His story adds up to everything
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX1sxARNq_c[/media]
Filmed one day after the shooting.
Poor man has to go through all this stress, I mean fuck I couldn't imagine what I'd be going through of I had people like the Black panthers attempting to place bounties on my head. Not to mention the media totally giving the man a bad name.
This proves why you don't accuse someone of something without sufficient evidence. The amount of people I recall calling this guy a racist cold-blooded murderer was insane, of course the media hyped it up to drive profits but people were so ignorant.
I remember writing in a thread explaining how the guy was Hispanic and is pretty dark himself (as evidenced by the video), and telling people to not jump to conclusions because there were to many gaps in a lot of the stories, plus when I read that previous article where George had stood up for a black person in his neighbourhood after a race-related crime it didn't make much sense. Not that by defending him it made him any less liable, it just didn't really make a coherent motive. Shows how silly people can be, and this guy has been right in the centre of all this abuse, I can't imagine what he will do from here, I mean he's been painted in this evil light due to peoples stupidity.
It always reminds me of that photo with the Vietnamese police chief Nguyen Ngoc Loan killing the Viet Cong prisoner Nguyen Van Lem, people don't know the story of the photo and so accused the police chief of being a murderer for killing a innocent man, even though the Viet Cong prisoner was a commander of a death squad, Nguyen Ngoc Loan later moved to America where he ran a pizza restaurant but was harassed by people who berated him as an evil murderer, he was forced to go into retirement, goes to show what ignorance does:
[img]http://www.wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/Vietimages/VCadams.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Laferio;36461615]Poor man has to go through all this stress, I mean fuck I couldn't imagine what I'd be going through of I had people like the Black panthers attempting to place bounties on my head. Not to mention the media totally giving the man a bad name.[/QUOTE]
the poor guy :'(
nevermind that dead kid lmao
Honestly it makes a lot of sense.
[editline]23rd June 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Kopimi;36461750]the poor guy :'(
nevermind that dead kid lmao[/QUOTE]
Except that he probably didn't do it. Why be sad for the kid if he probably died trying to hurt someone who was willing to defend themselves? You don't know that the kid was nothing but an innocent victim.
[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;36461761]Honestly it makes a lot of sense.[/QUOTE]
except from the fact that there are multiple discrepancies in his story. he's changed up his story multiple times in the course of the investigation, not to mention the business with him and his wife trying to hide their bank balance from the courts
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tG9RW3e5PQ&feature=channel&list=UL[/media]
[QUOTE=Kopimi;36461780]except from the fact that there are multiple discrepancies in his story. he's changed up his story multiple times in the course of the investigation, not to mention the business with him and his wife trying to hide their bank balance from the courts
[/QUOTE]
What does a bank balance matter at all, I fail to see the relevance. In response to the multiple discrepancies, sure there are differences in his story from what was reported earlier, but a lot of that could be down to memory, any psychologist will tell you the human mind is absolutely awful at recalling events post-situation, in fact it's incredibly unreliable because your brain will fill in the blanks to whatever logical conclusion. Ergo you cannot just call a person fallicious when their story differs.
Even if he is a liar which I wouldn't jump to assumptions that he is being entirely honest, my point remains that we clearly see Travyon was an aggressor and did attack George Zimmerman and that this wasn't a cold-blooded murder, nor was it race-related. Nor was Travyon just some kid with skittles and ice tea doing nothing but waltzing home.
Plus this doesn't mean that I think of George Zimmerman as the good guy here, he overreacted and was far to paranoid. It's uncertain who struck first whether it was Travyon attacking him, which he had to eventually given by the cuts, or Zimmerman detaining him and Travyon fighting back. Either way George shot a young kid because he wasn't thinking, regardless of whether he thought Travyon was reaching for a weapon, he killed a person where no such event had to occur.
