"If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon." - Obama. What the MSM isn't telling you.

Originally posted by SonoraUndergroundLabs

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by popsmayhem

 

Because he is a moron and thought he would thug up and pick on the neighbor hood watch guy who was just trying to keep his community safe..

Or maybe, just maybe, he felt threatened by that guy who was chasing FOR NO REASON and carrying a gun?

Trayvon paid with his life, the witness testimony proves in treyvon attacking zimmerman, zimmerman had every right to defend his ground from a potential life threatening threat

That was easy to find your lie. No facts here just hear say

reply to post by RealSpoke


That was Zimmerman screaming for help in that clip, he was below Trayvon getting pounded in the face, that is why he started bleeding from the back of his head as well as his nose and had grass stains on his back according to the police. When Zimmerman understood he was not about to get any help he began fearing for his life (naturally) so he drew his gun and shot the perp. The fact that the perp was black has nothing to do with it. And this is also why Zimmerman is not charged: It was self defence.

Originally posted by j2000
Here is some new light. An actual witness to the whole thing. The others did not see didly.

"The guy on the bottom who had a red sweater on was yelling to me: 'help, help…and I told him to stop and I was calling 911," he said.

Trayvon Martin was in a hoodie; Zimmerman was in red.

The witness only wanted to be identified as "John," and didn't not want to be shown on camera.

His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up Zimmerman's claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of Zimmerman.

www.myfoxtampabay.com... -attacked-zimmerman-03232012

Now I will give the OP a star and a flag. The other can stuff it in their pipe and smoke it.
A thug, is a thug, is a thug. No way around it.

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by MrWendal
You can not claim self defense when you initiate the confrontation.

You can when you were attacked first
like zimmerman was by treyvon

No you can not. The Law is VERY clear on this point. When someone runs from you, there is no self defense. It would be no different than me getting into a street fight with some random person. I can only use as much force as necessary to stop the attack.

So, if I get attacked and after one punch my attacker backs off. I can not legally hit him again. The attacker would have to actually advance towards me a second time, or have some type of reaction that is a threat to me, to be within my legal rights to hit him a second time.

In this case... Trayvon Martin walked away from a confrontation with Zimmerman. Zimmerman followed Martin. Therefor Zimmerman was advancing his ground.

If Martin did attack Zimmerman, it was already past the point of self defense. Zimmerman advanced his ground, he pursued Martin. He placed himself the position to be attacked. Once Martin called Police, his duty was done. This is the Law. This is why the 911 Operator told Zimmerman NOT to follow Martin.

I am disgusted Obama is playing this out,to pander to his "voting" initiative.There are so many other cases like this,but he picks this particular one,to spout off his own brand of judgement. For a guy who earned a peace prize,and has blood on his hands,speaks volumes.Its pathetic actually. Polarizing America,once again. I wonder if Obama checked to see what race Mr Zimmerman was (Hispanic) before he spouted off at the mouth. He probably saw the name Zimmerman,and thought immediately,white guy. For him to judge him,based on his name, tells more about Obama then anything else. He knows all to well,how it feels to be Judged by both races. Me and Obama are mixed,we have that in common,and that's where ALL similarity's cease. He should have known better.

Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by RealSpoke

 

That was Zimmerman screaming for help in that clip, he was below Trayvon getting pounded in the face, that is why he started bleeding from the back of his head as well as his nose and had grass stains on his back according to the police. When Zimmerman understood he was not about to get any help he began fearing for his life (naturally) so he drew his gun and shot the perp. The fact that the perp was black has nothing to do with it. And this is also why Zimmerman is not charged: It was self defence.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
FINALLY THE TRUTH IS COMING OUT!

Zimmerman is innocent. there is a key eye witness
who saw treyvon attack zimmerman first..Heard and saw zimmerman screaming for help.

Zimmerman did no wrong in defending himself

EVERYBODY is buying into the MSM propaganda and hearsay
not looking at the evidence, witness testimony and facts.

Originally posted by j2000
Here is some new light. An actual witness to the whole thing. The others did not see didly.

"The guy on the bottom who had a red sweater on was yelling to me: 'help, help…and I told him to stop and I was calling 911," he said.

Trayvon Martin was in a hoodie; Zimmerman was in red.

The witness only wanted to be identified as "John," and didn't not want to be shown on camera.

His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up Zimmerman's claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of Zimmerman.

www.myfoxtampabay.com... -attacked-zimmerman-03232012

You realize this witness saw the fight AFTER it began.

He DOES NOT SEE what started the fight.

So your saying because Martin was on top that automatically means Martin was the aggressor? Is it even possible in your mind that it was Martin who was defending himself from a person who had been following him?

reply to post by sonnny1


You know that I'm no longer a supporter of Obama, but he did what a President should do here. The whole country is reacting to this case, with marches daily...it's not something any POTUS can ignore.

Originally posted by SonoraUndergroundLabs
reply to post by TsukiLunar

 

Its not against the law to not listen to a police officer. They said that for zimmermans safety. And he gave up his rights to his safety.

So... he was justified in chasing a complete stranger down the street for NO REASON?

If the kid hid in a bush then attacked the kid would have been charged with assault and battery in the first place.

