're a non entity, now fuckoff, boy.
Street cred? Boy?
Don't you have some Alex Jones tin foil hats to put together you racist shit stain??
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: OR. Maybe he IS a fucking lunatic... Â
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
I don't even know what this means in response to my post. I'm not interested in arguing with you GWG. I've witnessed first hand the type of poster you are and I'm not interested in even debating with you. You've made your point with me.
I'm amazed he has Internet acess in his bunker, tbh. And I'm surprised he has time to argue something as trivial as this while the military is planning a joint strike with law enforcement to take out all of the red states.
Hahaha....everybody's a racist except you. The legend of Great White Power continues.
Right, that's what I said. Don't jherk your little stump too hard pretending you have somethign to say, or that anyone is listening, or that you have a clue what you're talking about.You're a punk ass bitch jumping on someone else's bandwagon to try and get some street cred here. You're a non entity, now fuckoff, boy.
Street cred? Boy?
Don't you have some Alex Jones tin foil hats to put together you racist shit stain??
Like I said, all you can do is try and glom onto someone else's tired shit.You're weak and lacking.Come back when you fit into your big boy pants.You're like a little fish I catch, make dance on my line for a bit, then release hoping it will grow up and come back bigger and smarter in a few years and give me a better fight when it isn't just a little fish like you.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: never seen a fight where an armed man up and takes a swing Â
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
If he didnt want to start a fight why did he go back? why did his girlfriend find it necessarry to tell him to just go home and not go looking for trouble? Your case has no merits, thus why Zimmerman was found not guilty.
So if your going to use his GF testimony as evidence, you would then have to use all of it correct? If that is the case then you have right there all the evidence of Zimmerman starting the fight and being the one on top while martin was the one calling for help. That makes all of Zimmermans testimony a lie then threatening Martin. I mean, we can't just claim one part was accurate (Her claiming Martin said he was almost back to his house) and ignore the rest can we?
You make fallacious statements and when cornered you dont own your shit, you continually try and expand the point, the scope of initial claims in the hope you can obfuscate the issue,and attempt to turn the argument on it's head. As far as what "we can believe" we can believe whatever we find to be credible, and not believe that which is not.
Your claims that Zimmerman was the one on top and the one that started the fight make you look like the idiot you are. Even the witness said martin was on top.You're just not very bright, are you. Go chase your tail, bumpkin.
WTF is it with some of these posters on here. They write shit and then don't understand what the hell they wrote.
YOUR THE ONE who used his GF's testimony as proof he "went back" to Zimmerman. I am merely pointing that if your going to use her testimony for that, you have to use all of what she testified about. If you do that then, her claims that she heard Martin telling Zimmerman to "get off of me" have to apply and that means Zimmerman lied about Martin being on top.
Why the fuck do I have to explain to you your own fucking argument? You can't use just part of what she said, you have to use all of it then and that means Zimmerman was the agressor and the one one beating Martin up.
Why the hell is he going to start a fight instead of drawing his weapon? That makes absolutely no sense.
You can't just draw your firearm in Florida. The only time you can draw your firearm is in a stand your ground situation where your life is in danger, and you pretty much have to fire it.
Wrong.
Stand your ground in Florida means nothing more than you don't have to retreat.
Why stand your ground was never used as a defense in the Martin case? It didn't apply and wouldn't fly.
Self defense was the was the defense used and is damn near the same in every state.
A concealed weapons permitted carrier can draw and use his weapon of choice in any of a number of situations legally.
Not when someone is walking through a neighborhood doing nothing wrong. You can't just pull your gun and legally approach someone because you believe someone wearing a hoodie might want to rob a house
I'm amazed he has Internet acess in his bunker, tbh. And I'm surprised he has time to argue something as trivial as this while the military is planning a joint strike with law enforcement to take out all of the red states.
And thats what someone does when they can't argue whats said, pretend the other party said something they didn't so they CAN take issue.Keep trying to put words in my mouth, I got something to put in yours.You'll like it I promise.
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: A prosecution witness minimized Zimmerman's injuries? Â
The devil you say! I'm nonplussed! Is that the right word?
Apparently she wasn't very convincing.
So based on that logic, I take it you believe OJ is innocent correct?
Since there is virtually no exculpatory evidence that should have cleared OJ....no. But invoking OJ is a pretty good sign that you don't have a whole helluva lot to use here.
Yeah I guess those gloves not fitting was a fantasy
Which just shows how twisted partial and lacking credibility anything you have to say is.Tell us how OJ is innocent, but martin is guilty. Hypocrite. It's clear what you think and who you support is based not on facts but the color of their skin.
You really are a stupid fuck aren't you? Nowhere in the context of that discussion you have quoted did i say OJ was innocent. You fail on basic reading skills
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
So by this statement "A jury found him innocent" Does that mean everyone found innocent was not guilty of the crime? Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, OJ? they were all innocent and did not do the crime correct?
Didn't you already say OJ was innocent?
No I did not...And really that is a weak attempt at not answering the question because you know it will make you look silly when you do.
So lets try this again:
Since you feel that a jury finding someone not guilty means they are innocent, does that mean you believe Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, and OJ are innocent and did not commit those crimes?
I think what is silly is you pretending it's some eort of established fact Zimmerman is guilty of anything, especially since he was tried. What is silly is you assuming everyone like you wishes him harm and sees it as just he got shot in the face. I don't look silly, but you look like the sick vengeful hateful person you are.
So in other words because you made the stupid claim that someone being found "Not Guilty" means they are innocent. me pointing out how completely silly that claim is means you lack the nads to answer the question. You keep dodging it like a pussy, so lets try it again Einstein.:
Since YOU BELIEVE that a "not guilty" decision means someone is innocent, does that mean you feel that Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, and OJ are also innocent?
This is really easy even for you. You claimed a not guilty meant someone was innocent. Does that also mean those mentioned are innocent people who did not do the crime?
Grow a set of balls and answer the simple question. Do so though before you get banned again for good this time, it won't be long in coming
I'm amazed he has Internet acess in his bunker, tbh. And I'm surprised he has time to argue something as trivial as this while the military is planning a joint strike with law enforcement to take out all of the red states.
And thats what someone does when they can't argue whats said, pretend the other party said something they didn't so they CAN take issue.Keep trying to put words in my mouth, I got something to put in yours.You'll like it I promise.
His bunker = Mom's basement
RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: never seen a fight where an armed man up and takes a swing Â
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
If he didnt want to start a fight why did he go back? why did his girlfriend find it necessarry to tell him to just go home and not go looking for trouble? Your case has no merits, thus why Zimmerman was found not guilty.
So if your going to use his GF testimony as evidence, you would then have to use all of it correct? If that is the case then you have right there all the evidence of Zimmerman starting the fight and being the one on top while martin was the one calling for help. That makes all of Zimmermans testimony a lie then threatening Martin. I mean, we can't just claim one part was accurate (Her claiming Martin said he was almost back to his house) and ignore the rest can we?
You make fallacious statements and when cornered you dont own your shit, you continually try and expand the point, the scope of initial claims in the hope you can obfuscate the issue,and attempt to turn the argument on it's head. As far as what "we can believe" we can believe whatever we find to be credible, and not believe that which is not.
Your claims that Zimmerman was the one on top and the one that started the fight make you look like the idiot you are. Even the witness said martin was on top.You're just not very bright, are you. Go chase your tail, bumpkin.
WTF is it with some of these posters on here. They write shit and then don't understand what the hell they wrote.
YOUR THE ONE who used his GF's testimony as proof he "went back" to Zimmerman. I am merely pointing that if your going to use her testimony for that, you have to use all of what she testified about. If you do that then, her claims that she heard Martin telling Zimmerman to "get off of me" have to apply and that means Zimmerman lied about Martin being on top.
Why the fuck do I have to explain to you your own fucking argument? You can't use just part of what she said, you have to use all of it then and that means Zimmerman was the aggressor and the one one beating Martin up.
I know what I wrote and I know what I said, and I dont have to do a fucking thing.You dont get to tell people what to think or tell them what they have to consider, especially when someone does the same to you and you ignore facts and logic .You can maintain Zimmerman assaulted martin and Zimmerman was on top, but you occupy a lonely position, most anyone with a brain, like the jury in the case disagree.
The fact remains his girlfreind said she told him not to go back. you can lie and pretend she didnt, but she did. You can try and raise other issues and other points, but why would anyone engage with someone dealing in bad faith? one thing if you respond to any issue, it gets resolved, and we move on. But this isn't a dialogue. You don't have dialogues. You verbally assault and insult anyone with a different opinion.Don't mistake whats going on here. This isn't a discussion. This is you trying to be internet tough guy and someone calling you on your bullshit, and you trying to obfuscate the issue.You want a civil discussion, then have one, but you don't and you won't. You're a thug and a wannabe bully.Acting like a gentleman isn't something you're capable of.
My God, you are really just an insignificant moron who does not have one whit about what they are talking about. Go away little boy, the adults are talking
I will try one last time and do so in a manner you might be able to un Â
Now, I have asked you repeatedly to respond to that silly ass "Not guilty means your innocent" logic you used earlier. But you keep running from answering the question i asked with regards to that. We all know why you are doing that, because it makes your point extremely silly and naive. but lets hope you can answer this simple question without running from it also
Thats treue also. How Graziano makes the jump form Tyree saying he doesn't approve, to all of a sudden claiming hateful and damaging actions is bullshit.I'm tired of this hysterical whining
bullshit and will fight it wherever I find it.who the hell is graziano to be telling us what we should or shouldn't approve of.I leave you alone, you leave me alone, but go fuck yourselves wheb you want to tell me how to think or nake moral judgements on it, cause guess what, then ill start passing moral judgements on other people for being dicksucks. And i don't really give a shit who it offends anymore. those who are offended tend to be the most vile sorts of people anyway.most parts of the world fagotism is treated as a mental illness, or a crime.i don't really give a shit is some closeted fag in the giants locker room was thinking about coming out and now feels he can't. Maybe we get lucky and he asks to be traded, and furthermore others of their ilk avoid signign with us in the future. If Mara and Tasxh had that in mind, Bravo.The whole soncept of them " scrambling for damage control" is hirseshit. The did it, and they don't give 2 shits who is butthurt over it.Theyw ant to hire a gay player, go right ahead. They want to hire 20, thats fine too.They want to hire a gay GM< i'm down with that also. But don't presume to tell me how to feel about it. What a man thinks in his own head id his own fucking business, and he has a right to express it if he wants.
You wanna call me a bigot, go right ahead.Doesn't make me one.somehow now saying anything other than promoting fagotry is a hate crime. i call bullshit.Also tyree is right. Go find the fag gene, otherwise shut the fuck up about how you were born this way and can't help yourself.Bigots make you sick? Fagots make me sick. too bad.If me saying thst is a crime, then I think you are a sick twisted bastard.Tyree has every right to hisd opinion and doesnt owe his integrity as a man and a human being to an employer. There are plenty of ameerican men whio think homosexuality is sick and disgussting, but they simply wont say so in public because they might be adversely affected. these men are characterless weasels. At least Tyree has the courage of his convictions.anyone don't like my opinion can go pound it up their ass along with whatever else they like to shove up there.Graziano makes me sick.
Imagine how incoherent he would be if he actually drank?
This right here is excellence defined as far as nutjob posting goes:
Quote:
If Mara and Tasxh had that in mind, Bravo.The whole soncept of them " scrambling for damage control" is hirseshit. The did it, and they don't give 2 shits who is butthurt over it.
I'm amazed he has Internet acess in his bunker, tbh. And I'm surprised he has time to argue something as trivial as this while the military is planning a joint strike with law enforcement to take out all of the red states.
And thats what someone does when they can't argue whats said, pretend the other party said something they didn't so they CAN take issue.Keep trying to put words in my mouth, I got something to put in yours.You'll like it I promise.
Flattered, but no thanks! No worries, I'm a smexe fuck and used to it.
Anyway, before all of arousing homoeroticism got throw in Id like to respond:
I wasn't trying to disprove anything you've typed. Haven't even read it. I thought that was pretty obvious. I was just providing your background based on your recent posting history here to "color" (haha) what you've typed for those that don't know.
I figure it's kinda like going through a dead teenager's phone and splashing it all over certain media outlets. Ya know, to "be informed". (I used quotes because I don't like being disingenuous. I'm doing it so folks have something to confirm their biases about you- I consider it a public service.)
I took the whole blow job proposition as the "not very secure in his sexuality" kind of insult, or maybe the plain old mostly innocent "that's just how we did insults when we were kids" - not the "self loathing projecting" type.
And his level of holding a coherent and logical conversation is that of a drunk 15 year old moron, and his level of typing is that of a 9 year old, who barely learned how to type.
I weep for those, who have to deal with him in person on a daily basis. And I weep for the Corps that this jackass homophobic racist wore the EGA once. But hey, what the hell do I know? I'm a gay rights supporting, minority, PLC pogue according to him.
And his level of holding a coherent and logical conversation is that of a drunk 15 year old moron, and his level of typing is that of a 9 year old, who barely learned how to type.
I weep for those, who have to deal with him in person on a daily basis. And I weep for the Corps that this jackass homophobic racist wore the EGA once. But hey, what the hell do I know? I'm a gay rights supporting, minority, PLC pogue according to him.
I'm sorry, I referred to you or implied you're a minority somewhere?as usual, you're a liar.
Post your Annopolis dilpoma or GTFO, pogue.Put up or shut up.And stop being such a whining woman. You follow me around, toss grenades and cry like a total bitch when you get anything back. You're weak, spineless.I'm in your head, not the other way around. It's you who follows me around looking for a bone or acknowledgement. Go make some friends, and fuckoff.I happen to know for a fact i pay absolutely no attention to you unless your jumping up and down throwing handgrenades begging for attention. like I said I feel sorry for you. was pathetic to watch you in that other thread. toss a comment in and you were good for another 12 hours. it was sad, like I said, and goes a ways to explain how we lsot the last few wars we've fought and can't even take care of our own personell anymore when I come to understand guys like you think they are our best and bravest. you understand shit about how to fight and win wars.Funny, I think it's you who are a disgrace to my beloved corps.Don't think it didn't escape me that the one time I attempted to even discuss actual doctrine and doctrine development you fled like a girl.Another inept uninformed officer.Probably an Amos fan as well.
This thread is an 'Add water and mix' Instant Classic Â
Now, I have asked you repeatedly to respond to that silly ass "Not guilty means your innocent" logic you used earlier. But you keep running from answering the question i asked with regards to that. We all know why you are doing that, because it makes your point extremely silly and naive. but lets hope you can answer this simple question without running from it also
Here, I'll throw you a bone.Say for the sake or argument, you're right. say for the sake or argument it's obvious that a not guilty vote doesn't mean he's innocent. Take it a step further, and pretend that anyone with half a brain actually knows that.Yet that's not what I put out there. Now, you seem quite content to leave it at that, and come to what, for you, is the obvius conclusion, that I am of below avg intelligence. If youre good with that, then you stay there.Vut assuming that what I wrote above is self apparent, it begs the question, why would I say that?
Do you suppose I had no reason, or that I truly believe the verdicts showed Zimmerman had no blame.Lets see if you're as smart as you think.
You tried to discuss doctrine with me? Dude, you probably barely understanding squad tactics, let alone actual doctrine. Stay in your lane, fool.
And you don't have to believe anything about me. To you, I'm a nobody. However, I'm also that nobody, who has gotten into your head to the point that you can't do anything but get irate whenever I post in response to your idiotic posts. And I do admit that I get a ton of laughs out of pushing your buttons because it's so damn easy. And all I get in response is you calling me a pogue or a terrible officer or whatever lame insults you can throw my way. But then again, your lengthy, error-ridden diatribes are always welcome, so I do have to thank you for some awesome entertainment.
Also, you can go on and insult those of us, who did do our part in these conflicts by talking about how we lost multiple wars, but in the end, the extent to your conflict while in the Corps was to decide whether you should bang that Thai hooker during a MEU. But hey, don't mind us, who actually lost friends in actual combat. I'm sure you've lost some of yours as well...well, at least to venereal disease or something similar.
And don't worry, I lead a very uneventful life, so I will definitely spend my time hounding you until you either decide to leave BBI or get banned for doing something that comes natural to you, which is to be a homophobic, racist, conspiracy theorist moron. That the least I can do for my favorite teufel hunden on BBI.