[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;36461825]What does a bank balance matter at all, I fail to see the relevance. In response to the multiple discrepancies, sure there are differences in his story from what was reported earlier, but a lot of that could be down to memory, any psychologist will tell you the human mind is absolutely awful at recalling events post-situation, in fact it's incredibly unreliable because your brain will fill in the blanks to whatever logical conclusion. Ergo you cannot just call a person fallicious when their story differs.
Even if he is a liar which I wouldn't jump to assumptions that he is being entirely honest, my point remains that we clearly see Travyon was an aggressor and did attack George Zimmerman and that this wasn't a cold-blooded murder, nor was it race-related.[/QUOTE]
the bank account is related because its evidence of him lying and hiding things from the courts. the rest of your post is rubbish, "even though his story varied dramatically multiple times during the investigation, he was probably just shocked is all!". shock doesn't change your recollection of events that massively, and if you really want to use the "he was shocked!" defense, then i guess we have to throw out everything he has ever said regarding the issue, because after all, his word is unreliable!
what do you mean you wouldn't jump to the conclusion that he's a liar? he [B]is[/B] a liar, he lied about his bank account and got caught, so clearly he's not exactly a saint when it comes to telling the truth. how do you "clearly see trayvon as an aggressor"? because Zimmerman had bruises on the back of his skull? that's literally it, all it proves is that martin knocked zimmerman around a bit before being shot to death. it tells you nothing about who instigated the fight and why. all we have for evidence is the fact that zimmerman is on tape following martin around the neighborhood while on the phone with 911 operators who told him to [B]stop following him[/B]. he didn't. then we have zimmerman's testimony that while he innocently walked away, trayvon decided to beat the ever loving shit out of him for no discernible reason. and seeing as trayvon is dead, we can't really get his side of the story.
[QUOTE=Kopimi;36461780]except from the fact that there are multiple discrepancies in his story. he's changed up his story multiple times in the course of the investigation[/QUOTE]
What discrepancies.
This video was filmed before the whole nationwide media outrage/deaththreats, if he did change his story during the course of the investigations it could have been of fear.
[QUOTE=areyoublack;36461907]What discrepancies.
This video was filmed before the whole nationwide media outrage/deaththreats, if he did change his story during the course of the investigations it could have been of fear.[/QUOTE]
he seemed pretty calm and collected (a single day after killing someone?) to have given a "shocked and unreliable" testimony in that video. so why did he change his story later on? because of media outrage and deaththreats? yeah that makes a ton of sense. "people are threatening to kill me, better change my story!", because CLEARLY that will solve the issue of outrage and threats.
Em sorry, I didn't mention shock at all in my post where did you pull that from. My point was purely factual and scientific, the human mind isn't be virtue of nature a good source of reliability under any situation especially under pressure.
The Bank account has no relevance to this case, if he's lying about his bank statement or the porn magazines he has under his bed it doesn't matter, it has no relevance to the case, nor can you outright accuse someone as being a liar merely because he lied in a different circumstance. That isn't how the law works my friend.
Those aren't bruises by the way I suggest you look up images showing the gashes in his head, that required quite a sufficient amount of force, not something that you could cause simply by hitting someone, which matches George's explanation of being slammed into the pavement. I love how you say "knocked him around a bit", so you yourself verify that he was attacking him, and then dispute me calling him an aggressor which he would clearly of had to be. My point was purely he isn't an innocent kid, not that he's to blame you seem to be mistaken the two ideas.
That isn't me defending him as I evidenced from my post, I have a neutral position on the situation I simply don't have enough evidence, but what evidence I do have makes it very unlikely the story develop similair to how news sources and people were claiming it had before hand. You on the other-hand need to stop seeing things in black and white. What amazes me regarding your post is that you claim we only have George's perspective, and that we'll never have Travyon's yet you seem to be procuring evidence and bias without any testimony or proof, if we have insufficient evidence we don't magically take sides.
