BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

X ` Man[_3_]

On 5/1/12 11:34 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 1 May 2012 08:50:27 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 17:37:05 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

I find it interesting that you can jump to the conclusion that
Zimmerman was an "asshole" who shot Martin for no reason but if
someone says Martin was a pot smoking thief with a chip on his
shoulder you say we are racists who are jumping to conclusions simply
based on his THREE suspensions from school and the things they found
in his back pack. .

Martin had no police arrest record. Zimmerman has an arrest record for
violence. Zimmerman was stalking the kid, probably confronted him, and
then pulled out his pistol.

Zimmerman had the same charge laid on him as Skip Gates had from the
Cambridge Police, Resisting arrest and both were dropped.

As for the "confrontation", as I posted a few notes ago, the sworn
testimony of the lead detective is that they had no evidence about who
started the confrontation, that Zimmerman was not heading back to his
truck or who threw the first punch. That is all you and your buddies
making stories up with no facts..

No one is making up stories except you and Scotty. First you said the
"state said they have no evidence". What is wrong is the misleading by
elimination. There are specific things that the state said they had no
information about YET.

Yet? are you saying they are going to coerce a witness to change their
story and lie?
This may end up being the most investigated shooting since the Kennedy
assassination and so for they have come up with nothing to counter
Zimmerman's story. The state has one more bite at the apple at the
immunity hearing. If they show up with the samelack of evidence,
this witch hunt is over.

"...so far they have come up with nothing..."

If memory serves, the prosecutor and defense agreed to not discuss the
particulars of the case outside of the courtroom.

So, how would you know what "they" have come up with?