Not if he felt threatened. Like if, say, a guy had chased him down the street for no reason.

You can instigate someone to hit you first and they take the blame.

No, its called, wait for it, self defense. If you are in a situation where you feel threatened and escaping has not worked, then yes, you can fight back.

The kid struck first and mounted Zimmerman. That would initiate self defense. He broke NO laws leading up to it

In determining a self defense case certain actions are taken into account. Like, say, if you started chasing a child, who is raised to run away and kick and scream and fight back against such actions, then YOU have initiated the confrontation and are the aggressor. The "self defense" defense just does not hold water in this case.

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by j2000


You realize this witness saw the fight AFTER it began.

He DOES NOT SEE what started the fight.

So your saying because Martin was on top that automatically means Martin was the aggressor? Is it even possible in your mind that it was Martin who was defending himself from a person who had been following him?

At that point it does not matter. He could have called him all kinds of names, etc. The "Little boy" came back out of his way and took to the agressive. He was beating the crap out of Zimmerman.

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by MrWendal
You can not claim self defense when you initiate the confrontation.

You can when you were attacked first
like zimmerman was by treyvon

No you can not. The Law is VERY clear on this point. When someone runs from you, there is no self defense. It would be no different than me getting into a street fight with some random person. I can only use as much force as necessary to stop the attack.

So, if I get attacked and after one punch my attacker backs off. I can not legally hit him again. The attacker would have to actually advance towards me a second time, or have some type of reaction that is a threat to me, to be within my legal rights to hit him a second time.

In this case... Trayvon Martin walked away from a confrontation with Zimmerman. Zimmerman followed Martin. Therefor Zimmerman was advancing his ground.

If Martin did attack Zimmerman, it was already past the point of self defense. Zimmerman advanced his ground, he pursued Martin. He placed himself the position to be attacked. Once Martin called Police, his duty was done. This is the Law. This is why the 911 Operator told Zimmerman NOT to follow Martin.

I am sorry but your entire point is moot since you are basically saying Trayvon was the one defending himself from Zimmerman by sitting on him and pounding his face repeatedly despite Zimmerman screaming for help over several minutes fearing for his life.

See anything wrong with that logic.?

Even if Zimmerman was following Trayvon previously, that does not give Trayvon a reason to attack Zimmerman in such a way, and even if it did, he would only be in his rights to tell Zimmerman to back off at most, in no way was a physical assault like this ever justified.

Have you even looked at the evidence?

reply to post by j2000


That isn't new information it was a local news interview the day after the murder.

reply to post by popsmayhem


Pops,We are in agreement that we have to have ALL the evidence ,before actually judging this man. But I want you to listen to this,with an open mind. Can you tell me what Zimmerman actually said on the 911 tape? I have to say this is a damning piece of evidence.


Zimmerman controversial comment (Explicit)

Again,I hold off,with my better Judgement,and this is the first time,I have heard this.

Let me know what you think.

reply to post by TsukiLunar


Again you can follow whoever you please in public. Look at paparazzi. But what happens when someone punches the camera for following them? They get put in jail! Is it self defence no. Does the paparazzi chase you? Yes. Does it seem like they want to hurt you yes. So what's the difference? I see none.

reply to post by sonnny1


He said f ing cops not coon

Originally posted by popsmayhem

Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by RealSpoke

 

That was Zimmerman screaming for help in that clip, he was below Trayvon getting pounded in the face, that is why he started bleeding from the back of his head as well as his nose and had grass stains on his back according to the police. When Zimmerman understood he was not about to get any help he began fearing for his life (naturally) so he drew his gun and shot the perp. The fact that the perp was black has nothing to do with it. And this is also why Zimmerman is not charged: It was self defence.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
FINALLY THE TRUTH IS COMING OUT!

Zimmerman is innocent. there is a key eye witness
who saw treyvon attack zimmerman first..Heard and saw zimmerman screaming for help.

Zimmerman did no wrong in defending himself

EVERYBODY is buying into the MSM propaganda and hearsay
not looking at the evidence, witness testimony and facts.

The MSM has an agenda? I'm shocked.

When the facts come out this will backfire on the opportunists.

I dont get why its such a big deal?? If its all about race then you people are just plain stupid, who cares what color these two guys were. If it was a white on white or a latino on latino or black on black this would be a non issue. Confrontations that end in a shooting happen EVERY DAY multiple times in america. Why the hell is this so different?

Get a grip.

reply to post by SonoraUndergroundLabs

Again you can follow whoever you please in public. Look at paparazzi. But what happens when someone punches the camera for following them? They get put in jail!

.
Analogy fail. You know what the paparazzi is doing. You do not know what "some guy" is doing, especially after you have fled and hid.

This is a kid. He ran, didn't work. And then he fought back against a clearly unknown aggressor.

Originally posted by SonoraUndergroundLabs
reply to post by sonnny1

 

He said f ing cops not coon

hmmm......

Dont know about that. I listened to it a few times,keeping an open mind on it.

If they clear the recording up,and its what I think he said,hes screwed.

reply to post by sonnny1


It sounds like coons to me to. But it doesn't matter. Zimmerman was clearly looking for a confrontation.