I personally feel that this case should just remain inconclusive. Obviously this is one of those scenarios that just cannot be investigated fully. The jury will most likely not find him 100% guilty of shooting Martin in cold blood; just as a jury wouldn't find Martin to be 100% responsible for the altercation. There are just so many unknowable variables; so instead of ruining a second person's life we should just sweep all of this under the rug and learn from it. Zimmerman obviously isn't some chain/serial killer, he isn't a danger to society (Arguably) so the case might as well be dropped due to insufficient evidence.
[editline]24th June 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Kopimi;36461947]he seemed pretty calm and collected (a single day after killing someone?) to have given a "shocked and unreliable" testimony in that video. so why did he change his story later on? because of media outrage and deaththreats? yeah that makes a ton of sense. "people are threatening to kill me, better change my story!", because CLEARLY that will solve the issue of outrage and threats.[/QUOTE]
He looked fairly nervous and uneasy, hence the breaks in his speech and such. From what I've seen his stories later on don't vary that dramatically. In the video above discussed by the Young Turks they mention that later on after the media explosion he says he was jumped going to his car; not a few houses away. If you pay attention to the OP's video he did say that he was going back to the car, hence why he might have said that he got jumped going to his car. I could understand if he mentioned distances that changed dramatically, (IE, he got jumped as he was opening the car door) but he doesn't.
[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;36461967]Em sorry, I didn't mention shock at all in my post where did you pull that from. My point was purely factual and scientific, the human mind isn't be virtue of nature a good source of reliability under any situation especially under pressure.[/QUOTE]
oh get over yourself, whining about semantics. shock/pressure/stress, call it whatever you want, the point is that you don't get to just ignore massive inconsistencies between multiple testimonies all because you think he might have been a bit worked up. it's clear he's had no issue recollecting the events that took place, so unless you can prove that in this specific case, George Zimmerman was unfit to testify and we can ignore the discrepancies in his statements, i'm not going to. you can play armchair psychologist all day long but until someone involved in the trial actually announces that his testimony was invalid, it isn't.
[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;36461967]The Bank account has no relevance to this case, if he's lying about his bank statement or the porn magazines he has under his bed it doesn't matter, it has no relevance to the case, nor can you outright accuse someone as being a liar merely because he lied in a different circumstance. That isn't how the law works my friend.[/QUOTE]
uh the bank account was very relevant to the case because it had to do with setting his bail if i recall, the entire reason we found out about him [B]LYING TO THE COURT[/B] about his bank account was because it was related to the trial and determined what his bail would be set at. what do you mean "this isn't how the law works"? uh, i'm not speaking about the law, i'm saying he has already LIED TO THE COURT (read that a few times until you start understanding what that means) about his bank account, so how do you know he's not lying to the court about what happened before he killed Martin?
[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;36461967]Those aren't bruises by the way I suggest you look up images showing the gashes in his head, that required quite a sufficient amount of force, not something that you could cause simply by hitting someone, which matches George's explanation of being slammed into the pavement. I love how you say "knocked him around a bit", so you yourself verify that he was attacking him, and then dispute me calling him an aggressor which he would clearly of had to be. My point was purely he isn't an innocent kid, not that he's to blame you seem to be mistaken the two ideas.[/QUOTE]
once again crying about meaningless semantics. yeah no shit, he had gashes on the back of his head and clearly trayvon was the one who did it, that doesn't make trayvon the aggressor. if i walk up to you and start beating the shit out of you with a baseball bat, and you get a good swing in and break my nose, that doesn't mean you're the aggressor. i still started the fight, which means you were fully entitled to bust my nose. are you keeping up? the "aggressor" isn't who you think hurt someone the most (which would still be fucking zimmerman), it's who started the conflict in the first place.
