Great, thanks…that doesnt say shit about what happened that night
I don’t see where she told you that. However I have seen some here imply that trayvon shouldve stayed where HE belonged.
Trayvon Martin is dead. George Zimmerman shot him.
Next?
If Zimmerman had better training with the gun he would have fired a grouping of shots. The point of using a gun to defend yourself is to kill the other person. You may disagree with the right to use deadly force but your doesn’t apply legally to this case.
I’m not sure why you think he should have performed CPR on Martin but I for one would not try to resuscitate someone who brutally attacked me.
Nitpick: The point is to stop the threat; whether the attacker is killed or not is irrelevant.
But I wouldn’t give first-aid to a person who’d attacked me, that’s for sure.
Trayvon should not have attacked Zimmerman. By the evidence at hand it appears he went out of his way to confront Zimmerman twice. By the description Zimmerman gave of the first event it appears confrontational in nature. This is a kid who has consistently demonstrated poor judgement and also a love of street fighting.
And again:
As long as your grandpa doesn’t wear a hoodie, you’re golden.
Regards,
Shodan
I’d nitpick your nitpick. Don’t shoot someone unless you intend to kill them or you’re Annie Oakley and can just successfully wing the person. Good luck with that one.
Monster!
Oh, you’ve already decided that you’re willing to cause death. But the instructor in my class (and the witness in the Zimmerman trial) both used the language of “stop the threat.”
It does, it says that even if Zimmerman was the initial aggressor, he was allowed to kill Martin.
ONLY if you believe his account that tm caused him to fear for his life. I do not, like many others, believe that. He didnt have to killtm, he wanted to
Okay, these threads have gone on far enough with near insults and name-calling.
After this post, warnings will be given out for anyone insulting or even insinuating insults toward another person.
So I suggest everyone in here either dial it back or make a thread in the Pit finally, because this is the first and last note in this thread.
No no, UNLESS you can prove beyond reasonable doubt that he did not reasonably fear death or serious injury. Believing his account is irrelevant, the simple fact that it exists requires that it be disproved.
What you, or many others, believe doesn’t matter. It’s what can be proved that matters.
You, and others, disbelieve. I, and others, believe. That’s been noted. Repeatedly.
And it’s also completely irrelevant to anything, since the only people that matter in the court case are the jurors.
So…where you wanna go next?
Ok, I wasn’t sure if you realized not everybody agrees with you, and in fact many do not. From your alpha aggressive sounding posts that command others to " withdraw their comments" it sounded like you feel there is no room for opinions that differ from yours
It’s not a case of believing his account on it’s own merits, it’s a case of believing it where it fits with the other evidence. Which is most of it. To disbelieve Zimmerman;s account that Martin attacked him, and he defended himself, you have to believe that most of the witnesses were mistaken or lying, the forensic tests were mistaken, and all the circumstantial evidence that points to the truth of his statement is irrelevant.
I don’t see a way to support that position, and as no-one has actually tried to show why Zimmerman’s account is wrong, preferring to use ad hominem attacks and distraction techniques, I still don’t know why people disbelieve the account.
I didn’t command anyone to withdraw their comments, I asked them to back them up or withdraw them, after I showed that they had no basis to support their claims.