But I do wish you a fine evening. Carry on the good fight, my man!
You tried to discuss doctrine with me? Dude, you probably barely understanding squad tactics, let alone actual doctrine. Stay in your lane, fool.
And you don't have to believe anything about me. To you, I'm a nobody. However, I'm also that nobody, who has gotten into your head to the point that you can't do anything but get irate whenever I post in response to your idiotic posts. And I do admit that I get a ton of laughs out of pushing your buttons because it's so damn easy. And all I get in response is you calling me a pogue or a terrible officer or whatever lame insults you can throw my way. But then again, your lengthy, error-ridden diatribes are always welcome, so I do have to thank you for some awesome entertainment.
Also, you can go on and insult those of us, who did do our part in these conflicts by talking about how we lost multiple wars, but in the end, the extent to your conflict while in the Corps was to decide whether you should bang that Thai hooker during a MEU. But hey, don't mind us, who actually lost friends in actual combat. I'm sure you've lost some of yours as well...well, at least to venereal disease or something similar.
And don't worry, I lead a very uneventful life, so I will definitely spend my time hounding you until you either decide to leave BBI or get banned for doing something that comes natural to you, which is to be a homophobic, racist, conspiracy theorist moron. That the least I can do for my favorite teufel hunden on BBI.
But I do wish you a fine evening. Carry on the good fight, my man!
Annapois diploma or GTFO, PLC pogue.
RE: RE: I will try one last time and do so in a manner you might be able to un Â
Now, I have asked you repeatedly to respond to that silly ass "Not guilty means your innocent" logic you used earlier. But you keep running from answering the question i asked with regards to that. We all know why you are doing that, because it makes your point extremely silly and naive. but lets hope you can answer this simple question without running from it also
Here, I'll throw you a bone.Say for the sake or argument, you're right. say for the sake or argument it's obvious that a not guilty vote doesn't mean he's innocent. Take it a step further, and pretend that anyone with half a brain actually knows that.Yet that's not what I put out there. Now, you seem quite content to leave it at that, and come to what, for you, is the obvius conclusion, that I am of below avg intelligence. If youre good with that, then you stay there.Vut assuming that what I wrote above is self apparent, it begs the question, why would I say that?
Do you suppose I had no reason, or that I truly believe the verdicts showed Zimmerman had no blame.Lets see if you're as smart as you think.
You failed once again to answer the question that directly points to your point about his GF's testimony. If you can't back your idiocy, don't post it then because all you are doing is making a fool of yourself. You truly show your ignorance with regards to subjects when you do stupid shit like that. Don't make a claim if you can't stand behind it
Now, I have asked you repeatedly to respond to that silly ass "Not guilty means your innocent" logic you used earlier. But you keep running from answering the question i asked with regards to that. We all know why you are doing that, because it makes your point extremely silly and naive. but lets hope you can answer this simple question without running from it also
Here, I'll throw you a bone.Say for the sake or argument, you're right. say for the sake or argument it's obvious that a not guilty vote doesn't mean he's innocent. Take it a step further, and pretend that anyone with half a brain actually knows that.Yet that's not what I put out there. Now, you seem quite content to leave it at that, and come to what, for you, is the obvius conclusion, that I am of below avg intelligence. If youre good with that, then you stay there.Vut assuming that what I wrote above is self apparent, it begs the question, why would I say that?
Do you suppose I had no reason, or that I truly believe the verdicts showed Zimmerman had no blame.Lets see if you're as smart as you think.
You failed once again to answer the question that directly points to your point about his GF's testimony. If you can't back your idiocy, don't post it then because all you are doing is making a fool of yourself. You truly show your ignorance with regards to subjects when you do stupid shit like that. Don't make a claim if you can't stand behind it
the only thing that's happened is you've shown what at idiot you are.I gave you a chance. And you're common, much as I suspected.
I always knew you wouldn't because once i backed you into the corner using your own nonsense it hit you that you fucked up. lol...its like dealing with a 8 year old child who lied.
What is going to be your next handle when you get banned again?
Aren't you then just going to throw out some lame Ring Knocker insult? I mean you are pretty predictable.
And there are some here who can vouch for my bona fide nature of my background. That's enough as far as I see it.
Sweet dreams, my angry friend.
Dont get upset and go away all mad. after all it was you who started questioning other peopels backgrounds. Dont cry you got exposed, PLC pogue.
What is your background you keep claiming? obviously its not teaching grammar, so clue us all in. you claimed you teach military tactics, where on Earth does this happen at? And please tell me we are not talking about Dungeon and Dragons tactics are we?
You can go on line like GWG like this idiot did and get all the slang. It is a term meant to degrade support staff like cooks, paper pushers, etc.. Anyone who has actually served though understands they also serve an important function, its just the wanna-be's who think they don't.
I would also throw in an assault on the English language and proper logic to that list. But I'm sure Antisemitism will also be added to the list shortly.
Deep in the Vietnamese jungles, he is known as the deadly White Ghost, a stealthy guerilla killer who continues to wage war against the Viet Cong, even though the war ended over a decade before. He is, in reality, Steve Shepard, a former U.S. Intelligence Officer with the Special Forces squad, a man listed MIA when his unit was slaughtered during an ambush. Since then, he has chosen to remain in the jungle. His only companion is his Vietnamese wife. This jungle actioner follows what happens when the U.S. military decides to try and bring him back to the U.S. Unfortunately, the former Green Beret officer chosen to lead the mission is Shepard's sworn enemy Walker, a man who seems more interested in bringing him back in a body bag. But will he succeed? This film went direct to video.
Deep in the Vietnamese jungles, he is known as the deadly White Ghost, a stealthy guerilla killer who continues to wage war against the Viet Cong, even though the war ended over a decade before. He is, in reality, Steve Shepard, a former U.S. Intelligence Officer with the Special Forces squad, a man listed MIA when his unit was slaughtered during an ambush. Since then, he has chosen to remain in the jungle. His only companion is his Vietnamese wife. This jungle actioner follows what happens when the U.S. military decides to try and bring him back to the U.S. Unfortunately, the former Green Beret officer chosen to lead the mission is Shepard's sworn enemy Walker, a man who seems more interested in bringing him back in a body bag. But will he succeed? This film went direct to video.
Link - ( New Window )
You are GWG's Walker, Ronnie. But will you succeed?
Some people and incidents are too far off central tendency to usefully use to discuss anything...imho.
But I am interested in asking...but wish the response kept private and not discussed.
GWG....for whatever reason and at this point top lost in time to be your fault or something anyone can overcome...can you take a day or so privately and ask yourself of this is worth it? It cannot be good for anyone to spend time in so much opposition. It's stress without a healthy payoff. It strikes me as unhealthy for you. I realize that opposition triggers stubborn opposition in all of us. But none of this or any one here is worth stress.
Secondly, there comes a time when the best inside any poster is lost and replaced by too much enjoyment at hammering the errant nail.
Don't misunderstand me....too many possible conversations wrecked by GWG and brownstones need to self stroke instead of discuss...but at some point none of us do well so far from our best. And we get into the practice of put down before give and take discussion that makes it hard for opposing and interesting view points to be submitted even if civilly done.
To slay the monster we become a new monster that wrecks what we originally objected to...decency and civic discourse.
No replies encouraged....just food for personal thought. I don't know what to do... but it sure seems like a lot of threads are going to be wrecked rehashing and re trying emotions long unanchored from original offense.
Your post definitely makes me question my own part in these back-and-forths with GWG. For some strange reason, I just feel compelled to push his buttons, and that's most definitely not a recipe for good discussions in any thread.
So for that, I will refrain from interacting with GWG, no matter if I enjoy seeing him get all discombobulated.
Here's a photo of George's car. Bullet hole through the window and one through the lower part of the passenger door Notice how deeply tinted the windows are and the location of the bullet hole. Again this is the same vehicle Zimmerman has been driving since the Martin altercation. Plus Zimmerman had moved out of Florida and was visiting his mom when this happened.
I've attached the arrest record of this Apperson guy who reminds me of that Slingblade character.
Interesting how quickly Mark Nejame got on this case to represent Apperson. This is the same attorney that George Zimmerman first went to. Nejame declined but referred Zimmerman to Mark O'Meara whom he later hired. I guess Nejame and O'Meara are good friends. Court record of Matt Apperson - ( New Window )
never hinged on him being a model citizen, it was whether or not what he did was criminal in that place and time. And while certainly some trouble has probably found him as a result of what happened, and no doubt the experience of being one of the most hated men in America probably took a toll, one can acknowledge that he is very likely an asshole without having to admit a mistake in trying to interpret what happened with Trayvon Martin.
Yeah its a weird phenomenon. I don't know the right way to handle these circles. Never did. It's like how do you discourage the discouraging without discouraging what we want to encourage?
Talk about bad English...re read that question three times and tell me we are not far off course.
Hopefully see you down the road my friend.
RE: RE: RE: RE: aaaaand.....again.....all this has fuck-all to do with the Martin Â
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Check out Bernie Goetz. Similar situation IF GZ was trying to instigate a 'justified' shooting. Goetz was found innocent but he was tried for murder. If he had a past like GZ and it was introduced in court what would have happened?
Wasn't Bernie Goetz being mugged? That's not similar at all, unless you are one of those people that just sees a white man shooting a black teen and lumps it all together. Which makes you part of the problem. btw.
Your post definitely makes me question my own part in these back-and-forths with GWG. For some strange reason, I just feel compelled to push his buttons, and that's most definitely not a recipe for good discussions in any thread.
So for that, I will refrain from interacting with GWG, no matter if I enjoy seeing him get all discombobulated.
Thank you, sir.
Meh. Definitely intentional on my part. I'm happy enough with my own shortcomings. They taste like bacon.
This word combo is the kind of shit some of us live for on BBI. Â
Meh. Definitely intentional on my part. I'm happy enough with my own shortcomings. They taste like bacon.
Of course my actions were also intentional, but that doesn't mean that I'm not derailing threads with my snark directed towards him. I definitely recognize my shortcomings in that regard. And yes, anything that taste like bacon is a good thing.
Derailing threads is fantastically fun sometimes. Â
Other then himself. You look at every discussion thread with different people. He comes on, makes a response and then flies off the handle when the problems or counter point is made regarding his response.
How is that anyone else's fault?
RE: I really don't see anyone else being the cause of that idiots angst Â
Other then himself. You look at every discussion thread with different people. He comes on, makes a response and then flies off the handle when the problems or counter point is made regarding his response.
How is that anyone else's fault?
Pretty sure that was the point, no? A request for some self-reflection (probably not A-Rod style, but who knows? Might do him some good?).
Its not. You know that and I know that. Blame was far from the point ( and you know better than to think that was my point....Did you give that response out of combative mode or thoughtful mode? That's what guys like this do to good posters....get them in bad cycles far from their best)
But its easy to do if you are willing to do so and easier if you have a screw loose and get some emotional payoff from it we do not understand.
You are working 20x harder than he is and getting nothing out of it.
He has no audience. He has no voice on here.
Meanwhile we let his presence wreck good threads.
I get the temptation....I fall into it all the time. I get that driving such posters away has a civic value to the site. However there are posters that are more than missing self awareness. At that point we have the sane engaging the insane (a response on a topic or at a time or in a situation or by a certain poster)....which by definition is insane. Why volunteer to be insane ( Repeating behavior proven useless and expecting a different response)?
imho. Again...I do the same things. I am not calling you out so lets lay down firearms on the subject
I could be way off but often in life people who act in ways not conducive to less stress for themselves are afraid of something....usually being irrelevant.
I am not qualified to help the real reason for the posts...and for all I know am contributing to the self administration of toxic cortisol into a PTSD victim.
Repeated public counterproductive self abuse by a stranger is not the kind of video I want to see friends watching. Nor does the practice help us produce good videos on other subjects.
if everyone on BBI wrote as well as Bill2 does, imho. Then points being made would be clear and meanings obvious. Oh, well.
Just glad we have a Bill2 among us to lend a hand.
Hey! I think I write pretty clearly and make the meanings pretty obvious. As my students have repeated said about me in their end of course critique, I'm a master of breaking things down Barnie style to make it easily understood even for the slowest of people.
if everyone on BBI wrote as well as Bill2 does, imho. Then points being made would be clear and meanings obvious. Oh, well.
Just glad we have a Bill2 among us to lend a hand.
Hey! I think I write pretty clearly and make the meanings pretty obvious. As my students have repeated said about me in their end of course critique, I'm a master of breaking things down Barnie style to make it easily understood even for the slowest of people.
if everyone on BBI wrote as well as Bill2 does, imho. Then points being made would be clear and meanings obvious. Oh, well.
Just glad we have a Bill2 among us to lend a hand.
Hey! I think I write pretty clearly and make the meanings pretty obvious. As my students have repeated said about me in their end of course critique, I'm a master of breaking things down Barnie style to make it easily understood even for the slowest of people.
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Check out Bernie Goetz. Similar situation IF GZ was trying to instigate a 'justified' shooting. Goetz was found innocent but he was tried for murder. If he had a past like GZ and it was introduced in court what would have happened?
Wasn't Bernie Goetz being mugged? That's not similar at all, unless you are one of those people that just sees a white man shooting a black teen and lumps it all together. Which makes you part of the problem. btw.
Bernie Goetz repeatedly rode the subway looking for an opportunity to 'defend himself'. Meaning that in a way he caused/looked for the confrontation that led to the shooting. In that way I thought it was on point. Also I think you completely missed the tone. The previous poster asked how it would be illegal to shoot someone in self defense. Goetz was on point in that regard. He was charged and tried.
If I was not clear, my fault. But by no means was I using Goetz to justify Zimmermin and I'm a bit resentful that you casually lumped me into that group and stopped just short of calling me a racist, btw
I'm sorry that I don't want to post a picture of my diploma or my commissioning warrant from my alma matre. So yes, for a PLC pogue.
Frankly, I cannot imagine anyone, even GWG, making such an outlandish request and expecting you to publish personal info here. It's so very similar to all the hoo-ha by the Birthers that I cannot view it as coincidental.
I have my persona-non-grata preferences here, just like everyone else does. I generally, although not nearly enough, manage to just avoid any interaction with those posters. Maybe if GWG starts presenting less inflammatory subjects and somehow manages to play well with others it would make it worthwhile to engage with him.
Unfortunately, that's fairly obviously not why he posts here. When the discussion devolves into demanding tangible "proof" of someone's assertions, especially in your case where there already exists substantial corroborating evidence, I think it's the better part to just say Sayonara, sucker and let him howl at the moon all by his lonesome.
Frankly, I cannot imagine anyone, even GWG, making such an outlandish request and expecting you to publish personal info here. It's so very similar to all the hoo-ha by the Birthers that I cannot view it as coincidental.
I have my persona-non-grata preferences here, just like everyone else does. I generally, although not nearly enough, manage to just avoid any interaction with those posters. Maybe if GWG starts presenting less inflammatory subjects and somehow manages to play well with others it would make it worthwhile to engage with him.
Unfortunately, that's fairly obviously not why he posts here. When the discussion devolves into demanding tangible "proof" of someone's assertions, especially in your case where there already exists substantial corroborating evidence, I think it's the better part to just say Sayonara, sucker and let him howl at the moon all by his lonesome.
Nicely stated. And that's why I'm taking the advice found in Bill2's post.
Here is my issue - GWG posted that awful, homophobic tirade that I reposted above. He was banned, and Eric, as is his right, let him back.
That means that it is now incumbent upon the rest of us to forget that he is a hate-filled piece of shit. Does GWG do ANYTHING to prove that he is any different than what he displayed in that post? Nope, same behavior, only slightly more circumspect, and he revels in it.
Sometimes a piece of shit needs to be reminded what decent people think of him.
on Matthew Apperson haven't gone unnoticed. This thread is all about GWG's stupid ass now but this Apperson character definitely seems like a shit-stirrer.
Police have charged Apperson with aggravated assault among other things over the incident, and he's out on $35,000 bail. And if the police report is to be believed he has some mental issues. Link - ( New Window )
Link - ( New Window )
George Zimmerman shot in face in Lake Mary - ( New Window )
dude seems like a nut though
Ah yes, poor St. Trayvon! Poor, poor, beating a man's head into the pavement St. Trayvon!