[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;36461967]That isn't me defending him as I evidenced from my post, I have a neutral position on the situation I simply don't have enough evidence, but what evidence I do have makes it very unlikely the story develop similair to how news sources and people were claiming it had before hand. You on the other-hand need to stop seeing things in black and white.[/QUOTE]
your neutral position involves disregarding any evidence possible that might incriminate zimmerman, and making huge assumptions about the case based on whatever zimmerman said. if you're trying to be neutral you're doing a godawful job of it
[editline]24th June 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Bredirish123;36462002]I personally feel that this case should just remain inconclusive. Obviously this is one of those scenarios that just cannot be investigated fully. The jury will most likely not find him 100% guilty of shooting Martin in cold blood; just as a jury wouldn't find Martin to be 100% responsible for the altercation. There are just so many unknowable variables; so instead of ruining a second person's life we should just sweep all of this under the rug and learn from it. Zimmerman obviously isn't some chain/serial killer, he isn't a danger to society (Arguably) so the case might as well be dropped due to insufficient evidence.[/QUOTE]
"idk i think he should just get away with what might be murder because in my uneducated opinion it's just not possible for him to be convicted!"
[QUOTE=Kopimi;36461750]the poor guy :'(
nevermind that dead kid lmao[/quote]
title
Didn't they have a 911 call with the black kid screaming help me in the background and then you hear the gun shot and no more voices.
Semantics are very important, shock is very different from inconsistent memory, your point was that I said he was in shock and you made sarcastic claims that I was using that as an argument "he was probably just shocked is all!" and defending Zimmerman as innocent, both of which I hadn't done in any statement. Your also an extremely rude individual, if you can't merely have a reasonable debate regarding information of this case then I see no point in this, you know as little as I do and that is consistent regardless of either of our views.
The Bank account has no relevance to the actual case, for someone saying I'm whining over semantics I find that very ironic. While it may have be necessary information during the bail period or during judiciary procedures it has no baring on the validity of any statements or events that took place during the crime. Also you statement "so how do you know he's not lying to the court about what happened before he killed Martin", that isn't how evidence works, you cannot accuse someone because they were caught lieing and thereby assume anything they say is invalid.
Once again semantics aren't meaningless, especially when your openly particular about what definitions you choose, your posts paint the image as Zimmerman being the aggressor which is clear because you belittle every event that takes place whether it be Zimmerman walking away and your sarcastic "trayvon decided to beat the ever loving shit out of him for no discernible reason", to your detailing of the injuries "bruises on the back of his skull?" regardless of what you think semantics do a lot to reveal your standing and clear bias. Your analogy also helps support this idea. Once again you failed to see my point, my point was in regards to sensationalist people painting Travyon as an innocent bystander, I thought I'd done enough to make that abundantly clear.
Also I fail to see how I'm avoiding evidence incriminating Zimmerman, I'm merely saying statements you've provided are either hearsay, assumptions. It deeply saddens me I've failed to meet your opinion of a neutral position even though I've made it decisively clear to you that I don't feel Zimmerman is innocent either way but I also don't have sufficient evidence, which makes me wonder why you're even arguing with me. What I am doing however diffusing previously outrageous claims made by the media which at this point can practically be seen as nothing more then sensationalist. For instance George being a racist.
Please also provide details as to what "huge assumptions" I've made regarding the case on what Zimmerman said, you seem to be very vague about the whole affair, I haven't taken any of Zimmerman's statements and used them as evidence I've merely suggested they are logical given the circumstances. Have I said they're truthful or trustworthy now that is something I indeed have not.
