Travyon Martin Parents Settle Wrongful Death Claim for Over One Million Dollars

Originally posted by buddhasystem

I have no faith in your reading skills, and your writing was shot already with that Hitler related demagoguery. Content-free stuff.

You are defending someone who has called a dead teenager an "animal", has suggested - with no evidence - that he is implicated in burglaries, and has exonerated his killer with no evidence.

Your stuff isn't content free. It's just sad.

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by buddhasystem

I have no faith in your reading skills, and your writing was shot already with that Hitler related demagoguery. Content-free stuff.

You are defending someone who has called a dead teenager an "animal", has suggested - with no evidence - that he is implicated in burglaries, and has exonerated his killer with no evidence.

Your stuff isn't content free. It's just sad.

I didn't defend anyone who said that Trayvon was an animal. I never thought Trayvon was an animal. Don't put words in my mouth. Quote me saying anything in such defense. You can't. You are a liar. What I said was more like this:

When I open a thread about Martin, and instead I see a statement about Jews and their "usury", I call idiocy on this. When I open a thread about Martin and see "Hitler", I call double idiocy on this.

I'm not even defending anyone, I'm just saying that whoever posted this was certifiably stupid.

reply to post by buddhasystem


So, someone who uses a Hitler comparison to ridicule another poster's worthless comment is more worthy of your ire than the person who calls a person he knows very little about an animal, and one that deserved to be put down? Prioritise much?

reply to post by buddhasystem


Look at what IvanAstikov said and consider your priorities.

If you see someone using a leaden metaphor to criticise, say, a child murderer, is your usual response to wade in and attack them? Because it makes it look awfully like you care about one more than the other. And while you're free to call that an even-handed response, by what it omits it really isn't.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

So, someone who uses a Hitler comparison to ridicule another poster's worthless comment is more worthy of your ire than the person who calls a person he knows very little about an animal, and one that deserved to be put down? Prioritise much?

Yeah, I think that the Hitler schtick is just way too stupid and moronic to pass. It's same as writing in your blood "I swear I'm an idiot". So forgive me for pointing this out, that imbecile type of a comment.

Trayvon, Hitler... Duh.

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

So, someone who uses a Hitler comparison to ridicule another poster's worthless comment is more worthy of your ire than the person who calls a person he knows very little about an animal, and one that deserved to be put down? Prioritise much?

Yeah, I think that the Hitler schtick is just way too stupid and moronic to pass. It's same as writing in your blood "I swear I'm an idiot". So forgive me for pointing this out, that imbecile type of a comment.

Trayvon, Hitler... Duh.

Actually there's a parallel there. But perhaps in your haste to condemn bad writing over genuinely vile, baseless cruelty you missed it.

Whatever. Keep fighting the good fight against bad analogy, man. It's far more important than noticing racism and hate.

Originally posted by JuniorDisco

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

So, someone who uses a Hitler comparison to ridicule another poster's worthless comment is more worthy of your ire than the person who calls a person he knows very little about an animal, and one that deserved to be put down? Prioritise much?

Yeah, I think that the Hitler schtick is just way too stupid and moronic to pass. It's same as writing in your blood "I swear I'm an idiot". So forgive me for pointing this out, that imbecile type of a comment.

Trayvon, Hitler... Duh.

Actually there's a parallel there. But perhaps in your haste to condemn bad writing over genuinely vile, baseless cruelty you missed it.

Whatever. Keep fighting the good fight against bad analogy, man. It's far more important than noticing racism and hate.

Let's note racism and hate. The last few years have been prime example of hate. Look at how African Americans have used the death of this animal to justify hate crimes against "white people", even though white people had very little to do with this as Zimmerman only has a "whiteish name", and is Hispanic.

You folks who take outrage still didn't answer the question. Did the mysterious case of home burglaries end when Travyon died after Travyon attacked an older guy who was following him in a private community because Travyon was acting suspicious?

Nope, you give the animal blanket immunity because he is black. Lord knows blacks never commit crime, and are the most law abiding ethnic group in America. You Travyon supporters are so utterly unapologetically racist that it is beyond pathetic. If you cared this much about the deaths of all young black men(most of whom are killed by other young black men), I doubt Travyon would of became the animal he became. People like you are the ones truly responsible for that young mans death. The only time you pretend to care is when you can use those crocodile tears to "bash or shame whitey".

reply to post by korathin


Yeah man. The problem here is black people acting all racist.

Like they are totally assuming - with no evidence at all - loads of stuff about Martin, about the incident and about Zimmerman purely on the basis of their prejudice. How dare they.