Quote:
Only if he left Trayvon alone..
Ah yes, poor St. Trayvon! Poor, poor, beating a man's head into the pavement St. Trayvon!
After all that's transpired, you still believe that? Or are you just kidding around here? There is something very wrong with George Zimmerman. Every one of these incidents makes the killing of Treyvon Martin look worse.
No - that means that he was INVOLVED IN A ROAD RAGE INCIDENT that led to shots being fired.
I've never been in one of those. You, Greg?
Quote:
Only if he left Trayvon alone..
Ah yes, poor St. Trayvon! Poor, poor, beating a man's head into the pavement St. Trayvon!
Good thing we got the 'full story' from the only survivor, St. George.
Well, we learned that Zimmerman is a crazy person, for one.
Well, I don't think Zimm's mental stability was called as much into question then as it is now.
Quote:
George Zimmerman gets shot in face = "George Zimmerman involved in shooting". Interesting construction.
No - that means that he was INVOLVED IN A ROAD RAGE INCIDENT that led to shots being fired.
I've never been in one of those. You, Greg?
One of my best friends was shot to death in an alcohol infused, road rage incident back in '83. Only person who had a gun was the person who shot him. It happens...
More like you were responding out of your ass
Police said it appeared to be a "road rage incident," according to the FOX 35 television station in Orlando.
Apart from the 2012 Martin shooting, Zimmerman has had other encounters with the law, including two incidents in 2005, five incidents in 2013 and other incidents in following years.
August 2005, Zimmerman's former fiancee filed for a restraining order against him, alleging domestic violence.
September 2013, Zimmerman's estranged wife, Shellie, dials 911 and tells a police dispatcher that he punched her father and threatened her with a gun.
November 2013, Zimmerman is arrested by Seminole County authorities after a disturbance at a home in Apopka.
point is all of these dont make the case of him being the peaceful guy who got beat by a 17 year old
Quote:
Do you have a source, or are you just talking out of your ass? I've read all three linked stories in this thread, and none of them contained the words "road rage".
More like you were responding out of your ass
Police said it appeared to be a "road rage incident," according to the FOX 35 television station in Orlando.
Then perhaps someone should link that particular story, since the ones linked here say nothing of the sort you dupe motherfucker.
On Tuesday September 9, 2014, George Zimmerman was named by police in a road rage incident where he reportedly threatened and followed another driver. Zimmerman reportedly responded aggressively when he noticed another driver pointing at him. According to the other driver Zimmerman said "Do you know who I am?" before saying, "I'll (expletive) kill you." Zimmerman allegedly followed the other driver to a parking lot while the driver called 911, but he fled before the police arrived. The other driver declined to press charges.
Sure. It just seems that in the context of all the other times that Zimmerman has threatened others since and he was chasing Zimmerman, perhaps the right way to look at it now is that Martin was defending himself from a nutjob who ultimately killed him.
You have to look at the situation objectively. At the time, the evidence pointed to Trayvon attacking him (likely because Zimmerman was watching him).
Zimmerman's injuries supported his account.
He can, at the same time, be an insufferable dirtbag, and a victim. He can, at the same time, have legally defended himself against an attacker, and also be a head case.
And, both he and Trayvon both may have been, let's just say, not the finest examples of humanity, where both of their actions contributed to what transpired.
You don't have to believe George Zimmerman is a great guy to believe he was attacked and legally used lethal force to defend himself.
This is what I think of the whole thing... and the jury at the time agreed after reviewing all of the evidence and witness testimony.
Come on - which of YOU haven't been charged with domestic violence battery and criminal mischief???
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
He was acquitted because there was reasonable doubt, as St. Trayvon was unavailable to testify.
Hey, Freddie Gray was arrested a whole bunch of times! Who cares what happened to him, amirite?
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
Nope. Completely immaterial.
Quote:
In comment 12281433 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
Do you have a source, or are you just talking out of your ass? I've read all three linked stories in this thread, and none of them contained the words "road rage".
More like you were responding out of your ass
Police said it appeared to be a "road rage incident," according to the FOX 35 television station in Orlando.
Then perhaps someone should link that particular story, since the ones linked here say nothing of the sort you dupe motherfucker.
Here you go fat ass.
link - ( New Window )
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear, so I don't understand the nasty tone regarding the dead teen.
What happened after that - if Zimmerman was acting in self defense or not was not clear enough to convict him, so the justice system acted appropriately. Could not prove murder, so he walked.
But the incident occurred because Zimmerman is undeniably unstable with serious anger issues.
Well there was a big push t paint Martin as a thug, while white washing Zimmerman's past. The facts though are that Zimmerman was the only one with a criminal record. One case involved an altercation with police. In addition the only way you know for sure he was getting beaten on by Martin, Is Zimmerman's story.
Quote:
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
You have to look at the situation objectively. At the time, the evidence pointed to Trayvon attacking him (likely because Zimmerman was watching him).
Zimmerman's injuries supported his account.
He can, at the same time, be an insufferable dirtbag, and a victim. He can, at the same time, have legally defended himself against an attacker, and also be a head case.
And, both he and Trayvon both may have been, let's just say, not the finest examples of humanity, where both of their actions contributed to what transpired.
You don't have to believe George Zimmerman is a great guy to believe he was attacked and legally used lethal force to defend himself.
This is what I think of the whole thing... and the jury at the time agreed after reviewing all of the evidence and witness testimony.
What injuries supported that? The Medical examiner herself said his injuries were "Insignificant"
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
Quote:
In comment 12281463 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
Only a fool would suggest someone should wait until the injuries were significant enough to cause unconsciousness, severe bodily injury, or death, before it is justifiable to defend oneself.
You'd be horribly wrong, too.
Only a fool would suggest someone should wait until the injuries were significant enough to cause unconsciousness, severe bodily injury, or death, before it is justifiable to defend oneself.
I guess you know more then the medical examiner then:
Dr. Valerie Rao, the medical examiner for Duval, Clay, and Nassau Counties in northern Florida, said Zimmerman’s injuries could have been the result of a single blow during a confrontation between the two.
Quote:
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
You're head is getting beaten in to the sidewalk, a single one of those hits can render you unconscious. At that point, you are in a life or death situation.
What is indisputable is that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman.
Martin had zero injuries outside of the gunshot wound to his person.
When you attack someone, if that person is armed, they can justifiably shoot you. End of story.
Quote:
In comment 12281485 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
I think the better way to put it is that apparently DOJ thinks what we KNOW about his following and approaching Martin did not rise to the level of a civil rights violation.
Quote:
In comment 12281485 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
You adding "approaching Martin" is clear speculation and conjecture on your part. The evidence supported Martin doubled back, hid from Zimmerman, then jumped out and approached him.
Regardless, even if your fictionalizing of events were true, Zimmerman's actions do not have to be justified or advisable for him to have been within his rights to defend himself.
And not you or anyone else is within their rights to attack someone you perceive or is actually following or watching you when in a public place.
A guy who Angela Corey (who's a worthless sack of shit, btw, for many other cases besides this one - look up Marissa Alexander if you don't believe me) tried to railroad, who the media tried dishonestly to brand a racist, who has received innumerable death threats since as a result.....that guy has serious anger issues now? Shocking! I don't believe it.
You're head is getting beaten in to the sidewalk, a single one of those hits can render you unconscious. At that point, you are in a life or death situation.
What is indisputable is that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman.
Martin had zero injuries outside of the gunshot wound to his person.
When you attack someone, if that person is armed, they can justifiably shoot you. End of story.
LMAO....Hey Dipshit, the MEDICAL EXAMINER stated that his injuries were most likely caused by one punch, not the "Pounding into the pavement" you keep claiming. If these were such life threatening injuries why did he wait until the next day to get examined at a clinic? Why no x-rays? Why does an actual doctor who examined the evidence claim they were extremely minor injuries?
You can sit here and try to claim this "Well if he falls just right, he might actually get injured" line of stupid, but the actual facts of the case are that his injuries were minor despite you trying to claim otherwise. Don't try to spin your claim now idiot, acknowledge that your wrong
Quote:
In comment 12281509 njm said:
Quote:
In comment 12281485 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
You adding "approaching Martin" is clear speculation and conjecture on your part. The evidence supported Martin doubled back, hid from Zimmerman, then jumped out and approached him.
Regardless, even if your fictionalizing of events were true, Zimmerman's actions do not have to be justified or advisable for him to have been within his rights to defend himself.
And not you or anyone else is within their rights to attack someone you perceive or is actually following or watching you when in a public place.
Are you slow? njm stated that he approached Martin, I just asked how that would justified then
Quote:
In comment 12281509 njm said:
Quote:
In comment 12281485 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
I think the better way to put it is that apparently DOJ thinks what we KNOW about his following and approaching Martin did not rise to the level of a civil rights violation.
Which is an extremely hard case to prove with the best of evidence
Apparently she wasn't very convincing.
You're head is getting beaten in to the sidewalk, a single one of those hits can render you unconscious. At that point, you are in a life or death situation.
What is indisputable is that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman.
Martin had zero injuries outside of the gunshot wound to his person.
When you attack someone, if that person is armed, they can justifiably shoot you. End of story.
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
Apparently she wasn't very convincing.
So based on that logic, I take it you believe OJ is innocent correct?
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Quote:
The devil you say! I'm nonplussed! Is that the right word?
Apparently she wasn't very convincing.
So based on that logic, I take it you believe OJ is innocent correct?
Since there is virtually no exculpatory evidence that should have cleared OJ....no. But invoking OJ is a pretty good sign that you don't have a whole helluva lot to use here.
Quote:
In comment 12281527 montanagiant said:
I think the better way to put it is that apparently DOJ thinks what we KNOW about his following and approaching Martin did not rise to the level of a civil rights violation.
Which is an extremely hard case to prove with the best of evidence
Perhaps. But it also contradicts the absolute certitude on the part of some people. Let's be blunt. If DOJ had any reasonable shot at a conviction Holder would have brought the case. The fact that charges were not pressed indicate that he was a lot less certain as to what happened than a lot of people on this thread.
Quote:
shooting.
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Quote:
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
He started some shit. I can't say exactly what it was. Shoulda just left the kid alone. But he chased him right up until it was time to stand his ground.
Quote:
In comment 12281460 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
shooting.
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Why do you defend this numbnuts?
Quote:
In comment 12281563 BeerFridge said:
Quote:
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
He started some shit. I can't say exactly what it was. Shoulda just left the kid alone. But he chased him right up until it was time to stand his ground.
For the last fucking time "Stand You Ground" had nothing to do with this case.
Nothing. To. Do. With. It. Completely different scenario. Your cutesy pun only exposes the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.
So, back to your argument - he "chased him right up to the end"? So, you're now positing that Zimmerman just chased Martin the entire time, and what? "Something" happened? An armed man somehow initiated a physical confrontation with an unarmed man and got his ass kicked? Does that make any sense? Unless he in fact was jumped by the unarmed man, who of course had no idea at that point that the guy he was attacked was armed.
Because I believe in the rule of law? I know, I know, crazy thing to believe in the mobocracy we're becoming, but some people actually do take it seriously.
Quote:
In comment 12281537 njm said:
Quote:
In comment 12281527 montanagiant said:
I think the better way to put it is that apparently DOJ thinks what we KNOW about his following and approaching Martin did not rise to the level of a civil rights violation.
Which is an extremely hard case to prove with the best of evidence
Perhaps. But it also contradicts the absolute certitude on the part of some people. Let's be blunt. If DOJ had any reasonable shot at a conviction Holder would have brought the case. The fact that charges were not pressed indicate that he was a lot less certain as to what happened than a lot of people on this thread.
Of course he was a lot less certain... the only person to dispute Zimmerman's claim is dead. Isn't that nice how that all ties itself together?
Quote:
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
So is it not plausible that someone with his history, is not looking for a defendable situation to be able to shoot someone? Because it sure seems to me like this guy LOOKS for trouble and reasons to be able to unload a weapon.
I'm not sure how anybody with half a brain cannot see that his continued crazy behavior sheds serious doubt on his self-defense story in the Martin case.
Unless you just like to argue..
So is it not plausible that someone with his history, is not looking for a defendable situation to be able to shoot someone? Because it sure seems to me like this guy LOOKS for trouble and reasons to be able to unload a weapon.
If all he wanted to do was shoot someone, why wait until he's in a fucking fistfight to do it? Why not just plug him right away? Also, enlighten me - when else has Zimmerman "unloaded a weapon"? I'm assuming you have some citation?
I'm not sure how anybody with half a brain cannot see that his continued crazy behavior sheds serious doubt on his self-defense story in the Martin case.
Unless you just like to argue..
Honestly I have the feeling that people that are on the side of "every yahoo should be able to carry a gun always" have to defend this particular lunatic asshole because he puts a crimp in the gun logic... lol
Quote:
In comment 12281565 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 12281563 BeerFridge said:
Quote:
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
He started some shit. I can't say exactly what it was. Shoulda just left the kid alone. But he chased him right up until it was time to stand his ground.
For the last fucking time "Stand You Ground" had nothing to do with this case.
Nothing. To. Do. With. It. Completely different scenario. Your cutesy pun only exposes the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.
So, back to your argument - he "chased him right up to the end"? So, you're now positing that Zimmerman just chased Martin the entire time, and what? "Something" happened? An armed man somehow initiated a physical confrontation with an unarmed man and got his ass kicked? Does that make any sense? Unless he in fact was jumped by the unarmed man, who of course had no idea at that point that the guy he was attacked was armed.
Heh, ok Greg. I have no idea why you defend Zimmerman or even why you think it makes sense to apply a logical decision making process to this crazy person who keeps getting involved in shit, threatening people, whatever. I'm sure he's lucky to have you to take up his cause on the internet, though. I'm sure there's a good reason why this time, it wasn't his fault.
Also, here are the jury instructions that specifically reference stand your ground. I'm out. - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 12281561 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
The devil you say! I'm nonplussed! Is that the right word?
Apparently she wasn't very convincing.
So based on that logic, I take it you believe OJ is innocent correct?
Since there is virtually no exculpatory evidence that should have cleared OJ....no. But invoking OJ is a pretty good sign that you don't have a whole helluva lot to use here.
Yeah I guess those gloves not fitting was a fantasy
LOL
Quote:
In comment 12281460 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
shooting.
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Check out Bernie Goetz. Similar situation IF GZ was trying to instigate a 'justified' shooting. Goetz was found innocent but he was tried for murder. If he had a past like GZ and it was introduced in court what would have happened?
During the defense's cross examination of Rao, Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara got Rao to concede that his client's injuries could have been caused by more than three impacts. She also indicated that abrasions on Martin's knuckles were consistent with him striking someone.
If is on top of me beating me, and/or banging my head into concrete, I'm not waiting for him to continue to beat me if I can do something about it. If you agree that Martin attacked Zimmerman, if you agree that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, then you have to acknowledge that Zimmerman legally shot Martin. Unless you are a complete moron. Doesn't mean he's a great guy... just means he shot in self-defense as allowable under the law.
And there's also this...
http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-beaten-prosecution-witnesses/story?id=19517236
Two witnesses called by the prosecution today described George Zimmerman as being on the losing end of a fight with Trayvon Martin in the moments before Zimmerman shot the Florida teenager.
However, an EMT who was on the scene immediately following the shooting testified that she treated Zimmerman for five minutes before releasing him into police care.
Zimmerman, 29, is facing second degree murder charges for shooting and killing Martin on Feb. 26, 2012. He maintains he shot Martin, 17, in self defense after his head was slammed several times against a concrete sidewalk.
John Good told the jury today that he yelled "stop" at both men shortly after realizing that what he at first assumed to be a dog attack was actually two men grappling on the ground.
Catch up on all the details from the George Zimmerman murder trial.
"I said cut it out. I'm calling 911 because it was getting serious," said Good.
Good testified that he saw what he believed to be Martin on top of Zimmerman.
"The color on top was dark and the color at bottom was…red," Good said referring to the men's clothing.
At another point he told the court that the person on the bottom had "lighter skin color."
Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who was wearing a red and black jacket that night. Martin, who was black, was wearing a dark sweatshirt.
"The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help,'" he said.