[QUOTE=nerdygamer;36462135]Didn't they have a 911 call with the black kid screaming help me in the background and then you hear the gun shot and no more voices.[/QUOTE]
not quite
there is a 911 call with someone screaming for help. the first witness (who came out and saw martin on zimmerman's back, hitting him) said zimmerman was calling for help. another witness thought it may have been martin calling for help but she didn't see the confrontation and has proved to be somewhat unreliable
martin's father, when first having the call played to him, said it wasn't his son's voice. he later changed his mind about this. zimmerman's father was certain from the outset that it was zimmerman's voice calling out for help
in zimmerman's version of events, before the 911 call was released and before the media frenzy, he says many times that he said "i need help". some of this was directed at the first witness who replied "i'm going to call the cops" (or words to that effect). zimmerman supposedly said "no i need help getting this guy off me" (or words to that effect)
[editline]24th June 2012[/editline]
also can we stop calling martin a "kid"? the biggest problem with this case is the media hype, like the news channels using an old picture of martin so he looks really young, while using a seven year-old picture of zimmerman from when he was bigger looking
calling martin a 'kid' really messes with people's perspective on the case. martin was 17. he's older than like half of this forum who refer to him as a 'kid'
[QUOTE=Kopimi;36462068]oh get over yourself, whining about semantics. shock/pressure/stress, call it whatever you want, the point is that you don't get to just ignore massive inconsistencies between multiple testimonies all because you think he might have been a bit worked up. it's clear he's had no issue recollecting the events that took place, so unless you can prove that in this specific case, George Zimmerman was unfit to testify and we can ignore the discrepancies in his statements, i'm not going to. you can play armchair psychologist all day long but until someone involved in the trial actually announces that his testimony was invalid, it isn't.[/quote]
Can you point out the massive discrepancies in his statements instead of just saying there are some?
[QUOTE=Kopimi;36462068]uh the bank account was very relevant to the case because it had to do with setting his bail if i recall, the entire reason we found out about him [B]LYING TO THE COURT[/B] about his bank account was because it was related to the trial and determined what his bail would be set at. what do you mean "this isn't how the law works"? uh, i'm not speaking about the law, i'm saying he has already LIED TO THE COURT (read that a few times until you start understanding what that means) about his bank account, so how do you know he's not lying to the court about what happened before he killed Martin?[/quote]
Oh look, he cares about losing money, hmm that's rare in a person.
[QUOTE=Kopimi;36462068]once again crying about meaningless semantics. yeah no shit, he had gashes on the back of his head and clearly trayvon was the one who did it, that doesn't make trayvon the aggressor. if i walk up to you and start beating the shit out of you with a baseball bat, and you get a good swing in and break my nose, that doesn't mean you're the aggressor. i still started the fight, which means you were fully entitled to bust my nose. are you keeping up? the "aggressor" isn't who you think hurt someone the most (which would still be fucking zimmerman), it's who started the conflict in the first place.[/quote]
Zimmermann was going back to his car, Trayvon could have walked away. Also you're saying if you come at me, I can break your nose? What if I get out of control and keep on beating the shit out of you until you pass out or die? Doesn't matter by your logic, you were the aggressor. Not like I could restrain you or anything right?
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;36462292]calling martin a 'kid' really messes with people's perspective on the case. martin was 17. he's older than like half of this forum who refer to him as a 'kid'[/QUOTE]
i fail to see why we shouldn't call a 17 year old kid a kid. he wasn't an adult. at 17 you're still a kid.
[editline]23rd June 2012[/editline]
just because a bunch of kids on this forum are talking about it doesn't change the fact that he was a kid
i recall fp lynching people for even siding with zimmerman
[editline]24th June 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=BrickInHead;36463014]i fail to see why we shouldn't call a 17 year old kid a kid. he wasn't an adult. at 17 you're still a kid.
[editline]23rd June 2012[/editline]
just because a bunch of kids on this forum are talking about it doesn't change the fact that he was a kid[/QUOTE]
if the media wants to portray someone as innocent then they'll say kid, if they want people to think negatively they'll say teenager, but I think you knew that already. To me a kid is someone 1-12, then they hit teens.
Apparently there were a lot of robberies in his neighborhood leading up to the shooting. I would have been suspicious too knowing this:
[url]http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-zimmerman-idUSBRE83O18H20120425[/url]
It's an account of the robberies and circumstances surrounding Zimmerman before the shooting. Also, he's probably not racist.
Edit:
And isn't Trayvon Martin something like 6'2 and tattooed? He doesn't have kid like features....
[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;36461699]
[img]http://www.wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/Vietimages/VCadams.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
The guy who took this photo, later on apologies to Nguyen Ngoc Loan for the damages he had done to his reputation, and went as far as to say he was a hero, and that the photo was out of context.