Well, it's good to see that this lawsuit hasn't polluted the truth from coming out.
I'm glad the trial is setting all the facts straight .. whichever way they may fall.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Well, it's good to see that this lawsuit hasn't polluted the truth from coming out.
I'm glad the trial is setting all the facts straight .. whichever way they may fall.

But why did Martin's parents have to endure the lie that they had forfeited their right to the truth for cash? Could it be because people were trying to smear them? As was argued - and ferociously denied - at the time...

reply to post by JuniorDisco


LOL.. they know the truth. Here's what happened really. The Martins and their lawyer used Trayvons dumb friend Rachel having her give false statements so they could settle and get their million, because they are greedy scum. Thhey knew the truth would come out and that by going for the cash an innocent man would go tto trial. They also knew they would be throwing Jeantel to the wolves and that she would look stupid and be humiliated. I bet the HOA wishes the would have gone to court instead of settling.



Forgive me if I don't take the logic of a guy, that doesn't think black people can be racist or as racist as white people, serious.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow

LOL.. they know the truth. Here's what happened really. The Martins and their lawyer used Trayvons dumb friend Rachel having her give false statements so they could settle and get their million, because they are greedy scum. Thhey knew the truth would come out and that by going for the cash an innocent man would go tto trial. They also knew they would be throwing Jeantel to the wolves and that she would look stupid and be humiliated. I bet the HOA wishes the would have gone to court instead of settling.

As I say elsewhere, this is not backed up by the facts and is simply your overwhelmingly biased reading of events.

Tell me something - and for once try to answer a direct point I make - why do you think Zimmerman supporters were claiming that no criminal case was possible because of the wrongful death settlement? I'll look back, perhaps you were one of them, perhaps not. But it was obviously nonsense.

So why were people selling it? Was it because it made Martin's parents look bad? Or was there another reason?

Forgive me if I don't take the logic of a guy, that doesn't think black people can be racist or as racist as white people, serious.

edit on 30-6-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

You don't take my logic serious[sic]? Well hot dang Lester, I sure am purdy angry bout that.

Or at least I would be if I had any faith in your ability to follow it.

reply to post by JuniorDisco


I never said no criminal case was possible because of a wrongful death settlement. However had the criminal case come first, I think maybe HOA would have fought instead of settling.

I'm on my phone posting, just presume it's a typo if I use the wrong form or there's a typo. Keep the faith though, because I can argue with the best of them. I know I haven't been shown to be wrong or failed any arguments on this topic.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
I bet the HOA wishes the would have gone to court instead of settling.

No doubt. The trial isn't over and we won't have the absolute truth until the gunpowder forensics are exposed in court ... but the way the trial is going, it's looking like the HOA jumped the gun. I have no doubt that they are kicking themselves now.

reply to post by JuniorDisco

:shk: Go away or just stop with the outlandish insults which are against T&C.
PIck one or the other.

reply to post by FlyersFan


If anyone here thinks that the parents wanted anything except money out of this are totally misguided. They knew their kid was guilty but played on the heart strings of idiots nation wide. And now, they're a million dollars richer. Just wait until that money is gone, we'll hear from them again.

Information Here ... Martins mother didn't know he was missing. Martins father didn't report him missing until the next morning. Martins Step Mother says that Martin didn't get along with his mother and that she raised him. She didn't know he was missing. Martins father has a fiance (to be wife #3) and she has pretty much disappeared from the 'close family picture' that the Martins are trying to portray in court. Apparently she didn't know he was missing either.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


No his story is supported by witness testimony and evidence. The police absolutely DID NOT take him at face value. One cop considered charging him with something, but was over ruled. The cop was harsh with him and they did witness interviews and those witness interviews are why he was let go.

The jury has to be wondering why they are even in court right now.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


What are you talking about? Everyone knows about Zimmerman stopping the burglary of his neighbors house. His neighbor talks about it on t.v. like every day so far in this trial and the cops recognize it.

Look up the police report. They came and arrested the guy that Zimmerman caught. It's a fact. You could have looked it up yourself but it works better for your agenda to have questioned it publicly rather than to have searched and found out it was true and you were wrong.

reply to post by JuniorDisco


You own a bridge across the thames? I guess you bought it from NBC around the same time the sold you the b.s. story that Zimmerman was racist and killed Trayvon in cold blood.

Evidence supports him as well as witness testimony. It's not me taking his word for it. It is all the information combined with his story. Almost everything supports his story and almost nothing supports the state's story (a girl that has already confessed to lying and most of her story supports Zimmerman's side except the last instance which is dubious still).