George Zimmerman Case in Pictures
Under cross examination by Zimmerman's lawyer, Good said he believes he saw Martin on top punching Zimmerman "MMA style," a reference to mixed martial arts.
"The person on top was ground and pounding the person on the bottom?"asked Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara.
"Correct," said Good
Good testified that he did not see Martin banging Zimmerman's head on the concrete.
His account was accompanied by a recording of Good's 911 call to police in which he is heard telling the dispatcher that he heard a gunshot.
"I'm pretty sure the guy is dead out there. Holy sh**. .. There's a black guy down and he's been shot. It looks like he is dead," Good said.
Jonathan Manalo, who also lived near the shooting scene, testified today that Zimmerman told him just moments after Martin was killed to call his wife and say "Just tell her I shot someone."
Manalo did not see the confrontation between Zimmerman and the unarmed teenager, but walked outside of his home with a flashlight moments after hearing a gunshot.
He said Zimmerman looked like he had "got his butt beat," but was "speaking clearly."
Manalo took photos of Zimmerman's bloody nose, the back of his bloody head, Martin's body lying face down in the grass and a flashlight on the ground.
He says Zimmerman told him as he approached, "This guy was beating me up. I was defending myself and I shot him."
Stacy Livingston, an EMT who arrived on the scene, said she treated Zimmerman -- who was complaining of dizziness -- for five minutes before releasing him into police custody.
In addition, Police Officer Tim Smith told the court he took Zimmerman into custody on the night of the shooting and that the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet and had bits of grass on it, and the back of his pants appeared wet. It had been raining that night and the ground was wet.
Again, you don't have to wait until injuries are "life-threatening" before using deadly force if you are being attacked. Even the notion of this is laughably stupid.
So you can cherry-pick one comment made by the medical examiner who was dealing in "maybe's" and "could have's" all you want... but the jury considered the totality of the evidence, and most fair-minded people do the same. At least 3 blows, lmao.
Again, anyone who says Zimmerman "approached" Martin is being speculative, btw, and really is immaterial as to the legality of using lethal force.
I think the better way to put it is that apparently DOJ thinks what we KNOW about his following and approaching Martin did not rise to the level of a civil rights violation.
Which is an extremely hard case to prove with the best of evidence
Perhaps. But it also contradicts the absolute certitude on the part of some people. Let's be blunt. If DOJ had any reasonable shot at a conviction Holder would have brought the case. The fact that charges were not pressed indicate that he was a lot less certain as to what happened than a lot of people on this thread.
Of course he was a lot less certain... the only person to dispute Zimmerman's claim is dead. Isn't that nice how that all ties itself together?
Then perhaps the way to leave this is that this is one case where we wished there was a surveillance camera. And without that we really don't know what happened in those final minutes after the 911 call Zimmerman made.
Quote:
In comment 12281568 Johnny5 said:
Quote:
In comment 12281460 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
shooting.
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Check out Bernie Goetz. Similar situation IF GZ was trying to instigate a 'justified' shooting. Goetz was found innocent but he was tried for murder. If he had a past like GZ and it was introduced in court what would have happened?
Well you have to take into account different state laws. Goetz never would have been tried in Florida
Whoops!
[quote]That matched the assessment of legal experts who earlier Monday were describing the verdict on Saturday as the result of successful, garden-variety self-defense arguments that could sway a jury in any state.
Though these observers said Florida's expanded self-defense law, which says citizens can "stand their ground" rather than retreat in the face of a deadly threat has emboldened citizens to take unnecessary risks and led to an increase in homicides, they detected little impact on the Zimmerman case.
[quote]
Link - ( New Window )
What kind of a pie is that? If it's cherry or apple, I'm game. If it's anything else, I'll have to think about it.
Quote:
Dr. Valerie Rao testified that Zimmerman was struck as few as three times by Martin during the fight that night. She also asserted his head may have only been slammed on the concrete a single time.
During the defense's cross examination of Rao, Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara got Rao to concede that his client's injuries could have been caused by more than three impacts. She also indicated that abrasions on Martin's knuckles were consistent with him striking someone.
If is on top of me beating me, and/or banging my head into concrete, I'm not waiting for him to continue to beat me if I can do something about it. If you agree that Martin attacked Zimmerman, if you agree that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, then you have to acknowledge that Zimmerman legally shot Martin. Unless you are a complete moron. Doesn't mean he's a great guy... just means he shot in self-defense as allowable under the law.
And there's also this...
http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-beaten-prosecution-witnesses/story?id=19517236
Two witnesses called by the prosecution today described George Zimmerman as being on the losing end of a fight with Trayvon Martin in the moments before Zimmerman shot the Florida teenager.
However, an EMT who was on the scene immediately following the shooting testified that she treated Zimmerman for five minutes before releasing him into police care.
Zimmerman, 29, is facing second degree murder charges for shooting and killing Martin on Feb. 26, 2012. He maintains he shot Martin, 17, in self defense after his head was slammed several times against a concrete sidewalk.
John Good told the jury today that he yelled "stop" at both men shortly after realizing that what he at first assumed to be a dog attack was actually two men grappling on the ground.
Catch up on all the details from the George Zimmerman murder trial.
"I said cut it out. I'm calling 911 because it was getting serious," said Good.
Good testified that he saw what he believed to be Martin on top of Zimmerman.
"The color on top was dark and the color at bottom was…red," Good said referring to the men's clothing.
At another point he told the court that the person on the bottom had "lighter skin color."
Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who was wearing a red and black jacket that night. Martin, who was black, was wearing a dark sweatshirt.
"The person on the bottom, I could hear a 'Help,'" he said.
George Zimmerman Case in Pictures
Under cross examination by Zimmerman's lawyer, Good said he believes he saw Martin on top punching Zimmerman "MMA style," a reference to mixed martial arts.
"The person on top was ground and pounding the person on the bottom?"asked Zimmerman attorney Mark O'Mara.
"Correct," said Good
Good testified that he did not see Martin banging Zimmerman's head on the concrete.
His account was accompanied by a recording of Good's 911 call to police in which he is heard telling the dispatcher that he heard a gunshot.
"I'm pretty sure the guy is dead out there. Holy sh**. .. There's a black guy down and he's been shot. It looks like he is dead," Good said.
Jonathan Manalo, who also lived near the shooting scene, testified today that Zimmerman told him just moments after Martin was killed to call his wife and say "Just tell her I shot someone."
Manalo did not see the confrontation between Zimmerman and the unarmed teenager, but walked outside of his home with a flashlight moments after hearing a gunshot.
He said Zimmerman looked like he had "got his butt beat," but was "speaking clearly."
Manalo took photos of Zimmerman's bloody nose, the back of his bloody head, Martin's body lying face down in the grass and a flashlight on the ground.
He says Zimmerman told him as he approached, "This guy was beating me up. I was defending myself and I shot him."
Stacy Livingston, an EMT who arrived on the scene, said she treated Zimmerman -- who was complaining of dizziness -- for five minutes before releasing him into police custody.
In addition, Police Officer Tim Smith told the court he took Zimmerman into custody on the night of the shooting and that the back of Zimmerman's jacket was wet and had bits of grass on it, and the back of his pants appeared wet. It had been raining that night and the ground was wet.
Again, you don't have to wait until injuries are "life-threatening" before using deadly force if you are being attacked. Even the notion of this is laughably stupid.
So you can cherry-pick one comment made by the medical examiner who was dealing in "maybe's" and "could have's" all you want... but the jury considered the totality of the evidence, and most fair-minded people do the same. At least 3 blows, lmao.
Again, anyone who says Zimmerman "approached" Martin is being speculative, btw, and really is immaterial as to the legality of using lethal force.
What a shocker, dipshit here conveniently left out this testimony:
testimony on Wednesday by Ms. Surdyka and another neighbor, Jeannee Manalo.
Ms. Manalo said she thought Zimmerman was astride Trayvon during a violent struggle. But she also said it was too dark to see exactly what was going on, and she made the judgment about who was the aggressor by looking at photos of Zimmerman and Trayvon afterward. She said she still believed she saw Zimmerman “hitting down” on a prone Trayvon.
Surdyka testifed she heard from her second-floor window two loud voices, including an “aggressive voice” and a voice that belonged to “a boy.”
“I felt like it was the boy’s voice,” Jayne Surdyka told jurors about the deadly scene that unfolded on a rainy February night last year in her Sanford, Fla., neighborhood.
If your going to pull testimony out of your ass, at least include all of it, not just that which you want to use.
I'm also going to tell you for the last time, no one but njm stated he approached Martin, so stop tryiung to use that as some angle. That is a weak attempt at parsing what has been said
The fellow who tried to kill Zimmerman yesterday is the same fellow who alleged "road rage" in September of last year. This whacko stalker's name is Matt Apperson - a fairly unhinged guy.
One man in the incident had been punched. It was Zimmerman. One had knuckles that were busted up. That was Martin.
But yeah, some woman who admits she doesn't really know what she saw think that Zimmerman was the one beating on Martin. You've got me.
Quote:
Also, here are the jury instructions that specifically reference stand your ground. I'm out. - ( New Window )
Whoops!
[quote]That matched the assessment of legal experts who earlier Monday were describing the verdict on Saturday as the result of successful, garden-variety self-defense arguments that could sway a jury in any state.
Though these observers said Florida's expanded self-defense law, which says citizens can "stand their ground" rather than retreat in the face of a deadly threat has emboldened citizens to take unnecessary risks and led to an increase in homicides, they detected little impact on the Zimmerman case.
[quote] Link - ( New Window )
At least you've stopped pretending it was irrelevant when it was clearly in the instructions. I'm not pretending he got off and should have been convicted. The law is the law. It was applied correctly. With stand your ground, it was nearly impossible to convict that dumbfuck.
But the fucking tragic reality is that the law (especially when it leaves room for standing your ground) allows for a numbnuts wannabe cop with a gun to watch the neighborhood -> follow a kid who wasn't doing anything -> chase a kid who wasn't doing anything leading to an altercation -> Then numbnuts is losing a fistfight and kills the kid who wasn't doing anything. And this fuckface, numbnuts wannabe asshole who goes on to show what a non-model citizen fuckup he really is can claim self defense when the reality is that if he'd just have stayed home that night, none of this shit would have happened and the kid would still be alive. If he had just not assumed the black kid walking in the neighborhood was a criminal the kid would be alive. If he had just let the cops follow up on it as directed by 911 the kid would still be alive.
But, I'm glad you feel the need to defend numbnuts GZ. He's terrific.
I think it has to do with Zimmerman's tiny but extremely vocal group of defenders.
One man in the incident had been punched. It was Zimmerman. One had knuckles that were busted up. That was Martin.
But yeah, some woman who admits she doesn't really know what she saw think that Zimmerman was the one beating on Martin. You've got me.
So from the fact that Zimmerman got punched, and Martin had scrapes on his hand we can throw out any kind of theory that Zimmerman initiated this? That those scrapes are proof positive that Martin started this? Never seen a fight where one idiot decides to shove someone and gets clocked? Never seen a fight where one guy takes a swing and misses and then gets his ass handed to him? Must be nice to live in such a proof positive world where scrapes on a knuckle is all you need
See the ONLY one who has had a say in what actually happened at the start was the guy fighting not to go to jail.
Ok...come on, you can definitely defend the law and the outcome of the case without having to be so obtuse that you can't see Zimmerman for what he is, a total jackass cop-wannabe, who put himself into a shitty situation (even when he was advised not to follow by a police dispatcher) that eventually led to the altercation that resulted in him having to kill Martin.
Not sure if you're just bored on Monday and choose to be extra argumentative or if you seriously believe that Zimmerman didn't put himself into a shitty situation by his own action that night that required him to defend himself.
Because he was chasing him? Why the fuck is he allowed to do that? Zimmerman started all this shit. Martin was trying to go home.
Really? So a police dispatcher's advice is just that of a $10 an hour nobody?
It's just another dumb fucking thing that GZ did that led to Martin being dead.
And yet, somehow, with more than enough time to get home from the time Zimmerman lost sight of him, he didn't actually go home. That's odd. Wonder why that was??
Following someone is against the law - yes or no? Simple question, simple answer.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
Quote:
As if some fucking phone operator making ten bucks an hour is the voice of God or something.
Really? So a police dispatcher's advice is just that of a $10 an hour nobody?
Definitely a head scratching comment. Much better that a wanna be vigilanti on meds take matters into his own hands instead of listening. I mean what could actually happen, someone getting killed?
What led to Martin being dead was jumping a guy he didn't know was armed.
Which, by the way, is something else the people who latch on to "crazy man with a gun stalking him!!1!" tend to gloss over. Either Martin got into a fistfight with an armed man, which is insanely stupid, or he didn't know Zimmerman was armed and thus the the narrative is incorrect.
Quote:
Because he was chasing him? Why the fuck is he allowed to do that? Zimmerman started all this shit. Martin was trying to go home.
And yet, somehow, with more than enough time to get home from the time Zimmerman lost sight of him, he didn't actually go home. That's odd. Wonder why that was??
Following someone is against the law - yes or no? Simple question, simple answer.
I already said it's not illegal and the case was decided correctly based on the facts. Don't be obtuse.
The point is that George Zimmerman is a gaping asshole who, like all of us, deserved defense in a court of law but not on a message board, which makes your dedication to defending him kinda weird.
Quote:
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
He was several inches shorter, and at night, in the dark, I'm guessing it may have been difficult to gauge the build of someone wearing a big sweatshirt. And, no, he doesn't want to start a fight. Are you being deliberately obtuse? Why the hell is he going to start a fight instead of drawing his weapon? That makes absolutely no sense.
Quote:
It's just another dumb fucking thing that GZ did that led to Martin being dead.
What led to Martin being dead was jumping a guy he didn't know was armed.
Which, by the way, is something else the people who latch on to "crazy man with a gun stalking him!!1!" tend to gloss over. Either Martin got into a fistfight with an armed man, which is insanely stupid, or he didn't know Zimmerman was armed and thus the the narrative is incorrect.
LOL. Yeah, Martin is the stupid one who fucked up. You're a lost cause.
Want to talk Manalo?
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman/os-george-zimmerman-trial-day-13-20130625-story.html
If jurors wanted clarity from them, they did not get it.
By the time they stepped down from the witness stand, both had been damaged.
The first was Jayne Surdyka, a former Olympic-caliber marathoner. Just minutes before the shooting, she heard someone make two desperate cries for help — the second she described as a "yelp."
She is convinced, she said, that the second voice was Trayvon's.
"Someone sounded very angry, very agitated," she said. The other person spoke with "a lighter, softer, higher-pitched voice."
She also reported seeing two figures on the ground fighting or wrestling.
But her account does not mesh with other evidence on three key points.
She testified that Trayvon was on the bottom, facedown when Zimmerman shot him. But Trayvon was shot at near-point-blank range in the chest — not the back.
Surdyka said she heard three gunshots. There was one.
She also got their clothing confused, saying the figure wearing black clothing survived, and she saw him stand up and walk around after the shooting.
Trayvon was wearing a charcoal-colored hoodie, Zimmerman a red jacket.
The second neighbor, Jeannee Manalo, also had credibility problems. She testified that she heard "a howling sound," looked out a glass door and saw two figures on the ground fighting.
The one on top was moving his hands "like he's hitting him," she said.
"That's when my husband told me to sit down and mind my own business," she said.
A few seconds later, she heard a shot, she said.
When she was interviewed immediately after the shooting, she told police she could not tell who was on top, but a few weeks later, after seeing photos of Trayvon on television, she told investigators that she was convinced it was Zimmerman because he is bigger.
On Wednesday, that was her testimony again until defense attorney Mark O'Mara pointed out that the photos of Trayvon on which she had relied showed him at about age 10 to 12.
"You're not sure as you sit here today who was where in the altercation?" O'Mara asked.
"No," she answered.
Only John Good had a vantage point where he could even tell who was who, and if memory serves his apartment was the closest to the altercation. The "witnesses" you are citing had contrary accounts of what happened, and contrary accounts as to the physical evidence in the case. John Good's account he gave to police matched the evidence, matched Zimmerman's story he also gave to police, without collaboration, and matched the evidence.
Dude, I have no desire to sit here and re-hash this case. The verdict was made, it was the correct verdict, and every point you have made is irrelevant or refuted.
You clearly don't have an understanding of this case, self-defense laws, or the ability to use basic logic.
