George Zimmerman sues Trayvon Martin's family, others for $100M

that statement is proof of guilty by public opinion through msm's smearing of a person...

guilty until proven innocent, a totalitarian concept...

 

When it comes to what happened regarding trayvon martin literally everything you just said is irrelevant. That is an indisputable fact.

I'm not disputing your opinions if him. I don't care what those are. I don't have a particularly high opinion of him either.

You claimed he got away with it and have provided nothing of relevance to support that claim. You're just spouting off opinions or irrelevant facts simply as a character assassination. Again.....totally irrelevant to what happened.

 

This again? And people after all this time STILL don’t know the facts of this case? GOOD GOD how pathetic.

Dude jumps other dude on neighborhood street Dude defends himself and kills attacker. VERY SIMPLE. VERY LEGAL!!!!

It doesn’t matter if anyone thought it’s not legal to kill a person trying to kill you. It doesn’t matter if anyone thought it should be illegal to carry a gun. It doesn’t matter if one guy was following another guy in his own neighborhood because that’s also completely LEGAL!!! It doesn’t matter if they exchanged words which cause the attack to happen. You can not legally touch another human being and try to pound his head into the ground because that’s Assault and attempted murder. And it’s completely legal to defend yourself from said attacker with lethal force.

this was a rather simple case the media in the blatant bias and hate, turned into a freak show. They lied about the case and defamed a mans character. And if trust movie also lies and defames someone he can sue their ass off and it’s still ALL LEGAL!!! Might now win but it’s legal and certainly not frivolous.

 

Yes, the man who defended himself according to the judgement of a court of law will be found innocent of that on Judgment Day.

 

So you posted links you didn't believe? Or you posted links that you did believe?

 

The party of science strikes again, once again declaring opinion "fact."

 

In 2014 I did believe the reports that he'd been killed. Are you crazy?

 

You didn't post those links in 2014, you posted them this year. I don't see how that makes me crazy to point out that you not only posted links, you actually said it.

 

I did post them in 2014.

 

I cited the facts why don't you use your asserted higher intelligence to refute them. Prove your claim that Zimmerman was sitting in his car when the dispatcher told him they didn't want him to follow to suspicious person.

 

It is your claim Zimmerman was in his cat when told by the dispatcher they didn't want him to follow the suspicious person and Zimmerman is at fault because he got out if his car then. Prove your assertion oh mighty intelligent one.

 

The movie maker is a huge conspiracy nut from Infowars.

 

Your simple dismissals of both the jury and the Civil Rights Division of Obama's DOJ refute nothing and are not based on factual evidence. You are even operating on a factual timelinenhaving made up events like Zimmerman sitting in his car when told not to follow the suspect disobeying the urging of the dispatcher. So what you "think" has no merit it is based on false assumptions. Oh mighty intelligent one.

 

There was no confrontation until Martin started both of them. How did the jury screw up, what did they get wrong and be specific.

 

Zimmerman did not approach Martin nor try to confront him. Martin had run off the entire incident was over when Martin went back to the T junction and confronted Zimmerman. Zimmerman's reasonable fear he was in danger of serious bodily harm began after Martin cold cocked him and had him on his back and was beating his head against the concrete sidewalk. Are you asserting Zimmerman was just supposed to let him continue until he did receive a serious bodily injury or even be killed?

 

Based on what evidence? Zimmerman was the one who was phyiscally attacked and had a reasonable feat of serious bodily harm at the least. What evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt it was a manslaughter and be specific.

 

Failed where, what did they get wrong vis-a-vis the evidence? And you don't even know the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ did a full investigation and determined there was no Zimmerman civil rights violation? So you can't even get the timeline and the facts sstraight have no knowledge about the subsequent investigation but claim due to your mighty intelligence the jury which heard all the evidence just got it wrong. How laughable.

 

And the Obama/Holder DOJ Civil Rights Division was also racist.......

 

Zimmerman should have waited for the police.

 

Martin was the one killed by Z, he was not supposed to follow him, what proof is there that martin was not defending himself from z?

 

According to z, z should not of been stalking z, he should have reported it and let the police handle it, Martin did not do anything wrong

 

There did not need to be a civil rights violation if you got him on simple murder or at least manslaughter. Civil rights charges are pursued when simple murder charges are difficult to proove or if a state is corrupt and fails to charge someone.

 

Which is relevant to what? You also posted them in 2019; in fact just a few weeks ago.

 

He was found not guilty by the jury, on what basis do you claim they got it wrong, what evidence did they get wrong and be specific. Civil Rights charges were pursued and they came up empty on what basis do you claim the the Obama/Holder DOJ got it wrong?

 

There was no stalking and he was sitting in his car waiting for the police to arrive to "handle it". Martin did plenty wrong when he went back to the T junction and assaulted Zimmerman.