BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

iBoaterer[_2_]

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 08:54:06 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

Zimmerman shot an unarmed kid.

.,.. who had broken his nose and pounded his head on the concrete.

Hearsay.

No that has been established from medical records and the police
pictures.

It's been established from medical records and the police pictures that
Martin did all of that? It's also been proven by those records that
Martin "pounded his head on the concrete" HOW?? You are using your
emotions to embellish what those reports said. Do you think it's
impossible that Zimmerman approached Martin, in the dark, with a
handgun, and Martin, afraid for his life, retaliated? How do those
alleged records make that scenario impossible?

How long would you let someone try to kill you before you shot them?

Please show what evidence you have that Martin was "trying to kill"
Zimmerman as opposed to defending himself from a stranger who approached
him in the dark with a gun.

Cite?
Nobody has proved Zimmerman was not "returning to his truck" and
"Martin confronted him"

And nobody has proven that Martin was acting in self defense when a
large, armed stranger approached him in an unfamiliar place, in the
dark.

Without witnesses and any other evidence we are left with Zimmerman's
story whether you like it or not.

Got it, you take a known liar's word for everything because FOX told you
to.

Even if it was self defense, the point that Martin was in danger
passed when Zimmerman went down.

Really? A person can't shoot you because he's on the ground?

Getting on top of him or beating his
head on the concrete is no longer defense.

Please show me where in the medical reports and police records that
there are FACTS and REAL EVIDENCE that it happened like that. What in
those records would make one conclude that it couldn't have been that
Martin was scared for his life and knocked Zimmerman down and was trying
to disarm the perp?