I'm done, you can have the last word if you want. I'm no Zimmerman supporter, but the main point in this case is you can be an asshole and still have the right to defend yourself when attacked, and you don't have the right to attack someone because they are an asshole.
LOL. Yeah, Martin is the stupid one who fucked up. You're a lost cause.
Seeing as how he's dead because he jumped a guy who turned out to have a gun rather than just going home....yeah, I'd say there were bad decisions made by both parties.
Quote:
In comment 12281679 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
He was several inches shorter, and at night, in the dark, I'm guessing it may have been difficult to gauge the build of someone wearing a big sweatshirt. And, no, he doesn't want to start a fight. Are you being deliberately obtuse? Why the hell is he going to start a fight instead of drawing his weapon? That makes absolutely no sense.
How do you know he didn't want to start something? Every action he took that night appeared that he wanted to start something, be it a questioning Martin, or a confrontation. And if he did walk up to him with his gun drawn, that right there is a criminal act. That gun emboldened him to act the way he did. Every arrest he has had since that trial involved a physical act or threat with a gun by Martin shows where this guys head is at with regards to guns and his bravery
On September 9, 2013, in Lake Mary, police responded to a 911 call by Zimmerman's estranged wife, who reported that Zimmerman had threatened her and her father with a gun and had punched her father in the face. Zimmerman was briefly detained and questioned by police.[32] No gun was found at the scene. Police took a broken iPad from the scene for examination of a video recording of the incident to determine whether to press charges against either Zimmerman or his wife.[33] His wife declined to press charges, later expressing regret about her decision.[34] After determining that the iPad video could not be recovered, the Lake Mary police department announced they would not be pressing charges against Zimmerman, his wife, or her father.[35]
On November 18, 2013, Zimmerman's girlfriend called the police alleging that after she had asked Zimmerman to leave her home, he had pointed a shotgun at her and begun breaking her belongings.[36] The police reported that Zimmerman had barricaded himself inside the apartment before they had made their way inside and arrested him.[37] He was charged with aggravated assault with a weapon – a felony – as well as domestic violence battery and criminal mischief.[38][39] On December 6, Zimmerman's girlfriend asked that the charges against Zimmerman be dropped and that the restraining order barring him from seeing her be lifted, after which prosecutors said that they would no longer be pursuing a case against him.[40][41]
On Tuesday September 9, 2014, George Zimmerman was named by police in a road rage incident where he reportedly threatened and followed another driver.[42] Zimmerman reportedly responded aggressively when he noticed another driver pointing at him. According to the other driver Zimmerman said "Do you know who I am?" before saying, "I'll (expletive) kill you." Zimmerman allegedly followed the other driver to a parking lot while the driver called 911, but he fled before the police arrived.[43] The other driver declined to press charges.
Todays incident involves the same guy he threatened during his last road rage incident. He is constantly looking for fights
If I am not mistaken, he is in police custody right now.
Want to talk Manalo?
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman/os-george-zimmerman-trial-day-13-20130625-story.html
Quote:
Early in the day, they called two neighbor eyewitnesses who heard and saw part of the confrontation between Trayvon and Zimmerman the night of the shooting.
If jurors wanted clarity from them, they did not get it.
By the time they stepped down from the witness stand, both had been damaged.
The first was Jayne Surdyka, a former Olympic-caliber marathoner. Just minutes before the shooting, she heard someone make two desperate cries for help — the second she described as a "yelp."
She is convinced, she said, that the second voice was Trayvon's.
"Someone sounded very angry, very agitated," she said. The other person spoke with "a lighter, softer, higher-pitched voice."
She also reported seeing two figures on the ground fighting or wrestling.
But her account does not mesh with other evidence on three key points.
She testified that Trayvon was on the bottom, facedown when Zimmerman shot him. But Trayvon was shot at near-point-blank range in the chest — not the back.
Surdyka said she heard three gunshots. There was one.
She also got their clothing confused, saying the figure wearing black clothing survived, and she saw him stand up and walk around after the shooting.
Trayvon was wearing a charcoal-colored hoodie, Zimmerman a red jacket.
The second neighbor, Jeannee Manalo, also had credibility problems. She testified that she heard "a howling sound," looked out a glass door and saw two figures on the ground fighting.
The one on top was moving his hands "like he's hitting him," she said.
"That's when my husband told me to sit down and mind my own business," she said.
A few seconds later, she heard a shot, she said.
When she was interviewed immediately after the shooting, she told police she could not tell who was on top, but a few weeks later, after seeing photos of Trayvon on television, she told investigators that she was convinced it was Zimmerman because he is bigger.
On Wednesday, that was her testimony again until defense attorney Mark O'Mara pointed out that the photos of Trayvon on which she had relied showed him at about age 10 to 12.
"You're not sure as you sit here today who was where in the altercation?" O'Mara asked.
"No," she answered.
Only John Good had a vantage point where he could even tell who was who, and if memory serves his apartment was the closest to the altercation. The "witnesses" you are citing had contrary accounts of what happened, and contrary accounts as to the physical evidence in the case. John Good's account he gave to police matched the evidence, matched Zimmerman's story he also gave to police, without collaboration, and matched the evidence.
Dude, I have no desire to sit here and re-hash this case. The verdict was made, it was the correct verdict, and every point you have made is irrelevant or refuted.
You clearly don't have an understanding of this case, self-defense laws, or the ability to use basic logic.
I'm done, you can have the last word if you want. I'm no Zimmerman supporter, but the main point in this case is you can be an asshole and still have the right to defend yourself when attacked, and you don't have the right to attack someone because they are an asshole.
You do realize that Good testified he could not confirm the man on top (who he says appeared to be Martin) hit Zimmerman, or pound his head into the concrete correct? Trhat he admitted that in trial. Also he claimed that the only way he could tell who was who was by the color of their clothes and what he thought was lighter skin color with regards to the guy on the bottom. He said this even though he could not say if the guys shirt was white or red. How can you not tell the difference between white and red, but you can discern skin color even though you cant see if someone is getting punched?
If I am not mistaken, he is in police custody right now.
I don't know the particulars of that Road Rage incident, but it was Zimmerman who left the scene not this guy
And for what reason did he have to call those 10$ an hour nobodies at 911? What did Martin do to warrant that call, walk home?
His description of the clothing of both parties made his testimony particularly strong.
His testimony is yet the most reliable.
where are you getting all this info?
This guy has some weird fascination with Zimmerman and wants to kill him. Called him a baby killer.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
"According to Cornell, the man told him that he and Zimmerman have had three disputes. This time, Zimmerman waved a gun and the man shot at him, according to Cornell.
Police arrived minutes after he called 911, Cornell said.
Police have not verified Cornell's account to CNN.
History of run-ins with the law
It is the latest headline-grabbing incident for Zimmerman since his acquittal in July 2013 on a murder charge in the death of Martin, a 17-year-old African-American.
Zimmerman fatally shot Martin on February 26, 2012.
On that day, Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida, called 911 to report "a suspicious person" in the neighborhood.
The dispatcher asked him if he was following the person and Zimmerman replied that he was "trying to find out where he went."
He ignored the dispatcher's advice not to follow the person, and according to later accounts by Zimmerman, Martin jumped toward him and a fight ensued."
To this day, I can't see how some defend Zimmerman. How they instead of feeling bad for the kid who was running an errand, instead mocking his death because "he wasn't a saint". And that a zealot with a gun and an itchy finger initiated the whole incident by breaking his own neighborhood's rules about involvement, creating a situation where TM felt he needed to defend himself from the guy who was following him...And TM turned out to be right--he was being followed by a guy who would later kill him. He was right! Yet some blame this victim.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
Awww Allstar is all upset because he was made to look a fool...Awww.
Hey Dickstain, Bake and I are actually friends. Both from the same upstate city. We are about as diverse in our thinking as it gets but we always have a rational discussion. Unlike you he has quite a bit ofknowledge on subjects and he can write a ratinal post.
"According to Cornell, the man told him that he and Zimmerman have had three disputes. This time, Zimmerman waved a gun and the man shot at him, according to Cornell.
Police arrived minutes after he called 911, Cornell said.
Police have not verified Cornell's account to CNN.
History of run-ins with the law
It is the latest headline-grabbing incident for Zimmerman since his acquittal in July 2013 on a murder charge in the death of Martin, a 17-year-old African-American.
Zimmerman fatally shot Martin on February 26, 2012.
On that day, Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida, called 911 to report "a suspicious person" in the neighborhood.
The dispatcher asked him if he was following the person and Zimmerman replied that he was "trying to find out where he went."
He ignored the dispatcher's advice not to follow the person, and according to later accounts by Zimmerman, Martin jumped toward him and a fight ensued."
To this day, I can't see how some defend Zimmerman. How they instead of feeling bad for the kid who was running an errand, instead mocking his death because "he wasn't a saint". And that a zealot with a gun and an itchy finger initiated the whole incident by breaking his own neighborhood's rules about involvement, creating a situation where TM felt he needed to defend himself from the guy who was following him...And TM turned out to be right--he was being followed by a guy who would later kill him. He was right! Yet some blame this victim.
Ya get used to it after a while Randy.
I guess it depends on how you look at it. Legally, probably not as the law is written in Florida. However, when it comes to culpability, you can't just classify this as another person doing something stupid. Most stupid actions don't amount to a person putting themselves in a potential dangerous situation that should be reserved for the police. And this leading to the death of an innocent person gives an entire demographic a sense of injustice. And you can say whatever you want, but people have a strong feeling about this, so obviously this will continue to be used/seen as a prime example of injustice.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
By the way Ace, before getting your panties in an uproar, you were the one to take the first personal shot, so don't sit here crying like a little bitch because you got it back. Here, because knowing you, your going to lie and say I'm wrong:
allstarjim : 3:20 pm : link : reply
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
This not understanding who wrote what seems to be a trend with you. I suggest you read slower and it will help you to follow all the ignorant shit you write.
Quote:
You can pick a fight with montanagiant... it's ok. You'll win because people like him only like to deal with speculation, maybe's, emotion, what MSM/the internet tells them to think, and their imagination. People like us try to be objective and look at the totality of evidence and consider all the facts, without preconceived notions and biases.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
Awww Allstar is all upset because he was made to look a fool...Awww.
Hey Dickstain, Bake and I are actually friends. Both from the same upstate city. We are about as diverse in our thinking as it gets but we always have a rational discussion. Unlike you he has quite a bit ofknowledge on subjects and he can write a ratinal post.
LMAO... I bet you disagree with him an awful lot.
Only you would think I was the one that looked like a fool in this thread. All I did was link articles proving your inaccuracies and that you were full of shit. Good times.
BTW, I'm not upset in the least tiniest bit. I quite enjoyed using you as a punching bag. Until next time, junior... brush up on... well, something.
"According to Cornell, the man told him that he and Zimmerman have had three disputes. This time, Zimmerman waved a gun and the man shot at him, according to Cornell.
Police arrived minutes after he called 911, Cornell said.
Police have not verified Cornell's account to CNN.
History of run-ins with the law
It is the latest headline-grabbing incident for Zimmerman since his acquittal in July 2013 on a murder charge in the death of Martin, a 17-year-old African-American.
Zimmerman fatally shot Martin on February 26, 2012.
On that day, Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida, called 911 to report "a suspicious person" in the neighborhood.
The dispatcher asked him if he was following the person and Zimmerman replied that he was "trying to find out where he went."
He ignored the dispatcher's advice not to follow the person, and according to later accounts by Zimmerman, Martin jumped toward him and a fight ensued."
To this day, I can't see how some defend Zimmerman. How they instead of feeling bad for the kid who was running an errand, instead mocking his death because "he wasn't a saint". And that a zealot with a gun and an itchy finger initiated the whole incident by breaking his own neighborhood's rules about involvement, creating a situation where TM felt he needed to defend himself from the guy who was following him...And TM turned out to be right--he was being followed by a guy who would later kill him. He was right! Yet some blame this victim.
Spot on
Quote:
In comment 12281787 allstarjim said:
Quote:
You can pick a fight with montanagiant... it's ok. You'll win because people like him only like to deal with speculation, maybe's, emotion, what MSM/the internet tells them to think, and their imagination. People like us try to be objective and look at the totality of evidence and consider all the facts, without preconceived notions and biases.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
Awww Allstar is all upset because he was made to look a fool...Awww.
Hey Dickstain, Bake and I are actually friends. Both from the same upstate city. We are about as diverse in our thinking as it gets but we always have a rational discussion. Unlike you he has quite a bit ofknowledge on subjects and he can write a ratinal post.
LMAO... I bet you disagree with him an awful lot.
Only you would think I was the one that looked like a fool in this thread. All I did was link articles proving your inaccuracies and that you were full of shit. Good times.
BTW, I'm not upset in the least tiniest bit. I quite enjoyed using you as a punching bag. Until next time, junior... brush up on... well, something.
Your still looking like a fool because you have a habit of parsing the discussion and taking portions out of context while ignoring your own actions. Its a habit of fools
NBC - ( New Window )
Quote:
You can pick a fight with montanagiant... it's ok. You'll win because people like him only like to deal with speculation, maybe's, emotion, what MSM/the internet tells them to think, and their imagination. People like us try to be objective and look at the totality of evidence and consider all the facts, without preconceived notions and biases.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
By the way Ace, before getting your panties in an uproar, you were the one to take the first personal shot, so don't sit here crying like a little bitch because you got it back. Here, because knowing you, your going to lie and say I'm wrong:
Quote:
Again
allstarjim : 3:20 pm : link : reply
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
This not understanding who wrote what seems to be a trend with you. I suggest you read slower and it will help you to follow all the ignorant shit you write.
This is not true at all. Re-read the thread.
montanagiant : 3:10 pm : link : reply
What injuries supported that? The Medical examiner herself said his injuries were "Insignificant"
allstarjim : 3:14 pm : link : reply
http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/george-zimmermans-injuries/
Only a fool would suggest someone should wait until the injuries were significant enough to cause unconsciousness, severe bodily injury, or death, before it is justifiable to defend oneself.
That's not personal attack, it's a valid, relevant point. Same here:
allstarjim : 3:20 pm : link : reply
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
Then this is you:
montanagiant : 3:28 pm : link : reply
LMAO....Hey Dipshit, the MEDICAL EXAMINER stated that his injuries were most likely caused by one punch, not the "Pounding into the pavement" you keep claiming. If these were such life threatening injuries why did he wait until the next day to get examined at a clinic? Why no x-rays? Why does an actual doctor who examined the evidence claim they were extremely minor injuries?
You can sit here and try to claim this "Well if he falls just right, he might actually get injured" line of stupid, but the actual facts of the case are that his injuries were minor despite you trying to claim otherwise. Don't try to spin your claim now idiot, acknowledge that your wrong
Which is hilarious, because your point was shown to be incorrect, despite you writing it with such amazing conviction, lol.
This is also you:
montanagiant : 3:19 pm : link : reply
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
I was responding to all of you (njm, xmeadowlander included)... but you clearly were in the "Zimmerman approached Martin" camp, as your question indicated acceptance that this statement was factual.
Seriously, I would just give it up if I were you. Maybe you could try another topic.
You'd be horribly wrong, too.
How about if they're actively stalking you? Your narrative is a garden of disinformation and begs the question.
Quote:
Only if he left Trayvon alone..
Ah yes, poor St. Trayvon! Poor, poor, beating a man's head into the pavement St. Trayvon!
If someone confronted me, I discovered it was George Zimmerman, and I couldn't run, I sure hope I could beat his head into the pavement. Might be the only way to survive that encounter.
We probably have complete opposite views on many subjects but I know you are a passionate guy and I respect that. As I have said in the past, your dad was a major figure in our fair city and that tells me something about you.
You guys should know by now not to trust the headlines with little or no detail.
Lastly, after the last incident where the Lake Mary police issued a press release announcing the arrest and releasing Zimmerman's phone number and address, he had to move out of the state of Florida. The fact that this guy found him driving around after Zimmerman was visiting his mom is beyond creepy
Hey, Freddie Gray was arrested a whole bunch of times! Who cares what happened to him, amirite?
Zimmerman deserves what he gets. Poor freddie gray though.Just like Rodney King, innocent guy being picked on.
