what ever, I just figure a few things are for certain that can be deduced as logical, Zimmerman sees a suspicious young teen , had no business to confront the kid, in turn the kid decides to put his big boy pants on and get into a verbal altercation, Zimmerman probably tosses some verbal tough guy taunts back at the kid, an decides to follow the kid to make sure he isn’t apart of some gang and is going to come back into his neighborhood and cause more problems, nothing either person did was illegal, poor choices on both of their parts yes, but then at some point a fight breaks out, then the debate begins, then people want to point fingers and say who is to blame first even though trash talking an taunting is not a crime, the crime begins with who , struck who first, who had the advantage in the fight and thus in the end even if a teenager of any race has the upper hand at pummeling an adult male does that adult male in turn have the right to use a firearm that is he is in lawful possession of to defend his life…Uh no. OJ was a civil trial for wrongful death that the families filed and win after his criminal trial. This is the federal govt discuss charging GZ with federal criminal charges. Of course no one is discussing how this is a blatant violation of double jeopardy .
And the same DOJ which coordinated the protests will be COMPLETELY IMPARTIAL in making the decision to prosecute. You simply can’t claim to be American and support such an abomination of justice.
The court, which is deemed to have authority to make such determinations.Whose to say that the jury came up with the right verdict?
LOVE, not guns!
4 minutes and we don’t know what happened. This much we do know.No, what I’m saying is that TM may well have been on top of GZ, but the bashing of his head may not have occurred until after GZ pulled his gun.
LOVE, not guns!
Witness statements put Martin straddling Zimmerman and hitting him. No DNA from that either. But, Zimmerman’s account and witness statements support each other.And Martin had no DNA on his hands, DNA can not be washed off. So one can say this supports the account that Martin was not pounding Zimmerman’s head into the pavement. …
Since he did infact shoot Martin, in order for the jury to find him not guilty it had to be a justifiable killing. If they didn’t determine he was justified in shooting Martin, then he would have been found guilty.And Martin had no DNA on his hands, DNA can not be washed off. So one can say this supports the account that Martin was not pounding Zimmerman’s head into the pavement.
This is why I say in the end, the Jury simply finds there is not a case against Zimmerman for murder and the other charges.
Martin doesn’t have an account, he’s dead. Don’t forget that either.Witness statements put Martin straddling Zimmerman and hitting him. No DNA from that either. But, Zimmerman’s account and witness statements support each other.
What evidence supports such a wild assertion?But it could very well be possible that TM used physical force in pounding GZ’s head into the ground after GZ pulled his gun. This is perfectly plausible given the evidence, but nobody seems interested in taking this into account. This thread is so biased.
LOVE, not guns!
Where did the injuries come from?Well, I’m not quite sure that’s a “fact.” The defense doesn’t have to prove their version of events
None of that matters when one man is bashing another man’s head in.However, the original point was that the situation could have been avoided had Zimmerman not gotten out of his car. Zimmerman reported to police that a suspicious person, possibly on drugs, looked like he was up to no good. If you believe that about another person then getting out of your car to look for them is, imho, a foolish thing to do.
Hey, it’s perfectly plausible, but people on this thread keep on taking GZ’s perspective for granted!What evidence supports such a wild assertion?
Zimmerman had more than one gash and contusion on his head. He had multiple injuries. Do you believe that a man with a weapon readied to fire would allow someone to break his nose and bash his head on concrete more than once before firing the weapon?TM may have struggled with the gun with one hand while bashing GZ’s head with the other. All it would have taken is one bashing for GZ to have sustained his injury.
Worship God, not guns!
Again with all due respect, you brought up your Parish and the gun violence. If you were not equating it with this case, why bring it up? What does gang banger, inner city violence have to do with a case of an armed citizen judged to be defending himself? Is your point that no one should carry a weapon, other than law enforcement or military service members? If so, I am in 200% disagreement with you. I think the reality that peole can and do arm themselves prevents or reduces more gun violence than it perpetuates. The statistics, history and the law bears out my stance on this subject. There is extensive research and statistical support for trained and responsible citizens having the ability to carry a weapon. Please do not conflate this to a desire for vigilante justice. That is neither what I mean nor what occurs.Never equated the two.
Never said they were.
Once again never said they were. But unwise actions that can have bad consequences don’t become viable choices just because we have good intentions.
I
…
It is based on that because he was the one getting his head bashed in.No, TM could have been of top of GZ but it may be that TM only used physical force of banging his head on the ground after GZ pulled his gun. It you were on top of somebody and they pulled a gun on you, what would your response be?
Again, this thread is largely biased in favor of GZ’s perspective.
LOVE, not guns!
Exactly who on CAF is worshipping guns, rather than God? Perhaps I’m misinterpreting your intent, but that is a horribly unfair, unjust, and ridiculous statement to makeWhat about here on CAF?
Worship God, not guns!
Rash judgement is a sin too.This thread is infested by gun worshipers! Where are your Catholic virtues!
LOVE, not guns!
No we listened to testimony, read transcripts, and believed the corroborating evidence as well as the witnesses.Hey, it’s perfectly plausible, but people on this thread keep on taking GZ’s perspective for granted!
Worship God, not guns.
Of course. All I can go on are the facts presented and supporting evidence.Martin doesn’t have an account, he’s dead. Don’t forget that either.
I disagree.Hey, it’s perfectly plausible, …
Okay, this was not a hate crime ! Zimmerman obviously stereotyped this young man and now Trayvon is dead because he wore a hoodie on his head. Lord have mercy on us all.This was not hate what so ever. Look facts are facts. First of all, George should of listened to the police operator on not followed mr. Martin. Alright he went against police instructions. But let’s look at the other side, how many 15 to 19 yr olds look and act “thuggish”. Here in dallas it’s not only a black thing, but Hispanics and whites want to blend in with their friends and feel that they must act a certain way to blend in.
CNN had a piece out on Saturday, were an employee from the state got fired for giving information to the defense of trayvon’s phone texts and Facebook posts. Now mr. Martin is no angel in all of this. Should this had been avoided absolutely, but to say it was a hate crime based on color, umm the answer is a big no. Now, he probably did stereotyped mr. Martin
I already know you disagree, but it’s plausible.I disagree.