Unarmed Kid Killed (part 5)

That's subjective. You have no right to limit anyone's ability to report suspicious activity to police. None.

 

This is absolutely false as eye witness testimony says it was Trayvon screaming for help.

No eyewitness ever saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman.

No witness ever said they heard Zimmerman screaming.

We know for a fact Zimmerman pursued Trayvon after Trayvon ran away from him.

The first witnesses seconds after the shooting saw Zimmerman over Trayvon.


But keep ignoring those facts.

 

Sorry, wrong. Zimmerman, armed with a loaded 9mm, created the circumstance which caused the confrontation. You cannot claim self-defense if you're the aggressor.

How do I know he created the circumstance? He pursued an innocent young man. Even when the young man was fleeing (moving away from him), he pursued. That's not a case for self-defense.

No facts point to Martin being the aggressor, bloody nose or not as you don't know who started the altercation. That's simply you speculating as Zimmerman never said Martin attacked him first. What we do know is Zimmerman made a statement that suggested his intent. Martin retreated.

 

Remember how many times you whined that we had no proof Zimmerman followed Trayvon? When the recording of Zimmerman admitting it came out you suddenly became dead silent about that out of pure embarrassment. Now you're just repeating the process because you haven't learned from past mistakes. Which is why the best you can do is have a paco fan club.

 

More nonsensical babbling and strawman arguments. His activities determines if he's suspicious or not. Looking around, walking on the sideway and wearing a hoodie does not constitute suspicious.

 

That is not a fact. It is a fact the police have CLAIMED they did not have evidence for probable cause but the police have proven to be dishonest on several occasions:

They claimed Zimmerman had a "squeaky clean" record two days after Zimmerman murdered Trayvon. He was arrested for assault. Neighbors also complained he was too aggressive.

They claimed Zimmerman did not know Trayvon was African American then the recorded calls are released and Zimmerman describes him as a "black male...late teens"

The cops lied and said Tracy Martin said it was not Trayvon screaming.

The cops tried to "correct" eyewitness testimony by telling Mary Cutcher she was wrong when she said she heard Trayvon yelling for help.

The cops claimed to do a "fair" investigation but did not follow standard protocol of running Zimmerman's background.

They did not test Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol which is also standard when one person shoots another.

The first press release from the police department stated there was an altercation between two males and "shots were fired" then they say only one shot was fired.

Your position has been repeatedly proven to be a bad joke but you keep embarrassing yourself.

 

The fact Zimmerman claimed Trayvon was "definitely" messed up on drugs or something only helps prove his observation skills are less than up to par.

 

If you want to be so obsessed with skin color I won't combat this point because to me it is meaningless. It doesn't change any of the facts of the case so if you want to be fixated on skin color, so be it. Let's say you are correct and he isn't white. So what?

 

I've also noted the vehemence has tapered off, from "some old white guy" murdered in cold blood a black teen, to "a white vigilante Neighbourhood Watch type" gunned down a black teen, to "so what he is Mexican, mob mentality on display when he was presumed white, had nothing to do with deliberating fueling racist flames."

Liberals require race to properly fuel their victim status mentality basis of thought. If the thread(s) go much further...the Mexican will become white in the liberal mind, while simultaenously claiming it is only about the 17 year old being killed.

 

Here we go again with the "being beaten bloody" crap. The tapes prove it is impossible that was Zimmerman by your hypothesis.

 

It could have simply been a kid listening to music and dancing for all we know. Whether he was acting strange or not, Martin was not in the process of doing anything illegal.

But just look at their arguments. They've yet to provide any evidence that Martin was the aggressor. All evidence point to Zimmerman being the aggressor. If he is, then self-defense doesn't follow. Even with the bloody nose and cut on the head, if he's the aggressor he has no claim to self-defense.

For those that have a hard time understanding... you cannot start a fight, lose the fight and then shoot the person who was actually defending themselves and claim self-defense. It doesn't work that way.

 

Super already pointed out the kid himself did not say he saw a red shirt. The kid only said he saw someone on the ground. The reporter threw that in there about the red shirt. People like pacodons know they are purposefully spreading misinformation but if it fits their agenda they are very pleased with themselves......while moaning about "facts."

 

What does any of this have to do with Liberal or Conservative idealogues? Why are you forcing this square block into the round hole of this case?

Or are you just trying to find a way to justify your refusal to address the case honestly by filling it with political nonsense?

 

This is why the SYG law is so contentious because it does not use the same legal tests as the older law. It does not really matter who the aggressor was and it does not matter if the shooter was actually in fear or not.

The SYG law does require the shooter to be acting lawfully and have a lawful right in the location of the altercation. This is why Zimmerman does not qualify. He had no lawful right to pursue and interrogate Trayvon. Even as a neighborhood watch idiot, he is not afforded additional rights over other civilians. The fact he was in the location of Trayvon and interrogating him means he was not in a lawful place or acting lawfully.

 

I addressed it back at the start, calling for all the facts to come in, official police reports...and requesting the mob mentality to cease.

The Mexican guy shot the black teen. That is the square block not fitting into your contrived liberal victim status round hole.

 

If you have a Canadian eye then why not open it up to see the race of Zimmerman doesn't change any of the the facts? It sure doesn't change the fact he profiled young black males before killing Trayvon and even if Zimmerman was an African American that would still be racism.

Please pay attention: racism is not defined by the race of the perp. It is defined by the race of the victim. You could say Zimmerman is white, black, yellow, extra extra black, green, or any other color and it would not change the fact racism played a role in his behavior by racially profiling even before February 26th.

 

That would be incorrect. It does matter who the aggressor is.

 

WTF are you talking about? Race doesn't affect any of the facts in this case. Liberal or Conservative also doesn't change the facts.

How about this... address the topic instead of writing (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)y ass posts about off topic crap that has no bearing on this situation.

 

I already addressed this but it seems your camp believes changing the race of Zimmerman changes anything at all. It doesn't change anything.

 

Your family/lawyer/media generated claims are worthless.

.

 

Martin could have been the aggressor, the evidence so far points that way.

 

You didn't have any evidence.

 

Each caller has to decide what they feel is suspicious or not. You are just being absurd now.

.