And dont bring up that nonsense about double standards.If Al Sharpton says it, it has to be true. Just ask Tawana Brawley.
Quote:
You may think that if someone is doing that to you, it give you the right to confront that person with physical violence.
You'd be horribly wrong, too.
How about if they're actively stalking you? Your narrative is a garden of disinformation and begs the question.
I have zero interest in schooling more BBIers who didn't follow the case closely enough to have an informed opinion.
First you need to look up the definition of stalking and then see if it applies to this case (it doesn't). Other than that... feel free to let your imagination run wild.
Further, I've simply posted articles from credible news sources like ABC News and quoted them. I am far from providing disinformation. I have studied this case far more than most people outside of the legal authorities charged with doing so. If you have not done the same then do so before starting in with me. Btw this includes hearing all of the 911 calls, looking at overhead maps with incident overlays (critical to understanding what happened), reading the police reports, watching testimony on youtube, watching news interviews of eyewitnesses shortly after the altercation, and more. So, if you have more information I have not seen, I'd be glad to see it. Otherwise, bark up another tree.
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear, so I don't understand the nasty tone regarding the dead teen.
What happened after that - if Zimmerman was acting in self defense or not was not clear enough to convict him, so the justice system acted appropriately. Could not prove murder, so he walked.
But the incident occurred because Zimmerman is undeniably unstable with serious anger issues.
That will always remain a hypothetical, because I'm not the sort of person who'd carry a gun and follow a guy.
Quote:
misunderstanding in 2015? 3-5 sounds about right
You mean like with rodney king who kept getting in trouble until he was killed, not by the police? Like that? Or is it different?
Just to be clear, this is a white vs black issue for you?
Quote:
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
That will always remain a hypothetical, because I'm not the sort of person who'd carry a gun and follow a guy.
Agree with this... which is why position is and has been that he's an asshole.
Agree with this... which is why position is and has been that he's an asshole.
*my position
Quote:
And it has precisely what to do with the evidence in that case?
Well there was a big push t paint Martin as a thug, while white washing Zimmerman's past. The facts though are that Zimmerman was the only one with a criminal record. One case involved an altercation with police. In addition the only way you know for sure he was getting beaten on by Martin, Is Zimmerman's story.
Quote:
In comment 12281468 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 12281463 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
This is a good point. What right do we have to criticize Zimmerman for pursuing the guy counter to the 911 dispatcher's advice? That kind of reverence for the law and those whose job it is to uphold it is reserved only towards those that make triple her salary.
Quote:
In comment 12281485 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
Quote:
In comment 12281421 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
And it has precisely what to do with the evidence in that case?
Well there was a big push t paint Martin as a thug, while white washing Zimmerman's past. The facts though are that Zimmerman was the only one with a criminal record. One case involved an altercation with police. In addition the only way you know for sure he was getting beaten on by Martin, Is Zimmerman's story.
Right. Forensic evidence be damned.
Wasn't there a thread posted not too long ago citing a study that found a lot of forensic evidence is completely flawed? I think some namby-pamby liberal posted that, if I recall correctly.
Juries dont find people "innocent" in America.
Quote:
In comment 12281563 BeerFridge said:
Quote:
Sure, in principle that is true. But is that still true if the person you "attack" is a crazy guy chasing you with a gun? It depends on who's doing the attacking and who's doing the defending.
So, your contention is that Zimmerman started a fistfight while he was carrying a pistol? Do I have that correctly?
He started some shit. I can't say exactly what it was. Shoulda just left the kid alone. But he chased him right up until it was time to stand his ground.
BURN THE WITCH!!! ignorant asshole.
Quote:
In comment 12281787 allstarjim said:
Quote:
You can pick a fight with montanagiant... it's ok. You'll win because people like him only like to deal with speculation, maybe's, emotion, what MSM/the internet tells them to think, and their imagination. People like us try to be objective and look at the totality of evidence and consider all the facts, without preconceived notions and biases.
You will get called a dipshit, though. So as long as you're cool with that...
By the way Ace, before getting your panties in an uproar, you were the one to take the first personal shot, so don't sit here crying like a little bitch because you got it back. Here, because knowing you, your going to lie and say I'm wrong:
Quote:
Again
allstarjim : 3:20 pm : link : reply
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
This not understanding who wrote what seems to be a trend with you. I suggest you read slower and it will help you to follow all the ignorant shit you write.
This is not true at all. Re-read the thread.
Quote:
RE: Because one thing is true
montanagiant : 3:10 pm : link : reply
What injuries supported that? The Medical examiner herself said his injuries were "Insignificant"
Quote:
montanagiant
allstarjim : 3:14 pm : link : reply
http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/george-zimmermans-injuries/
Only a fool would suggest someone should wait until the injuries were significant enough to cause unconsciousness, severe bodily injury, or death, before it is justifiable to defend oneself.
That's not personal attack, it's a valid, relevant point. Same here:
Quote:
Again
allstarjim : 3:20 pm : link : reply
Are you so much of a moron that you would wait until you were suffering "serious" injuries before you defended yourself?
Then this is you:
Quote:
RE: Again
montanagiant : 3:28 pm : link : reply
LMAO....Hey Dipshit, the MEDICAL EXAMINER stated that his injuries were most likely caused by one punch, not the "Pounding into the pavement" you keep claiming. If these were such life threatening injuries why did he wait until the next day to get examined at a clinic? Why no x-rays? Why does an actual doctor who examined the evidence claim they were extremely minor injuries?
You can sit here and try to claim this "Well if he falls just right, he might actually get injured" line of stupid, but the actual facts of the case are that his injuries were minor despite you trying to claim otherwise. Don't try to spin your claim now idiot, acknowledge that your wrong
Which is hilarious, because your point was shown to be incorrect, despite you writing it with such amazing conviction, lol.
This is also you:
Quote:
RE: RE: Well, if you aren't a supporter...
montanagiant : 3:19 pm : link : reply
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
I was responding to all of you (njm, xmeadowlander included)... but you clearly were in the "Zimmerman approached Martin" camp, as your question indicated acceptance that this statement was factual.
Seriously, I would just give it up if I were you. Maybe you could try another topic.
Quote:
In comment 12281566 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 12281561 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
The devil you say! I'm nonplussed! Is that the right word?
Apparently she wasn't very convincing.
So based on that logic, I take it you believe OJ is innocent correct?
Since there is virtually no exculpatory evidence that should have cleared OJ....no. But invoking OJ is a pretty good sign that you don't have a whole helluva lot to use here.
Yeah I guess those gloves not fitting was a fantasy
Which just shows how twisted partial and lacking credibility anything you have to say is.Tell us how OJ is innocent, but martin is guilty. Hypocrite. It's clear what you think and who you support is based not on facts but the color of their skin.
Quote:
In comment 12281421 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
And it has precisely what to do with the evidence in that case?
Well there was a big push t paint Martin as a thug, while white washing Zimmerman's past. The facts though are that Zimmerman was the only one with a criminal record. One case involved an altercation with police. In addition the only way you know for sure he was getting beaten on by Martin, Is Zimmerman's story.
Right. Forensic evidence be damned.
What forensic evidence? The fact no DNA of Martins was found on the Holster despite Zimmermans claim he made a grab for the gun there?
Quote:
In comment 12281509 njm said:
Quote:
In comment 12281485 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
The kid was unjustly stalked and approached by this lunatic asshole. That much is clear
If that much was clear I think DOJ would have proceeded with civil rights charges.
What aspect made Zimmerman following and approaching Martin "Justified" then?
I'm sorry, is approaching someone a crime? Is there a statue for it somewhere? He needs to show justification for approaching someone? Or can I walk through your hood and you better stay the fuck away from me, is that the law? Pretty sure it isn't.
Why do I have to explain to the second person who can't follow a fucking thread discussion? IT WAS NJM WHO SAID HE APPROACHED HIM in response to someone else claiming he it happened unjustly...Holy fuck is it really that hard to follow a discussion?
Quote:
You may think that if someone is doing that to you, it give you the right to confront that person with physical violence.
You'd be horribly wrong, too.
How about if they're actively stalking you? Your narrative is a garden of disinformation and begs the question.
Watch it he will start whining your picking on him.
Quote:
In comment 12281503 allstarjim said:
Quote:
In comment 12281468 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 12281463 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
So by this statement "A jury found him innocent" Does that mean everyone found innocent was not guilty of the crime? Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, OJ? they were all innocent and did not do the crime correct?
You can't just draw your firearm in Florida. The only time you can draw your firearm is in a stand your ground situation where your life is in danger, and you pretty much have to fire it.
Quote:
That there is absolutely no evidence for?
One man in the incident had been punched. It was Zimmerman. One had knuckles that were busted up. That was Martin.
But yeah, some woman who admits she doesn't really know what she saw think that Zimmerman was the one beating on Martin. You've got me.
So from the fact that Zimmerman got punched, and Martin had scrapes on his hand we can throw out any kind of theory that Zimmerman initiated this? That those scrapes are proof positive that Martin started this? Never seen a fight where one idiot decides to shove someone and gets clocked? Never seen a fight where one guy takes a swing and misses and then gets his ass handed to him? Must be nice to live in such a proof positive world where scrapes on a knuckle is all you need
See the ONLY one who has had a say in what actually happened at the start was the guy fighting not to go to jail.
Quote:
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
Quote:
In comment 12281512 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 12281503 allstarjim said:
Quote:
In comment 12281468 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 12281463 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
So by this statement "A jury found him innocent" Does that mean everyone found innocent was not guilty of the crime? Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, OJ? they were all innocent and did not do the crime correct?
My opinion of Zimmerman has nothing to do with the case that made him infamous. I'd feel the same about any person who is involved in all sorts of disputes that turn violent and usually involve a firearm. He disgusts me as a fellow human. I hope there is some law on the books somewhere that can ensure he goes gunless or goes to prison.
Jeez, have you been stalking me?
Quote:
In comment 12281462 Headhunter said:
Quote:
misunderstanding in 2015? 3-5 sounds about right
You mean like with rodney king who kept getting in trouble until he was killed, not by the police? Like that? Or is it different?
Just to be clear, this is a white vs black issue for you?
Everything is for Great White Power.
You have to look at the situation objectively. At the time, the evidence pointed to Trayvon attacking him (likely because Zimmerman was watching him).
Zimmerman's injuries supported his account.
He can, at the same time, be an insufferable dirtbag, and a victim. He can, at the same time, have legally defended himself against an attacker, and also be a head case.
And, both he and Trayvon both may have been, let's just say, not the finest examples of humanity, where both of their actions contributed to what transpired.
You don't have to believe George Zimmerman is a great guy to believe he was attacked and legally used lethal force to defend himself.
This is what I think of the whole thing... and the jury at the time agreed after reviewing all of the evidence and witness testimony.
Unfortunately, dead people cannot defend themselves. George can say all he wants. We will never know the truth except that a young man was killed. The police specifically told George not to follow the kid. If he didn't follow kid, we would not be discussing this.
Quote:
In comment 12281914 Great White Ghost said:
Quote:
In comment 12281512 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 12281503 allstarjim said:
Quote:
In comment 12281468 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 12281463 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
So by this statement "A jury found him innocent" Does that mean everyone found innocent was not guilty of the crime? Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, OJ? they were all innocent and did not do the crime correct?
Didn't you already say OJ was innocent?
So lets try this again:
Since you feel that a jury finding someone not guilty means they are innocent, does that mean you believe Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, and OJ are innocent and did not commit those crimes?
Quote:
In comment 12281498 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 12281421 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
And it has precisely what to do with the evidence in that case?
Well there was a big push t paint Martin as a thug, while white washing Zimmerman's past. The facts though are that Zimmerman was the only one with a criminal record. One case involved an altercation with police. In addition the only way you know for sure he was getting beaten on by Martin, Is Zimmerman's story.
Right. Forensic evidence be damned.
Wasn't there a thread posted not too long ago citing a study that found a lot of forensic evidence is completely flawed? I think some namby-pamby liberal posted that, if I recall correctly.
It's my practice to try and keep dialogue civilized until the other party decides they don't need to do that.What I'll say is that I followed the Zimmerman case, I don't think much of the man, but in the end I concluded 2 things. 1)Trayvon martin assaulted Zimmerman.Had Zimmerman NOT fired I think it would have been next to impossible to not have found Martin guilty of assault.My review of what I saw as evidence presented told me that, told me that in fact reports on his injuries were minimized by the media.
2)I also thought had the jury come back with a verdict of manslaughter or misadventure, I wouldn't have been too upset about it. The prosecution had no business charging him with murder in the first place. On the other hand I thought Zimmerman should have served some time. He was guilty of Harrasment at the very least.Manslaughter at most.
Matt Apperson is one crazy dude - ( New Window )
Quote:
In comment 12281679 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
If he didnt want to start a fight why did he go back? why did his girlfriend find it necessarry to tell him to just go home and not go looking for trouble? Your case has no merits, thus why Zimmerman was found not guilty.
So if your going to use his GF testimony as evidence, you would then have to use all of it correct? If that is the case then you have right there all the evidence of Zimmerman starting the fight and being the one on top while martin was the one calling for help. That makes all of Zimmermans testimony a lie then threatening Martin. I mean, we can't just claim one part was accurate (Her claiming Martin said he was almost back to his house) and ignore the rest can we?
Quote:
In comment 12281462 Headhunter said:
Quote:
misunderstanding in 2015? 3-5 sounds about right
You mean like with rodney king who kept getting in trouble until he was killed, not by the police? Like that? Or is it different?
Just to be clear, this is a white vs black issue for you?
Do I think it's a black and white issue?I do. I don't think it should be, but I think it is.I don't think it's whites who make it a racial issue, however.
Just like I don't think Daniel Gray should have been a race issue. Had it been a white guy arrested 20 times, with an arrest record getting increasingly frequent and increasingly violent as time wore on, I don't think anyone gives a flying fuck if he dies after a "rough ride" obviously getting arrested and apprehended by the police means shit in Baltimore, as he just keeps getting released, no matter what he does. I'll take it a step further and point to a mayor who like Nero watched her city burn while ordering law not to be enforced.
You have a black mayor, a black DA, a black Police chief, 3 out of 6 officers involved in that incident are black, and a mayor that lets riot run rampant because "the system" is at fault, a system in a city , and state, run by black democrats for 50 years, their system, that they run, and have run, for half a century, and then try and blame outside forces for the awful state of affairs in Baltimore, one of their own making one where the only real outside forces consist of massive amounts of federal cash flowing into both the city and state for education, making it like I think the third highest recipient in the country, with math and reading skills both below 20th%, regardless of how much money is thrown at them.They bring in al Sharpton, the famous conciliator to work his Magic, like he did in the Tawana Brawley case.I know parasites and opportunists posing as leaders and healers when I see them.They exist in real life, in politics, and on the interwebz as well.
I think it's a black and white issue when one side says the other side is guilty of this that and the other thing, and then refuse to own their own stinky shit, and pretend like the rest of us have to portend it doesn't stink. Your shit stinks. Bad.
Quote:
Why the hell is he going to start a fight instead of drawing his weapon? That makes absolutely no sense.
You can't just draw your firearm in Florida. The only time you can draw your firearm is in a stand your ground situation where your life is in danger, and you pretty much have to fire it.
Wrong.
Stand your ground in Florida means nothing more than you don't have to retreat.
Why stand your ground was never used as a defense in the Martin case? It didn't apply and wouldn't fly.
Self defense was the was the defense used and is damn near the same in every state.
A concealed weapons permitted carrier can draw and use his weapon of choice in any of a number of situations legally.
Quote:
In comment 12281980 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 12281914 Great White Ghost said:
Quote:
In comment 12281512 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 12281503 allstarjim said:
Quote:
In comment 12281468 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 12281463 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
So by this statement "A jury found him innocent" Does that mean everyone found innocent was not guilty of the crime? Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, OJ? they were all innocent and did not do the crime correct?
Didn't you already say OJ was innocent?
No I did not...And really that is a weak attempt at not answering the question because you know it will make you look silly when you do.
So lets try this again:
Since you feel that a jury finding someone not guilty means they are innocent, does that mean you believe Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, and OJ are innocent and did not commit those crimes?
Pretty sure we've known each other (here) for years and years. BTW: Just to de-rail the thread, I finally got a very good job last month. C#.NET+SQL+Web+mvc+WebAPI stuff. I really like this job! Haven't had a good job in a long time.