[QUOTE=Kopimi;36462068]
once again crying about [b]meaningless semantics[/b]
[/QUOTE]
"Semantics (from Greek: sēmantiká, neuter plural of sēmantikós)[1][2] is the study of meaning. It focuses on the relation between signifiers, such as words, phrases, signs, and symbols, and what they stand for, their denotata."
So, crying about what words actually mean?
[QUOTE=Drax-Quin;36461825]What does a bank balance matter at all, I fail to see the relevance. In response to the multiple discrepancies, sure there are differences in his story from what was reported earlier, but a lot of that could be down to memory, any psychologist will tell you the human mind is absolutely awful at recalling events post-situation, in fact it's incredibly unreliable because your brain will fill in the blanks to whatever logical conclusion. Ergo you cannot just call a person fallicious when their story differs.
Even if he is a liar which I wouldn't jump to assumptions that he is being entirely honest, my point remains that we clearly see Travyon was an aggressor and did attack George Zimmerman and that this wasn't a cold-blooded murder, nor was it race-related. Nor was Travyon just some kid with skittles and ice tea doing nothing but waltzing home.
Plus this doesn't mean that I think of George Zimmerman as the good guy here, he overreacted and was far to paranoid. It's uncertain who struck first whether it was Travyon attacking him, which he had to eventually given by the cuts, or Zimmerman detaining him and Travyon fighting back. Either way George shot a young kid because he wasn't thinking, regardless of whether he thought Travyon was reaching for a weapon, he killed a person where no such event had to occur.[/QUOTE]
"Hes not lying he must be innocent"
"says the lies don't matter"
He confronted a teenager walking home with food from the petrol station with a gun after being told to stay the fuck away by police [I]with a gun[/I] and then claims self defense because his head was bashed into the sidewalk despite him not having any sign of injury and not being taken straight to hospital. If a person claims head injury they will be taken straight to the hospital because internal injury isn't always visible externally (duh) and their life could be on the line. If this wasn't a racially motivated crime then Goerge is crazy
He even said to the 911 operator that he wasn't letting them get away this time, there are several reports from his neighbours saying he is over active in his [B]self appointed[/B] role of Neighbourhood Watch, and he was fired from numerous jobs for the same reasons
You are either racist or incredibly fucking dumb
[editline]24th June 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=areyoublack;36462387]Can you point out the massive discrepancies in his statements instead of just saying there are some?
Oh look, he cares about losing money, hmm that's rare in a person.
Zimmermann was going back to his car, Trayvon could have walked away. Also you're saying if you come at me, I can break your nose? What if I get out of control and keep on beating the shit out of you until you pass out or die? Doesn't matter by your logic, you were the aggressor. Not like I could restrain you or anything right?[/QUOTE]
You are stupid as fuck. He lied about his funds so A) Less bail B) He has money to run away
And what seems more likely? Trayvon attacked Zimmerman for no reason or Zimmerman attacked him [I]after being told not too by police, then saying he wasn't letting them get away this time [B]with a motherfucking gun[/B][/I]
And yes, if you attack someone and threaten them, they are perfectly in the right to try and get away, especially when the aggressor has a gun.
It was a racially motivated crime theres no getting away from it. A man with white skin who would never be discriminated against racially because of his appearance (yes I know he's half spanish doesn't change the fact his skin colour is white unless you are trying to justify your racism) went after an innocent black teenager because he had a hoody and food that Zimmerman assumed he stole
[editline]24th June 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=cdr248;36463454]Apparently there were a lot of robberies in his neighborhood leading up to the shooting. I would have been suspicious too knowing this:
[url]http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-zimmerman-idUSBRE83O18H20120425[/url]
It's an account of the robberies and circumstances surrounding Zimmerman before the shooting. Also, he's probably not racist.
