BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

JustWaitAFrekinMinute

On 1/31/2013 8:34 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 1/30/2013 8:21 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 12:54:05 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

Invalid premise HOW, dip****? Zimmerman took after the kid, did you
happen to hear, and thus understand the 911 tapes??? What is wrong with
making correct and true statements again?

Nobody who was there has ever said anything but that Zimmerman was
following Martin and that he had lost sight of him until Martin
approached Zimmerman.,
Everyone else is only guessing.

MY point proven again.. this is getting old. Words have meaning,
"accosted" was used in this case to deliberately set a false narrative
that thinking folks just shouldn't stipulate to. There is no evidence,
or even credible suggestion that Zimmerman "accosted" Martin, it's a
lie, it's a loogism.. Period.

He was "accosted" by Zimmerman,

No he wasn't, not one piece of evidenct to prove that. Words have
meaning, at most he was watched by Zimmerman...

Zimmerman is heard on the 911 tapes
saying he is going to follow him.