Do you still place programmers? Are most positions perm, contract or contract-to-hire? I went through Vaco and it was going to be contract-to-hire but went perm at the last minute, which is what I really wanted.
Quote:
In comment 12281696 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 12281679 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
If he didnt want to start a fight why did he go back? why did his girlfriend find it necessarry to tell him to just go home and not go looking for trouble? Your case has no merits, thus why Zimmerman was found not guilty.
So if your going to use his GF testimony as evidence, you would then have to use all of it correct? If that is the case then you have right there all the evidence of Zimmerman starting the fight and being the one on top while martin was the one calling for help. That makes all of Zimmermans testimony a lie then threatening Martin. I mean, we can't just claim one part was accurate (Her claiming Martin said he was almost back to his house) and ignore the rest can we?
Your claims that Zimmerman was the one on top and the one that started the fight make you look like the idiot you are. Even the witness said martin was on top.You're just not very bright, are you. Go chase your tail, bumpkin.
Quote:
Hahaha....everybody's a racist except you. The legend of Great White Power continues.
Right, that's what I said. Don't jherk your little stump too hard pretending you have somethign to say, or that anyone is listening, or that you have a clue what you're talking about.You're a punk ass bitch jumping on someone else's bandwagon to try and get some street cred here. You're a non entity, now fuckoff, boy.
Street cred? Boy?
Don't you have some Alex Jones tin foil hats to put together you racist shit stain??
Quote:
In comment 12281503 allstarjim said:
Quote:
In comment 12281468 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 12281463 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
I don't even know what this means in response to my post. I'm not interested in arguing with you GWG. I've witnessed first hand the type of poster you are and I'm not interested in even debating with you. You've made your point with me.
Quote:
In comment 12282074 rut17 said:
Quote:
Hahaha....everybody's a racist except you. The legend of Great White Power continues.
Right, that's what I said. Don't jherk your little stump too hard pretending you have somethign to say, or that anyone is listening, or that you have a clue what you're talking about.You're a punk ass bitch jumping on someone else's bandwagon to try and get some street cred here. You're a non entity, now fuckoff, boy.
Street cred? Boy?
Don't you have some Alex Jones tin foil hats to put together you racist shit stain??
Quote:
In comment 12281990 Great White Ghost said:
Quote:
In comment 12281696 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 12281679 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
If he didnt want to start a fight why did he go back? why did his girlfriend find it necessarry to tell him to just go home and not go looking for trouble? Your case has no merits, thus why Zimmerman was found not guilty.
So if your going to use his GF testimony as evidence, you would then have to use all of it correct? If that is the case then you have right there all the evidence of Zimmerman starting the fight and being the one on top while martin was the one calling for help. That makes all of Zimmermans testimony a lie then threatening Martin. I mean, we can't just claim one part was accurate (Her claiming Martin said he was almost back to his house) and ignore the rest can we?
You make fallacious statements and when cornered you dont own your shit, you continually try and expand the point, the scope of initial claims in the hope you can obfuscate the issue,and attempt to turn the argument on it's head. As far as what "we can believe" we can believe whatever we find to be credible, and not believe that which is not.
Your claims that Zimmerman was the one on top and the one that started the fight make you look like the idiot you are. Even the witness said martin was on top.You're just not very bright, are you. Go chase your tail, bumpkin.
WTF is it with some of these posters on here. They write shit and then don't understand what the hell they wrote.
YOUR THE ONE who used his GF's testimony as proof he "went back" to Zimmerman. I am merely pointing that if your going to use her testimony for that, you have to use all of what she testified about. If you do that then, her claims that she heard Martin telling Zimmerman to "get off of me" have to apply and that means Zimmerman lied about Martin being on top.
Why the fuck do I have to explain to you your own fucking argument? You can't use just part of what she said, you have to use all of it then and that means Zimmerman was the agressor and the one one beating Martin up.
Quote:
Quote:
Why the hell is he going to start a fight instead of drawing his weapon? That makes absolutely no sense.
You can't just draw your firearm in Florida. The only time you can draw your firearm is in a stand your ground situation where your life is in danger, and you pretty much have to fire it.
Wrong.
Stand your ground in Florida means nothing more than you don't have to retreat.
Why stand your ground was never used as a defense in the Martin case? It didn't apply and wouldn't fly.
Self defense was the was the defense used and is damn near the same in every state.
A concealed weapons permitted carrier can draw and use his weapon of choice in any of a number of situations legally.
Not when someone is walking through a neighborhood doing nothing wrong. You can't just pull your gun and legally approach someone because you believe someone wearing a hoodie might want to rob a house
Quote:
In comment 12281574 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 12281566 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 12281561 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
The devil you say! I'm nonplussed! Is that the right word?
Apparently she wasn't very convincing.
So based on that logic, I take it you believe OJ is innocent correct?
Since there is virtually no exculpatory evidence that should have cleared OJ....no. But invoking OJ is a pretty good sign that you don't have a whole helluva lot to use here.
Yeah I guess those gloves not fitting was a fantasy
Which just shows how twisted partial and lacking credibility anything you have to say is.Tell us how OJ is innocent, but martin is guilty. Hypocrite. It's clear what you think and who you support is based not on facts but the color of their skin.
You really are a stupid fuck aren't you? Nowhere in the context of that discussion you have quoted did i say OJ was innocent. You fail on basic reading skills
So these threads aren't endlessly long.
Thank you.......
Quote:
In comment 12281995 Great White Ghost said:
Quote:
In comment 12281980 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 12281914 Great White Ghost said:
Quote:
In comment 12281512 T-Bone said:
Quote:
In comment 12281503 allstarjim said:
Quote:
In comment 12281468 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 12281463 x meadowlander said:
Quote:
Honestly, I can't believe he still has supporters.
On January 9, 2015, Zimmerman was arrested by Lake Murray police and charged with aggravated assault with a weapon after allegedly throwing a wine bottle at his ex-girlfriend.
Supporters? I don't give a flying fuck what he's done since then, and if any of you were honest, neither do any of you. This is entirely about what happened several years ago, otherwise none of this would be posted here so you guys can engage in yet another session of furious back-patting.
This. You can easily subscribe to the theory that Trayvon defended himself. If you ignore witness accounts and pesky facts.
I think he's at least somewhat mentally unstable. And he allowed himself to think that because he was found not guilty, that he is like some vigilante superhero above the law now. I wouldn't say the guy has supporters at all. There are those that believe his version of what happened on the night he shot Trayvon was pretty close to the truth (the version supported by physical evidence and eyewitnesses). Everything since then, however, really is irrelevant as to what happened, and it would surprise no one to see him in future legal trouble in some way or another.
Oh... so I guess only Zimmerman had the right to defend himself that night huh? Oh wait... he wasn't the one being followed by a guy with a gun was he?
You don't need to guess. A jury found him innocent.
So by this statement "A jury found him innocent" Does that mean everyone found innocent was not guilty of the crime? Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, OJ? they were all innocent and did not do the crime correct?
Didn't you already say OJ was innocent?
No I did not...And really that is a weak attempt at not answering the question because you know it will make you look silly when you do.
So lets try this again:
Since you feel that a jury finding someone not guilty means they are innocent, does that mean you believe Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, and OJ are innocent and did not commit those crimes?
I think what is silly is you pretending it's some eort of established fact Zimmerman is guilty of anything, especially since he was tried. What is silly is you assuming everyone like you wishes him harm and sees it as just he got shot in the face. I don't look silly, but you look like the sick vengeful hateful person you are.
So in other words because you made the stupid claim that someone being found "Not Guilty" means they are innocent. me pointing out how completely silly that claim is means you lack the nads to answer the question. You keep dodging it like a pussy, so lets try it again Einstein.:
Since YOU BELIEVE that a "not guilty" decision means someone is innocent, does that mean you feel that Kasey Anthony, Robert Durst, and OJ are also innocent?
This is really easy even for you. You claimed a not guilty meant someone was innocent. Does that also mean those mentioned are innocent people who did not do the crime?
Grow a set of balls and answer the simple question. Do so though before you get banned again for good this time, it won't be long in coming
So these threads aren't endlessly long.
Thank you.......
Yes sorry
Quote:
I'm amazed he has Internet acess in his bunker, tbh. And I'm surprised he has time to argue something as trivial as this while the military is planning a joint strike with law enforcement to take out all of the red states.
And thats what someone does when they can't argue whats said, pretend the other party said something they didn't so they CAN take issue.Keep trying to put words in my mouth, I got something to put in yours.You'll like it I promise.
His bunker = Mom's basement
Quote:
In comment 12282056 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 12281990 Great White Ghost said:
Quote:
In comment 12281696 montanagiant said:
Quote:
In comment 12281679 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
at a larger man who may or may not be armed for no apparent reason, no. That is indeed a new one for me.
Larger man? Zimmerman outweighed him by 27 lbs. So the guy who has an actual gun does not want to start a fight with someone who may have one? OK
If he didnt want to start a fight why did he go back? why did his girlfriend find it necessarry to tell him to just go home and not go looking for trouble? Your case has no merits, thus why Zimmerman was found not guilty.
So if your going to use his GF testimony as evidence, you would then have to use all of it correct? If that is the case then you have right there all the evidence of Zimmerman starting the fight and being the one on top while martin was the one calling for help. That makes all of Zimmermans testimony a lie then threatening Martin. I mean, we can't just claim one part was accurate (Her claiming Martin said he was almost back to his house) and ignore the rest can we?
You make fallacious statements and when cornered you dont own your shit, you continually try and expand the point, the scope of initial claims in the hope you can obfuscate the issue,and attempt to turn the argument on it's head. As far as what "we can believe" we can believe whatever we find to be credible, and not believe that which is not.
Your claims that Zimmerman was the one on top and the one that started the fight make you look like the idiot you are. Even the witness said martin was on top.You're just not very bright, are you. Go chase your tail, bumpkin.
WTF is it with some of these posters on here. They write shit and then don't understand what the hell they wrote.
YOUR THE ONE who used his GF's testimony as proof he "went back" to Zimmerman. I am merely pointing that if your going to use her testimony for that, you have to use all of what she testified about. If you do that then, her claims that she heard Martin telling Zimmerman to "get off of me" have to apply and that means Zimmerman lied about Martin being on top.
Why the fuck do I have to explain to you your own fucking argument? You can't use just part of what she said, you have to use all of it then and that means Zimmerman was the aggressor and the one one beating Martin up.
The fact remains his girlfreind said she told him not to go back. you can lie and pretend she didnt, but she did. You can try and raise other issues and other points, but why would anyone engage with someone dealing in bad faith? one thing if you respond to any issue, it gets resolved, and we move on. But this isn't a dialogue. You don't have dialogues. You verbally assault and insult anyone with a different opinion.Don't mistake whats going on here. This isn't a discussion. This is you trying to be internet tough guy and someone calling you on your bullshit, and you trying to obfuscate the issue.You want a civil discussion, then have one, but you don't and you won't. You're a thug and a wannabe bully.Acting like a gentleman isn't something you're capable of.
Now, I have asked you repeatedly to respond to that silly ass "Not guilty means your innocent" logic you used earlier. But you keep running from answering the question i asked with regards to that. We all know why you are doing that, because it makes your point extremely silly and naive. but lets hope you can answer this simple question without running from it also
Thats treue also. How Graziano makes the jump form Tyree saying he doesn't approve, to all of a sudden claiming hateful and damaging actions is bullshit.I'm tired of this hysterical whining
bullshit and will fight it wherever I find it.who the hell is graziano to be telling us what we should or shouldn't approve of.I leave you alone, you leave me alone, but go fuck yourselves wheb you want to tell me how to think or nake moral judgements on it, cause guess what, then ill start passing moral judgements on other people for being dicksucks. And i don't really give a shit who it offends anymore. those who are offended tend to be the most vile sorts of people anyway.most parts of the world fagotism is treated as a mental illness, or a crime.i don't really give a shit is some closeted fag in the giants locker room was thinking about coming out and now feels he can't. Maybe we get lucky and he asks to be traded, and furthermore others of their ilk avoid signign with us in the future. If Mara and Tasxh had that in mind, Bravo.The whole soncept of them " scrambling for damage control" is hirseshit. The did it, and they don't give 2 shits who is butthurt over it.Theyw ant to hire a gay player, go right ahead. They want to hire 20, thats fine too.They want to hire a gay GM< i'm down with that also. But don't presume to tell me how to feel about it. What a man thinks in his own head id his own fucking business, and he has a right to express it if he wants.
You wanna call me a bigot, go right ahead.Doesn't make me one.somehow now saying anything other than promoting fagotry is a hate crime. i call bullshit.Also tyree is right. Go find the fag gene, otherwise shut the fuck up about how you were born this way and can't help yourself.Bigots make you sick? Fagots make me sick. too bad.If me saying thst is a crime, then I think you are a sick twisted bastard.Tyree has every right to hisd opinion and doesnt owe his integrity as a man and a human being to an employer. There are plenty of ameerican men whio think homosexuality is sick and disgussting, but they simply wont say so in public because they might be adversely affected. these men are characterless weasels. At least Tyree has the courage of his convictions.anyone don't like my opinion can go pound it up their ass along with whatever else they like to shove up there.Graziano makes me sick.
Deep breaths.
Imagine how incoherent he would be if he actually drank?
Quote:
5th grade level post he wrote?
Imagine how incoherent he would be if he actually drank?
This right here is excellence defined as far as nutjob posting goes:
Quote:
I'm amazed he has Internet acess in his bunker, tbh. And I'm surprised he has time to argue something as trivial as this while the military is planning a joint strike with law enforcement to take out all of the red states.
And thats what someone does when they can't argue whats said, pretend the other party said something they didn't so they CAN take issue.Keep trying to put words in my mouth, I got something to put in yours.You'll like it I promise.
Flattered, but no thanks! No worries, I'm a smexe fuck and used to it.
Anyway, before all of arousing homoeroticism got throw in Id like to respond:
I wasn't trying to disprove anything you've typed. Haven't even read it. I thought that was pretty obvious. I was just providing your background based on your recent posting history here to "color" (haha) what you've typed for those that don't know.
I figure it's kinda like going through a dead teenager's phone and splashing it all over certain media outlets. Ya know, to "be informed". (I used quotes because I don't like being disingenuous. I'm doing it so folks have something to confirm their biases about you- I consider it a public service.)
And:
I took the whole blow job proposition as the "not very secure in his sexuality" kind of insult, or maybe the plain old mostly innocent "that's just how we did insults when we were kids" - not the "self loathing projecting" type.
Thanks for the refresh!
I weep for those, who have to deal with him in person on a daily basis. And I weep for the Corps that this jackass homophobic racist wore the EGA once. But hey, what the hell do I know? I'm a gay rights supporting, minority, PLC pogue according to him.
Now, back to our regularly scheduled bickering.
I did not notice the gorilla. Seriously.
The Inevitable Return Of The Great White Dope - ( New Window )
Quote:
I did not notice the gorilla. Seriously.
There's a gorilla in that picture??
I weep for those, who have to deal with him in person on a daily basis. And I weep for the Corps that this jackass homophobic racist wore the EGA once. But hey, what the hell do I know? I'm a gay rights supporting, minority, PLC pogue according to him.
Post your Annopolis dilpoma or GTFO, pogue.Put up or shut up.And stop being such a whining woman. You follow me around, toss grenades and cry like a total bitch when you get anything back. You're weak, spineless.I'm in your head, not the other way around. It's you who follows me around looking for a bone or acknowledgement. Go make some friends, and fuckoff.I happen to know for a fact i pay absolutely no attention to you unless your jumping up and down throwing handgrenades begging for attention. like I said I feel sorry for you. was pathetic to watch you in that other thread. toss a comment in and you were good for another 12 hours. it was sad, like I said, and goes a ways to explain how we lsot the last few wars we've fought and can't even take care of our own personell anymore when I come to understand guys like you think they are our best and bravest. you understand shit about how to fight and win wars.Funny, I think it's you who are a disgrace to my beloved corps.Don't think it didn't escape me that the one time I attempted to even discuss actual doctrine and doctrine development you fled like a girl.Another inept uninformed officer.Probably an Amos fan as well.
I'm setting it at 11. And taking the over.