Edit:
And isn't Trayvon Martin something like 6'2 and tattooed? He doesn't have kid like features....[/QUOTE]
How can you justify saying he is not racist after saying he was suspicious of the black people in his community after a bunch of robberies. Even if it was a black person who did it it's still racist to assume it was a black guy
[editline]24th June 2012[/editline]
Zimmerman had no gashes on his head, if you watch the footage when he's being taken from the car you'll notice that it's a shadow that moves across his head and the police' head aswell. Even if he did, how could Trayvon be the agressor when Zimmerman got out of his car with his gun after telling police he's not letting him get away this time.
[editline]24th June 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;36462292]not quite
there is a 911 call with someone screaming for help. the first witness (who came out and saw martin on zimmerman's back, hitting him) said zimmerman was calling for help. another witness thought it may have been martin calling for help but she didn't see the confrontation and has proved to be somewhat unreliable
martin's father, when first having the call played to him, said it wasn't his son's voice. he later changed his mind about this. zimmerman's father was certain from the outset that it was zimmerman's voice calling out for help
in zimmerman's version of events, before the 911 call was released and before the media frenzy, he says many times that he said "i need help". some of this was directed at the first witness who replied "i'm going to call the cops" (or words to that effect). zimmerman supposedly said "no i need help getting this guy off me" (or words to that effect)
[editline]24th June 2012[/editline]
also can we stop calling martin a "kid"? the biggest problem with this case is the media hype, like the news channels using an old picture of martin so he looks really young, while using a seven year-old picture of zimmerman from when he was bigger looking
calling martin a 'kid' really messes with people's perspective on the case. martin was 17. he's older than like half of this forum who refer to him as a 'kid'[/QUOTE]
17 is a kid, both in reality and legally. A males brain isn't adult in ~25 years of age depsite people being legally an adult at 18
[QUOTE=McGii;36463919]*pathetic, non-sensical rant about being racist*[/QUOTE]
So basically you're saying that if you support Zimmerman in any way...you're racist.
Fuck logic.
Can anyone tell me the story of what really happened on that day? Since there are so many stories saying different things that happened. I would like to know what really happened based on reliable sources.
[QUOTE=Jim_Riley;36464228]So basically you're saying that if you support Zimmerman in any way...you're racist.
Fuck logic.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the shitpost and strawman, but good try though!
[QUOTE=.FLAP.JACK.DAN.;36464251]Can anyone tell me the story of what really happened on that day? Since there are so many stories saying different things that happened. I would like to know what really happened based on reliable sources.[/QUOTE]
We don't know 100% but we do know that George saw Trayvon walking down the street with food and drink from a petrol station. George called 911 while following Trayvon, stating he was suspicious, was told to stop following. George Said he wasn't letting "them" get away this time, got out of his car with his gun. Later Trayvon ends up dead, George is taken to a police station with only a broken nose. If he had said he had been hit in the head the police would have taken him to the hospital as head injuries easily lead to death even if they aren't visible. Note: There were no gashes, I have to go out and I'll get the video later but the "gash" moves across his head and the heads of the police like a shadow (IE it's a shadow)
[QUOTE=Laferio;36461615]Poor man has to go through all this stress, I mean fuck I couldn't imagine what I'd be going through of I had people like the Black panthers attempting to place bounties on my head. Not to mention the media totally giving the man a bad name.[/QUOTE]
THIS.
Just the fact the media said jack shit about the friggen bounty placed on his head....ugh. All that "hate crime" bullshit is so damn annoying. Love how this ridiculously small incident (compared to all of the other brutal murders out there that are never talked about) gets attention, yet when that one black guy murdered those 2 British tourists in Florida this past April (for not giving him money), it didn't get nearly as much press.
Did that person get charged or held by police? The reason it got press is that the police were willing to let him get away with it
You are saying the media is racist but in reality it's the Florida police who let so many people get away with murder because they dead guy is black
[QUOTE=McGii;36464412]Did that person get charged or held by police? The reason it got press is that the police were willing to let him get away with it
You are saying the media is racist but in reality it's the Florida police who let so many people get away with murder because they dead guy is black[/QUOTE]
yeah he totally got away with it. that's why he's going to court :|
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