Now, I have asked you repeatedly to respond to that silly ass "Not guilty means your innocent" logic you used earlier. But you keep running from answering the question i asked with regards to that. We all know why you are doing that, because it makes your point extremely silly and naive. but lets hope you can answer this simple question without running from it also
Do you suppose I had no reason, or that I truly believe the verdicts showed Zimmerman had no blame.Lets see if you're as smart as you think.
And you don't have to believe anything about me. To you, I'm a nobody. However, I'm also that nobody, who has gotten into your head to the point that you can't do anything but get irate whenever I post in response to your idiotic posts. And I do admit that I get a ton of laughs out of pushing your buttons because it's so damn easy. And all I get in response is you calling me a pogue or a terrible officer or whatever lame insults you can throw my way. But then again, your lengthy, error-ridden diatribes are always welcome, so I do have to thank you for some awesome entertainment.
Also, you can go on and insult those of us, who did do our part in these conflicts by talking about how we lost multiple wars, but in the end, the extent to your conflict while in the Corps was to decide whether you should bang that Thai hooker during a MEU. But hey, don't mind us, who actually lost friends in actual combat. I'm sure you've lost some of yours as well...well, at least to venereal disease or something similar.
And don't worry, I lead a very uneventful life, so I will definitely spend my time hounding you until you either decide to leave BBI or get banned for doing something that comes natural to you, which is to be a homophobic, racist, conspiracy theorist moron. That the least I can do for my favorite teufel hunden on BBI.
But I do wish you a fine evening. Carry on the good fight, my man!
And you don't have to believe anything about me. To you, I'm a nobody. However, I'm also that nobody, who has gotten into your head to the point that you can't do anything but get irate whenever I post in response to your idiotic posts. And I do admit that I get a ton of laughs out of pushing your buttons because it's so damn easy. And all I get in response is you calling me a pogue or a terrible officer or whatever lame insults you can throw my way. But then again, your lengthy, error-ridden diatribes are always welcome, so I do have to thank you for some awesome entertainment.
Also, you can go on and insult those of us, who did do our part in these conflicts by talking about how we lost multiple wars, but in the end, the extent to your conflict while in the Corps was to decide whether you should bang that Thai hooker during a MEU. But hey, don't mind us, who actually lost friends in actual combat. I'm sure you've lost some of yours as well...well, at least to venereal disease or something similar.
And don't worry, I lead a very uneventful life, so I will definitely spend my time hounding you until you either decide to leave BBI or get banned for doing something that comes natural to you, which is to be a homophobic, racist, conspiracy theorist moron. That the least I can do for my favorite teufel hunden on BBI.
But I do wish you a fine evening. Carry on the good fight, my man!
Quote:
Do you believe his girlfriend's testimony?
Now, I have asked you repeatedly to respond to that silly ass "Not guilty means your innocent" logic you used earlier. But you keep running from answering the question i asked with regards to that. We all know why you are doing that, because it makes your point extremely silly and naive. but lets hope you can answer this simple question without running from it also
Here, I'll throw you a bone.Say for the sake or argument, you're right. say for the sake or argument it's obvious that a not guilty vote doesn't mean he's innocent. Take it a step further, and pretend that anyone with half a brain actually knows that.Yet that's not what I put out there. Now, you seem quite content to leave it at that, and come to what, for you, is the obvius conclusion, that I am of below avg intelligence. If youre good with that, then you stay there.Vut assuming that what I wrote above is self apparent, it begs the question, why would I say that?
Do you suppose I had no reason, or that I truly believe the verdicts showed Zimmerman had no blame.Lets see if you're as smart as you think.
You failed once again to answer the question that directly points to your point about his GF's testimony. If you can't back your idiocy, don't post it then because all you are doing is making a fool of yourself. You truly show your ignorance with regards to subjects when you do stupid shit like that. Don't make a claim if you can't stand behind it
And there are some here who can vouch for my bona fide nature of my background. That's enough as far as I see it.
Sweet dreams, my angry friend.
I know we break each other's balls here a lot, but I am genuinely sorry to hear that, brother.
I know we break each other's balls here a lot, but I am genuinely sorry to hear that, brother.
Thanks. Terrible things happen. We try to move on. Doesn't help to dwell on the past. But appreciate your words.
Quote:
In comment 12282181 montanagiant said:
Quote:
Do you believe his girlfriend's testimony?
Now, I have asked you repeatedly to respond to that silly ass "Not guilty means your innocent" logic you used earlier. But you keep running from answering the question i asked with regards to that. We all know why you are doing that, because it makes your point extremely silly and naive. but lets hope you can answer this simple question without running from it also
Here, I'll throw you a bone.Say for the sake or argument, you're right. say for the sake or argument it's obvious that a not guilty vote doesn't mean he's innocent. Take it a step further, and pretend that anyone with half a brain actually knows that.Yet that's not what I put out there. Now, you seem quite content to leave it at that, and come to what, for you, is the obvius conclusion, that I am of below avg intelligence. If youre good with that, then you stay there.Vut assuming that what I wrote above is self apparent, it begs the question, why would I say that?
Do you suppose I had no reason, or that I truly believe the verdicts showed Zimmerman had no blame.Lets see if you're as smart as you think.
You failed once again to answer the question that directly points to your point about his GF's testimony. If you can't back your idiocy, don't post it then because all you are doing is making a fool of yourself. You truly show your ignorance with regards to subjects when you do stupid shit like that. Don't make a claim if you can't stand behind it
And there are some here who can vouch for my bona fide nature of my background. That's enough as far as I see it.
Sweet dreams, my angry friend.
What is going to be your next handle when you get banned again?
Quote:
Aren't you then just going to throw out some lame Ring Knocker insult? I mean you are pretty predictable.
And there are some here who can vouch for my bona fide nature of my background. That's enough as far as I see it.
Sweet dreams, my angry friend.
Dont get upset and go away all mad. after all it was you who started questioning other peopels backgrounds. Dont cry you got exposed, PLC pogue.
What is your background you keep claiming? obviously its not teaching grammar, so clue us all in. you claimed you teach military tactics, where on Earth does this happen at? And please tell me we are not talking about Dungeon and Dragons tactics are we?
You can go on line like GWG like this idiot did and get all the slang. It is a term meant to degrade support staff like cooks, paper pushers, etc.. Anyone who has actually served though understands they also serve an important function, its just the wanna-be's who think they don't.
Another amusing gaywhiteghost thread - ( New Window )
1. Self-loathing gay basher
2. Conspiracy theorist
3. Racist
For his next trick, maybe he goes anti-Semitic?
1. Self-loathing gay basher
2. Conspiracy theorist
3. Racist
For his next trick, maybe he goes anti-Semitic?
I would also throw in an assault on the English language and proper logic to that list. But I'm sure Antisemitism will also be added to the list shortly.
Link - ( New Window )
Quote:
Deep in the Vietnamese jungles, he is known as the deadly White Ghost, a stealthy guerilla killer who continues to wage war against the Viet Cong, even though the war ended over a decade before. He is, in reality, Steve Shepard, a former U.S. Intelligence Officer with the Special Forces squad, a man listed MIA when his unit was slaughtered during an ambush. Since then, he has chosen to remain in the jungle. His only companion is his Vietnamese wife. This jungle actioner follows what happens when the U.S. military decides to try and bring him back to the U.S. Unfortunately, the former Green Beret officer chosen to lead the mission is Shepard's sworn enemy Walker, a man who seems more interested in bringing him back in a body bag. But will he succeed? This film went direct to video.
Link - ( New Window )
You are GWG's Walker, Ronnie. But will you succeed?
F$@^ you, Greg!
Walker, Texas Ranger is currently busy defending Texas against the unconstitutional encroachment of the federal government, so it's up to me.
But I am interested in asking...but wish the response kept private and not discussed.
GWG....for whatever reason and at this point top lost in time to be your fault or something anyone can overcome...can you take a day or so privately and ask yourself of this is worth it? It cannot be good for anyone to spend time in so much opposition. It's stress without a healthy payoff. It strikes me as unhealthy for you. I realize that opposition triggers stubborn opposition in all of us. But none of this or any one here is worth stress.
Secondly, there comes a time when the best inside any poster is lost and replaced by too much enjoyment at hammering the errant nail.
Don't misunderstand me....too many possible conversations wrecked by GWG and brownstones need to self stroke instead of discuss...but at some point none of us do well so far from our best. And we get into the practice of put down before give and take discussion that makes it hard for opposing and interesting view points to be submitted even if civilly done.
To slay the monster we become a new monster that wrecks what we originally objected to...decency and civic discourse.
No replies encouraged....just food for personal thought. I don't know what to do... but it sure seems like a lot of threads are going to be wrecked rehashing and re trying emotions long unanchored from original offense.
Just a thought
So for that, I will refrain from interacting with GWG, no matter if I enjoy seeing him get all discombobulated.
Thank you, sir.
I've attached the arrest record of this Apperson guy who reminds me of that Slingblade character.
Interesting how quickly Mark Nejame got on this case to represent Apperson. This is the same attorney that George Zimmerman first went to. Nejame declined but referred Zimmerman to Mark O'Meara whom he later hired. I guess Nejame and O'Meara are good friends.
Court record of Matt Apperson - ( New Window )
Talk about bad English...re read that question three times and tell me we are not far off course.
Hopefully see you down the road my friend.
Quote:
In comment 12281568 Johnny5 said:
Quote:
In comment 12281460 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
shooting.
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Check out Bernie Goetz. Similar situation IF GZ was trying to instigate a 'justified' shooting. Goetz was found innocent but he was tried for murder. If he had a past like GZ and it was introduced in court what would have happened?
Wasn't Bernie Goetz being mugged? That's not similar at all, unless you are one of those people that just sees a white man shooting a black teen and lumps it all together. Which makes you part of the problem. btw.
So for that, I will refrain from interacting with GWG, no matter if I enjoy seeing him get all discombobulated.
Thank you, sir.
Meh. Definitely intentional on my part. I'm happy enough with my own shortcomings. They taste like bacon.
You wanna call me a bigot, go right ahead. Doesn't make me one. Fagots make me sick.
Of course my actions were also intentional, but that doesn't mean that I'm not derailing threads with my snark directed towards him. I definitely recognize my shortcomings in that regard. And yes, anything that taste like bacon is a good thing.
Truth. But I will still refrain from here on out. But now I'm in the mood for some bacon. Thanks, ass!
How is that anyone else's fault?
How is that anyone else's fault?
Pretty sure that was the point, no? A request for some self-reflection (probably not A-Rod style, but who knows? Might do him some good?).
But its easy to do if you are willing to do so and easier if you have a screw loose and get some emotional payoff from it we do not understand.
You are working 20x harder than he is and getting nothing out of it.
He has no audience. He has no voice on here.
Meanwhile we let his presence wreck good threads.
I get the temptation....I fall into it all the time. I get that driving such posters away has a civic value to the site. However there are posters that are more than missing self awareness. At that point we have the sane engaging the insane (a response on a topic or at a time or in a situation or by a certain poster)....which by definition is insane. Why volunteer to be insane ( Repeating behavior proven useless and expecting a different response)?
imho. Again...I do the same things. I am not calling you out so lets lay down firearms on the subject
And the circus
I am not qualified to help the real reason for the posts...and for all I know am contributing to the self administration of toxic cortisol into a PTSD victim.
Repeated public counterproductive self abuse by a stranger is not the kind of video I want to see friends watching. Nor does the practice help us produce good videos on other subjects.
Just glad we have a Bill2 among us to lend a hand.
Just glad we have a Bill2 among us to lend a hand.
Hey! I think I write pretty clearly and make the meanings pretty obvious. As my students have repeated said about me in their end of course critique, I'm a master of breaking things down Barnie style to make it easily understood even for the slowest of people.
Quote:
if everyone on BBI wrote as well as Bill2 does, imho. Then points being made would be clear and meanings obvious. Oh, well.
Just glad we have a Bill2 among us to lend a hand.
Hey! I think I write pretty clearly and make the meanings pretty obvious. As my students have repeated said about me in their end of course critique, I'm a master of breaking things down Barnie style to make it easily understood even for the slowest of people.
huh?
Well...even I have my limits. I'm not a miracle worker.
Well...even I have my limits. I'm not a miracle worker.
There, there.
Quote:
if everyone on BBI wrote as well as Bill2 does, imho. Then points being made would be clear and meanings obvious. Oh, well.
Just glad we have a Bill2 among us to lend a hand.
Hey! I think I write pretty clearly and make the meanings pretty obvious. As my students have repeated said about me in their end of course critique, I'm a master of breaking things down Barnie style to make it easily understood even for the slowest of people.
Even for PLC Pogues?
:(
I'm sorry that I don't want to post a picture of my diploma or my commissioning warrant from my alma matre. So yes, for a PLC pogue.
You can't handle the Proof!
Will you settle for a scanned copy of my DD-214? And can I black my SSN out or do you want that as well?
Quote:
In comment 12281577 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 12281568 Johnny5 said:
Quote:
In comment 12281460 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
shooting.
Greg seriously? Not understand why you are defending him, is he a friend or something? LOL
Do you not see that this guy historically inserts himself into situations that he shouldn't be in, over and over and over and over again? Doesn't raise a red flag to you? At all?
Inserts himself in situations.....where is that in the Florida criminal code? If you can find it for me, I'll give you a round of applause.
Check out Bernie Goetz. Similar situation IF GZ was trying to instigate a 'justified' shooting. Goetz was found innocent but he was tried for murder. If he had a past like GZ and it was introduced in court what would have happened?
Wasn't Bernie Goetz being mugged? That's not similar at all, unless you are one of those people that just sees a white man shooting a black teen and lumps it all together. Which makes you part of the problem. btw.
Bernie Goetz repeatedly rode the subway looking for an opportunity to 'defend himself'. Meaning that in a way he caused/looked for the confrontation that led to the shooting. In that way I thought it was on point. Also I think you completely missed the tone. The previous poster asked how it would be illegal to shoot someone in self defense. Goetz was on point in that regard. He was charged and tried.
If I was not clear, my fault. But by no means was I using Goetz to justify Zimmermin and I'm a bit resentful that you casually lumped me into that group and stopped just short of calling me a racist, btw
Quote:
Even for PLC Pogues?
:(
I'm sorry that I don't want to post a picture of my diploma or my commissioning warrant from my alma matre. So yes, for a PLC pogue.
Frankly, I cannot imagine anyone, even GWG, making such an outlandish request and expecting you to publish personal info here. It's so very similar to all the hoo-ha by the Birthers that I cannot view it as coincidental.
I have my persona-non-grata preferences here, just like everyone else does. I generally, although not nearly enough, manage to just avoid any interaction with those posters. Maybe if GWG starts presenting less inflammatory subjects and somehow manages to play well with others it would make it worthwhile to engage with him.
Unfortunately, that's fairly obviously not why he posts here. When the discussion devolves into demanding tangible "proof" of someone's assertions, especially in your case where there already exists substantial corroborating evidence, I think it's the better part to just say Sayonara, sucker and let him howl at the moon all by his lonesome.
I have my persona-non-grata preferences here, just like everyone else does. I generally, although not nearly enough, manage to just avoid any interaction with those posters. Maybe if GWG starts presenting less inflammatory subjects and somehow manages to play well with others it would make it worthwhile to engage with him.
Unfortunately, that's fairly obviously not why he posts here. When the discussion devolves into demanding tangible "proof" of someone's assertions, especially in your case where there already exists substantial corroborating evidence, I think it's the better part to just say Sayonara, sucker and let him howl at the moon all by his lonesome.
Nicely stated. And that's why I'm taking the advice found in Bill2's post.
We all have posters on here that get under our skin, and we all post things we shouldn't or wish we could take back.
Except for me. lol
I can't believe this thread is still going.
Here is my issue - GWG posted that awful, homophobic tirade that I reposted above. He was banned, and Eric, as is his right, let him back.
That means that it is now incumbent upon the rest of us to forget that he is a hate-filled piece of shit. Does GWG do ANYTHING to prove that he is any different than what he displayed in that post? Nope, same behavior, only slightly more circumspect, and he revels in it.
Sometimes a piece of shit needs to be reminded what decent people think of him.
He has no place on this board.
Ban.
He's all too visible, and for those who haven't seen it, shame on you.
Link - ( New Window )